Post by Professor Sarah Ashwin, Professor of Comparative Employment Relations and Head of Department at ÐÓ°ÉÂÛ̳'s Department of Management.
A decade ago, Rana Plaza, an eight-storey building housing garment factories, collapsed in Bangladesh, killing 1,134 workers and injuring approximately 2,500. It was the worst accident to affect garment workers in history.
Sarah Ashwin, Professor of Comparative Employment Relations and Head of the ÐÓ°ÉÂÛ̳’s Department of Management, is an international expert on global supply chains in the garment industry.
Following on from her recent , she explains the impact of the Rana Plaza tragedy on the global fashion industry and what more we can do to ensure garment workers’ rights and safety across the world.
A decade since the Rana Plaza collapse, what has been done to ensure the safety of garment workers?
The Bangladesh Accord on Fire and Building Safety was signed in 2013. It was lauded as a “breakthrough” in terms of the rights and safety of garment workers. The Accord was a transnational industrial relations agreement between 222 global brands, retailers and global union organisations that represent tens of millions of workers. When the Accord’s five-year term came to an end, independent research confirmed that the safety of many factories had been transformed - some 85 per cent of hazards initially identified had been fixed.
However, the Bangladesh government and the garment industry’s employers’ association were unhappy about the Accord’s extension in 2018 and fought a legal battle to exclude the Accord from the country. Two key reasons for this were suppliers’ perceived lack of voice and the perception that suppliers were of safety remediation with little help from global brands. Eventually a compromise was reached with the establishment of a national initiative uniting industry, brands and trade unions ‘to , based on a unified compliance standard’.
In 2021 brands and global unions signed the International Accord for Health and Safety in the Textile & Garment Industry, with the first country agreement, the legally-binding Pakistan Accord on Health and Safety in the Textile and Garment Industry coming into effect earlier this year. This Accord includes independent inspections, workers’ safety committees and many of the features of the Bangladesh Accord. Country Accords are also under discussion in Sri Lanka, India and Morocco.
It’s impossible to say whether the Rana Plaza tragedy could happen again, but I think it’s far less likely.
What has changed when it comes to the voice and empowerment of garment workers?
Sadly, there hasn’t been enough progress in these areas.
The Accords do include wording on workers’ ‘freedom of association’, but this isn’t the focus of these agreements. Company codes of conduct usually include freedom of association, but it is hard for auditors to assess. We know that in China, for example, officially-recognised unions are controlled by the Communist Party, and independent workers’ organisation is prohibited. One of the best ways to improve the conditions for garment workers would be to have trade unions, but free trade unions cannot be organised from above by brands, and are often not tolerated by local management and governments.
Which country has led the way when it comes to improving garment workers’ safety?
Bangladesh was an unwilling leader - it was pushed into action to recover its reputation after Rana Plaza. After a while, the Bangladeshi Government began to be frustrated by what they saw as foreign interference in trying to protect garment workers’ safety and rights.
A big problem in the past has been that as soon as labour standards (and therefore costs) rise, garment firms move on to a cheaper destination. This explains why governments are supplier firms are hesitant about unionisation and wage increases. Garment brands have indeed been developing new sourcing countries such as Myanmar (which has proved a huge political risk) and Ethiopia. This is why binding agreements such as the Accord which include sourcing commitments are so important.
Which well-known brands prioritise garment workers’ rights and safety and which don’t?
It’s hard for consumers and even experts to assess firms’ labour standards from the outside. Most publicly-available rankings rely on input rather than output measures that capture labour standards.
A decent way to judge from the outside is to look at the commitments that brands have signed up to. Those that are willing to sign binding agreements with global unions are likely to be those that are . Some low-cost brands such as H&M, Primark and Lidl have done this, but others, such as Shein, fly under the radar and have not even committed to baseline CSR standards. .
How, as consumers, should we be putting pressure on governments and brands to ensure further progress?
The has been effective in naming and shaming brands, whereas global unions try to draw brands in through negotiation, rather than through naming and shaming. I think the most powerful way of putting pressure on governments and brands is for campaign groups and unions to work together. For example, campaign groups helped to push brands into signing the Bangladesh Accord with global unions through strong campaigning on social media.
Do you think we are in danger of forgetting the Rana Plaza tragedy?
Ten years on from Rana Plaza, many of the corporate leaders at the time, who were deeply impacted by the tragedy, have moved on and some brands who signed the Accord have gone bankrupt. It’s hard to keep the attention on garment workers’ rights and safety because it’s a highly competitive industry with small margins. However, it’s fantastic that the global unions have managed to keep a significant number of brands involved in developing the Accord model.