"How does a company respect the right to freedom of association in its operations and supply chain when its operations, business partners or suppliers are based in countries where such rights are heavily restricted in law and/or practice?"

NB: Freedom of association is a separate right from collective bargaining as it can take place even when there are no trade unions present. However, there is a relationship between the two as trade unions and other groups of workers will often participate in collective bargaining.

According to the International Labour Organization (ILO), freedom of association is the "key element in ensuring respect for other fundamental rights at work".1 If companies restrict workers' rights to join a union or organisation, or to associate freely, then it is unlikely that a company will continue to maintain good labour practices. This could result in the infringement of a number of fundamental rights and labour rights violations including the use of child or forced labour, poor health and safety conditions, and the right to equal treatment.

The challenge for a business is how it can best respect its workers' right to freely associate (including the right to join a trade union and to undertake union activities) when it operates in or sources from countries in which this right is heavily restricted by government. Even if workers (either within the company or its suppliers) formally enjoy the right to freely associate, they can still face a range of practical barriers, including discrimination, informal restrictions, intimidation and even violence. In such circumstances, how – and to what degree – can a responsible company continue operating or sourcing from such countries, whilst at the same time respecting this right?

Real world examples

Drummond Company Inc. alleged to be complicit in paramilitary killings of trade union members

In March 2012, the ex-paramilitary Alcides Mattos Tabares, whilst testifying before a US court, claimed that the mining company Drummond Ltda paid paramilitary groups approximately US$1.5 m to kill trade unions members in the department of Cesar.2 Alcides claimed that whilst part of the paramilitary group Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia (AUC), he took part in the murder of two strike-organising trade union members at Drummond. A month later, in a subsequent hearing, Jaime Blanco Maya, who was contracted by Drummond to provide catering services for the mining workers, claimed that the he served as a mediator between the paramilitary group and the multinational, and was in charge of arranging the payment of financial aid. Blanco Maya pled guilty to conspiracy to commit murder, admitting that he knew two trade union members were going to be killed but had not acted to stop it. He claims, however, that James Atkins (the CIA agent in charge of the security of the company) and Jairo Charris (a former worker at Drummond) had masterminded the killings.

Drummond stated that they only relied on their own private security forces and the Colombian army to protect their assets and denied all connections with paramilitary groups. The hearings were part of a civil lawsuit, in which over 600 victims filled against the company in the State of Alabama. How does a company ensure that at no stage of its operations are anti-union sentiments expressed through, potentially fatal, violent force, especially when security operations are carried out at worksites?

HP and other electronic companies accused of labour abuses in factories in Guandong

In February 2007, NGO Students & Scholars against Corporate Misbehaviour (SACOM) launched a campaign highlighting labour abuses in electronic factories within Special Economic Zones in China's Guangdong Province, where trade unions are forbidden.

According to a 2008 SACOM follow up report, "High Tech – No Rights?", these electronic factories supplied parts to multinational companies including HP, Apple and Dell. According to SACOM, as trade unions cannot be formed workers cannot defend their fundamental labour rights. SACOM's campaign alleged a number of related labour abuses, including low wages, not being paid for overtime, long working hours, lack of health and safety measures and the lack of a worker's right to legal information. How does a multinational company, with several tiers in the supply chain ensure that the right to freedom of association is not being restricted in its supplier factories?

IKEA, Walmart and Carrefour accused of failing to take action to prevent ‘union busting' in Turkey

On 18 May 2009, the Clean Clothes Campaign (CCC) claimed on its website3 that IKEA, Walmart and Carrefour failed to take action against a bed linen supplier factory in Turkey accused by textile union TEKSiF of ‘union busting'. It was alleged that when TEKSiF started to organise workers at the factory in March 2008, union leaders were called into employers' offices one-by-one and were given a choice between renouncing union membership or dismissal. How does a large multinational company sourcing from a country where the law protects union members from retribution ensure that supplier companies are complying with the laws of the country?

