Copyright

(c) 2010-2024 Jon L Gelman, All Rights Reserved.
Showing posts with label Bangladesh. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bangladesh. Show all posts

Thursday, October 10, 2013

Fashion Safety: The Tragedy Continues

Fashion Safety continues be be a major problem in Bangladesh. One a catalyst for increased regulation, the movement continues lack sufficient traction to make a difference. Today post is shared from retail-week.com.


Nine people have died following a fire in a Bangladesh factory renewing concerns about the safety of the country’s garment industry that supplies many of the world’s biggest retailers.
The fire broke out at the Aswad factory in Gazipur outside of Dhaka yesterday. The factory has supplied goods to Canadian retailers Loblaw, which owns Joe Fresh, according to shipping data provider ImportGenius.com. The Wall Street Journal reported Aswad had also produced clothes for Wal-Mart.
The deaths come after the devastating collapse of the Rana Plaza factory complex in Dhaka in April which killed more than 1,100 people.
The disaster led to an industry-wide move to improve safety in the country. Retailers includingPrimarkH&MRiver Island and Arcadia have signed up to the Bangladesh factory safety Accord led by union IndustriALL.
By signing the Accord, retailers agreed to a legally binding pledge to contribute up to $500,000 (£325,000) a year towards rigorous independent factory inspections and the installation of fire safety measures.
Yesterday Primark, which was one of many western retailers which used a factory situated within Rana Plaza, committed to paying six months wages as compensation.
A Primark spokesman said: “Primark takes its responsibilities extremely seriously. To help alleviate short-term hardship, the company is committed to paying six months wages to more than 3,500 Rana Plaza workers, or their families, irrespective of whether they made...

Saturday, September 28, 2013

Bangladesh Deploys Paramilitary in Garment Zone After Protests

International Fashion Safety is becoming an international catalyst for change. Today's post was shared by Steven Greenhouse and comes from www.bloomberg.com


Bangladesh’s government deployedparamilitary troops in the industrial belt of Gazipur to deterfurther protests as garment factories reopened after five daysof violent demonstrations.
“The situation is now relatively calm,” MostafijurRahman, additional superintendent of police for Gazipurdistrict, said in a phone interview. Television footage showedthe troops patrolling streets where workers attacked factoriesand blocked traffic earlier this week to demand wage increases.
The government is acting after factory owners met HomeMinister Muhiuddin Khan Alamgir yesterday to urge tightersecurity. Thousands of garment workers clashed with police thisweek in the industrial belt on the outskirts of Dhaka, forcingabout 400 factories that supply companies such as Wal-MartStores Inc. to close.
“Unrest in the garment sector will be firmly dealt with,”the minister told reporters, after the meeting.
The labor unrest came five months after the collapse of theeight-story Rana Plaza factory complex killed more than 1,000people in the worst industrial accident in the South Asiancountry’s history. Low wages and production costs have helpedspawn the country’s $19 billion manufacturing industry thatsupplies global retailers with cheap clothes.
The protestors, some of whom pelted factories with bricksand blocked a highway, demanded a minimum monthly salary of8,114 taka ($104), up from 3,000 taka now. Retailers such asWal-Mart, Inditex SA, Gap Inc. and ...
[Click here to see the rest of this post]

Wednesday, September 18, 2013

Doing Business in Bangladesh

International fashion safety continues mirror the genesis of the workers" compensation moment in the US. Today's post was shared by WCBlog and comes from www.nytimes.com


The owner of a clothing factory in Dhaka, Bangladesh, was at New York University last week to meet with clothing industry executives, labor activists and American and European government officials to talk about the Bangladeshi garment industry, the world’s second-biggest exporter of clothes after China.

The workplace disasters in this business have grabbed the world’s attention, and for the past year, Western retailers that outsource their clothing production to Bangladesh have tried to come up with reforms. But there are big obstacles to improving safety in an industry driven by low profits and constant upheaval.

I met with the businessman and another factory owner; both would speak only on the condition that they not be identified because they feared offending their customers. A central problem, the first owner told me, is the rapid turnaround big retailers like Walmart demand when they put in orders for tens of thousands of T-shirts or shorts. Since his factory isn’t able to make all the garments in time, he has to send some of the work to smaller producers. “I can’t do it officially,” he said, “but unofficially, I can.”
Unauthorized subcontracting to smaller, uninspected factories is not supposed to happen, but it remains an entrenched practice. It is a primary reason safety guidelines that apply to bigger contractors have not prevented the hundreds of worker deaths in fires and building collapses in facilities like Rana...

[Click here to see the rest of this post]

Monday, September 2, 2013

Fast and Flawed Inspections of Factories Abroad

Today's post was shared by WCBlog and comes from www.nytimes.com


Inspectors came and went from a Walmart-certified factory in Guangdong Province in China, approving its production of more than $2 million in specialty items that would land on Walmart’s shelves in time for Christmas.

