THIRD PARTY ASSESSMENT
PHILIP MORRIS POLAND

AGRICULTURAL LABOR PRACTICES PROGRAM

Control Union Certifications
Meeuwenlaan 4-68011 BZ ZWOLLE
Netherlands

September 2014

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications
TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.

ALP PROGRAM BACKGROUND AND ASSESSMENT OVERVIEW ....................... 5

2.

PMPL-T ASSESSMENT: SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY ........................................... 8
2.1 OPENING MEETING .......................................................................................................................... 9
2.2 STAFF INTERVIEWS AND ALP PROGRAM DOCUMENTATION ......................................................... 9
2.3 OVERVIEW OF PMPL-T TOBACCO GROWING AREAS .................................................................... 9
2.4 SELECTION OF CU FARM SAMPLE ................................................................................................. 10
2.5 DEMOGRAPHICS OF FARMS SAMPLED BY CU ............................................................................... 10
2.6 FARM VISITS .................................................................................................................................. 11
2.7 EXTERNAL WORKERS AND FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE FARMERS INTERVIEWED .......................... 11
2.8 CLOSING MEETING ........................................................................................................................ 12
2.9 PREPARATION OF THE FINAL REPORT ........................................................................................... 12

3. ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PHASE 1 OF THE ALPPROGRAM ....................................................................................................................................... 13
3.1 CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................... 14
3.2 PEOPLE AND PROCESSES TO MANAGE THE ALP PROGRAM ........................................................ 14
3.2.1 Internal structure for ALP implementation ................................................. 14
3.2.2 Internal communication and reporting ........................................................ 15
3.2.3 ALP training, roles and responsibilities ........................................................ 15
3.2.4 Understanding of the ALP Code Principles .................................................. 15
3.2.5 Interpretation of relationship between farmers and workers ............. 16
3.3 COMMUNICATING THE ALP CODE REQUIREMENTS TO ALL FARMERS ........................................ 16
3.3.1 The ALP communication strategy ................................................................... 16
3.3.2 ALP communication methods and materials .............................................. 17
3.4 BUILDING FARM PROFILES FOR ALL CONTRACTED FARMS ......................................................... 18
3.4.1 Data gathering system for Farm Profiles .................................................... 18
3.5 PROMPT ACTIONS .......................................................................................................................... 19
3.5.1 Prompt Action reporting mechanism ............................................................ 19
3.5.2 Understanding and reporting Prompt Actions ........................................... 20
4. ASSESSMENT OF THE CURRENT STATUS OF PHASE 2 OF THE ALPPROGRAM ....................................................................................................................................... 21
4.1 MONITORING OF LABOR PRACTICES FARM BY FARM ................................................................... 22
4.1.1 Building capacity of PMPL-T staff for Phase 2 ........................................... 22
4.1.2 Selection of focus areas ..................................................................................... 22
4.1.3 Methods and tools for monitoring labor practices ................................... 22
4.2 ADDRESS WIDESPREAD ISSUES ................................................................................................... 23
4.2.1 Investigation of root causes ............................................................................. 23
4.2.2 Initiatives to mitigate risk and improve socio-economic conditions . 24
4.3 SUPPORT MECHANISM ................................................................................................................... 24
4.3.1 Pilot government help line ................................................................................ 24
5.

FARM LEVEL ASSESSMENT OF ALP CODE STANDARDS ................................... 26
5.1 ALP CODE PRINCIPLE 1: CHILD LABOR ...................................................................................... 27

2

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

5.1.1 Prevalence of children working ....................................................................... 28
5.1.2 Awareness of legal minimum working age ................................................. 29
5.1.3 Awareness of hazardous work ......................................................................... 29
5.1.4 Underlying factors that increase risk ............................................................ 29
5.2 ALP CODE PRINCIPLE 2: INCOME AND WORK HOURS ............................................................... 30
5.2.1 Minimum salary ..................................................................................................... 30
5.2.2 Payment schedule ................................................................................................ 30
5.2.3 Regular and overtime hours ............................................................................ 30
5.2.4 Legal benefits ........................................................................................................ 31
5.2.5 Awareness of legal minimum wage ............................................................... 31
5.2.6 Record keeping ..................................................................................................... 31
5.2.7 Pay slips ................................................................................................................... 31
5.3 ALP CODE PRINCIPLE 3: FAIR TREATMENT ................................................................................ 32
5.3.1 No evidence of practices suggestive of unfair treatment ..................... 32
5.4 ALP CODE PRINCIPLE 4: FORCED LABOR ................................................................................... 33
5.4.1 No evidence of workers unable to leave their job ................................... 33
5.5 ALP CODE PRINCIPLE 5: SAFE WORK ENVIRONMENT ............................................................... 34
5.5.1 Training and awareness of Green Tobacco Sickness (GTS) ................. 34
5.5.2 CPA handling and training ................................................................................ 34
5.5.3 Clean drinking and washing water ................................................................ 36
5.5.4 General safety measures .................................................................................. 36
5.6 ALP CODE PRINCIPLE 6: FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION ............................................................... 37
5.6.1 Workers´ right to freedom of association................................................... 38
5.6.2 Awareness of freedom of association ........................................................... 38
5.7 ALP CODE PRINCIPLE 7: COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW ............................................................. 38
5.7.1 Information on legal rights ............................................................................... 39
6.