• For an example of how HP addressed workers grievances in Mexico through partnering with local labour rights NGO, CEREAL, go to: Freedom of association case studies
• For an example of how Chiquita Brands has addressed this dilemma through sustained campaigning resulting in a framework agreement between Chiquita and global and regional trade unions, go to: Freedom of association case studies
• Please contribute your commentary or suggestions through our online discussion forum: Freedom of association online discussion forum

Back to top

Business and freedom of association

Often, strategic and operational goals require companies to work in countries where freedom of association is constrained, either by law or practice. As a result, businesses will often face challenges when trying to uphold policies that allow for freedom of association.

Companies are likely to come across this dilemma when operating in, or sourcing from countries where:

Laws restrict or prohibit the right to freedom of association: This includes laws forbidding workers to form their own organisations free from interference by the employer or government. Some governments, such as those in China, Myanmar, North Korea and Iran only allow one trade union, which is often under the government's control (either directly or indirectly). Even if unions or other worker groups purport to be independent from the government, government influence can nonetheless be strong.

There are poor legal frameworks and legal enforcement is weak: Many of the worst abuses in relation to the right to join trade unions or workers associations is characterised by limited enforcement of labour laws. Likewise, in many countries the ability of courts, labour inspectorates and other enforcement bodies to protect this right is undermined by a lack of capacity and resources – as well as corruption. In such contexts, local companies are often able to discriminate against workers linked to unions (and other workers' groups), or subject them to more extreme abuses. In some cases, these can include kidnapping and even murder.

Governments interfere with the formal registration of unions: In some countries governments may obstruct the bureaucratic process necessary for the legal recognition of trade unions. In others, governments may refuse to legally recognise these unions for spurious reasons.

Companies refuse to recognise a trade union: Suppliers may refuse to recognise trade unions or worker organisations and therefore refuse to listen to complaints or to partake in collective bargaining.

Managers or suppliers engage in practices that discourage workers from organising: This includes, for example, not allowing union leaders access to workers for recruiting purposes, as well as the punishment of union organisers or members through intimidation, arbitrary dismissal or forced relocation. The International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) claims that in 2008, 7,500 workers in 68 countries were sacked due to their involvement in trade union activity.4 The ITUC says that Turkey was the worst offender, with 2,000 workers having been dismissed due to union activity.5

Global overview of impediments to freedom of association

In 2006, the Global Union Federation estimated that almost 160 million people were members of trade unions globally, with a presence in around 160 countries. In the ITUC's 2009 Annual Survey6 of infringements of trade union rights, it claims that "hundreds of millions"7 of workers around the world are denied the fundamental rights to freedom of association (and collective bargaining). This, it says, results in long working hours, hazardous or unhealthy working conditions and low incomes that are insufficient for supporting a family.

A number of countries continue to ban independent trade unions including Myanmar, China, Laos, North Korea and Viet Nam. According to the ITUC, in many countries, those attempting to unionise are often arrested, fired, harassed or discriminated against.8 The ITUC notes that in 2008 at least nine countries (including China, Iran, South Korea and Turkey) governments were responsible for imprisoning trade unionists on account of their legitimate activities.9 In addition, some 7,500 cases of dismissal of workers involved in trade union activity were recorded in a total of 68 countries, including 20 countries in Africa alone.10 Turkey, Indonesia and Pakistan were amongst the countries with the highest number of workers dismissed due to union-related activities.

In some locations, workers' representatives face serious violence at the hands of groups who are either politically motivated and/or who have been directly tasked by employers to discourage union activity. This includes paramilitary groups operating in areas of weak government control – for example in remote rural areas with a limited government presence. The ITUC reports that in 2008, at least 76 trade unionists were killed worldwide as a result of their actions for worker's rights, with the majority (66) in South America.11 This is a particular issue in Columbia, where 49 trade unionists were killed in 2008 as a result of their union activities.12

In some regions, employers may finance organisations that provide non-work related benefits to workers, such as social programmes and possibly access to credit. These organisations (‘solidarista') are often led by company managers. They do not amount to independent trade unions and can in some cases act as impediments to the development of independent trade unions.