But unknown to the inspectors, none of the playful items, including reindeer suits and Mrs. Claus dresses for dogs, that were supplied to Walmart had been manufactured at the factory. Instead, Chinese workers sewed the goods — which had been ordered by the Quaker Pet Group, a company based in New Jersey — at a rogue factory that had not gone through the certification process set by Walmart for labor, worker safety or quality, according to documents and interviews with officials involved.

To receive approval for shipment to Walmart, a Quaker subcontractor just moved the items over to the approved factory, where they were presented to inspectors as though they had been stitched together there and never left the premises.

Soon after the merchandise reached Walmart stores, it began falling apart.
Fifteen hundred miles to the west, the Rosita Knitwear factory in northwestern Bangladesh — which made sweaters for companies across Europe — passed an inspection audit with high grades. A team of four monitors gave the factory hundreds of approving check marks. In all 12 major categories, including working hours, compensation, management practices and health and safety, the factory received the top grade of “good.”...
[Click here to see the rest of this post]

Thursday, August 29, 2013

Fashion Safety: Charges of Child Labor Confront Walmart and The GAP

Child labor infractions and workplace safety conditions in Bangladesh have been raised against Walmart and The GAP by Al Jazeera America in a report aired in its initial week of broadcasting.

Children as young as 12 make clothes with
Old Navy tags in a Dhaka factory with no fire exit or fire extinguishers.
"Fault Lines repeatedly asked for on-camera interviews with representatives of Walmart and Gap, but by our deadline, both companies had denied our requests. Instead, they issued written comments in response to the reporting in our investigative film, "Made in Bangladesh," which examines some of the practices of U.S. retailers in Bangladesh's garment industry. Walmart's comments come in the form of a Q&A we did with a company spokesperson, while Gap issued a statement in response to our findings in Bangladesh that we outlined to them. Both statements are posted in full."

Tuesday, August 20, 2013

Bangladesh’s Workers Deserve Better

Fashion Safety and compensability payments are an important issue and one that originally framed US Workers' Compensation programs. Today's post was shared by Steven Greenhouse and comes from www.nytimes.com


Opinion Twitter Logo.
Four months after a building collapse killed more than 1,100 factory workers in Bangladesh, their families are still waiting for adequate — and in some cases, any — compensation. This is a shocking lapse by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and her government.

After the disaster at Rana Plaza, a poorly constructed eight-story building outside Dhaka, the capital, Ms. Hasina promised to give the relatives of those who died about $1,250 in cash and $19,000 in savings certificates — amounts that far exceed the roughly $1,250 that factory owners are legally required to pay per victim, but far from sufficient, considering that many victims were young women and men who had a whole lifetime ahead of them. The money was supposed to come from the government and from private donations by, among others, the factory owners.

But the government has yet to distribute most of that money. It has provided sums ranging from $1,250 to $5,000 to about 777 families, far short of the total compensation it had promised, according to the Solidarity Center, a Washington-based group that helps workers around the world form unions. Also, many of the remaining families have not received any aid at all because the government has not moved fast enough to identify nearly 300 bodies.

Compensating victims’ families in a tragedy as big as the collapse of Rana Plaza would strain the resources of a poor country like Bangladesh. But Ms. Hasina’s administration can do a much better job....
[Click here to see the rest of this post]



Friday, August 16, 2013

Bangladesh Building Collapse Highlights Need for Safety Inspections

Today's post comes from guest author Kit Case from Causey Law Firm. 
Ed Note: Samsung has been sued in Brazil over factory working conditions

The total number of workers killed or injured in the collapse of a building in Savar, Bangladesh on April 24, 2013 is not yet known, as rescuers continue to search for survivors.  As of Sunday, April 28th, the count was at least 377 dead.  


Bangladeshi Workers Protest Deaths
Many of those killed were workers at clothing factories housed in the building, known as Rana Plaza, where fire broke out in the wreckage of the building, temporarily suspending rescue efforts as of April 24.  Efforts will restart with the aide of heavy equipment, which had previously been avoided in an effort to not injure those still buried in the rubble.  T

here no longer are assumed to be any victims remaining alive, although hundreds remain unaccounted for. The death toll surpassed a fire five months ago that killed 112 people and brought widespread pledges to improve worker-safety standards. But since then, very little has changed in Bangladesh.
Human Rights Watch reported on the building collapse, noting that it knows of no cases in which the Bangladeshi government has ever prosecuted a factory owner over the deaths of workers.
 USA Today reported on the tragedy with the news that Mohammed Sohel Rana, the fugitive owner of the illegally-constructed building, was apprehended by a commando force while trying to flee to India.  Rana was returned to Dhaka to face charges of negligence. Rana had been on the run since the building collapsed Wednesday. He last appeared in public Tuesday in front of the Rana Plaza after huge cracks appeared in the building. Witnesses said he assured tenants, including five garment factories, that the building was safe. Hours later, the Rana Plaza was reduced to rubble, crushing most victims under massive blocks of concrete.

