From Rana Plaza to today: Why Canada Must Act on Corporate Accountability

Co-authors: Nirvana Mujtaba (Oxfam Canada) & Aidan Gilchrist-Blackwood (Canadian Network For Corporate Accountability)

Textile workers working inside a garment factory in Savar, Bangladesh
Textile workers are working inside a garment factory in Savar, Bangladesh. Photo: Fabeha Monir/Oxfam

One of the deadliest industrial disasters of the 21st century unfolded in 2013, when the Rana Plaza building in Bangladesh collapsed. In a matter of moments, over 1,100 garment workers, most of them young women, lost their lives, and more than 2,500 others were injured. The world watched in horror as images of crushed concrete, trapped bodies, and desperate rescue efforts filled our screens. However, this was not a sudden or unforeseeable tragedy. Cracks in the building had been reported the day before. Workers had voiced their fears. Still, they were told to return to work and were trapped inside the building as it collapsed.

The collapse of Rana Plaza exposed a devastating truth: the global fashion industry, built on the labour of women, was failing them at every level. It revealed a system where fast fashion was prioritized over safe working conditions, where accountability was diffused across borders and where corporations, many based in wealthy countries like Canada, profited from conditions they did little to monitor or improve. Among the revelations was that a Canadian company was sourcing clothing from Rana Plaza, yet lacked sufficient oversight to ensure even the most basic standards of workplace health and safety. Affordable clothing was being subsidized by a devastating human cost.

Nilufa Yesmin and Ajirun Begum, Rana Plaza Survivors
Nilufa Yesmin (35) and Ajirun Begum (47) both are Rana Plaza Survivors. They are suffering from continuous health issues since the incident. None of them were able to do any work despite getting some occasional works from local tailors. Savar, Bangladesh. Photo: Fabeha Monir/Oxfam

Since then, international pressure and tireless worker-led organizing have driven some improvements in factory safety, reducing the risk of catastrophic failures in parts of the industry. Yet, health and safety in Bangladesh’s factories remain deeply concerning, as shown by the April 4 fire at a gas lighter factory near Dhaka that left five workers dead. Moreover, safer buildings have not meant fairer working conditions. Workers still face poverty wages, excessive work hours, and intense pressure to meet production targets in a non-unionized environment. Gender-based violence and harassment remain widespread, particularly for the women who make our clothes. The fashion industry may be less visibly dangerous than it was in 2013, but it is far from just.

This pattern is not limited to fashion. Canadian companies continue to operate in ways that harm vulnerable communities both at home and abroad. In the mining sector, Canadian companies have been repeatedly linked to human and labour rights abuses, environmental destruction and the contamination of local ecosystems. Communities have suffered displacement, pollution, and long-term health impacts. These harms continue in part because the rules for companies are weak and accountability is limited.

The harm also extends to global arms trade. Canadian companies export weapons and weapons components that are used in war and conflict zones likely against civilians and in violation of international law, contributing to violence and human rights abuses. These transfers often happen through indirect routes, allowing Canadian companies to avoid scrutiny. Without strong laws, Canada risks being complicit in harm.

Canada’s response: more rhetoric than reform

Canada falls far short in meaningfully holding Canadian corporations accountable. Measures such as modern slavery reporting legislation and voluntary corporate social responsibility frameworks have been framed as progress. Yet in practice, they rely heavily on self-reporting, lack enforcement mechanisms, and impose few real consequences for non-compliance. Companies are required to disclose whether or not they have assessed the risks of forced labour in their supply chains – but are not required to actually investigate those risks in the first place, let alone to prevent or remedy harms.

Workers at a garment factory in Phnom Penh, Cambodia
Workers at a garment factory in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Photo: Caroline Leal/Oxfam

At the same time, oversight of Canadian businesses operating abroad remains weak. The Canadian government “expects” – but does nothing to actually require – Canadian companies respect human rights in their operations abroad.