Special Economic Zones

Special Economic Zones (SEZs) aim to attract foreign investment through a number of incentives, including tax breaks and exemptions from labour and environmental laws. As a result, in some countries trade unions are forbidden or restricted within these zones.

Because of this, SEZs are often the site of abuses. The ITUC reports that there are 34 countries worldwide that have inadequate or non-existent protection of workers in SEZs, including Albania, the Bahamas, Belize, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Jamaica, Jordan, Mexico, Nicaragua, Poland and Oman.13 In 2003, the ILO reported that there were about 3,000 SEZs in 116 countries, in which approximately 43 million workers were employed.14 China, Bangladesh, Pakistan and Malaysia either outlaw unions within their SEZs, or make it very cumbersome for workers to form trade unions or workers' organisations.15 Common industries located within SEZs include electronics and textiles.

Cost pressures and globalisation

Companies and their suppliers can be under intense pressure to reduce the costs of production. Since many production costs are fixed, the pressure to reduce variable costs (such as wages) is often increased. When workers form trade unions, companies (or their suppliers) may become concerned that any union activities could incur costs for the company, such as higher wage settlements and reduced working hours.

The global financial and economic crisis has increased pressure on labour markets, reducing available jobs and negatively impacting on working conditions such as wages. In addition, accelerated globalisation has arguably prompted a ‘race to the bottom' for companies seeking cheaper labour costs and lighter labour regulation. Similarly, countries compete with one another to attract investment from such companies, often through the liberalisation of labour regulation. This may mean that an increasing number of workers are denied fundamental human rights.

Back to top

Examples of the kinds of scenarios companies might face when operating in emerging economies include:

Bangladesh: According to the US Department of State's 2009 Human Rights Report, the total labour force in Bangladesh was approximately 50 million, and union membership was 1.9 million in 2008.16 In its 2012 survey of Bangladesh17, the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) stated that trade union rights are not adequately protected in law, primarily because union formation requires participation of at least 30% of the workforce. In addition, the EPZ Workers Welfare Association and Industrial Relations Act 2010 only allows workers in export processing zones (EPZs) to form ‘worker welfare societies'. These organisations are not granted the same rights as unions, denying them adequate freedom of association protection. The right to strike is also limited; any strike continuing beyond 30 days in ‘essential services', or which may be considered a threat to national interest, can be banned. Offences including ‘obstruction of transport' carry excessive penalties, such as up to 14 year's forced labour.

Brazil: The Constitution18 and Labour Code19 allow workers to form trade unions. The law stipulates certain restrictions such as "unicidade", which limits freedom of association by prohibiting multiple, competing unions of the same professional category in a given geographical area.20 The Single Central Organisation of Workers estimates that 20 to 25% of workers are unionised.21 Most informal sector workers (approximately 38% of the labour force)22 cannot join unions as they are not protected by the law. Allegations of harassment, killings and unfair dismissal by both employers and state authorities are frequently reported. As a result of poor legal enforcement, labour rights organisations claim that dismissals, anti-union policies and the persecution of trade unionists are common. The US State Department has reported that laws to protect trade unionists from retaliatory action by their employers are often unenforced, and illegal dismissals commonly occur.23 There is a strong tendency for these protections to be mostly enforced in the formal sector in urban centres, thus many violations of trade union rights take place in rural areas.

