Cleaning Up Recruitment and Return Practices to Protect Migrant Workers

This op-Ed was originally published on TheDailyStar.net.

As tens of thousands of Bangladeshi workers fled the conflict in Libya, their plight exposed the vulnerability of migrant labour. It also laid bare the gaps in protecting the human rights of migrant workers. In today's globalised world millions of people work outside their own borders.

But across the entire spectrum of migration -- from recruitment to employment to return -- they face exploitation and abuse.

In Bangladesh where a job abroad is seen as a ticket out of poverty, people often sell everything they or their families own and borrow heavily to pay unscrupulous labour brokers and recruitment agencies. Many of them are trapped for years in debt bondage because of excessive fees and bribes. There is no effective government regulation of recruitment processes.

On arrival in the host countries the workers' freedom of movement might be restricted because employers or brokers withhold their passports and wages. Many of them work and live in sub-standard conditions. They are not allowed to form or join trade unions. They have no voice and no vote as foreigners. Sometimes they are physically abused or sexually exploited and can end up being trafficked into various forms of modern-day slavery. Access to justice for those who face such abuses is rarely available or affordable.

If the workers are forced to leave suddenly, as happened in Libya, their lives' savings -- along with it their dreams -- are wiped out. Of the 36,500 Bangladeshis who escaped from Libya, many had not received their full wages and were robbed of what little they had in the course of their flight.

Who is responsible for protecting the rights of migrant workers -- the sending country or the receiving country or the companies that employ them? Clearly the latter benefit from the fruits of migrants labour as much as the governments but there is little clarity on their role and responsibilities towards the very people on whose backs they make their profits.

Traditionally, international law looks to governments to protect human rights. The UN Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers and their Families is a treaty among states. So far only 44 states are parties to it. In April this year the Bangladesh government indicated its intention to ratify it. But no major migrant receiving state has yet ratified it -- leaving the Convention operationally ineffective.

Furthermore, Bangladesh like many developing countries does not have the resources or capacity to protect all its citizens abroad. There can be a lack of political will to pursue consular responsibilities diligently. The government is not always keen to press a receiving country hard for fear the latter might rescind the labour agreement.

As for the receiving country -- if, like Libya, it is violating the rights of its own citizens, why should it care about the rights of foreigners?

These shortcomings do not absolve home and host governments from their human rights obligations. But they do create a strong argument for companies that employ the labourers -- and often have more influence and resources than many governments -- to do more.

For the past decade a debate has raged in the United Nations on business's role towards human rights. On June 16 the UN Human Rights Council finally adopted Guiding Principles that aim to clarify the responsibilities of companies -- alongside the obligations of governments -- to respect human rights. Applicable to all economic sectors and all governments and businesses, they have profound implications for the protection of migrant labour.

Multinational companies know full well the reputational damage they can suffer if they fail to check the labour conditions in their global supply chains. That same risk to reputation -- and ultimately to profits -- also exists in relation to the exploitative practices of labour brokers and recruitment agents. That's why some progressive companies are beginning to focus on recruitment and repatriation processes for migrant workers.

Having drawn the lessons from the Libya crisis, the Bangladesh government too is well placed to review its manpower export policies and practices. Remittances from migrant workers account for 12% of the country's GDP. The rights of those who sustain this lucrative sector of the economy deserve more attention.

The London-based Institute for Human Rights and Business is working with a number of governments and companies to develop a framework for responsible recruitment and repatriation of migrant workers. After meetings in London and Mauritius, the Institute is convening a round-table this week in Dhaka in collaboration with the Research and Migratory Movements Research Unit (RMMU).

The first meeting of its kind to bring together leading global apparel brands, recruitment agencies, government officials and migrants' rights groups in Bangladesh, it provides a good opportunity for all constituencies in the migration equation to show leadership, commitment and collaboration.

The government is keen to sustain manpower export in the face of the global economic slowdown and turmoil in the Middle East. Companies want to keep costs low in tough times. The temptation to let sub-standards persist may be strong but that would be short-sighted.

Corruption, exploitation and human rights abuses do not create robust economies. Transparency, accountability and fair labour practices do.