What are Worker-driven Social Responsibility programmes, and how can we support them?

Worker-driven Social Responsibility (WSR) programmes improve conditions for workers in the supply chains of major brands.

How the Worker-driven Social Responsibility model began

The Fair Food Programme is considered to be the first WSR programme. It was developed in the tomato fields of Immokalee, Florida by the Coalition of Immokalee Workers (CIW). These workers decided to start campaigning to get big brands to acknowledge their role in exploitative supply chains, and try to leverage the buying power of big brands to improve working conditions at the farms the brands buy from. 

They created a workers’ rights code of conduct and monitoring programme, which they pressured big brands to commit to abiding by. 

It has since been successfully implemented across Florida, with brands like Taco Bell and McDonald’s buying from farms that participate in the WSR programme. And there are now many more WSR programmes operating worldwide, in the supply chains of brands ranging from Ben & Jerry’s to Levi’s.

Lucas Benitez, co-founder of the CIW, says "Florida’s fields were once dubbed ground zero for modern slavery by federal prosecutors. But through the Fair Food Program, we are ushering in a new era of human rights, and have virtually eradicated those abuses on participating farms, transforming those same fields into what one labour expert called ‘the best workplace-monitoring program I’ve seen in the US.'"

CIW co-founder Greg Asbed says the idea behind the model is easy to understand.“Retail food giants commit to purchase from farms that respect workers’ rights and to cut-off purchases from those who violate their rights, with a dedicated monitoring body that listens to workers’ voices, protected against retaliation, monitoring and enforcing compliance.”

What makes a WSR programme different?

The WSR model is based on six interconnected principles, bringing together:

• a code of conduct created by workers
• legally binding agreements signed by brands at the top of supply chains
• worker-driven enforcement mechanisms
• worker education
• a 24/7 complaint support line
• comprehensive independent monitoring, which results in a mechanism that is trusted by workers.

While all WSR programmes share these six elements, there is significant variation in what the programmes look like and how they operate. The WSR programme (Milk with Dignity) in Ben & Jerry’s dairy supply chain looks very different to the WSR programme in ASOS’ apparel supply chain (Bangladesh Accord).

Some elements of workers’ rights programmes, such as auditing, are simple to explain and applied the same way in different contexts. But their effectiveness rests on how they are modified and tailored to unique locations, industries and needs or workers.

Individual workers’ rights programmes do not follow a fixed step-by-step implementation method. They adapt and change course based on the needs of workers in their specific supply chain. This means WSR programmes take much longer to develop and implement than other workers’ rights initiatives, and might look very different in one country or sector compared to another. 

Worker-led

The most significant element of WSR programmes is that they are worker-led from inception. This is important because it is workers who really understand what abuses are more common and severe, and therefore need to be prioritised, as opposed to supposed experts who provide advice on working conditions in fields, factories, or other workplaces from a distance without having any lived experience.

For example, in Florida workers were routinely expected to pile strawberry buckets high above the rim of the bucket. This meant workers were picking many extra strawberries for free for the company. It’s the type of issue that an auditor or person working in a company or NGO abroad is unlikely to identify as a major form of exploitation – but to a worker, it’s a blatant problem which needs addressing.

Being worker-led therefore helps to ensure the programme focuses on real issues that workers face, and if the issues change in the future, the programme can change with it.

Being truly worker-led also avoids worker rights or welfare programmes becoming tokenistic or social washing. 

While companies and NGOs benefit from overstating the effectiveness of  workers’ rights programmes because it improves their brand’s reputation, there’s no incentive for workers to falsely pretend a workers’ rights programme is working.

WSR sounds great – how can my company sign up?

Sometimes companies learn about WSR programmes and want to implement a programme in their own supply chains. But since WSR programmes are worker-led, there’s no way for a company to design or deliver a WSR programme.

If a company genuinely wants WSR to develop in its supply chain, it could find a way to share information about the programme with workers. This might mean searching for worker organisations or collectives within its supply chain, and sharing information about WSR with them directly. It could also involve commissioning an independent NGO or WSR practitioners organisation to scope out potential groups of workers who could start exploring whether they want to try out WSR.

WSR practitioners such as the Coalition of Immokalee Workers and WSR-Network are receptive to worker-led organisations that are interested in learning about and starting their own WSR programme. So if a group of workers is interested in exploring the potential of WSR, there are ways they can get support and advice.

It’s important for companies or third parties working to connect workers with WSR practitioners to be mindful of the risks workers could face under this model. 

For example, while a brand might be keen for WSR to develop, suppliers may be less enthusiastic as WSR programmes result in the supplier having to change and improve working conditions. 

Asking a supplier to identify workers to help develop WSR is a bad idea – the workers could feel pressure from their employer to progress or disregard WSR, through fear of repercussions from the employer. 

Workers should only partake in WSR exploration of their own volition and without pressure from either brands or suppliers.

How can third-parties sow the seeds of WSR?

NGOs and campaign groups often play a role in WSR development. For example, they can connect WSR practitioners with groups of workers that could benefit from these programmes.

Third parties such as NGOs have sometimes developed trusting relationships with groups of workers. As WSR is a complicated programme which most people are unfamiliar with, having it endorsed by someone they trust could encourage workers to spend time exploring WSR.

Funders can also support WSR. The development of a WSR programme must be independent of corporate influence, and workers need independent sources of funding to be able to spend time learning about WSR and starting to build their programme. Visiting a practitioner, such as the Fair Food Programme in Florida, helps workers to see WSR in action and can inspire them to keep developing their own programme.

This all requires capital, so funders play a crucial role in WSR development.