Mechanisms intended to investigate corporate abuse, including the Canadian Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprise (CORE) office, have been left to flounder. The government has left the position of CORE vacant for close to a year, meaning the office cannot process complaints, and the office lacks long-promised independence and investigatory teeth. Survivors of labour exploitation, environmental harm, or corporate-linked violence face significant barriers to seeking justice, particularly when abuses occur outside of Canada’s borders. The result is a system where harm is sometimes acknowledged, but rarely addressed in a way that shifts corporate behaviour.

This gap between commitment and action is not incidental – it reflects a broader policy approach that prioritizes narrowly-defined economic interests and voluntary compliance over binding regulation. As long as respect for human rights remains at the discretion of Canadian companies, they can continue to benefit from global systems of exploitation with limited accountability.

What real corporate accountability looks like

On the 11th anniversary of the Rana Plaza disaster, Canada’s Minister of Labour affirmed that “Canada’s supply chains are far-reaching” and that Canada has “an obligation to every single worker across them”. If Canada is serious about living up to those obligations it must take decisive action to prevent the harms that continue to be linked to Canadian corporations – such as labour rights violations, extractive industry exploitation, and weapons exports which fuel growing human rights abuse – it must move beyond voluntary and reporting-only approaches and adopt a mandatory human rights due diligence law. This means requiring companies to actively identify, prevent, and address human rights and environmental risks throughout their global operations and supply chains – not simply reporting on whether or not they have bothered to look.

To be effective, such legislation must include strong enforcement mechanisms. Companies that fail to meet their obligations should face meaningful penalties, including fines and potential civil liability. Furthermore, affected communities and workers must have clear pathways to seek remedy in Canadian courts, regardless of where the harm occurred. Without access to justice, accountability remains incomplete.

The government of Canada should:

Adopt human rights and environmental due diligence legislation. Canadian civil society has developed a model law which the government could table at any time.

Appoint a new Canadian Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprise, and empower the office with real independence and robust investigatory powers.

More than a decade after the Rana Plaza tragedy and amid ongoing harm by various Canadian businesses, the question is not whether we have learned, but whether Canada will finally act.

The lives lost should have marked a turning point, a moment to say clearly that no job, no product, no profit is worth a human life. And yet, from factories to mines to conflict zones, similar patterns of exploitation persist – often hidden and too often ignored.

Canada has the power to do better. It has a duty to do better. Without bold action – as called for by directly-impacted people and by Canadians standing in solidarity from coast to coast – Canada will continue to be complicit in serious human rights violations, and risks contributing to future tragedies like Rana Plaza.

Canada’s New Modern Slavery Reporting Law

We took a closer look at Canada’s modern slavery reporting law, the Forced and Child Labour in Supply Chains Act, that came into effect in January. What does it mean for global workers’ rights, and can it achieve what lawmakers say it does – more transparency and an end to forced and child labour in supply chains? Let’s find out.

Aritzia 

Disclosure of Policies and Due Diligence Processes: Reported having comprehensive policies and due diligence processes. Aritzia’s Supplier Code of Conduct remains publicly available, however, their Migrant Worker Policy, Child Labour & Young Worker Policy and Homeworker Policy are not publicly available.  

Transparency: Reports sourcing countries but does not disclose specific factory names, locations, or addresses. 

Supplier Monitoring: Conducts regular audits, assessments, and training programs. However, the effectiveness of social audits often falls short industry-wide due to poor-quality worker interviews and lack of genuine worker engagement. 

Risk Assessment and Remediation Strategies: Acknowledges the risks of modern slavery and outlines steps for identification, prevention, and mitigation. There is no mandatory requirement for concrete remediation actions under Canada’s new law. 

Prevalence of Forced Labour and Remediation Actions: Reported not being aware of or identifying any instances of forced labour or child labour during the reporting period. 

Herschel 

Disclosure of Policies and Due Diligence Processes: Reported having supplier code of conduct and due diligence processes but did not make these policies publicly available. 

Transparency: Reports sourcing countries but does not disclose specific factory names, locations, or addresses. 

Supplier Monitoring: Conducts regular audits, assessments, and training programs. However, the effectiveness of social audits often falls short industry-wide due to poor-quality worker interviews and lack of genuine worker engagement. 

