Maid in India

Maid in India
schemes, but it is all on a voluntary basis. Brands and retailers may well be part of this or that
initiative, but still do not take strong action on forced labour issues. Commitment to eradicating
labour rights abuses is easily stated, but putting promises into action is another matter. Action is
often translated into more audits, while audits fail to detect more sensitive issues such as bonded
labour, harassment and discrimination.
Recommendations
All players – manufacturers, buying companies, trade unions, local and international civil society
organisations, governments and others – need to acknowledge the persisting problems.
Governments have a duty to protect against human rights abuses by third parties, including
business enterprises, through appropriate policies, regulation, and adjudication.
Companies, individually but also collectively, should respect and protect national legislation and/or
international standards regarding human rights; whichever offers the highest protection to the
concerned workers. The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and ISO 26000 in addition
to the relevant Indian laws and regulations, the ILO Conventions and the UN Principles on
Business and Human Rights are pertinent, internationally supported standards which must be
applied to fight labour rights violations in the South Indian garment industry. Companies have a
supply chain responsibility to ensure these standards are applied beyond the first-tier suppliers. To
detect human rights abuses, focused investigations and tailor-made audit methodologies, as well
as close consultation and collaboration with local stakeholders are required. The human rights risk
assessments must also take into account local cultural notions regarding human rights.
In the absence of law enforcement or functioning labour inspection, companies have a
responsibility to ensure labour rights. For instance, the absence of state-determined and enforced
minimum wages for the garment industry does not relieve manufacturers and buyers from the duty
to ensure workers are paid a living wage.
Undeniably, each individual company has an individual responsibility to abide by national labour
laws and international human rights and labour norms and standards. At the same time, the global
garment industry also has a collective responsibility to ensure human rights are respected
throughout the global supply chain. This should become visible in the policies and actions of trade
associations and employers’ associations both in garment producing and importing countries.
Increased collaboration among brands, retailers, manufacturers and suppliers further up the supply
chain is needed. All relevant actors should be on board when dialogue is organised and action
plans are developed. It is of the utmost importance to have, for instance, SIMA, TASMA and the
relevant Indian governmental agencies at the table, as well as the brands and retailers that thus far
have been unresponsive. Initiatives should focus on scale and leverage, without, however, lowering
the normative bar.
All parties involved should ensure that independent trade unions can play their designated roles.
First and foremost, the right of workers to form and join trade unions and to bargain collectively
should be protected and respected. These enabling rights permit workers to defend their rights,
voice grievances, and negotiate recruitment and employment conditions, including wages.
To deal with workers’ needs and complaints, grievance procedures should be put in place. Such
grievance procedures should meet the following core criteria: legitimacy; accessibility;
predictability; equality; compatibility with internationally acceptable rights; transparency. Complaint
procedures should provide a basis for continuous learning and improvement. Company’s grievance
8