A complaint against Lidl resulted in swift success: a few weeks after the complaint was made, Lidl agreed in a declaration to the Consumer Protection Agency to retract the claims made in the advertisements regarding fair working conditions.
Lidl can no longer make the following claims in its advertisements: “We trade fairly! Every product has a story. It is important to us who writes this story. Lidl advocates fair working conditions on a global scale. Therefore, at Lidl, we contract our non-food orders exclusively to selected suppliers and producers that are willing to comply with and can demonstrate their social responsibility. We categorically oppose every form of child labor, as well as human and labor rights violations in our production facilities. We continually strive to ensure these standards.”
In April 2010, on the initiative of ECCHR and the Clean Clothes Campaign, the Hamburg Consumer Protection Agency filed an unfair competition complaint against the German discount retailer Lidl for claims made in the company’s advertisements about fair working conditions in their supplier chain. The complaint accused Lidl of deceiving consumers by using advertisements to create the impression that the working conditions at Lidl suppliers were fundamentally good and complied with minimum standards set by Lidl.
A study by the CCC and ECCHR was able to show, however, that in fact the opposite was true. Inhumane working conditions were reported by seamstresses working at many of Lidl’s suppliers: excessive working hours, wage deductions as punishments, non-existent or uncertain payment for overtime, obstruction of trade union activity and discrimination against female employees. The practices described violate the conventions of the International Labour Organization, the BSCI Code of Conduct and the voluntary obligations undertaken by Lidl.
Payment below the living wage, excessive overtime hours on six to seven days per week, workplace abuse and discrimination, repression of trade unions and frequent workplace accidents and fire disasters: this is the sad reality faced by millions of workers in South and East Asia. European companies aggravate the already poor conditions by demanding low prices and tough deadlines. This pressure is passed along to the workers by the factory owners.
The term soft law is used to denote agreements, principles and declarations that are not legally binding. Soft law instruments are predominantly found in the international sphere. UN General Assembly resolutions are an example of soft law. Hard law refers generally to legal obligations that are binding on the parties involved and which can be legally enforced before a court.
The term soft law is used to denote agreements, principles and declarations that are not legally binding. Soft law instruments are predominantly found in the international sphere. UN General Assembly resolutions are an example of soft law. Hard law refers generally to legal obligations that are binding on the parties involved and which can be legally enforced before a court.
The collapse of the Rana Plaza factory building in April 2013 in Dhaka, Bangladesh and the fire at Ali Enterprises in Karachi, Pakistan in September 2012 are two particularly drastic examples of the inhumane working conditions endured in southern Asia by those producing goods for the European market. Payment below the living wage, excessive overtime hours on six to seven days per week, workplace abuse and discrimination, repression of trade unions and frequent workplace accidents and fire disasters: this is the sad reality faced by millions of workers in South and East Asia. European companies aggravate the already poor conditions by demanding low prices and tough deadlines. This pressure is passed along to the workers by the factory owners.
European companies do require their suppliers to comply with codes of practice and hire certification firms to monitor working conditions. What the Ali Enterprises case shows, however, is that this kind of auditing and certification is wholly unsuitable for effecting meaningful improvement in the lives of local workers. This situation makes it all the more important to establish what liability is borne by certification firms and by companies like German clothing discounter KiK.
The collapse of the Rana Plaza factory building in April 2013 in Dhaka, Bangladesh and the fire at Ali Enterprises in Karachi, Pakistan in September 2012 are two particularly drastic examples of the inhumane working conditions endured in southern Asia by those producing goods for the European market. Payment below the living wage, excessive overtime hours on six to seven days per week, workplace abuse and discrimination, repression of trade unions and frequent workplace accidents and fire disasters: this is the sad reality faced by millions of workers in South and East Asia. European companies aggravate the already poor conditions by demanding low prices and tough deadlines. This pressure is passed along to the workers by the factory owners.
European companies do require their suppliers to comply with codes of practice and hire certification firms to monitor working conditions. What the Ali Enterprises case shows, however, is that this kind of auditing and certification is wholly unsuitable for effecting meaningful improvement in the lives of local workers. This situation makes it all the more important to establish what liability is borne by certification firms and by companies like German clothing discounter KiK.