Risk Assessment and Remediation Strategies: Acknowledges the risks of modern slavery and outlines steps taken to prevent and reduce the risk of child and forced labour in its supply chains.  There is no mandatory requirement for concrete remediation actions under Canada’s new law. 

Prevalence of Forced Labour and Remediation Actions: Reported not being aware of or identifying any instances of forced labour or child labour during the reporting period. 

Joe Fresh (Loblaw) 

Disclosure of Policies and Due Diligence Processes: They reported having comprehensive policies and due diligence processes to address forced and child labour. Loblaw’s approach to human rights addresses the risk of modern slavery and is supported by its Colleague Code of Conduct, Supplier Code of Conduct and Loblaw’s Position on Human Rights. All of these policies are publicly available.  

Transparency: Discloses information about their Tier 1 suppliers, including factory names, locations, and addresses on their website. 

Supplier Monitoring: Conducts regular audits, assessments, and training programs. However, social audits are widely acknowledged to fall short industry-wide due to poor-quality worker interviews and a lack of genuine worker engagement. 

Risk Assessment and Remediation Strategies: Acknowledges the risks of forced labour and child labour. Loblaw identified five inherent Salient Risks – forced labour, child labour, discrimination, harassment and abuse, livelihoods and occupational health and safety through their Human Rights Due Diligence (HRDD).  Loblaw expanded their commitment to not knowingly source cotton or textile products using cotton produced in Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Xinjian Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR) of China due to widespread evidence of forced and child labour in their cotton harvests.  There is no mandatory requirement for concrete remediation actions under Canada’s new law. 

Prevalence of Forced Labour and Remediation Actions: Stated they “may receive reports of forced or child labour through our supply chain compliance and factory audits program” but did not disclose specific instances. 

lululemon 

Disclosure of Policies and Due Diligence Processes: Reported having comprehensive policies and due diligence processes. Lululemon’s policies and commitments include Global Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, Vendor Code of Ethics, Vendor Code of Ethics Compliance Benchmarks,  

Foreign Migrant Workers Standard. All of these policies are publicly available. 

Transparency: Discloses information about their suppliers, including factory names, locations, and addresses on their website

Supplier Monitoring: Conducts regular audits, assessments, and training programs. However, the effectiveness of social audits often falls short industry-wide due to poor-quality worker interviews and lack of genuine worker engagement. 

Risk Assessment and Remediation Strategies: Acknowledges the risks of modern slavery, including forced and child labour and outlines steps for identification, prevention, and mitigation. There is no mandatory requirement for concrete remediation actions under Canada’s new law. 

Prevalence of Forced Labour and Remediation Actions: Acknowledged finding two instances of forced labour in its supply chain and reported subsequent remediation actions. 

Roots 

Disclosure of Policies and Due Diligence Processes: Reported having comprehensive policies and due diligence processes. Roots only publicly disclose their Vendor Workplace Code of Conduct, Supplemental Expectations, Employee Code of Conduct while other policies such as the Responsible Purchasing Practices, Critical Issues Policy are not publicly available. 

Transparency: Discloses only the continents of their suppliers/third-party vendors. 

Supplier Monitoring: Conducts regular audits, assessments, and training programs. However, the effectiveness of social audits often falls short industry-wide due to poor-quality worker interviews and lack of genuine worker engagement. 

Risk Assessment and Remediation Strategies: Acknowledges the risks of modern slavery and outlines steps for identification, prevention, and mitigation. There is no mandatory requirement for concrete remediation actions under Canada’s new law. 

Prevalence of Forced Labour and Remediation Actions: Reported not being aware of or identifying any instances of forced labour or child labour during the reporting period. 

Our analysis reveals that while all five brands reported having policies and due diligence processes in place, the lack of public availability of many of these documents hinders external verification. Transparency varied, with Joe Fresh (Loblaw) and lululemon being more open about who their suppliers are. All brands reported regular supplier monitoring, but social audits are widely criticized for their limitations. Only lululemon acknowledged finding and remediating instances of forced labour. Overall, the findings highlight significant shortcomings in the legislation and the need for more robust, transparent, and enforceable measures to protect global workers’ rights. 