China: Contrary to international standards, workers are not free to form or join trade unions of their choice. Only the government-affiliated All-China Federation of Trade Unions (ACFTU) is legally recognised. The International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) has reported that the organisation has 258 million members, representing about 20% of China's population and covering 5.2 million businesses.24 The ACFTU is a party-led organisation which has a trade union monopoly and consists of ten national industrial unions. Trade union officials are usually appointed by the government, restricting union autonomy.25 The Chinese policy of a single, government-controlled union federation significantly curtails union rights. The ACTFU constituent unions are often ineffective in protecting the rights and interests of members.26 The US Department of State reports an estimated 30,000 strikes or work-stoppages throughout the country during 2011. Strikes are frequently resolved without the involvement of the ACTFU, as management often prefers to negotiate directly with workers.27

Egypt: The US Department of State's latest report on Egypt suggests that the protection of freedom of association in Egypt has been mixed since the overthrow of President Hosni Mubarak in February 2011. Prior to the revolution, all unions were required to join 23 officially recognised industrial federations, which were all affiliated to the government-linked Egyptian Trade Union Federation (ETUF).28 However, on 12 March 2011, the Minister of Manpower and Migration issued a declaration recognising freedom of association, which led to 211 newly registered independent trade unions, as of 23 October 2011. Despite the growth of union plurality since the departure of Mubarak, Egyptian policies on trade unions still fall significantly short of international standards. A substantial portion of the Mubarak-era legal framework governing unions is still in force, including the Trade Union Act and Unified Labour Law, both of which significantly curtail union rights in violation of international standards. For example, the International Labour Organisation (ILO) has consistently criticised Egyptian policies that do not comply with the country's treaty requirements. NGO and media reports suggest that many employers discriminate against members of the new unions, which they refuse to recognise, claiming that the 12 March decree had not been codified into law. In additions, labour organisers remained subject to harassment, arrest, and arbitrary dismissal.29 Businesses have used armed groups to intimidate and harass individuals on strike.

Indonesia: Private sector workers are allowed to form and join unions of their choice without previous authorisation or excessive requirements; however the law places restrictions on the ability of public sector workers to organise. An estimated 4% of the total workforce (including the informal sector) is unionised. An estimated 10% of workers in the formal sector are organised. A court can dissolve a trade union if its basic principles are perceived to conflict with the "national ideology". According to the law, to negotiate a collective agreement a union must have membership equal to or more than 50% of the total workforce in the establishment or receive more than 50% support by the enterprise's workers on the union's demands30.

Mexico: Federal law entitles workers to form and join unions of their choice and to organise and bargain collectively. The US State Department31 reports, however, that government involvement in the registration of independent unions is often hostile and politicised. Government labour boards frequently reject registration applications on technicalities. Furthermore, the ITUC reports that, as well as exploiting the difficulties associated with obtaining legal union status, the government also encourages the appointment of certain union leaders over others. The ITUC reports that deficiencies in federal employment law have been exploited in order to create false collective agreements called "protection contracts", which force workers to join unions nominated by company management. These contracts consist of a company paying a monthly sum to the union in exchange for a guarantee of ‘industrial peace'.32

Philippines: The ITUC reports that employers in the private sector often harass, as well as file criminal charges against, union leaders and members, commonly labelling them as terrorists in order to disrupt the formation and action of trade unions. Between March and May 2011, four trade union officials were killed and there were reports of union leaders being charged with falsified criminal charges.33 There is widespread use of contract labour by businesses in order to frustrate trade union activity, as such workers cannot unionise. In special cases, the President may intervene in order to mandate a settlement if the strike affects activities vital to the national interest. However, the government has been criticised for broadening the scope of this status beyond a reasonable degree.34

Viet Nam: There is only one trade union, the Vietnam General Confederation of Labour, which is an umbrella organisation controlled by the Communist Party of Vietnam. It approves and manages a range of subsidiary labour unions that are organised by location and industry. According to the ITUC, the right to strike is severely restricted by law. In 2011 however, illegal strikes increased to nearly 1,000 per year, an increase of 136%from 2010. 35 According to the latest report of the ILO's Better Work Programme in Viet Nam, three of the 78 participating factories refused to reinstate all eligible workers after strikes occurred, and one business actively punished workers for their involvement. At times, strikes end with clashes and violence. Between 24 and 29 June 2011, a strike by over 90,000 workers at the Pou Yuen shoe factory, a major supplier to major brands such as Adidas, resulted in the arrest and/or dismissal of many of those involved.36

Back to top

Legal risks

When the right to freedom of association is enshrined in national law, a company may face legal risks if it obstructs worker activity in this regard. This is in a great degree dependant, however, on whether and to what degree such law is enforced in practice and whether workers are prepared to defend their rights in court. Although many such cases have taken place in the United States and other similar jurisdictions, for example, they nonetheless demonstrate some of the situations in which litigation can take place in a range of countries - including emerging economies.

