The CCC. Code of Conduct and criteria for implementation, monitoring and independent verification

The european platforms, in direct consultation with our worldwide partners and with the european and international trade union organisations, developed jointly the 'Code of labour practices for the apparel and sportswear industry' .

The code, finalized in february 1998, refers to the same standards as the ICFTU model code of labour practices: freedom of association, the right to collective bargaining, no discrimination of any kind, no forced or slave labour, a minimum employment age of 15, safety and health measures, a working week of 48 hours maximum and volunatary overtime of 12 hours maximum, a right to a living wage and establishment of the employment relationship. Reference to relevant ILO conventions are an integral part of the demands.

The Code puts forward certain minimum conditions with respect to implementing the code. One of the most important ways in which a code can be implemented is for it to become an enforceable and enforced part of agreements with contractors, subcontractors, suppliers and licensees. Companies adopting the code are also expected to co-operate and support a system of independent monitoring of compliance with the code.

A model is proposed base on a 'Foundation' established jointly by companies, industry associations or employers' organisations, trade union organisations and NGOs. The foundation, governed by a board that equally represents all concerned, shall: conduct, directly or indirectly through other organisations, the independent verification of compliance with the code; assist companies in implementing the code; and provide a means to inform consumers about observance of the code and more generally about labour conditions in the industry.

We believe that independent verification should based upon be a two-track system: one track includes the use of accredited agencies/organisations, who can gather a certain type of information via the methods open to them, the other track includes information gathered by local-level (worker)organisations, e.g. via complaints, who have access to different kinds of information and use different methods.

More details on the way the foundation should operate can be found in section IV of the 'model code for labour practices in the apparel and sportswear industry'.

Projects involving CCC platform (members) and companies or industry organisations

French CCC(L'ethique sur L'etiquette) and AUCHAN. A letter of intention signed by both parties included the adoption of a Code of Conduct and an agreed programme of work to further develop implementation and monitoring, including training of buyers (concluded), and pilotprojects in Vietnam and Madagascar (to be organized). Last october the French organisation of large retailers FCD (Carrefour, Promodes, Casino) adopted a code including a commitment to work on systems of monitoring.
Companies follow different approaches, Promodes wants to work within the framework of SA 8000, Carrefour wants to involve de Federation International de Droits de L'homme (FIDH).
A special committee has been set up to follow the proceedings with the different companies that includes the french CCC.

Swedish CCCand H&M, Kappahl, Lindex an Indiska. The companies have their own codes,. which are close to the model code. In the summer of 1998 the CCC signed a declaration of intent stating their intention to collectively develop a system for independent monitoring of compliance with the code. Developing a agreement on a common code is part of the programme. Other parts are developing 'guide books' and pilot studies for implementing the code in Bangladesh, India and China. Currently partners are selected to do pre-studies in these countries, to get more insight in what the different parties expect when it comes to implementation, monitoring and verification. Another element of the project is to develop models for (european level) structures for for independent monitoring.

The Ethical Trading Iniativeincludes a number of organisations active in the UK CCC (called Labour behind the Label) and several garment companies. It's a learning initiative, based on several principles: trust (NGO-trade unions-companies); codes of conduct have to be based on ILO conventions; companies have to accept independent monitoring; companies have to be committed to improving standards; companies have to be committed to not "cut and run"); has to be based on disclosure. Pilot studies are underway on the garment industry in China, more are foreseen as is a european level sharing of the results.

Dutch Fair Wear Charter Foundation .
Longstanding negotiations between the Dutch CCC, NOVIB, the Dutch trade union organisations FNV and CNV and the industry organisations representing the small and middlesized retailers (MITEX) and the producers (FENECON and NKC) have led to the establishment of the Fair Wear Charter Foundation on march 11 1999.