Why Canada needs stronger legislation 

While going through the legislative process, the Forced and Child Labour in Supply Chains Act was widely criticized for failing to address the deep-rooted human rights abuses and environmental impacts of Canadian companies operating abroad. Critics—including industry experts, civil society, and human rights activists—have condemned it as completely inadequate. We agree with them, and here’s why: 

Weak reporting requirements without mandated action: The Act merely requires companies to report on measures to identify forced and child labour in their supply chains. There is no mandate for concrete action or verification, allowing companies to obscure the true extent of their complicity. 

Lack of accountability: Companies are not obligated to confirm or deny the presence of forced labour and child labour within their supply chains. They retain the liberty to determine how much detail to disclose, rendering the reports potentially superficial and uninformative.   

Ignores comprehensive human rights: The legislation fails to include comprehensive human rights, including women’s rights and the right to a living wage. Human rights are recognized as indivisible and interdependent, without hierarchy, and cannot be upheld in isolation. A law addressing only forced labour and child labour will fail unless it addresses human rights violations comprehensively. 

Opaque Supply Chain: There is no mandatory reporting requirement to disclose detailed supply chain information, such as supplier names and addresses, product types, and the gender composition of the workforce. Opaque supply chains limit the ability of governments, civil society, workers, and rights holders to verify company claims and hold companies accountable.  

Inadequate Remediation Mechanisms: The legislation lacks robust remediation mechanisms, protections against re-victimization, and guarantees of non-recurrence. Victims of forced labour are left without effective means to seek justice and redress.  

Gender Blindness: The legislation lacks a gender lens and feminist approach. Women, particularly in the fashion industry, where they constitute the majority of the workforce, are disproportionately vulnerable to forced labour conditions. The Act’s failure to address this reality perpetuates gender inequality and exploitation. Canada should include gender-related protections and fulfill its commitment to upholding women’s human rights through laws, regulations, policies, and plans that address the unique challenges faced by women as rights holders. Legislation should require all Canadian companies to undertake gender-sensitive human rights due diligence. Additionally, legislation should require companies to adopt a proactive gender and non-discrimination policy, which is crucial to ensure that the companies’ policies and practices consider overlapping forms of structural discrimination through an intersectional lens. 

Economic Injustice: The Act does not address the right to a fair wage, perpetuating cycles of poverty and inequality. Workers remain trapped in exploitative working conditions and forced to work excessive overtime to cover their basic needs with no hope for economic improvement. 

Fails to meet minimum UN standards:  The legislation does not meet the basic standards set by the United Nations (UN), such as the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs). Governments should have stringent laws to protect people from human rights abuses by companies. However, Canada’s modern slavery reporting law falls short and lacks the necessary enforcement mechanisms and regulatory measures to hold businesses accountable.   

Canada’s modern slavery reporting law, in its current form, is a superficial measure that offers no protection to the vulnerable workers in the supply chain. Recent revelations of Canada falling short on promises to block imports produced by forced labour further underscores the urgent need for stronger legislative measures. 

To truly combat human rights abuses, Canada must introduce a robust corporate accountability law, such as the model law proposed by the Canadian Network on Corporate Accountability, The Corporate Respect for Human Rights and the Environment Abroad Act. Such legislation would require Canadian companies and companies importing goods into Canada to respect all human rights throughout their global supply chains, prioritize transparency and accountability with adequate enforcement mechanisms to hold corporations accountable, and provide access to remedies for those affected by human rights and environmental abuses.

The Labour Minister has promised to table new legislation by the end of the year. Will it be a step towards achieving these goals

Statement: Oxfam Stands with Bangladeshi Garment Workers

Oxfam stands in solidarity with the Bangladeshi garment workers, activists, trade unions and worker representatives who advocate for increasing the minimum wage to Tk. 23,000 per month. We strongly urge all international fashion brands that source from Bangladesh to support trade unions’ demands for an increased minimum wage, particularly Canadian fashion brands like Joe Fresh, Lululemon and Roots. 