Human Rights Watch reported on the building collapse, noting that it knows of no cases in which the Bangladeshi government has ever prosecuted a factory owner over the deaths of workers. Many factory owners in Bangladesh are parliamentarians or members of the main political parties. In an interview with a government minister in 2011, the minister told Human Rights Watch that it would be “impossible” to improve workers rights so long as factory owners were senior members of political parties. 

Friday, July 19, 2013

Fashion Safety: US Endorses Bangladesh Action Plan

The following is a joint statement from the Department of Labor, Office of the United States Trade Representative, and the State Department:

"Today, the United States is outlining next steps in a longstanding effort to address in a meaningful way worker safety problems in Bangladesh — the severity of which were exemplified in the tragedies of the November 2012 Tazreen Fashions factory fire and the April 2013 Rana Plaza building collapse — and, more broadly, the ability of Bangladeshi workers to exercise their full range of labor rights.
On June 27, 2013, President Obama announced his decision to suspend Bangladesh's trade benefits under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) in view of insufficient progress by the Government of Bangladesh in affording Bangladeshi workers internationally recognized worker rights. That decision followed an extensive, interagency review under the GSP program of worker rights and worker safety in Bangladesh during which the U.S. Government encouraged the Government of Bangladesh to implement needed reforms. At the time of the announcement, the Administration provided the Government of Bangladesh with an action plan which, if implemented, could provide a basis for the President to consider the reinstatement of GSP trade benefits.

