Einde inhoudsopgave
Corporate Social Responsibility (IVOR nr. 77) 2010/10.10.2
10.10.2 A hidden conflict: clash of CSR codes
Mr. T.E. Lambooy, datum 17-11-2010
- Datum
17-11-2010
- Auteur
Mr. T.E. Lambooy
- JCDI
JCDI:ADS368280:1
- Vakgebied(en)
Ondernemingsrecht (V)
Voetnoten
Voetnoten
SAI and its SA 8000 label was established in 1997, and revised in 2001; at: http://www.sa-intl.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.viewPage&pageId=473, accessed on 12 July 2010. BSCI: the Brussels-based Foreign Trade Association held its first deliberations with the business society on creating a framework for addressing labour conditions, which led to the worldwide implementation of the BSCI in the spring of 2004. See: http://www.bsci-eu.com/ index.php?id=2011, accessed on 2 May 2009. FWF (see Box 3) was created in 1999 in the Netherlands. In 2001, FWF became operational and from 2003 onwards companies were recruited to subscribe to the FWF Code of Labour Practices; http://www.fairwear.nl/index.php?p=25&s=32&t=2, accessed on 2 May 2010. These sites were visited on 18 February 2009.
By 2009 FWF has members from Belgium, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland and the UK, but the majority of the members are Dutch. Although FWF's Board and Committee of Experts still consists of only Dutch stakeholders, FWF aims to set an international standard, at: http://www.fairwear.nl/index.php?p=25&s=34&t=2, visited on 18 February 2009.
CCC letter to HEMA of 16 April 2007; (in Dutch) http://www.schonekleren.nl/hema/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=28&Itemid=38, visited on 18 February 2009.
Letters of 27 April and 16 May 2007; (in Dutch) http://www.schonekleren.nl/hema/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=28&Itemid=38#_ftn1, visited on 18 February 2009.
Letters by the Raad Nederlandse Detailhandel to the Cabinet and Parliament of 27 February 2008 and 7 April 2009. The last letter led to questions in the Parliament to the Minister for Development Cooperation, Mr Koenders. By 18 April 2009, these questions had not yet been answered. The letters and the MP questions are available (in Dutch) at: www. raadnederlandsedetailhandel.nl, visited on 18 April 2009.
M. Hearson, Clean Clothes Campaign, Cashing In - Giant retailers, purchasing practices, and working conditions in the garment industry, 25 February 2009; available at: www. cleanclothes.org, visited on 18 April 2009.
Questions by the MPs Voordewind, Ortega-Martijn and Gesthuizen, 18 February 2009, reference no. 2080913970; (in Dutch) http://static.ikregeer.nl/pdf/V080913970.pdf, visited on 26 February 2009.
Aldi and Lidl are members of BSCI.
K. Hudig, Clean Clothes Campaign, Van papier naar praktijk - Controle van gedragscodes in de kleding- en sportgoederenindustrie [From paper to practice - Monitoring compliance with codes of conduct in the textile and apparel industry], February 2007 (in Dutch); at http://www.schonekleren.nl/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=103&Itemid=0, visited on 20 February 2009. In this report the following CSR Implementation Systems are compared: FWF, ETI, SAI, FLA, WRC and BSCI. It reads: 'The BSCI was initiated by employer organisations, and currently is a typical example how it should not be done.... Moreover, its standard is below any standard of the other initiatives. Officially the goal of the initiative is studying complaints of abuses in the supply chain. However, it often seems that they (the initiators) sought to develop a means to counter justified critics, without addressing the abuses;' p. 22.
After the OECD MNE Guidelines and ILO MNE Declaration were released in 2000, several MSIs emerged to translate these recommendations into practical working schemes for the business sector. In the Netherlands, SA 8000, BSCI and FWF are popular MSIs in the retail sector.1 MSIs are CSR initiatives based upon cooperation with stakeholders, such as the business society, trade unions and NGOs. Although some work on a not-for-profit basis, they usually require a fee from participating companies. As demand increased for CSR certification and verification systems (CSR Implementation Systems), competition became inevitable. In short, 'selling' CSR Implementation Systems became business. For various Dutch companies operating on an international level, the internationally operating MSIs - BSCI or SA 8000 - seem more logical to follow than the primarily Dutch FWF.2
CCC/ICN's campaign against G-Star was not a one-off event. In the spring of 2007, in the midst of their campaign against G-Star, CCC/ICN also campaigned against the Dutch retailer HEMA concerning the allegedly poor labour conditions under which their apparel supply was produced. CCC/ICN stressed that only the involvement of local organisations can provide a buyer with a good view of the labour conditions at its supplier.3 HEMA replied that its labour conditions complied with its own code of conduct, and that HEMA had joined BSCI for independent verification. CCC/ICN s response exemplifies the clash between competing CSR Implementation Systems. CCC/ICN asserted that the way BSCI works by no means guarantees fair labour conditions. CCC/ICN expressed its disappointment that HEMA did not make use of FWF's knowledge of the textile sector, and notified HEMA that it would continue its campaigning.4
On 27 February 2008, the Dutch Council for the Retail Sector (RND)5
complained to the Dutch Minister for Foreign Trade about CCC/ICN s campaign against 'a Dutch denim wear producer.' The RND moreover asserted that CCC/ICN, being a campaigning organisation on the one hand, and an initiator of FWF on the other, acts as a ' norm setting, verifying and judging body. The RND also expressed its discontent with the substantive subsidy which FWF received from the Dutch government, stating that 'apparently without this subsidy FWF does not seem to have a future. Above all, the RND called upon the Dutch government and civil society organisations to 'focus on a constructive dialogue with the Dutch business society, on the basis of (policy) choices made by the business society. 6
While the investigation for this contribution was being conducted, a consecutive development evolved in this 'clash of codes'. On 10 February 2009, CCC published a report blaming large European retailers for violating a whole series of fundamental labour rights.7 In the Netherlands, only a few days after its publication, the report led to questions by Members of Parliament to the Ministers of Foreign Affairs and for Foreign Trade, asking them to demonstrate that they fully integrate CSR in their Dutch business promotion policies.8
The CCC's report also points at alleged flaws by various CSR Implementation Systems, such as the Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI), the Global Social Compliance Program, SA 8000 and BSCI. Many of the retailers targeted in CCC s report, such as Aldi and Lidl, have indeed implemented one of these systems for securing fair labour conditions among their suppliers.9 CCC's Dutch website subsequently directs one to another report containing a comparison between several CSR Implementation Systems. This report argues that FWF offers the highest standards in implementing and verifying fair labour conditions, whereas other systems are all flawed in some way, especially BSCI.10
Concluding, the hidden conflict that the FFI/JKPL case study and the other campaigns reveal is the clash between competing CSR Implementation Systems.