Background

​​

Change Alliance & LRQA will be organizing a side session titled, “Worker Grievance Mechanisms and Access to Remedy in Asia: Lessons from Selected Supply Chains” at 09:00 ICT on 24th September, 2024 at the 2024 UN Responsible Business and Human Rights Forum. During the session, we aim to discuss the international and national legislative frameworks, compliance needs, and performance of various supply chains in Asia concerning Business & Human Rights Principles. The focus will be on identifying solutions and strategies for effective remedy and grievance redressal for workers across these supply chains in the Asian context. 

The study of various legislative frameworks points out that despite robust international and national legislative frameworks aimed at ensuring business compliance with human rights norms, significant gaps remain in the implementation and enforcement of effective remedy and grievance redressal mechanisms in Asia. The performance of various supply chains, such as garment, sugarcane, construction, sea food, cotton and other agricultural products, where most of the migrant workers are hired to work, indicates a mixed picture of compliance, with notable efforts and persistent issues. Strengthening enforcement mechanisms, promoting more rigorous monitoring and reporting practices, and establishing robust grievance redressal systems are essential to enhance compliance and protect human rights within these sectors.

Efforts are being made globally to ensure responsible business conduct by integrating human rights due diligence systems into supply chains, with particular significance in Asia, where a large workforce is engaged in downstream value chains. Frameworks like the UNGPs and OECD guidelines, along with the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, set the stage for comprehensive human rights due diligence but require contextualization to be effective. The challenge lies in designing systems that address the socio-economic realities of supplier countries, as extensive informal labor in tiers 3 and 4 of supply chains often leaves marginalized workers invisible to formal systems and vulnerable to rights violations. 

​

For instance, the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) endorsed by the UN Human Rights Council in 2011, provide a global standard for preventing and addressing the risk of adverse human rights impacts linked to business activity. The framework is built on three pillars: the state duty to protect human rights, the corporate responsibility to respect human rights, and access to remedy for victims of business-related abuses (Ruggie, 2017). Despite these comprehensive guidelines, the implementation of effective remedy mechanisms in Asian countries, e.g. in South Asia, is insufficient. Businesses often lack accessible, transparent, and effective grievance redressal systems, leaving many victims of human rights abuses without proper recourse. On the other hand, the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises are recommendations addressed by governments to multinational enterprises operating in or from adhering countries. The new OECD Guidelines on climate change, environment, and biodiversity mandate science-based emission reduction targets, with non-compliance potentially leading to specific instance proceedings and civil liability. The revised Guidelines reaffirm global standards for due diligence across the entire value chain, impacting upcoming Due Diligence Directive negotiations and potentially increasing NCP proceedings. To mitigate litigation risks, businesses should update or develop comprehensive due diligence policies and involve legal departments in non-financial disclosures and sustainability reporting, navigating varying jurisdictional requirements with global principles. (OECD, 2023). The European Union’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) aims to mandate due diligence requirements on human rights and environmental impacts for certain large companies. This directive will have significant implications for global supply chains, including those extending into Asia, requiring companies to identify, prevent, mitigate, and account for how they address their impacts on human rights and the environment (European Commission, 2024). While the directive represents a step forward, the effectiveness of its implementation in ensuring access to remedy remains to be seen, particularly in complex and informal supply chains prevalent in Asia.

​

From a sectoral perspective, the garment industry in South Asia, particularly in India and Bangladesh, has been under scrutiny for labor rights violations, including poor working conditions and low wages. Major brands have implemented codes of conduct and audits to ensure compliance with international standards, but issues persist due to deep-rooted structural problems and the prevalence of informal labor (Mezzadri, 2017). Effective grievance redressal mechanisms are often lacking, leaving workers with limited avenues to seek justice. The sugarcane industry in India is characterized by significant labor rights issues, including child labor and debt bondage. Despite existing legal frameworks, enforcement remains weak, and many workers continue to face exploitation. The lack of effective grievance mechanisms exacerbates these issues, as workers have little recourse to address their grievances. The construction sector in South Asia is notorious for its poor labor conditions, including unsafe working environments and lack of social security for workers. Initiatives like the Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996, in India, aim to improve conditions, but compliance remains inconsistent across the sector (RoyChowdhury, 2021). Other Agricultural Product Supply Chains, including tea, coffee, and seafood, face challenges related to fair wages, safe working conditions, and elimination of child labor. The absence of effective grievance mechanisms means that many workers in these supply chains are unable to seek redress for violations. Remedies may include compensation, apologies, or punitive sanctions. Judicial and non-judicial grievance mechanisms should be impartial, transparent, and rights compatible - non-judicial mechanisms (e.g., mediation, culturally appropriate processes) alongside judicial ones to address grievances. These mechanisms may be industry-led or multi-stakeholder initiatives that offer faster and more cost-effective remedies. Acknowledging the victims may face legal, procedural, or administrative barriers when seeking justice, it is important to remove these barriers, ensuring effective access to remedies (Change Alliance, 2017).

​​​

Objectives

​

This side session by Change Alliance & LRQA will bring together various experts and stakeholders – workers, civil society members, buyers and brands etc. to engage in constructive dialogue and to explore how to develop effective worker grievance and remediation mechanisms in value chains in Asia. Through this session, participants will:

• Best practices for developing and implementing effective worker grievance mechanisms in Asian value chains.

• Innovative models for grievance mechanisms and remediation, including worker-driven and multi-stakeholder processes.

• The impact of new human rights due diligence legislation on access to remedy and its implications for companies, workers, and civil society.

• How buyers and brands can support and enhance grievance mechanisms across their supply chains.