Sunday, June 30, 2013

President Obama Tightens Bangladesh Trade Over Worker Safety Issues

TO MODIFY DUTY-FREE TREATMENT UNDER THE
GENERALIZED SYSTEM OF PREFERENCES AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
- - - - - - -
BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
A PROCLAMATION
1. Section 502(b)(2)(G) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (the "1974 Act") (19 U.S.C.
2462(b)(2)(G)), provides that the President shall not designate any country a beneficiary developing country under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) if such country has not taken or is not taking steps to afford internationally recognized worker rights to workers in the country (including any designated zone in that country). Section 502(d)(2) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2462(d)(2)) provides that, after complying with the requirements of section 502(f)(2) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2462(f)(2)), the President shall withdraw or suspend the designation of any country as a beneficiary developing country if, after such designation, the President determines that as the result of changed circumstances such country would be barred from designation as a beneficiary developing country under section 502(b)(2) of the 1974 Act. Section 502(f)(2) of the 1974 Act requires the President to notify the Congress and the country cocerned at least 60 days before terminating its designation as a beneficiary developing country for purposes of the GSP.
2. Having considered the factors set forth in section 502(b)(2)(G) and providing the notification called for in section 502(f)(2), I have determined pursuant to section 502(d) of the 1974 Act, that it is appropriate to suspend Bangladesh's designation as a GSP beneficiary developing country because it has not taken or is not taking steps to afford internationally recognized worker rights to workers in the country. In order to reflect the suspension of Bangladesh's status as a beneficiary developing country under the GSP, I have determined that it is appropriate to modify general notes 4(a) and 4(b)(i) of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS).
3. Section 503(c)(2)(A) of the 1974 Act provides that beneficiary developing countries, except those designated as least-developed beneficiary developing countries or beneficiary sub-Saharan African countries as provided in section 503(c)(2)(D) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2463(c)(2)(D)), are subject to competitive need limitations on the preferential treatment afforded under the GSP to eligible articles.
4. Pursuant to section 503(c)(2)(A) of the 1974 Act, I have determined that in 2012 certain beneficiary developing countries exported eligible articles in quantities exceeding
the applicable competitive need limitations, and I therefore terminate the duty-free treatment for such articles from such beneficiary developing countries.
5. Section 503(c)(2)(F)(i) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2463(c)(2)(F)(i)) provides that the President may disregard the competitive need limitation provided in section 503(c)(2)(A)(i)(II) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2463(c)(2)(A)(i)(II)) with respect to any eligible article from any beneficiary developing country, if the aggregate appraised value of the imports of such article into the United States during the preceding calendar year does not exceed an amount set forth in section 503(c)(2)(F)(ii) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2463(c)(2)(F)(ii)).
6. Pursuant to section 503(c)(2)(F)(i) of the 1974 Act, I have determined that the competitive need limitation provided in section 503(c)(2)(A)(i)(II) of the 1974 Act should be disregarded with respect to certain eligible articles from certain beneficiary developing countries.
7. Section 503(d)(1) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2463(d)(1)) provides that the President may waive the application of the competitive need limitations in section 503(c)(2) of the 1974 Act with respect to any eligible article from any beneficiary developing country if certain conditions are met.
8. Pursuant to section 503(d)(1) of the 1974 Act, I have received the advice of the United States International Trade Commission on whether any industry in the United States is likely to be adversely affected by waivers of the competitive need limitations provided in section 503(c)(2), and I have determined, based on that advice and on the considerations described in sections 501 and 502(c) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2462(c)) and after giving great weight to the considerations in section 503(d)(2) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2463(d)(2)), that such waivers are in the national economic interest of the United States. Accordingly, I have determined that the competitive need limitations of section 503(c)(2) of the 1974 Act should be waived with respect to certain eligible articles from certain beneficiary developing countries.
9. Section 503(d)(4)(B)(ii) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2463(d)(4)(B)(ii)) provides that the President should revoke any waiver of the application of the competitive need limitations that has been in effect with respect to an article for 5 years or more if the beneficiary developing country has exported to the United States during the preceding calendar year an amount that exceeds the quantity set forth in section 503(d)(4)(B)(ii)(I) or section 503(d)(4)(B)(ii)(II) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2463(d)(4)(B)(ii)(I) and 19 U.S.C. 2463(d)(4)(B)(ii)(II)).
10. Pursuant to section 503(d)(4)(B)(ii) of the 1974 Act, I have determined that in 2012 certain beneficiary developing countries exported eligible articles for which a waiver has been in effect for 5 years or more in quantities exceeding the applicable limitation set forth in section 503(d)(4)(B)(ii)(I) or section 503(d)(4)(B)(ii)(II) of the 1974 Act, and I therefore revoke said waivers.
11. Section 604 of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2483) authorizes the President to embody in the HTS the substance of the relevant provisions of that Act, and of other Acts affecting import treatment, and actions thereunder, including removal, modification, continuance, or imposition of any rate of duty or other import restriction.
12. Presidential Proclamation 6763 of December 23, 1994, implemented the trade agreements resulting from the Uruguay Round of multilateral negotiations, including Schedule XX—United States of America, annexed to the Marrakesh Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (Schedule XX). In order to maintain the intended tariff treatment for certain products covered in Schedule XX, I have determined that technical corrections to the HTS are necessary.
13. Presidential Proclamation 7011 of June 30, 1997, implemented modifications of the World Trade Organization Ministerial Declaration on Trade in Information Technology Products (the "ITA") for the United States. Products included in Attachment B to the ITA are entitled to duty-free treatment wherever classified. Presidential Proclamation 8840 of June 29, 2012, implemented certain technical corrections are necessary to the HTS in order to maintain the intended tariff treatment for certain products covered in Attachment B. I have determined that certain additional technical corrections are necessary to conform the HTS to the changes made by Presidential Proclamation 8840.
14. Presidential Proclamation 8818 of May 14, 2012, implemented U.S. tariff commitments under the United States-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement and incorporated by reference Publication 4320 of the United States International Trade Commission, entitled "Modifications to the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States to Implement the United States-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement." Presidential Proclamation 8894 of October 29, 2012, made modifications to the HTS to correct technical errors and omissions in Annexes I and II to Publication 4320. I have determined that a modification is necessary to correct an additional omission.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including but not limited to title V and section 604 of the 1974 Act, do proclaim that:
(1) The designation of Bangladesh as a beneficiary developing country under the GSP is suspended on the date that is 60 days after the date this proclamation is published in the Federal Register.
(2) In order to reflect the suspension of benefits under the GSP with respect to Bangladesh, general notes 4(a) and 4(b)(i) of the HTS are modified as set forth in section A of Annex I to this proclamation by deleting "Bangladesh" from the list of independent countries and least developed countries, effective with respect to articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after the date that is 60 days after the date this proclamation is published in the Federal Register.
(3) In order to provide that one or more countries should no longer be treated as beneficiary developing countries with respect to one or more eligible articles for purposes of the GSP, the Rates of Duty 1–Special subcolumn for the corresponding HTS subheadings and general note 4(d) of the HTS are modified as set forth in sections B and C of Annex I to this proclamation.
(4) The modifications to the HTS set forth in sections B and C of Annex I to this proclamation shall be effective with respect to the articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after the dates set forth in the relevant sections of Annex I.
(5) The competitive need limitation provided in section 503(c)(2)(A)(i)(II) of the 1974 Act is disregarded with respect to the eligible articles in the HTS subheadings and to the beneficiary developing countries listed in Annex II to this proclamation.
(6) A waiver of the application of section 503(c)(2) of the 1974 Act shall apply to the articles in the HTS subheadings and to the beneficiary developing countries set forth in Annex III to this proclamation.
(7) In order to provide the intended tariff treatment to certain products as set out in Schedule XX, the HTS is modified as set forth in section A of Annex IV to this proclamation.
(8) In order to conform the HTS to certain technical corrections made to provide the intended tariff treatment to certain products as set out in the ITA, the HTS is modified as set forth in section B of Annex IV to this proclamation.
(9) In order to provide the intended tariff treatment to certain goods from Colombia, the HTS is modified as set forth in section C of Annex IV to this proclamation.
(10) The modifications to the HTS set forth in Annex IV to this proclamation shall be effective with respect to the articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after the dates set forth in the relevant sections of Annex IV.
(11) Any provisions of previous proclamations and Executive Orders that are inconsistent with the actions taken in this proclamation are superseded to the extent of such inconsistency.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-seventh day of June, in the year of our Lord two thousand thirteen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-seventh.
BARACK OBAMA

