There are many actors on the global supply chain stage – each playing a role in keeping the wheels of trade turning and keeping our consumer habits fed. For the labour and human rights communities, the list of actors is endless – roles played often decided by expertise and focus, for example women’s empowerment, informal working, geography, and/or commodity. There are audit bodies, campaigners, trade unions, enforcement agencies, strategists, data experts, multi-stakeholder initiatives, think-tanks, and I/NGOs ……. and of course, the companies who buy, produce, transport, store & sell goods from all four corners of the globe.
Interlinked pathways or a traffic jam?
Most of the actors I’ve met over the years, coalesce around two – often interlinked pathways. One is improvement of working conditions for those workers or rightsholders who make, produce, and transport goods. The second, defending the rights of the workforce or rightsholders to safe, decent, and paid work – free from abuse and harassment.
Using the two-pathway mind picture is perhaps the wrong one ……… it has often felt like a roundabout or a traffic jam at peak times! Everyone trying to get somewhere, travelling in the same direction but never reaching the destination.
The effect of broken or damaged links
Looking back over 15 years of working on labour & human rights in supply chains shows that achieving change for workers is disrupted by broken links in the chain. Apart from commercial competitiveness and the states apathy on enforcement of the ILO’s Fundamental principles and rights at work, other factors I’ve come across are:
- Ideological bias throughout the chain ultimately leading to workplaces that are unsafe, oppressive, and exploitative.
- Competing initiatives and/or programmes! I have seen vast amounts of splintering of initiatives – each good on a stand-alone basis but the end game is significantly watered down with less of an impact than intended. The irony is that all actors have the same vision or mission – they just appear not to want to work together to get there.
- Silo mentality ranging from the human development models to data gathering and storage on social impact indicators. While I understand the investment involved to achieve results, walls protecting outcomes affects the ‘whole picture’ approach and makes joining the dots almost impossible.
- An issue-based approach to work in a workplace has the potential to weaken the overall improvements we strive for. Say for instance, if a workplace is made safe for all employees, then it benefits everyone working there. If wage negotiations are properly supported from the procurement practices right through to levelling the negotiating space, then everyone benefits.
Disparity in investment of money, time, and people
Coming back to why every link matters. There is a distinct disparity on where the investment of money, time, energy, and training goes; tragically, the highly vulnerable links tend to get the scraps from the funding tables, especially when their needs don’t align to policies, narratives or initiatives heavily influenced by the upper echelons of supply chain & policy decision makers.
This is why the vision is to be able to reach all actors on the supply chain stage. Yes, to break down barriers, open up & out the channels of collaboration and share what we all have stashed away. Whether a stakeholder or a rightsholder, each actor or link has a role to play to bring about the transformation to workplaces & working lives we strive for.
As always it’s the unheard and unsupported who need their story woven into all our narratives.