1. structure of the foundation
2. the board equally represents unions, ngo's, retailers and producers with an independent voting chair. Current composition: FNV federation, FNV bondgenoten, the South-North Federation (a Dutch coaliton of development and environmental NGO's), the CCC, Mitex, Fenecon and NKC. The second seat on the retailside is empty. Mrs. Margreet de Boer, former minister of environment and currently member of parliament for the labour party is the chairperson.
3. An 'expert panel' is set up to advice the board, with an especially tough job in the first two years, that is designed as a project-phase. The different groups represented in the board are also represented on the expert panel.
4. an appeals board will be put in place. The whole structure will be set up in such a way that we comply with the EOTC guidelines of certification bodies.
   
   The foundation's code of conduct:.

    

5. Where standards are concerned it is very similar to the CCC model code. The discussion was stuck for a long time on the standards that should be included (the 5 core labour standards or the additional standards as well) but in the end the whold package got accepted. A footnote is added explaining the difference between the two sets of standards, where they originate from and states that a differentiation in implemenation along these lines is a possibility.
6. The company declares that they only want to trade in clothes made under decent/human conditions;
7. that they have will do to do 'everything possible' to ensure that standards are upheld also at contractors, subcontractors, suppliers and licencees;
8. the company is obligated to ensure that contractors etc. will commit to compliance with the standards in the code and they (the contractors etc). will cooperate in the verification of this.
9. the company ensures that if it is proved that contractors etc. do not comply with one or more of the standards, they will take adequate measures to remedy the situation, with final sanction of losing the right to produce or organise production for the company in question
10. the company commits/agrees to independent monitoring of the provisions of the code and agrees that they will follow the advice of the foundation in this. Here another footnote is added, that this independent monitoring will judge the 'contents, quality, practice and results of the managementsystem that the company puts in place to comply with the standards of the code'. This to make it clear that the foundation's main job is to verify implementation and monitoring, not to do a lot of that work itself.
11. companies are expected to sign the code and join the foundation from now on, but the provision relating to independent monitoring and following the advice of the foundation only starts working when the foundation has established clear procedures and cost-estimates for this.

• linking as close as possible to existing European certification practices;
• third party monitoring (where necessary on the spot) of the 'self-monitoring' expected of the companies;
• proper complaints procedures
• developmental approach (no cut and run),
• enough attention for the special position and limits of influence of the small and medium sized entreprises we are dealing with.

Agenda for future CCC work on (independent) monitoring

Dialogue with companies when there is an agreement upon the contents of the code (all the standards in model code should be included, with reference to the relevant ILO conventions) and a possibility to work jointly on projects to increase implementation and independent monitoring. The principles described in our modelcode for implementation and monitoring (section III and IV) should are the startingpoint for the discussion. .

Input/critique on the SA 8000 system: paper on the fifth guidance.

Learning from the projects on independent monitoring outlined above, by organizing meetings, compiling information.

Increase european/international discussion on the following key issues:

• how can input from trade unions and NGO's at the local (production)level be integrated in methods of implementation, verification and monitoring? Access by local level organisations is often mentioned as important, but it remains a highly complex issue for all and more work is needed to see how we can guarantee quality, confidentiality and credibility.
• what are the possibilites of using the statutory framework of the EU, vis-a-vis ISO/CEN within a verification/monitoirng system.
• what are the implications of the european standards for certification agencies in relation to the models currently under development.
• what can/should be the way in which ILO bodies are involved in verification/monitoring systems (eg. setting standards for social auditing)
• how can we increase the applicability of systems for implementation, verification and monitoring to the different categories on companies that make up the production chain. In other words, it should be clear what is expected from a company at a certain stage: the third world supplier, the first world retailer, the big agent, the small subcontractor etc.
• Study legal measures that can support codes of conduct and (voluntary) agreements to work on independent monitoring. The EU legal framework for the protection of the rights of the consumer (principally the right to information and to a quality product) as well as extra-territoriality law are the starting points identified.

Lastly we are working on a more intensive and systematical gathering of complaints concerning violations of the standards in the model code, and of bringing them to the attention of the relevant companies the relevant authorities and the general public.