Monday, May 20, 2013

The International Call for Fashion Safety - Accord on Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh


MAY 13, 2013 
Accord on Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh

The undersigned parties are committed to the goal of a safe and sustainable Bangladeshi ReadyMade Garment ("RMG") industry in which no worker needs to fear fires, building collapses, or 
other accidents that could be prevented with reasonable health and safety measures. 
The signatories to this Agreement agree to establish a fire and building safety program in 
Bangladesh for a period of five years. 

The programme will build on the National Action Plan on Fire Safety (NAP), which expressly 
welcomes the development and implementation by any stakeholder of any other activities that 
would constitute a meaningful contribution to improving fire safety in Bangladesh. The 
signatories commit to align this programme and its activities with the NAP and to ensure a close 
collaboration, including for example by establishing common programme, liaison and advisory 
structures.

The signatories also welcome a strong role for the International Labour Organization (ILO), 
through the Bangladesh office as well as through international programmes, to ensure that both 
the National Action Plan, and the programme foreseen by the signatories of this Agreement, get 
implemented. 

The signatories shall develop and agree an Implementation Plan within 45 days of signing this 
Agreement. The nongovernmental organisations which are signatories to the Joint Memorandum 
of Understanding on Fire and Building Safety (dated March 15, 2012), having stated their 
intention to support the implementation of this programme, shall, at their own election, be signed 
witnesses to this Agreement. 

This Agreement commits the signatories to finance and implement a programme that will take 
cognizance of the Practical Activities described in the NAP involving, at minimum, the following 
elements:

SCOPE: The agreement covers all suppliers producing products for the signatory companies. 
The signatories shall designate these suppliers as falling into the following categories, according 
to which they shall require these supplier to accept inspections and implement remediation 
measures in their factories according to the following breakdown: 

1. Safety inspections, remediation and fire safety training at facilities representing, in the 
aggregate, not less than 30%, approximately, of each signatory company’s annual 
production in Bangladesh by volume (“Tier 1 factories”).

2. Inspection and remediation at any remaining major or long-term suppliers to each 
company (“Tier 2 factories”). Together, Tier 1 and Tier 2 factories shall represent not less 
than 65%, approximately, of each signatory company’s production in Bangladesh by 
volume. 

3. Limited initial inspections to identify high risks at facilities with occasional orders, onetime orders or those for which a company’s orders represent less than 10% of the MAY 13, 2013 
factory’s production in Bangladesh by volume (“Tier 3 factories”). Nothing in this 
paragraph shall be deemed to alleviate the obligation of each signatory company to 
ensure that those factories it designates as Tier 3 represent, in the aggregate, no more than 
35%, approximately, of its production in Bangladesh by volume. Facilities determined, as 
a result of initial inspection, to be high risk shall be subject to the same treatment as if 
they were Tier 2 factories. 

GOVERNANCE:

4. The signatories shall appoint a Steering Committee (SC) with equal representation 
chosen by the trade union signatories and company signatories (maximum 3 seats each) 
and a representative from and chosen by the International Labour Organization (ILO) as a 
neutral chair. The SC shall have responsibility for the selection, contracting, 
compensation and review of the performance of a Safety Inspector and a Training 
Coordinator; oversight and approval of the programme budget; oversight of financial 
reporting and hiring of auditors; and such other management duties as may be required. 
The SC will strive to reach decision by consensus, but, in the absence of consensus, 
decisions will be made by majority vote. In order to develop the activity of the SC, a 
Governance regulation will be developed. 