Since 2006, for example, Starbucks has faced six anti-union cases all initiated by the barista affiliated Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), which has resulted in considerable legal costs and adverse publicity. Three of these cases were filed in three different states in the US: New York, Michigan and Minneapolis, all with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The NLRB is an independent federal agency created to investigate and make findings in relation to complaints made by workers that are protected by the National Labor Relations Act.

Some of the cases filed by the IWW with the NLRB include:

New York (2009): In this case the administrative law judge found that work rules were unfairly imposed on employees who supported the IWW. It is claimed that the company reprimanded a barista for participating in a union protest, interrogated other baristas about their union activity and tore down union flyers from company bulletin boards. The company was ordered by the NLRB to give the jobs back to their former workers and to compensate them for lost earnings. The company was also ordered to post notices informing employees of their union rights

Michigan (2009): In this case, a worker was fired after making a complaint on behalf of the union about an air-conditioner that did not comply with occupational health and safety standards. Starbucks agreed to settle before the hearing for undisclosed costs, but did not admit liability

Minneapolis (2008): This case involved Starbucks who was found by the NLRB to have prohibited union members from discussing the union whilst at work, as well as prohibiting them from posting any union related materials. The NLRB found for the union early in 2009, stating that workers could discuss union issues while on the job

Production and reputational risks

Additional risks companies may face if the right to freedom of association is undermined within its operations or supply chain include:

Loss in productivity: A lack of legitimate channels through which workers can articulate grievances and concerns to employers can result in a breakdown in communications and acrimonious industrial disputes. Arguably, this in itself can result in disputes and strikes that could affect company productivity. In addition, it may result in high levels of employee turnover. Together, these can do much to undermine company productivity.

In addition, it may result in high levels of employee turnover. Together, these can do much to undermine company productivity.

High employee turnover: Workers that are not being adequately compensated, are working long hours and are being refused time off may look for work elsewhere. Employees who experience difficulty between balancing out home and work-life balance are three times more likely to consider quitting their jobs.

Damage to reputation: NGOs and trade union-driven media campaigns alleging that companies are violating workers' rights to associate freely can do significant damage their reputation. This can also result in brand contamination, a loss of sales, poor recruitment and other commercial challenges.

On 16 March 2010, for example, a conglomerate of trade unions (representing 45 million workers)37 wrote a letter to the Council on Ethics of the Government Pension Fund of Norway, asking it to divest its holdings in Grupo Mexico due to alleged labour and environmental abuses. The unions accused the large mining conglomerate of systematically attacking labour unions, as well as workers' rights to freely associate and collectively bargain. It was also alleged that the National Union of Mine and Metal Workers of the Mexican Republic (SNTMMSRM) in particular, were targeted by the company. The unions cited examples include seizing the SNTMMSRM's assets, attempting to replace the union with one selected by the company and the launch of a protracted campaign of repression against the union's leadership.

Sustained campaigning also can result in disinvestment. According to one study, best labour practices (which are often the outcome of strong worker representation) provide returns to shareholders that are three times greater than those of companies with weak practices.38

Similarly, on 30 June 2009 the Clean Clothes Campaign (CCC). On 30 June 2009 alleged that companies such as Polo, Ralph Lauren and Tommy Hilfiger have been ignoring labour right infringements occurring in supplier factory PT Mulia Knitting Factory located in Indonesia. CCC alleges the factory has denied its employees that right to set up its own workers' union39 and that these high quality brands are ignoring the rights of these employees.