We are deeply concerned about the violent attacks by police against peaceful worker protests in Bangladesh. The mounting violence is unfolding as garment workers rightfully demand fair negotiations to increase their minimum wage from Tk 8,000 to Tk 23,000, at this time of serious economic stress both nationally and globally. We mourn the loss of Rasel Howlader, a garment factory worker, who was shot dead by police earlier this week. Several labour organizers have been unjustly arrested and some union federation offices have been forced to shut down, while hundreds of garment workers have been injured.  

This year’s minimum wage revision is unfolding in a challenging environment for workers and the labour rights movement in Bangladesh, with tensions rising due to the upcoming national election. The tragic murder of trade unionist Shahidul Islam in June serves as a stark reminder of the oppressive conditions under which these wage negotiations are taking place. During the last round of minimum wage negotiations in 2018, one worker lost their life, dozens were injured and thousands lost their jobs.  

On October 22, 2023, the employer representatives submitted a proposal to the Minimum Wages Board to increase the minimum wage to only Tk. 10,400, less than half of what trade unions are calling for. Bangladesh trade unions, worker representatives and civil society organizations expressed their concern about this situation and have issued a public statement in response to the employer representatives’ proposal. The employers’ association, Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters Association (BGMEA), issued a warning that its members would temporarily close factories if the unrest continues. Oxfam perceives BGMEA’s ‘no work no pay’ position as a pressure tactic to weaken support for an increase in the minimum wage.   

Key Facts: 

  • The minimum wage for the women who make our clothes in Bangladesh has remained unchanged since 2019 at Tk. 8,000 per month (US $73). Meanwhile, the cost of living has significantly risen due to inflation, with food prices increasing by 21% to 50% between 2022 and 2023.  
  • The current minimum wage (Tk. 8,000) is only 35% of what workers should be paid to receive a living wage. A living wage, which should be earned within 48 hours/week, should at least cover nutritious food, housing, utilities, healthcare, childcare, education, clothing, transportation and other essential needs, including savings for unexpected events.  
  • Based on a thorough cost of living study conducted by the Bangladesh Institute for Labour Studies (BILS), any wage below Tk. 23,000 will not be enough to enable workers to support themselves and their dependents.  
  • The trade union demand closely aligns with the Global Living Wage Coalition
  • During the official visit of the UN Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights to Bangladesh in May, he addressed the issue of poverty wages and highlighted all workers have a right to remuneration, which provides them, at a minimum, fair wages and a decent living for themselves and their families.  

Oxfam strongly urges fashion brands in Canada that are sourcing from Bangladesh to make a public statement supporting union demands to increase the minimum wage to Tk. 23,000 and calling on the government of Bangladesh to include all relevant stakeholders in minimum wage negotiations, ensuring the safety of all trade unionists, activists and garment workers.  

Stitch for Change: Uniting for Fair Fashion

By Mwangala Matakala

On a bright Friday in Vancouver, Oxfam Canada joined forces with youth-led organizations, Threading Change, Remake, and Stand.Earth, to organize the Stitch for Change Challenge. Our mission? To highlight the urgent need for transparency in the fashion industry. 

As the sun rose in the crisp blue sky after a week of rain and clouds, our dedicated volunteers and campaigners gathered at the iconic Aritzia flagship store on Robson Street. Dressed in our unmistakable “Reveal the Chain” t-shirts, we carried sewing kits, brochures, and an unwavering determination for economic fairness.

We kicked off the day with a clear sense of purpose. Stitching is, after all, an act of creation and connection, and we were here to connect the stories of the women who make clothes for top Canadian brands like Aritzia, Herschel, Joe Fresh, Lululemon, and Roots with the people who wear them. 

Watch a video of our Stich for Change event in Vancouver on September 29, 2023

Secrecy in Numbers 

The garment industry is a lot more opaque than any of these brands let on, with major fashion brands outsourcing their production and often not disclosing their supply chain information. This lack of transparency restricts consumers’ knowledge about where and how garments are made and the wages paid to workers. 

Aritzia maintains an opaque sourcing system with no public information on who their suppliers are. Why is Aritzia keeping its supply chain and factory list such a big secret?

