I see two sides to this. One, the government of the country that allows this to happen is ultimately responsible. India is not a banana republic where companies can parachute in and muck about. So they bear responsibility for the working conditions they allow their fellow citizens to work under.
Two, yes firms with long and convoluted supply chains still have an obligation to ensure the suppliers follow local regulations, at the cost of contract. That said, supply chains are convoluted and can be difficult to follow, and the best way to address it is by the people closest the problem, the local people. If the locals are corrupt or don't care much about their fellow citizens, it does not absolve the foreign firms, but it does make things more difficult. It would help if there were established a WTO-like mechanism, but for pollution and labor concerns, to help enforce by way of treaties and thus penalties.
An option these economies would resist, I suspect would be to impose tariffs commensurate with their deviation from minimum international baselines for pollution, labor laws, etc. These growing economies, their governments and even the labor force, I suspect, would resist such efforts to bring progress in these areas.
Let's not forget western economies grew on child labor in the 19th century as well. It doesn't make it acceptable, but it should provide context.
Very sad article, not even so much that this material is in the supply chain (official India mica production is just a fraction of total exports) but the individual stories of the families caught in bondage to do this mining work for $1/day paying off a "loan" at 200% interest.
Now if only the fine for allowing this material to reach your end product was treated as serious of a negative externality, as say, putting out a bit more sulphur in the exhaust than the latest EPA standard.
I mean, sorry, but what a horrid fucking double standard?! Cheaters causing pollution in my backyard that statistically will result in perhaps 100 deaths, fine the bastards $50 billion and shut the company down. Modern day slavery and child labor producing 75% of India's mica output into our car paint and cosmetics causing untold suffering of thousands? Oh, but the standard contract language says they shouldn't do that, so companies wash their hands of it.
If an equivalent agency to the EPA cared about this negative externality as relatively as much as the EPA cares about emissions, this would be a $1T fine which would completely shutter the companies profiting from the illegally mined mica.
It seems reasonably consistent to me. This stuff stops at the borders. If they were employing slave labor in the US, they'd get hit hard. Likewise, when companies produce horrible pollution in foreign countries, we don't really care. I'm not saying this is necessarily a good way to do things, but I don't think it's quite a double standard.
We fine companies millions of dollars for illegally dumping waste in international waters.
EPA raided a company and jailed the executives for purporting to recycle but actually shipping the waste overseas.
So it doesn't have to stop at the borders. US law can and does punish companies for damage even outside the US.
I would have hoped for something like child slave labor, companies would be looking at potentially facing a full embargo on their goods. When you put the fear of God into a company for something like that, they will make damn sure their supply chain is clean. I see it as the best way to stomp out these horrific abuses.
So what I want to know is, does such an agency / regulatory framework exist in the US to fine companies for child labor in their supply chain? If so, how do we lobby it to enforce such a fine? If not, who are the key senators / representatives who we could lobby to form a coalition to try to create such a regulatory framework?
I assume that WTO must have a process to combat this. But also, just because it's not "polluting" our backyard doesn't mean US can't fine these companies dearly for using this illegal product in their supply chain. I can only hope that our WTO agreements don't actually shackle us from instituting not only massive tarrifs but also fines in these cases.
I consider it something akin to trading in blood diamonds / conflict diamonds. I'll have to research the legal framework by which conflict diamonds were outlawed. I wonder if the same could be done for slave-mined mica?
From a brief search, it looks like the most obvious convention against child labor and debt bondage which would apply in this case is C182 [1] to which 180 of 187 member countries have signed. Notably, India is the only large country which has not.
IKEA, for instance, got burned by prison labour and have been strong on CSR ever since. [1] They use the iWay framework [2] and other supplier certification [3]
But aren't these simple business standards which lead to standardized contract language and hand-washing?
I'm looking for the regulatory framework which treats employing slave-labor in your supply chain as a civil offense with potentially massive punitive damages.
But yes, you're right, greenwashing is always a danger.
Slavery is a good place to start, it is claimed that there are more slaves in the world now than every in human history, for example see - ‘Sea Slaves’: The Human Misery That Feeds Pets and Livestock [1]
In 2015 the UK passed the Modern Slavery Act [2] which gave the biggest companies (turnover £36m+) a legal responsibility and sets out a set of punishments and reparations if they fail to address slavery in their supply chains.
The Supply Chain managers of the future are having CSR drilled into them now as part of their education (I know, I'm part of it). We must hope they are not crushed by the wheels of the corporate machines.
Thanks for the pointers! I was really optimistic following the link, but reading more...
The draft bill included no measures to counter the use of slave
labour abroad as the Home Office believed that asking businesses
to audit and report on modern slavery in their supply chains
would be an “additional burden”. However, campaigning resulted
in a supply chain clause being added to the bills so that “big
business will be forced to make public its efforts to stop the
use of slave labour by its suppliers”.
And further...
There are, however, no legally binding requirements to conduct
due diligence on supply chains and there are no criminal or
financial penalties for non-compliance.
So, again, I ask the universe... why the fuck not?!
I for one support child labor and recognize that people cannot be lifted out of poverty by fiat. Children working along side their parents means these families can eat, and trying to legislate that away only prolongs and exasperates their poverty.
Every advanced economy started with child labor and other, from our perspective, deplorable conditions. The people must be able to gain enough capital first, before children can go to school, adults can have higher level jobs and enjoy other similar benefits of an advanced economy. But getting there is not a matter of outlawing child labor, instituting a minimum wage or other notions some have for "helping" the poor.
Interesting perspective, but I'd drop that "I for one support child labor" opening line, as I suspect most won't read/listen to anything you say after that.
I disagree that child labor is some kind of necessity to a nation developing its economy, but I will agree that legislation regarding it should be carefully considered.
> The people must be able to gain enough capital first, before children can go to school, adults can have higher level jobs and enjoy other similar benefits of an advanced economy.
Why? So that we don't have to give up a small amount the relative luxury we live in to help fund people who had the misfortune to be born in the wrong part of the world?
If everyone would just get over themselves we could fairly easily fund decent living standards for everyone without first requiring people to rent out their children.
It upsets me at how completely unsurprised I am about this. At this point, I've kind of started taking for granted that corporations in America depend on child labor.
Not just America. Most of the manufacturers listed are European. Not to say US corporations are innocent of this.
It's pretty upsetting to me since I own a car with glittery paint from one of the listed companies. It makes me curious as to how to solve the product sourcing traceability problem for the ethically minded like us.
Large corporations can be assumed to be doing multiple heinous things until they're exposed, at which point they'll issue a press release and hire a third party to certify compliance. Walmart does that with tomatoes sourced in Mexico, for example, where the tomatoes' conditions in their hothouses are better than the workers who tend them. The tomatoes get clean water.
Two, yes firms with long and convoluted supply chains still have an obligation to ensure the suppliers follow local regulations, at the cost of contract. That said, supply chains are convoluted and can be difficult to follow, and the best way to address it is by the people closest the problem, the local people. If the locals are corrupt or don't care much about their fellow citizens, it does not absolve the foreign firms, but it does make things more difficult. It would help if there were established a WTO-like mechanism, but for pollution and labor concerns, to help enforce by way of treaties and thus penalties.
An option these economies would resist, I suspect would be to impose tariffs commensurate with their deviation from minimum international baselines for pollution, labor laws, etc. These growing economies, their governments and even the labor force, I suspect, would resist such efforts to bring progress in these areas.
Let's not forget western economies grew on child labor in the 19th century as well. It doesn't make it acceptable, but it should provide context.