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.

WHAT SHE MAKES CAMPAIGN BRIEF 2024

Millions of women who make our clothes across sourcing countries are paid less than half of what they need to escape poverty, despite their hard work. The What She Makes campaign calls on Canadian clothing brands like Lululemon and Roots to commit to paying a living wage—one that covers a dignified standard of living for workers and their families. With billions in profits, these brands have the power to break the cycle of exploitation. Read the updated campaign brief and get in touch with Mwangala to learn more about how you can help make a difference.

From Tragedy to Triumph: Nilufa’s Journey and the Call for Justice

As we mark the 11th anniversary of the Rana Plaza disaster, Nilufa Yasmin’s story is a poignant reminder of the devastating human cost behind the clothes we wear. On that fateful day on April 24, 2013, the deadliest garment factory accident in history took place where an eight-story building housing five garment factories collapsed, claiming the lives of 1,135 garment workers. Nilufa’s life changed forever. “It’s hard for me to describe the day, I will not be able to sleep at night if I tell you,” she told me, and those words stuck with me. Trapped under the rubble and a metal beam, she suffered a fractured spinal cord, enduring not only physical pain but also the trauma of witnessing the collapse of a workplace that failed to prioritize the safety of its workers. The loss of her colleagues and friends and a way to provide for herself and her family still sticks with her a decade after the tragedy. I had the privilege and honor of meeting Nilufa last year in Dhaka. Her resilience in the face of adversity continues to inspire me every day.

“It’s hard for me to describe the day, I will not be able to sleep at night if I tell you,”

Nilufa
Photo Credit: Fabeha Monir | Oxfam

Nilufa’s testimony echoes the sentiments of thousands of garment workers in Bangladesh who were on the streets of Dhaka last fall, fighting for fair wages and safe working conditions. Their demands for living wages were met with increasing violence across Dhaka between October and December of last year. Reports emerged of merciless beatings targeting protesters and workers, as their peaceful demonstrations for a livable wage turned into violent clashes with authorities. Despite the risks, loss of life, and the brutality they faced, garment workers stood firm in their demands for dignity and fair compensation. The negotiations saw a slight increase in wages to now $155 a month from $100 a month, but this still falls far short of a decent standard of living given the growing cost of living. The revised minimum wage is only 54% of what workers should be paid to receive a living wage, leaving workers like Nilufa struggling to put food on the table, save any discretionary income, afford medication, or put their children through school.

Photo Credit: Fabeha Monir | Oxfam

Nilufa and other worker activists are calling on fashion brands sourcing from Bangladesh to do better, much better. While some global brands like H&M have committed to paying living wages, most continue to avoid their responsibility to ensure workers’ rights to living wages and safe working conditions. They need to do more than just pay lip service to voluntary corporate social responsibility guidelines; they need to take concrete actions to ensure that tragedies like Rana Plaza never happen again, and that workers are adequately compensated for their work. Garment workers have the right to a living wage, safe working conditions, and dignity in the workplace, just as we all do.

One thing Nilufa said really stuck with me: “Workers deserve to be paid fairly for their labor. They deserve respect and dignity. They deserve a life free from fear and exploitation.” It’s a simple yet powerful reminder that behind every piece of clothing lies the sweat and toil of the women who make our clothes, whose lives are too often overlooked in the pursuit of profit.

As we reflect on the 11th anniversary of Rana Plaza, let’s honor the memory of 1,134 workers who lost their lives by standing in solidarity with survivors like Nilufa. Let’s demand accountability from brands like Joe Fresh and lululemon; and the Canadian government that is yet to enact a mandatory human rights due diligence law. And let’s work together to build a future where no one has to sacrifice their lives for the clothes on our backs.

At Oxfam Canada, we are taking a stand and need your support to ensure poverty wages are not woven into the fabric of our clothes. Join us by signing the pledge to stand with the women that make our clothes and call on Canadian fashion brands to pay a living wage.

Nilufa’s journey may be marked by pain and struggle, but her spirit remains unbroken. She reminds us that even in the darkest of times, there is hope for a better tomorrow. Let’s make that hope a reality and stand with the women that make our clothes.

Aritzia’s little secret

By Nirvana Mujtaba

Rya has been working in the same garment factory in Cambodia for the past four years. Now forty years old, she has been a garment worker since 2007 and knows firsthand the harsh realities that persist under the shadows of glamorous fashion brands. 

