The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights

Abstract

FOCUS □ BUSINESSAND HUMANRIGHTS The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights I global Principles to newer be scaffolding human built The governance forms Guiding provide around rights for of Principlesprovide scaffoldingfor newer formsof human rights global governance to be builtaround BEN MOXHAM isPolicy Officer with the European Union and International Relations Department of the TUC in London The Elvis-like Human UN Guiding Rights statusin Principles have the achieved international on Business an human almost and Human Rightshave achieved an almost Elvis-like statusin the international human rights and Corporate SocialResponsibility (CSR) communities since theywere approvedby the UN HumanRights Councilback in May 2011. Countless seminars, conferences, businessguides and careers havebeen launchedintheir name. In contrast onlya handful of tradeunionists seem to have engagedwiththemin anydetail. Yet theGuidingPrinciples have thepotential to amplify unionorganising and bargaining efforts, especially in supplychains.Thisarticle explores whythiscouldbe thecase. Pennedby former UN Special Representative JohnRuggieand sixyearsinthemaking, the29 UN GuidingPrinciples on Businessand Human Rights are a setofrecommendations to governments , businessandsociety on howtotacklethe globalproblem ofbusiness-related humanrights abuse. ForRuggie, thescope and impactofbusiness has vastlyoutgrown the abilityof societiesto managetheir adverseconsequences. To fixthese so-called'governance gaps' of globalisation, he proposeda three'pillars'to guide action:the statedutyto protect; thebusinessresponsibility to respect;and access to remedy forvictims of corporate-related harm. Whatdo thesemeansfor workers andunions? The state dutyto protect. The first pillarmakesit clearthatstatesplaya uniqueand essential role in implementing their international human rights obligations. Companies cannotand should not attempt to police and enforce thelawsnecessary toprotect people. To takean obviousexample:itwillultimately takelaws,policiesandan effective ruleoflawto end forcedlabourin Burmaand not company actionalone.Ofcourse,companiesaren'tletoff the hook if states fail to act. The Guiding Principles makeclearthat a company needstodo all thatitcan to addressa humanrights harmit is associatedwithregardless ofwhatthestateis orisn'tdoing. Italso meansthat companiesshouldn't seekto fulfil theroleofthestate.Company-funded auditorsand grievancemechanisms arguablyhave someroletoplaybutthey arenota substitute for effective labourinspectorates and courts. Have states fallen overthemselves inthestampede to meetthisduty? I doubtthereis a government that hasrecently brought itslabourlaws into line with ILO conventionsbecause the Guiding Principles said so. Instead, progress has been subtleandtypically insofter lawareas.The Netherlands forexamplehasplacedthecoreILO conventions intoitspublicprocurement policies, and theEU is making progress on company disclosureintheextractives industry. Advocates for both measures readilyinvoked the Guiding Principles. TheUKwillpublishitsimplementation planin thefirst halfof2013.Whilethestrategy is likely topromote guidanceforBritish companies operatingin difficult overseasenvironments I would bet mybirthday presents thatitdoesn'trestore the unfair dismissalrights thatthe government recently tookawayfrom the2.7 million workers withbetweenone totwoyearsofservice. Responsibility to respect Thesecondpillar oftheGuiding Principles isalso refreshingly simple: businesses shouldbe responsiblefortheir impacts on humanrights. Being 'responsible' meansthatifa company causes,contributes oris associatedwithan actual orpotential humanrights adverseimpact then itneeds to prevent thatimpact(or mitigate and remediate it).Companiescan'tpickand choose whatbeingresponsible means:sponsoring a fun runhasnothing todo with theGuiding Principles especially ifa company is turning a blindeyeto unionbusting initssupplychain. And thisresponsibility is not limited by the employment contract orthecorporate veil.So, a clothing brandmaynothavea Delhihomeworkeron thepayroll, butifit'ssourcing contracts are denying hera living wage or resulting inunsafe workingconditions,then they need to act. Extending responsibility downthesupplychain iscritical for workers andunionsseeking tocombat thealarming riseof precarious work:those jobs madeinsecure, low paid and dangerous by companyoutsourcing. In the longertermthis idea of responsibility has thepotential to overcomethetypically restrictive and confusing tests innational lawoverwhoisandisn't protected by employment law. By 'human rights',the Guiding Principles meansall of them.Companycodes of conduct thatcontinueto ignoretradeunion rights, or replacethem withlimpreferences to'listening to workers'will now be even less credible.The Guiding Principles also makeitclearthat companiesneedtostrive toadheretointernational standardsregardless ofthedictatorship they've setup businessin. Claiming adherenceto weak local lawswillnotstackup. Let'stakea reallifeexample.Earlier thisyear managementat the Saida biscuitfactoryin Tunisiarefused to recognise or negotiate witha newlyformed unionandsackedZed Naloufi, the unionleaderwho hadbeen leadingtoughnegotiations on behalfof1600workers. INTERNATIONAL union rights Pa98 4Volume 19lssue 42012 FOCUS □ BUSINESS ANDHUMANRIGHTS Ina publicspatwiththeInternational Unionof Food workers (IUF), Kraft (now called 'Mondelez'), the49 percentownersofthefactory , tried towipetheir handscleanbystating that they 'do notexercise management control' andin anyeventexpectedtheir jointventure partner to comply withlocal lawsand regulations'. Neither excusestacks up undertheGuiding Principles as theIUFwerequicktopointout. Thereis a growinglistof companiesstating that they wanttobe,oralready are'Ruggie-complian ť.The realquestionis whether unionsand civilsociety groupshavetheresources anda supportive policyenvironment to be able to hold companies tothoseclaims. So howdo unionsknowifa company is being responsible? TheGuiding Principles callon companiesto understand theconsequencesof their actions andthenremedy anyhumanrights harm througha continualprocess of what Ruggie termed 'humanrights due diligence'. He...