Back to top

For a company to ensure the elimination of restrictions on freedom of association within its own operations, it should first comply with national laws on freedom of association. Where there are no national laws in place, companies that aim to create policies that responsibly respect the right to freedom of association can be guided by international instruments.

Instruments include the ILO Convention No. 87, Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise (1948) and ILO Convention No.98, Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining (1949) which set down a number of basic principles. Principles include giving employees the right to establish and join trade unions "of their own choosing without previous authorisation"40 and being given "adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination in respect of their employment."41

It is important to note however that employers are not required to take on an active role in supporting worker's efforts to associate or organise. That said, employers must ensure that workers can exercise this right in a climate free of violence, pressure, fear and threats.

Companies can seek specific guidance on this and other issues relating to international labour standards from the ILO Helpdesk. This aims to help company managers and workers understand the ILO approach to socially responsible labour practices and to assist in the development of good industrial relations.

Other actions that responsible business might take include:42

1. Policy and procedure

Adopting a human rights policy that commits to that does not restrict a worker's right to join a trade union/organisation and to associate freely. Such a policy should be compliant with national laws and regulations. However if it is below international standards then a company can make a commitment to aspire to international standards, as long as it does not conflict with the host country's law:

Specific policies, some of which have been used by companies with many tiers in their supply chain, such as Coca Cola, HP and Levis Strauss could include, for example:

• Workers shall not be discriminated against on the basis they belong to a trade union
• Workers shall have the right to develop a parallel means of independent free association to protect their rights, such as forming an internal workers group, if the law restricts the right for a worker associate freely
• Employers are prohibited to use intimidation, unreasonable searches, or police and military force to obstruct workers' right to freedom of association
• Workers' organisations have the right to conduct their activities without employer interference. This includes the right for workers to convene meetings without the presence of management
• Workers are free to meet and discuss workplace issues during breaks at work and before and after work.
• Workers are free to choose with whom they communicate their concerns.
• Workers shall have the right to freely choose representatives to organise workers
• Workers can personally, or through workers' representatives, engage in dialogue with management, inspect working conditions and carry out other organising activities that do not disrupt factory management
• Employers should not prohibit or impede individual unions affiliation with larger regional, national or international unions or federations
• Managers should be trained in freedom of association compliance

If appropriate, the policy can be extended to suppliers through their codes of conduct or contracts by embedding a requirement that the supplier must comply with the company's policies on freedom of association. This may become applicable when a company sources a majority of its products (or components) from multiple tiers of the supply chain. To ensure that suppliers are complying with the code they could, through supplier audits, check that these policies are being complied with.

• Mod-Style, a commercial company owned by the Australian-based charity, the Brotherhood of St Laurence (BSL) has committed to supporting suppliers that operate from countries that do not allow workers to join independent trade unions. In one of its supplying factories, Mod-Style and BSL have attempted to offer worker empowerment training and capacity building within supplier factories to ensure that, in the absence of adequate national trade union rights, workers' voices may still be heard and respected. See: Chiquita Brands International (Global) - in-depth
• For Maplecroft's policies and guidance on freedom of association, please see: Maplecroft's freedom of association policy
• Please contribute your commentary or suggestions through our online discussion forum: Freedom of association online discussion forum

2. Provision of training to company auditors

Companies can provide training to its auditors so that they are aware of the current national laws and regulations on labour rights, including laws on freedom of association in particular countries and regions

Furthermore, a company can train auditors on the warning signs that they must be on the lookout for in relation to breaches to an employee's right to associate freely.