Nirvana Mujtaba, Women’s rights policy specialist, Oxfam Canada

The answer is in the numbers. In Asia, the women who make our clothes earn as little as $4-11 per day. The top executives of Canadian fashion brands? Over $27,000 per day. It takes a Cambodian garment worker over 100 years to earn what Aritzia’s CEO, Jennifer Wong, makes in just one month!

And so, the message we’re sending out with Stitch for Change is clear: it’s high time for transparency and fair wages.

The What She Makes Stitch for Change Challenge in Vancouver
Stitch for Change Challenge in Vancouver

Final Stitches and Future Threads

As the sun went down, we completed our final stitches of the day, but the thread of change we’ve woven continues to grow. The Stitch for Change Challenge in Vancouver vividly illustrated the power of unified voices.

Mwangala Matakala, Oxfam Canada campaigner for What She Makes
Mwangala Matakala, Oxfam Canada campaigner for What She Makes

What began as an idea has transformed into a movement driven by individuals who care, demand transparency, and believe that every stitch in a piece of clothing should be a stitch in the fabric of a fair and just fashion industry.

The Stitch for Change Challenge was a snapshot capturing what it means to stand up for what’s right. But our journey continues. The online petition remains live until November 10, 2023, and our determination to Reveal The Chain remains unshaken.

Please sign it here, and don’t forget to share it with your networks!

A huge THANK YOU to everyone who joined us on this journey and those who continue to do so. I look forward to a future where every stitch represents progress, every signature represents hope, and every garment worker is afforded a life of dignity and fairness. Together, we stitch for change.

What She Makes Campaign Brief

The fashion industry is huge and glamourous, but it is built on the backs of millions of women who live in poverty despite working countless hours making the clothes we wear. Canadian clothing brands take part in the systemic exploitation of workers by allowing poverty wages to be paid in many of their supplier factories. Canadian brands have a responsibility to pay enough for workers to live on – a living wage.

The women who make our clothes are paid such paltry wages – as little as 60 cents per hour in countries like Bangladesh – that they live in dismal conditions, fall into spiraling debt, and cannot afford the healthcare and education they and their families need. They are paid less than half of what they need to live a decent life.

Access to dignified work is a human right and a fundamental pathway out of poverty. Canadian brands must commit to paying a living wage to the women who make our clothes.

Download our campaign brief to learn more.

Milestone Two: Being Transparent

Our What She Makes campaign calls on Canadian fashion brands to ensure the women who make our clothes are paid a living wage. This backgrounder describes why supply chain transparency is an important step in the runway to paying living wages and improving labour practices in the fashion industry.

The brand tracker includes four milestones:

  1. Making a commitment: As a first step, brands should make a public commitment to pay a living wage in their supply chain within four years and publish it on their website. 
  2. Being transparent: Brands should be transparent, disclose their full supply chain and publish the following information on their website: full name of factories and processing facilities, site addresses, parent companies, types of products made and number of workers. 
  3. Publishing plans: Brands should develop and publish a step-by-step strategy outlining how and when it will achieve its commitment to pay workers a living wage and meet all requirements with clear milestones and targets. 
  4. Paying a living wage: Within four years of making a commitment, brands should be paying a living wage in their supply chains. This requires collaboration, consultation, and public reporting on their progress. 

Companies will score green, amber, or red depending on the actions they have taken concerning each milestone. We assess brands’ scores by considering a set of indicators outlined under each milestone. A green score on the brand tracker shows that the brand has fulfilled all elements outlined within a milestone. Amber shows that the brand has taken some action and red illustrates that the company has not taken any action. 

Download the guide below to learn more about milestone two, being transparent.

Leader Or Laggard?

By Lauren Ravon and Marty Warren

Adopting human rights and environmental due diligence legislation would help to advance Canada’s feminist foreign policy goals and gender equality measures in aid, trade, diplomacy, and defence.

Canada is facing a major test of its human rights and feminist credentials. Will the government put effective safeguards in place to ensure Canadian companies proactively respect human rights and the environment abroad?

Our friend and colleague Kalpona Akter, a lifelong labour activist in the Bangladesh garment sector, has told us, “If my mum had received a wage we could live on, I wouldn’t have had to toil in a factory from the age of 12.”

