« Analysis: Early Season Trends
Submitted by: Subodh Mishra, Governance Institute
| Main | Aflac’s Pay Practices Get 93% Support
Submitted by: Ted Allen, Head of Publications »

Daily Posts

May 2008
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Email Alerts

Subscribe and receive email alerts when new articles are published!

Enter Your Email Address

Contact Us

Email us with any questions, or a topic you would like to see discussed

EMAIL US

Links

Monday, May 5, 2008

RiskMetrics Group Finds One in Five Large Firms Set Labor Supplier Standards
Submitted by: Peter DeSimone, Head of Labor and Human Rights Research

RiskMetrics Group just completed a year-long pilot project assessing more than 1,800 global companies-the S&P 500, the Toronto Stock Exchange 300 and the Morgan Stanley EAFE index excluding Japan—on more than 200 policy and performance indicators, including more than 60 on supplier labor standards. Findings from the report reveal a fifth of all large cap companies have codes addressing their suppliers’ compliance with labor standards. Still fewer, though, monitor their suppliers on their adherence to these standards.

The labor issues most frequently addressed by companies in their supplier codes were child and forced labor and workplace discrimination; 15 percent of all the companies surveyed set standards for their suppliers on these points. The next most common provisions in supplier codes were freedom of association (12 percent) and harassment, health and safety and wages (all tied for 10 percent). However, far fewer companies set standards for their suppliers on these labor issues that were as stringent as the corresponding core conventions of the International Labor Organization (ILO) with regard to barring child labor, forced labor, and discriminatory practices, and upholding freedom of association, the right to organize and collective bargaining.

For example, while 15 percent of the companies RiskMetrics analyzed had anti-discrimination policies, only 3 percent met the standards outlined in ILO conventions 100 and 111. Most fell short of ILO 100 by not specifically stating in their supplier EEO policy that it applies to pay. On ILO 111, those disqualified for meeting this standard did not include all of the classifications listed in the convention (i.e., race, color, sex, religion, political opinion, national extraction or social origin).

While 20 percent of the surveyed companies set labor standards of some kind for their suppliers, only 14 percent mentioned that they actually monitored their suppliers for compliance. Even fewer—12 percent—outlined consequences for suppliers found in violation, or whether they would engage the facilities in implementing corrective actions (11 percent). Meanwhile, fewer than half of the companies with supplier codes acknowledged training workers on these policies and programs (7 percent) or reporting on the findings from these efforts (4 percent). Likewise, 10 percent of the firms had supplier codes with a health and safety statement, but only 2 percent addressed workers’ contact with hazardous chemicals.

Risk Exposure

Based on the report findings, investors should be most concerned about firms in high risk sectors that lack supplier labor standards and monitoring procedures. The report identifies five sectors as particularly high risk: Retailing, Food and Staples Retailing, Consumer Durables and Apparel, Household & Personal Products, Food, Beverage & Tobacco. This assessment is based on the following factors:

* The pervasiveness and severity of sweatshop labor abuses in the supply chain within the industry as documented by governments and multilateral institutions.
* The number of intermediaries typically found between the publicly traded companies in the industry and the offending suppliers.
* The extent to which governments have cut off supplies of products to the sector from particular countries due to endemic child or forced labor problems.
* The frequency to which activists have targeted companies in the industry for contracting with supplier sweatshop labor.
*The degree to which groups have sued companies in the industry for damages related to labor abuses perpetrated by suppliers.

Out of these five high risk sectors, retailers were the most likely to have adopted a supplier code and won the distinction of exhibiting the highest rate of code adoption among all industries. Roughly half of all retailers RiskMetrics analyzed had codes, and the group also was the most likely to address all of the core labor rights areas identified by the ILO and monitor suppliers for compliance. In contrast, companies in the food, beverage and tobacco sector have been far slower to address this risk through codes and monitoring programs.

S&P 500 Makes Gains
While this was the first year RiskMetrics looked at non-U.S. firms’ policies and practices in this area, it represented the third time RiskMetrics has looked at the supplier labor codes of the S&P 500. This cohort appears to be adopting codes at an accelerating rate. The percentage of companies in the S&P 500 with standards addressing their suppliers’ treatment of employees leapt three percentage points between 2005 and 2006 and six between 2006 and 2007.

For a copy of the full report and further commentary, please visit here.

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://blog.riskmetrics.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/1092

   
 
About RiskMetrics Group | Disclaimer

Copyright © 2007 RiskMetrics Group


Powered by Movable Type 3.36