Warning signs can include (but are not limited to):

• Low trade union membership
• A disproportionate amount of workers who are members of trade unions being laid-off
• Frequent A high amount of strikes or lock-outs
• The refusal of the supplier factory to collectively bargain with trade unions or workers' organisations

• In some circumstances a company can partner with trade unions to provide joint training to auditors. For example, Gap Inc. has partnered with the International Textile, Garment and Leather Workers' Federation, to train its internal monitoring team on freedom of association and collective bargaining issues. These joint workshops have also assisted in strengthening relations and trust between the two parties. See: Gap Inc. (Global)
• Please contribute your commentary or suggestions through our online discussion forum: Freedom of association online discussion forum

3. Provision of training to supplier factories

The company can train suppliers on workers' rights in relation to freedom of association. This training can ensure that suppliers comply with any code of conduct that has been agreed with by the company. A company could do this where freedom of association is restricted by governments, such as China and Brazil as long as training complies with the laws of the country.

Training can provide information on:

Current national laws and regulations on labour rights, including laws on freedom of association

How to ensure that workers' rights are upheld. This could include, for example, allowing workers to form internal groups or vote for representatives. This training can be provided in countries where the right to join an independent trade union is restricted or forbidden

• If it is more efficient, training can be organised through unions or interested NGOs. The CULTIVAR project in Nicaragua, Honduras and the Dominican Republic is an example of how a multi-stakeholder collaboration can provide workshops for managers of suppliers and trade unions on workplace issues. CULTIVAR works with local NGOs and Social Accountability International and receives funding from the US Department of Labor. See: Project CULTIVAR (Central American/Dominican Republic)
• Please contribute your commentary or suggestions through our online discussion forum: Freedom of association online discussion forum

4. Sign international framework agreements with unions

Companies are increasingly signing framework agreements with relevant trade unions, which undertake to protect fundamental workers' rights. This provides for greater transparency and can assist the company in recruiting highly skilled workers. Agreements between companies and trade unions can be at a local, sectoral or international level. If companies deem it appropriate, they can join other parties to the framework agreement, such as major suppliers and joint venture partners.

International framework agreements often commit the company to observing international standards for the recognition of the right to join a trade union as well as other fundamental workers' rights.

• In 2008, for example, G4S (one of the world's largest international security firms) signed a global agreement with global union UNI Property Services. This agreement helps ensure that all of G4S's 570,000 employees (spread across more than 110 countries) have the right to organise in a free and fair atmosphere. See: G4S (Global)
• In 2001, Chiquita signed a Framework Agreement with the International Union for Food Workers and COLSIBA, the banana workers union, in which Chiquita committed to protecting the right to freedom of association and upholding minimum labour standards. The Agreement affirms the right of each worker to choose to belong to, and be represented by, an independent and democratic trade union and to bargain collectively. The Framework Agreement applies to suppliers, contract growers and joint venture partners. See: Chiquita Brands International (Global) - in-depth
• Please contribute your commentary or suggestions through our online discussion forum: Freedom of association online discussion forum

5. Develop grievance mechanisms for workers who do not have access to trade unions or workers' representative

Where the right to associate freely is restricted, either by law or practice, a company can (if appropriate) establish grievance mechanisms for both their employees, and, if feasible, for suppliers' employees. These mechanisms should ensure that workers are not reluctant to report any grievances, so if appropriate, a third party facilitator could be useful. The facilitator should also have the power to properly investigate any complaint, including being allowed to inspect suppliers' premises as well as implementing remedies in response to the complaint.

Mechanisms should be:

• Independent (e.g. either through a third party or an employee ombudsman)
• Confidential, so if required, the worker remains anonymous

• HP, for example, works with the NGO Centre for Reflection and Action on Labour Rights (CEREAL), to address worker complaints in Mexico. CEREAL raises complaints on behalf of workers with factory management. For an in-depth case study on how HP has helped develop partnerships to address workplace grievances in 170 countries, especially those that forbid independent trade unions. See: HP (Global)
• Another facilitator is the Fair Labour Association (FLA). It has established a Third Party Complaint Procedure to serve as a channel through which any individual or organisation can confidentially report a serious labour abuse at any factory affiliated to the FLA with regard to the FLA Workplace Code of Conduct or Principles of Monitoring. This includes breaches of the right of employees to freedom of association and collective bargaining. Members of the FLA include: Nike, Umbro, H&M, and Adidas, amongst others. See:Nike, Adidas, Umbro and others (China)
• The Ethical Trading Initiative is promoting conflict resolution by bringing member sourcing companies to meet factory workers in the supply chain in Cambodia. See: Ethical Trading Initiative (Cambodia)
• Please contribute your commentary or suggestions through our online discussion forum: Freedom of association online discussion forum