5. Dispute resolution. Any dispute between the parties to, and arising under, the terms of 
this Agreement shall first be presented to and decided by the SC, which shall decide the 
dispute by majority vote of the SC within a maximum of 21 days of a petition being filed by 
one of the parties. Upon request of either party, the decision of the SC may be appealed to 
a final and binding arbitration process. Any arbitration award shall be enforceable in a 
court of law of the domicile of the signatory against whom enforcement is sought and 
shall be subject to The Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign 
Arbitral Awards (The New York Convention), where applicable. The process for binding 
arbitration, including, but not limited to, the allocation of costs relating to any arbitration 
and the process for selection of the Arbitrator, shall be governed by the UNCITRAL 
Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration 1985 (with amendments as adopted 
in 2006). 

6. The signatories shall appoint an Advisory Board involving brands and retailers, suppliers, 
government institutions, trade unions, and NGOs. . The advisory board will ensure all 
stakeholders, local and international, can engage in constructive dialogue with each other 
and provide feedback and input to the SC, thereby enhancing quality, efficiency, 
credibility and synergy. The SC will consult the parties to the NAP to determine the 
feasibility of a shared advisory structure. 

7. Administration and management of the programme will be developed by the SC in 
consultation with the 'High-Level Tripartite Committee' established to implement and 
oversee the National Action Plan on Fire Safety, as well as with the Ministry of Labour 
and Employment of Bangladesh (MoLE), the ILO and the Deutsche Gesellschaft für 
Internationale Zusammenarbeit GmbH (GIZ), to maximize synergy at operational level; 
and the SC may make use of the offices of GIZ for administrative coordination and 
support.

CREDIBLE INSPECTIONS:

8. A qualified Safety Inspector, with fire and building safety expertise and impeccable 
credentials, and who is independent of and not concurrently employed by companies, 
trade unions or factories, shall be appointed by the SC. Providing the Chief Inspector acts 
in a manner consistent with his or her mandate under the provisions of this Agreement, 
and unless there is clear evidence of malfeasance or incompetence on his or her part, the 
SC shall not restrict or otherwise interfere with the Chief Inspector’s performance of the 
duties set forth in the Agreement as he or she sees fit, including the scheduling of 
inspections and the publishing of reports.

9. Thorough and credible safety inspections of Tier 1, 2 and 3 factories shall be carried out 
by skilled personnel selected by and acting under the direction of the Safety Inspector, 
based on internationally recognized workplace safety standards and/or national standards 
(once the review foreseen under the NAP is completed in June 2013). The Safety 
Inspector shall make all reasonable efforts to ensure that an initial inspection of each 
factory covered by this Agreement shall be carried out within the first two years of the 
term of this Agreement. The Safety Inspector will be available to provide input into the 
NAP legislative review and to support capacity building work regarding inspections by 
the MoLE foreseen under the NAP. 

10. Where a signatory company’s inspection programme, in the opinion of the Safety 
Inspector, meets or exceeds the standards of thorough and credible inspections, as defined 
by the Safety Inspector, it will be considered an integral part of the programme activities 
set forth in this Agreement. Signatory companies wishing to have their inspection 
programme so considered shall provide the Safety Inspector full access to the findings of 
their inspections and he or she will integrate these into reporting and remediation 
activities. Notwithstanding this provision, all factories within the scope of this Agreement 
shall still be subject to all the provisions of this Agreement, including but not limited to a 
least one safety inspection carried out by personnel acting under the direction of the 
Safety Inspector. 

11. Written Inspection Reports of all factories inspected under the programme shall be 
prepared by the Safety Inspector within two (2) weeks of the date of inspection and 
shared upon completion with factory management, the factory’s health and safety 
committee, worker representatives (where one or more unions are present), signatory 
companies and the SC. Where, in the opinion of the Safety Inspector, there is not a 
functioning health and safety committee at the factory, the report will be shared with the 
unions which are the signatories to this Agreement. Within a timeline agreed by the SC, 
but no greater than six weeks, the Safety Inspector shall disclose the Inspection Report to 
the public, accompanied by the factory’s remediation plan, if any. In the event that, in 
the opinion of the Safety Inspector, the inspection identifies a severe and imminent 
danger to worker safety, he or she shall immediately inform factory management, the 
factory’s health and safety committee, worker representatives (where one or more unions 
are present), the Steering Committee and unions which are signatories to this Agreement, 
and direct a remediation plan.

REMEDIATION:
12. Where corrective actions are identified by the Safety Inspector as necessary to bring a 
factory into compliance with building, fire and electrical safety standards, the signatory 
company or companies that have designated that factory as a Tier 1, 2, or 3 supplier, shall 
require that factory to implement these corrective actions, according to a schedule that is 
mandatory and time-bound, with sufficient time allotted for all major renovations.
13. Signatory companies shall require their supplier factories that are inspected under the 
Program to maintain workers’ employment relationship and regular income during any 
period that a factory (or portion of a factory) is closed for renovations necessary to 
complete such Corrective Actions for a period of no longer than six months. . Failure to 
do so may trigger a notice, warning and ultimately termination of the business 
relationship as described in paragraph 21. 