Akter’s story is not unique, and living-wage violations are not the only human rights violations to occur in the fashion world. When the women who make our clothes try to form a union or ask for a raise, their jobs are at risk. Nine out of 10 workers in Bangladesh don’t make enough money to live on or afford food for their families. The women who make our clothes make poverty wages while the profits of Canadian fashion brands soar.

It’s promising that Labour Minister Seamus O’Regan’s mandate letter commits to “introduce legislation to eradicate forced labour from Canadian supply chains and ensure that Canadian businesses operating abroad do not contribute to human rights abuses.” The minister has made supply chain legislation his priority and is currently studying existing private members’ bills tabled in Parliament.

The question is: what kind of legislation will stop the abuse? Learning from other jurisdictions provides some insights.

Robust and comprehensive legislation must include the full range of human rights and have clear consequences for bad behaviour. Effective due diligence is not achieved through voluntary measures, reporting-only laws, or box-ticking compliance exercises. Canadian companies operating or sourcing abroad must be legally obligated to identify, prevent, mitigate, and provide remedies for all human rights violations and environmental damage caused by their operations.

Bill C-262, the Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights Act, currently before Parliament, meets global standards on mandatory human rights due diligence. It would ensure that Canadian companies across economic sectors proactively respect human rights and would help create a level playing field for business.

Another bill is Senate public bill S-211 on modern slavery reporting, which just passed second reading in the House with government support. Forced and child labour are deplorable and evidence has shown that progress on their elimination has stalled. This modern slavery reporting bill taps into the abhorrence Canadians have for such exploitation, but unfortunately does not create the legislative framework or tools to combat it.

Incredulously, S-211 requires companies to report on whether forced or child labour exist in their supply chains, but does not actually create a legal obligation on companies to stop the practice or to remedy the situation if found. S-211 is modelled on a similar law in the U.K. The experience of other jurisdictions shows that legislation centred on reporting has proven ineffective in addressing egregious labour abuses in global supply chains.

Some might suggest to “not let perfect be the enemy of good.” But is S-211 good? Modern slavery acts and their reporting-only requirements have not brought the change they promised to bring. Adopting S-211 would be like buying a train ticket to nowhere and expecting to arrive at your destination.

If the government is serious on stopping human rights abuses, a bill must include all human rights, robust accountability, and pathways to remedy. As Akter demonstrated in the introduction, her rights as a child were intimately connected to the labour rights of her mother. We will not protect children and eliminate forced labour by ignoring the indivisibility of human rights or adopting measures that do not enforce accountability.

A country’s foreign policy is not limited to the actions of state institutions, such as its embassies and armed forces, but also includes the international operations and business dealings of the private sector. Adopting human rights and environmental due diligence legislation would help to advance Canada’s feminist foreign policy goals and gender equality measures in aid, trade, diplomacy, and defence.

Canada’s mining sector is active in at least 100 countries and Canadian retailers import apparel from every continent, depending on a workforce largely dominated by women. Without oversight of the private sector, the Canadian government risks harming some of its bilateral relationships and setting back its feminist foreign policy objectives.

We are entering a critical moment for corporate accountability in Canada. After years of failed half measures, it is high time we deal meaningfully with the conduct of Canadian business abroad. Let this be Canada’s coming of age and let us learn from the European Union, France, Germany, and Norway with ambition, urgency, and pride.

Our organizations and global partners, representing millions of workers and feminists, believe Canada can and must do the right thing. We need mandatory human rights and environmental due diligence legislation in Canada. The time is now.

Human rights and accountability are non-negotiable.

This op-ed was originally published in The Hill Times on June 15, 2022.

Lauren Ravon is the executive director of Oxfam Canada. Marty Warren is the Canadian national director of the United Steelworkers.

Statement Of Solidarity

Oxfam stands in solidarity with the Bangladesh Garment and Industrial Workers Federation (BGIWF), trade union leaders and all human rights defenders who stand up for workers’ rights and protect human rights.