Her daily routine involves waking up early in the morning, often as early as 5 am, to prepare food for the busy day ahead. She arrives at the factory at 7 am and works for long hours, often without breaks. When asked about how she feels about her work, Rya expressed exhaustion and frustration, adding that she works long hours often without breaks and that the working conditions in the factory are terrible. 

Rya works 8 to 10 hours a day, and earns $200USD per month. Photo: Caroline Leal/Oxfam
Rya works 8 to 10 hours a day and earns $262 CAD per month. Photo: Caroline Leal/Oxfam

Rya works 8 to 10 hours a day and her salary is $262 per month, which isn’t enough to survive. If she works overtime she can make around $354 per month. She will send $197-220 home to her family and keep $131 to pay for everything else – rent, food, utilities. If it turns out not to be enough, she’ll borrow money from others and when her next pay comes, she’ll pay off some debt, send some home and keep little for herself. The cycle keeps repeating. 

 “We earn so little here compared to other countries. We are all humans; how come we are only scraping by, only able to afford a small rental room to share with others, whereas overseas workers sleep in air-conditioned room.”

Rya

Rya, conveys a powerful message for everyone: “I have a message for the young people and students who like to buy these branded goods – to please spare a thought for the workers here who work tirelessly, more than workers in Canada, and for a much lower wage. So, they get to have a much better life than us”.

While workers are kept in poverty, Aritzia gets richer

Rya’s story is a stark reminder of the extreme disparities that exist in the world. A garment worker in Cambodia works tirelessly and, on average, earns poverty wages of only $262 per month, struggling to make ends meet. These poverty wages aren’t enough for them to afford decent housing, nutritious food, utilities, education, transportation, healthcare, childcare and saving for unexpected events. The women who make our clothes must be paid at least a living wage that covers a decent standard of living. 

On the flip side of this grim reality, Canadian fashion brand Aritzia soared to new heights last year, boasting a remarkable $2.2 billion in annual net revenue, and shattering its previous sales records. 

With an over $700 million increase from the previous year, this explosive growth highlights the company’s financial strength and growing market position. However, this success comes at a cost – a cost borne by the garment workers in Aritzia’s supply chain. 

As Aritzia celebrates its financial success, the women who make our clothes in the global South earn between $4-$11 per day. By contrast, Aritzia’s CEO, Jennifer Wong, was paid roughly $1,803 per hour last year. A garment worker in Cambodia, where Aritzia sources many of its products, would need to work full-time for more than three years to earn what Aritzia’s CEO makes in just one day. 

The current minimum wage in Cambodia is only 87 percent of what workers should be paid to receive a living wage, which is around $319 per month. By definition, a living wage should be earned in a standard 48-hour working week and be sufficient to afford a decent standard of living for a worker and their family. Fashion brands in Canada need to stop weaving poverty into the clothes that we wear.

Pay inequality isn’t the only problem with Aritzia

Massive pay inequality isn’t the only problem. Aritzia does not publicly disclose crucial information such as their supplier factory names, locations, types of products made, breakdown of the number of workers by gender and other gender identities of their sourcing factories. General information about their supplier countries, as well as the percentage of finished items sourced from each country, isn’t sufficient.

Supply chain transparency is critical for labour and human rights advocates, trade unions and worker representatives, and shows a degree of accountability by major brands and retailers. Brands can benefit from publishing their supplier lists as it allows them to receive timely and credible information from worker representatives which can help mitigate risks of human rights abuse. For instance, if Aritzia discloses its supply chain, workers and their representatives can share timely and credible information with the fashion brand about poverty wages or other labour rights violations. 

In our view, Aritzia’s public reporting on environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues is lacking compared with many of its industry peers. 

Here’s a glimpse into Aritzia’s work over the past few years:

Aritzia says they are reviewing their practices and encouraging two-way dialogue with their suppliers to “collaboratively develop a roadmap toward economic security.”In their 2023 ESG report, Aritzia placed high importance to human rights, working conditions & living wages on their materiality matrix.

There’s a lot missing. Aritzia has not made a credible commitment to paying living wages to the workers within their supply chain. There is no detailed information on their progress made towards workers economic security, how they are implementing wage ladders. In 2021, Aritzia scored amber on making a commitment on the What She Makes brand tracker because the company engages with appropriate stakeholders on economic security for workers but hasn’t made a commitment nor set a timeframe to pay a living wage.  

Furthermore, Aritzia’s supplier code of conduct (CoC) does not yet align with workers economic security as it only requires adherence to local minimum wage requirements. Unfortunately, these local wage standards are often insufficient, given the competitive environment of sourcing country suppliers striving to attract foreign investment by maintaining low labour costs. 

