Enforceable binding agreements & GBVH risks – Could this be the way forward?

Every year between 25 November and 10 December, organisations all over the world commemorate 16 days of activism against gender-based violence and harassment (GBVH). 

2024 also marks the five year anniversary of the landmark ILO convention on violence and harassment at work, which set the global standard for a world in which every worker is protected from violence and harassment, including gender-based violence. For ETI, this as an opportunity to galvanise our membership to reflect on addressing GBVH risks in global supply chains and renew our commitment to make meaningful progress. 

Unfortunately, the data shows that identifying, preventing and mitigating GBVH risks remains a challenge for many companies. The World Benchmarking Alliance’s Gender Benchmark, which assessed 112 companies across the food and apparel sectors found that whilst 86% of companies have a policy on violence and harassment at work that is publicly available, only 5% of companies actually disclose that they have identified this as salient risk. Furthermore, only 10% require suppliers to provide training to their managers and workers on the issue, and only 20% require suppliers to have a remediation process to address grievances related to violence and harassment.  

Although the data is quite bleak, there are some approaches that are making a difference and protecting workers from GBVH. Lately, there has been a significant amount of buzz around enforceable binding agreements (EBAs), specifically the Lesotho Agreement and the Dindigul Agreement, both of which are focused on ending GBVH in garment supply chains. 

So, what exactly are EBAs and how do they work to end GBVH? 

Here are three key points from the webinar ETI hosted on this topic, to mark 16 days of activism on GBVH. 

1. EBAs are enforceable! Unlike many other voluntary initiatives including codes of conduct, EBAs are signed agreements, similar to collective bargaining agreements, which means signatories can be held accountable. Both the Lesotho and Dindigul Agreements have a number of signatories representing brands, suppliers, local trade unions and international allies (civil society). Together, all stakeholder groups understand their roles and responsibilities in minimising risks related to GBVH and protecting all workers, especially women. 
2. EBAs are centered around freedom of association and worker representation. These agreements are typically signed with trade unions as equal partners, aimed at ensuring that under-represented and vulnerable workers groups have a seat at the table. For example, in Dindigul, the signatory trade union not only represents women workers but also workers from marginalised Dalit community. The unions also play a key role in ensuring that workers understand what constitutes GBVH and have an avenue to raise grievances and seek remedy 
3. Perhaps most important, EBAs are linked to purchasing practices. Brands who sign EBAs are in a position to utilise their leverage to reward or penalise suppliers who are embedding sustainable ways to improve labour standards within their factories, including efforts to end GBVH.

Signs of progress

From the evidence gathered through independent monitoring and assessments, as well as the perspectives shared by panellists during the webinar, EBAs such as the Lesotho and Dindigul Agreements are working well. Workers have shown increased understanding of GBVH and how to report issues using the multi-tier grievance mechanisms that have been designed with the unions. In the year two progress report of the Dindigul Agreement, workers raised a total of 242 grievances of which 30 related to GBVH. 76% of the GBVH grievances were resolved within two weeks. This data also shows that workers can use the grievance channels to raise a variety of issues beyond GBVH, which all contribute to making the workplace better and safer.

In Lesotho, the agreement paved the way to address one of the key root causes of GBVH against women workers in garment factories, which is the temporary nature of contracts.  Workers on short-term contracts are not eligible for the same employment protections as those on permanent contracts. This results in a power imbalance whereby supervisors have the final say on whether a worker is awarded a permanent contract or not. This leaves many female workers in precarious positions and at risk of exploitation. The Lesotho Agreement was able to put an end to this practice of daily short-term contracts.  

Challenges and obstacles

The progress is good but there are of course some hurdles along the way. For one, the Lesotho Agreement was not renewed due to closure of three out of the five supplier sites, resulting in a loss of over 3,000 jobs. At the supplier site where the Dindigul Agreement is being implemented, operations are not at full capacity. Without viable business contracts and responsible purchasing practices, there can be no EBAs. 

Another key factor is costs. Although the Dindigul Agreement was designed to minimise operating costs by working with local trade unions and creating a lean governance structure, there is still a financial commitment required from brands. 

What next?

Given that we are seeing considerable progress in reducing GBVH incidences and ensuring the safety of all workers through EBAs, what can be done to scale and up and replicate such approaches? 

The first and perhaps most important factor is commitment by brands to work with suppliers and trade unions to realise such agreements. Unfortunately, there continues to be significant bias against working with trade unions in production countries. This perception and narrative has to change if EBAs are to be replicated.

Another point to note is that for EBAs to be effective on larger scale, they need to be applied across the supply chain of a business, as opposed to only one supplier. Of course this will result in higher financial commitments, however, there is room to negotiate and engage other brands to share the costs. The important thing is to start the discussions with an open mind!

Finally, brands are in a unique position to use their leverage to ensure workers have access to functional grievance and redressal mechanisms, not only in relation to GBVH but a wide variety of issues. In a world where mandatory human rights due diligence is the norm and brands are expected to demonstrate compliance, these agreements can only strengthen such systems. 

EBAs represent a fundamentally different approach centered around enabling freedom of association to protect workers from human rights abuses such as GBVH. The emphasis on working with local trade unions to train workers and management, and establish independent multi-channel grievance mechanisms with the ability to investigate worker complaints and provide remedy, is crucial for success. Likewise, the commitment by brands to utilise their leverage to effect change across their supply chains through such agreements is necessary to sustain the gains.