Oxfam learned of the horrific news of the brutal murder of Shahidul Islam, a union leader who was beaten to death on June 25th for his labour rights activism in Gazipur, a major garment industry hub on the outskirts of Dhaka, Bangladesh. He was an organizer of the BGIWF for 25 years advocating for workers’ rights as a trade union organizer, and was attacked and killed for standing up for basic human rights. We mourn not only the loss of an individual but also the loss of a powerful voice that championed the rights and well-being of workers, including the right to a living wage. We extend our sincere condolences to the grieving family, friends, colleagues and allies mourning his loss.

Kalpona Akter, the president of BGIWF, said: “Shahidul mobilised thousands of workers to join unions, empowering them to become solid factory-level trade union leaders. Throughout his life, he assisted thousands of workers in receiving arrears and severance pay wrongfully denied by their employers. With workers’ needs always in mind, Shahidul and three other union leaders met on the evening of his death to discuss a peaceful resolution to a wage dispute and the Eid-ul-Azha festival bonus. He met his fate due to the industry’s ill practice to promote yellow unionism for years and the neglect of workers’ voices. This needs to stop. Let our workers be free to organize and join unions. Shahid’s contributions to the labour movement were remarkable and will be sorely missed.”

Ahmed Sharif, a union organizer who was wounded in the attack, told the Guardian “As soon as we came out of the gate, a group of assailants grabbed Islam and separated him from us. They started cursing and randomly beating us, particularly Islam, some of them were kicking him mercilessly.”

As an organization dedicated to the fight to end poverty and injustice, we are deeply concerned by the murder of Shahidul Islam. This tragic incident highlights the vulnerability of union leaders and activists fighting for workers’ rights. Oxfam joins BGIWF in demanding a thorough investigation and ensure justice is served for the death of Islam. We further call on all brands and stakeholders to conduct ethical purchasing practices upholding human rights within their supply chain and paying a living wage. We call on the government of Bangladesh to step up their protection of trade unionists who are exercising their fundamental human rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining.

Oxfam stands in solidarity with BGIWF, raising a resounding call for justice in the case of Shahidul Islam and demanding the unwavering safety of workers, union members and human rights defenders. We stand united in their relentless struggle to defend workers’ rights at Prince Jacquard Sweaters Ltd factory and in workplaces across Bangladesh. Together we demand accountability and an end to the systemic violations that perpetuate injustice.

#Justice4Shahidul

Background

Shahidul and his colleagues were attacked after leaving the meeting with the management of a factory named Price Jacquard Sweaters Ltd to help the workers collect their due bonuses and wages. The factory management refused to comply despite being directed by the Deputy Commissioner’s (DC) office of Gazipur District to pay the workers’ salaries.

This is not the first time BGIWF has been the victim of such a fatal attack. Eleven years ago, in April 2012, another worker leader, Aminul Islam was tortured and murdered. Aminul was also an organizer with BGIWF, a vital contributor to the nation’s striving movement to advance workers’ rights. The murders of human rights defenders exemplify the extreme measures employed to suppress freedom of association in Bangladesh.

The tragic death of Shahidul, along with countless incidents of other workers being silenced by violence and fear, highlight the urgent need for change. Brands are responsible for ethical business practices and need to ensure that their purchasing practices are not leading to exploitation and deprivation of human rights. Brands must guarantee the right to a living wage and just, safe and healthy working conditions for garment workers.

Despite legal provisions, union leaders and activists face many challenges and restrictions such as anti-union discrimination, harassment, and retaliation against union leaders and members. Additionally, labour activists have raised concerns about the composition and independence of worker participation committees in factories. Labour activists argue that these ‘yellow unions’ are established by factory owners to exert control on workers raising concerns of workers’ rights to collective bargaining and discriminatory power dynamics.

Oxfam Canada, Oxfam Australia and Oxfam Aotearoa’s What She Makes campaign aims to transform the fashion industry into a more just and equitable space by holding brands accountable for their purchasing practices and advocating for a living wage. A living wage is the minimum amount that a worker should earn in a 48-hour work week and adequately covers workers’ and their family’s basic needs, including food, water, housing, energy, healthcare, clothing, childcare, education, transportation and savings for unexpected events. We stand united with the women who make our clothes, advocating for their right to living wages, freedom of association and labour rights.