Back to top

International standards

The principle of freedom of association is set out in Article 20 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: "Everyone has the right to peaceful assembly and association" and "no-one may be compelled to belong to an association". It is also enshrined in a number of human rights instruments including Article 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)43 and Article 8 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).44

According to the The Labour Principles of the United Nations Global Compact, Guide for Business, "Freedom of association implies a respect for the right of all employers and all workers to freely and voluntarily establish and join groups for the promotion and defence of their occupational interests. Workers and employers have the right to set up, join and run their own organisations without interference from the State or any another entity. Employers should not interfere in workers' decision to associate or discriminate against either those workers who choose to associate or those who act as their representatives."45

Article 2 of the ILO Convention No. 87, Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise (1948) gives both workers and employers the right to establish (in accordance with rules) or join organisations of their own choosing without previous authorisations. Article 3(2) further says that public authorities should refrain from any interference. It has been ratified by 150 countries. Countries that have not ratified the convention include China, Iran, Iraq, Brazil and India.

ILO Convention No.98, Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining (1949) has been ratified by 160 countries. Article 1 says that "workers shall enjoy adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination in respect of their employment." Further, Article 4 states: "Measures appropriate to national conditions shall be taken, where necessary, to encourage and promote the full development and utilisation of machinery for voluntary negotiation between employers or employers' organisations and workers' organisations, with a view to the regulation of terms and conditions of employment by means of collective agreements". China, Iran, Brazil and India are some of the countries that have not ratified this convention.

Relevance with collective bargaining

Collective bargaining is a separate right, which can create separate issues for companies. It can be defined as "a voluntary process through which employers and workers discuss and negotiate their relations, in particular terms and conditions of work. Participants include employers themselves or their organisations, and trade unions or, in their absence, representatives freely designated by the workers."46 Therefore, although trade unions often participate in collective bargaining this is not a requirement and workers not part of organisations can also participate.

According to the ILO, collective bargaining serves a dual purpose: "It provides a means of determining wages and conditions of work applying to a group of workers". "It also enables employers and workers to define agreement the rules governing their relationship."47

The ILO recommends that "workers' representatives should be given appropriate facilities (taking account of the needs, size and capabilities of the enterprise involved) that will enable them to do their work effectively and allow them to perform their role without interference. Workers' representatives should be provided with information required for meaningful negotiations."48 It also notes that it is important that collective bargaining agreements include provisions for settling disputes.49

Human rights impact

In contexts where the right to freedom of association is restricted, a range of human rights abuses are impacted, including:

Right to equality before the law, equal protection of the law, and rights of non-discrimination (ICCPR, Article 26): Trade union activists can experience discrimination in the form of arbitrary dismissal, demotion, or lack of access to promotions.

Right to work (ICESCR, Article 6): The right to work includes a prohibition of arbitrary dismissal. However, trade union members in many countries are arbitrarily dismissed by employers as a result of trade union membership or collective bargaining activities.

Right to freedom of assembly (ICCPR, Article 21): The right enables workers and trade union members to peacefully undertake group demonstrations. Demonstrations by trade unions can result in interference by police or company security in many countries, in extreme circumstances, end in violence. Restrictions in the right to assemble freely often go hand in hand with frequent dismissals of unionised workers.

Right to enjoy just and favourable conditions of work (ICESCR, Article 7): The right to enjoy just and favourable conditions at work encompasses a wage that enables families to enjoy the right to a decent standard of living and for parents to maintain reasonable working hours (according to the ILO no more than 48 hours). In many countries where trade unions are not independent or present, workers' conditions are not just and favourable.

Back to top