|
CCC Reference Guide on Code Implementation & Verification
Section 4. Critical issues on code implementation and verification
Complaints mechanisms
For a system that monitors and verifies compliance with a code of labour
practices to be complete, it must include a mechanism to handle complaints.
Such a complaint mechanism or procedure would be used to bring workplace
concerns to the attention of multi-stakeholder monitoring and verification
initiatives or sourcing companies.
Complaint procedures are seen as a means to ensure direct input at
any given time from workers and their organizations in the monitoring
and verification process, and to balance and supplement the limited
scope of social audits, which only provide a "snapshot" of
labour practices at a specific moment in time.
Unlike social audits, varying methodologies for which have been and
continue to be tested by various organizations, complaints mechanisms
in this context have received only limited attention. It has been suggested
that this is due to the considerable commercial and corporate interest
in social auditing, which has promoted audits as the key tool for demonstrating
corporate accountability to good labour practices.
This has had an impact on the activities of NGOs and trade unions involved
in monitoring and verification debates, who have had to assign capacity
and resources to take up auditing issues, in an attempt to prevent the
development of auditing techniques from being dominated by corporate
and commercial interests. This is not to say however that there have
been no interesting developments in relation to complaint mechanisms
in this context. A number of multi-stakeholder monitoring and verification
initiatives are developing and working with such systems, and some companies
are developing internal systems to process and follow-up on complaints
of rights violations. The challenge of developing a timely and orderly
process for resolving worker complaints has also begun to be discussed
in a number of fora.
Already there is a broadening in perceptions surrounding complaint
systems. Once seen largely as a mechanism to balance auditing and allow
for worker participation, such systems are now also seen by some companies
as a means for solving problems and by labour rights activists as another
avenue for pressuring companies to make improvements.
It is important to recognize that complaints of labour rights violations
are often filed with labour law enforcement authorities at the local
level where they occur. In most cases, violations of code of labour
standards also constitute violations of local labour law. In cases where
code compliance complaint mechanisms might be invoked governmental bodies
are also approached regarding the rights violation, or for example,
the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) or
the International Labour Organization (ILO).
Often workers or labor rights organizations simultaneously file grievances
wherever they can, both to increase pressure for a resolution of a specific
case but also to draw broader attention to what are often systemic issues
that transcend a single workplace.
For more information see: Considering Complaint Mechanisms: An Important
Tool for Code Monitoring and Verification, 2003, by Nina Ascoly and
Ineke Zeldenrust. This paper is intended to raise key issues in relation
to complaint procedures being developed in conjunction with code compliance
monitoring and verification initiatives for the garment and footwear
industry: As often as possible, examples drawn from the experiences
of existing complaint mechanisms are used to highlight these issues.
Where possible complaint systems developed by companies themselves have
been mentioned. However, there is not a great deal of information available
on the internal systems companies have for handling complaints. Transparency
in this regard will be crucial to facilitate learning on this important
issue among all stakeholders. The experience of the CCC in raising complaints
with companies has also provided useful insight into these issues. While
this paper does draw upon a variety of experiences it is not intended
to be a critique of any existing initiatives, but instead as an input
intended to help strengthen these complaint mechanisms.
Available Resources
|