14. Signatory companies shall make reasonable efforts to ensure that any workers whose 
employment is terminated as a result of any loss of orders at a factory are offered 
employment with safe suppliers, if necessary by actively working with other suppliers to 
provide hiring preferences to these workers.

15. Signatory companies shall require their supplier factories to respect the right of a worker 
to refuse work that he or she has reasonable justification to believe is unsafe, without 
suffering discrimination or loss of pay, including the right to refuse to enter or to remain 
inside a building that he or she has reasonable justification to believe is unsafe for 
occupation. 

TRAINING:
16. The Training Coordinator appointed by the SC shall establish an extensive fire and building 
safety training program. The training program shall be delivered by a selected skilled 
personnel by the Training Coordinator at Tier 1 facilities for workers, managers and 
security staff to be delivered with involvement of trade unions and specialized local 
experts. These training programmes shall cover basic safety procedures and precautions, 
as well as enable workers to voice concerns and actively participate in activities to ensure 
their own safety. Signatory companies shall require their suppliers to provide access to 
their factories to training teams designated by the Training Coordinator that include 
safety training experts as well as qualified union representatives to provide safety training 
to workers and management on a regular basis. 

17. Health and Safety Committees shall be required by the signatory companies in all 
Bangladesh factories that supply them, which shall function in accordance with 
Bangladeshi law, and be comprised of workers and managers from the applicable factory. 
Worker members shall comprise no less than 50% of the committee and shall be chosen 
by the factory’s trade union, if present, and by democratic election among the workers 
where there is no trade union present.

COMPLAINTS PROCESS:
18. The Safety Inspector shall establish a worker complaint process and mechanism that 
ensures that workers from factories supplying signatory companies can raise in a timely 
fashion concerns about health and safety risks, safely and confidentially, with the Safety 
Inspector. This should be aligned with the Hotline to be established under the NAP. 

TRANSPARENCY AND REPORTING:
19. The SC shall make publicly available and regularly update information on key aspects of 
the programme, including:

a. a single aggregated list of all suppliers in Bangladesh (including sub-contractors) 
used by the signatory companies, based on data which shall be provided to the SC 
and regularly updated by each of the signatory companies, and which shall 
indicate which factories on this list have been designated by that company as Tier 
1 factories and which have been designated by that company as Tier 2 factories, 
however volume data and information linking specific companies to specific 
factories will be kept confidential, 

b. Written Inspection Reports, which shall be developed by the Safety Inspector for 
all factories inspected under this programme, shall be disclosed to interested 
parties and the public as set forth in paragraph 11 of this Agreement. 
Public statements by the Safety Inspector identifying any factory that is not acting 
expeditiously to implement remedial recommendations. 

c. Quarterly Aggregate Reports that summarize both aggregated industry 
compliance data as well as a detailed review of findings, remedial 
recommendations, and progress on remediation to date for all factories at which 
inspections have been completed.

20. The signatories to this Agreement shall work together with other organizations such as ILO 
and the High-Level Tripartite Committee and the Bangladeshi Government to encourage 
the establishment of a protocol seeking to ensure that suppliers which participate fully in 
the inspection and remediation activities of this Agreement shall not be penalised as a 
result of the transparency provisions of this Agreement. The objectives of the protocol 
are to (i) support and motivate the employer to take remediation efforts in the interest of 
the workforce and the sector and (ii) expedite prompt legal action where the supplier 
refuses to undertake the remedial action required to become compliant with national law. 

SUPPLIER INCENTIVES: 
21. Each signatory company shall require that its suppliers in Bangladesh participate fully in 
the inspection, remediation, health and safety and, where applicable, training activities, as 
described in the Agreement. If a supplier fails to do so, the signatory will promptly
implement a notice and warning process leading to termination of the business 
relationship if these efforts do not succeed. 

22. In order to induce Tier 1 and Tier 2 factories to comply with upgrade and remediation 
requirements of the program, participating brands and retailers will negotiate commercial terms 
with their suppliers which ensure that it is financially feasible for the factories to maintain safe 
workplaces and comply with upgrade and remediation requirements instituted by the Safety 
Inspector. Each signatory company may, at its option, use alternative means to ensure factories 
have the financial capacity to comply with remediation requirements, including but not limited to 
joint investments, providing loans, accessing donor or government support, through offering 
business incentives or through paying for renovations directly. 