On Aritzia’s website they mention; “We take a data-driven approach to information gathering and wage analysis, which is part of deepening our understanding of wages throughout our supply chain. With this information, we’re building wage ladders throughout our supply chain and defining next steps.

Their claim to build wage ladders throughout their supply chain has not followed through their reports or any publicly available resources since 2021, when Aritzia scored amber on the WSM brand tracker on making a commitment to paying living wages. 

“We understand that a well-managed supply chain is integral to build a stable, successful and sustainable business. With this in mind, we partner with the best-in-class fabric, trim and finished goods suppliers, defined not only by the quality of the product but also how they work.”

Aritzia’s claim of partnering with best-in-class suppliers could not be verified since they do not disclose:

  • names of supplier factories, location and addresses
  • name and address of parent company (if applicable)
  • types of product made at each factory
  • breakdown of workers by gender per factory
  • the sourcing channel (direct sourcing or through agents)

Aritzia reports their sourcing countries for finished goods and fabric suppliers and the percentage of finished goods procured from their sourcing countries. This isn’t enough to validate their claim.

In 2022, Aritzia said “Over the past year, we conducted a Human Rights Impact Assessment across our value chain, and the findings are being socialized to inform our programming and guide Aritzia as we update our mitigation strategies to focus on addressing the identified priority human rights issues, should they persist.”. In 2023, Aritzia said; “Over the past year, we’ve conducted a Human Rights Impact Assessment and shared the findings internally. Moving forward, these findings will inform how we review our practice and continue to improve by implementing measures to address any identified issues or risks.”

It’s great that Aritzia conducted a human rights impact assessment. However, what were the company’s findings? What are the human rights abuse risks (if any) that they found within their supply chain? What is their risk mitigation strategy? Why is it only shared internally? Why not publicly?

Download the full report including research notes below:

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.

Milestone One: Making a Commitment

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 one, making a commitment.

The What She Makes campaign calls on Canadian fashion brands to ensure the women who make our clothes are paid a living wage. This backgrounder provides additional information on the first milestone highlighted on our corporate brand tracker.

2022 Naughty or Nice

In the midst of today’s cost of living crisis, every worker deserves to be paid a living wage. This holiday season, we want to know which Canadian fashion brands are acting “Naughty” or “Nice” on the issue of living wages for the women who make our clothes.

We’re demanding that Canadian fashion brands stand with the women who make our clothes and improve the working conditions of the millions of garment workers who toil in factories to meet their clothing orders.

If fashion brands paid living wages, the women who make our clothes, and their families, would no longer be struggling in poverty. However, this year, none of the brands is fully on its way to ensuring living wages in supplier factories.

Which brands have made a real commitment to a living wage, and who is lagging behind? Our first annual Naughty or Nice List reveals how Joe Fresh, Lululemon, Aritzia, Herschel Supply Co. and Roots stack up.

Our Thoughts On Bill S-211

On November 18, 2022, Oxfam Canada submitted a recommendation on Bill S-211 to the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development. In it, we call on the Minister of Labour to introduce robust and comprehensive mandatory due diligence legislation that includes all human rights and all business sectors.

What is Bill S-211

Bill S-211, also known as the Fighting Against Forced Labour and Child Labour in Supply Chains Act, is a legislative proposal that aims to enhance transparency and combat forced labor and child labor in supply chains. We don’t believe it goes far enough.

Why it matters

Canada is at a crossroads regarding corporate accountability and responsible business conduct. A strong legislative framework is needed that recognizes that all companies have a responsibility to respect human rights.

Canada’s human rights obligations include respect for all human rights, including women’s rights and the right to a living wage. Parliament should adopt effective legislation that includes adherence to all internationally recognized human rights. Companies must ensure they pay their workers a living wage and mitigate, prevent and remedy human rights and environmental harm.

Canadian legislation should apply to all companies of all sizes and sectors, and include the entire supply chain, and should include protections against re-victimization and ensure guarantees of non-recurrence. It should also include a feminist analysis, and be broad in scope.

Bill S-211 does none of the above, and we encourage all parties and Parliament to work together to introduce effective legislation.

We call on the Foreign Affairs Committee to table a more robust and progressive bill.

Read our full submission on Bill S-211:

Rana Plaza – A Graphic Novel

Read Rana Plaza, a graphic novel by artist François Simard which tells the story of the Rana Plaza building collapse.

We hope that this will encourage you to act in solidarity with Bangladeshi workers in order to create a world filled with justice and solidarity.