23. Signatory companies to this agreement are committed to maintaining long-term sourcing 
relationships with Bangladesh, as is demonstrated by their commitment to this five-year 
programme. Signatory companies shall continue business at order volumes comparable to or 
greater than those that existed in the year preceding the inception of this Agreement with Tier 1 
and Tier 2 factories at least through the first two years of the term of this Agreement, provided 
that (a) such business is commercially viable for each company and (b) the factory continues to 
substantially meet the company’s terms and comply with the company’s requirements of its 
supplier factories under this agreement. 

FINANCIAL SUPPORT:
24. In addition to their obligations pursuant to this Agreement, signatory companies shall 
also assume responsibility for funding the activities of the SC, Safety Inspector and 
Training Coordinator as set forth in this Agreement, with each company contributing its 
equitable share of the funding in accordance with a formula to be established in the 
Implementation Plan. The SC shall be empowered to seek contributions from 
governmental and other donors to contribute to costs. Each signatory company shall 
contribute funding for these activities in proportion to the annual volume of each 
company’s garment production in Bangladesh relative to the respective annual volumes 
of garment production of the other signatory companies, subject to a maximum 
contribution of $500,000 per year for each year of the term of this Agreement. A sliding 
scale of minimum contributions based on factors such as revenues and annual volume in 
Bangladesh will be defined in the Implementation Plan with annual revisions, while 
ensuring sufficient funding for the adequate implementation of the Accord and the Plan. 

25. The SC shall ensure that there are credible, robust, and transparent procedures for the 
accounting and oversight of all contributed funds.

See also: 

Public Outrage Over Factory Conditions Spurs Labor Deal (NY Times) 

......................................

UNI Global Press Release

Politicians on both sides of the Atlantic are waking up to the fact they must take an initiative on Bangladesh garment factory safety.
Global commerce union leaders are urging all governments to commit to the Accord on Fire and Building Safety and push for its speedy implementation. 

The Netherlands Government has called on Dutch retailers to sign the Accord and discussed financial support to improve conditions for the Bangladeshi garment industry. Other European governments, notably France, Denmark and Norway have also shown support. In the U.S. a group of leading Senators has written to retail CEOs who have not signed up, including Walmart and Gap, urging them to reconsider.

The legally binding Accord, driven by IndustriALL and UNI Global Union and the NGOs, the Clean Clothes Campaign and the Worker Rights Consortium, has a critical mass of support from leading retailers around the world with more than 35 brands confirmed:

H&M, Inditex, C&A, PVH, Tchibo, Tesco, Marks & Spencer, Primark, El Corte Inglés, jbc, Mango, Carrefour, KiK, Helly Hansen, G-Star, Aldi, New Look, Mothercare, Loblaws, Sainsbury’s, Benetton, N Brown Group, Stockmann, WE Europe, Esprit, Rewe, Next, Lidl, Hess Natur, Switcher, Abercrombie & Fitch, John Lewis, Charles Vögele, V&D, Otto Group, s.Oliver, Bonmarche, HEMA, Comtex.

UNI Global Union General Secretary, Philip Jennings said, “There can be no excuses from the retail sector for not signing up to the Accord, when Walmart alone spends $2.5 billion per year on advertising and Gap $653 million.” 

The trade unions committed to take the message back to their home governments to insist the retail sector backs the deal and that grass root members of parliament mobilise to support it.

Union leaders said it was time for governments to step up.

Per Tønnesen, President of the Danish union HK HANDEL said, “We welcome the fact that the Danish Trade Minister has raised the Bangladesh Factory Safety deal and shown support. This is an important step to convince Danish brands to sign the Accord. All Danish retail companies must be urged to support the Accord. HK HANDEL is looking forward to playing its part in rolling out the implementation plan and the governments should be on-board.” 

John Hannett, General Secretary of USDAW in the UK and President of UNI Europa Commerce said, “The British Government must get behind the Bangladeshi Safety deal but so must politicians of every political persuasion. The big UK retailers have shown their support for the Accord and now it’s up to the politicians to help convince those who have not yet signed. The French Commerce Minister has called on companies, unions and NGOs to come together to discuss concrete steps to improve factory safety in Bangladesh and the Dutch have made their position clear and are considering financial support – the UK must not drag its heels.” 

Michael Bride, of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union of North America said, "We applaud the group of eight U.S. Senators, led by Sherrod Brown, Tom Harkin and Dick Durbin, for calling on those brands yet to sign the Accord to reconsider. U.S. corporations should understand that their efforts to excuse themselves from human rights obligations which companies elsewhere have signed up to will be neither easily forgotten nor forgiven. The U.S. Government has a responsibility to ensure that companies located in its jurisdiction are not permitted to adhere to a lesser standard on human rights and safety than companies in the rest of the world."

The shoe factory collapse in Cambodia earlier this week has underlined that factory safety is not an issue confined to Bangladesh and that such an agreement is vital for the whole retail industry.