CONCLUDING REMARKS ................................................................................................. 40

APPENDICES ................................................................................................................................. 42
APPENDIX 1. PMPL-T RESPONSE AND ALP PROGRAM ACTION PLAN .............................................. 43
APPENDIX 2. ALP CODE ...................................................................................................................... 52

3

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

GLOSSARY OF TERMS and ACRONYMS

ALP
ALP Code
ALP Code Principle
ALP Country Team (or CT)
ALP Program
CA
CU
CPA
Crew leader
EHS
EU
Family farm
Farm Profiles

FCV
GAP
GTS
Leaf tobacco supplier
Migrant labor

Measurable Standard

NGO
OC
Phase 1
Phase 2
Piece work
PMI
PMPL-T
PPE
Prompt Action

STP
Support mechanism

TPG

Agricultural Labor Practices
PMI’s Agricultural labor practices code
Short statements that set expectations of how the farmer should
manage labor on his farm in seven focus areas
Inter-department group charged with ALP implementation
Agricultural Labor Practices Program
Corporate Affairs
Control Union
Crop Protection Agents
Person responsible for recruitment, supply and/or managing a groupof workers
Environment, Health, Safety Department of a PMI entity
European Union
A farm that depends mainly on family members for the production of
tobaccoA data collecting tool developed by PMI with Verité to track thesocio-economic status of the farms, systematically gather detailed
information about, among other things, the type of labor employed,
farming activities that minors may be involved in, and hiring
Flue-cured Virginia tobacco
Good Agricultural Practices
Green Tobacco Sickness
A company that has a contract with PMI to supply tobacco but is nota farmer
Migrant labor refers to labor that comes from outside the farm’s
immediate area. Migrant labor can come from a neighboring region
in the same country, or from a different country. Labor is considered
migrant labor when workers cannot go home every day.
A Measurable Standard defines a good labor practice on a tobacco
farm and help us determine to what extent the labor conditions andpractices on a tobacco farm are in line with each of the ALP Codeprinciples
Non-Governmental Organization
PMI Operations Center (Lausanne, Switzerland)Startup of ALP Program (training, communications, outreach)
ALP Program full implementation (monitoring, addressing problems)Payment at a fixed rate per unit of production/work
Philip Morris International, Inc. or any of its direct or indirect
subsidiaries
Philip Morris Polska Tobacco Sp. Z o.o.
Personal Protection Equipment
A situation in which workers’ physical or mental well-being might be
at risk, children or a vulnerable group – pregnant women, the elderly- are in danger, or workers might not be free to leave their job
Sustainable Tobacco Production
A way for workers to access information and get support in difficult
situations and for workers and farmers to get support in mediating
disputes. Farmers have access to additional services to improve laborand business practices.
Tobacco Producer Group

4

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

1. ALP Program background and assessment
overview

THIRD PARTY ASSESSMENT
PHILIP MORRIS POLAND
AGRICULTURAL LABOR PRACTICES PROGRAM

DRAFT

5

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

In 2011, Philip Morris International Inc. (PMI)1 launched a worldwide Agricultural
Labor Practices (ALP) program to progressively eliminate child labor and other laborabuses where they are found and to achieve safe and fair working conditions on all
farms from which PMI sources tobacco. This program applies to all tobacco farms
with which PMI affiliates or PMI´s leaf tobacco suppliers have contracts to growtobacco for PMI and consists of four main components:
1) the Agricultural Labor Practices Code, setting clear standards for all
tobacco farms growing tobacco from which PMI ultimately buys;2) an extensive training program for all PMI and leaf tobacco supplier’s staff
that are directly involved with tobacco growing, in particular the fieldtechnicians providing regular visits to the farms;3) a multi-layered internal and external monitoring system; and
4) involvementofgovernmental
andnon-governmental(NGO)
stakeholders in improving labor practices and enhancing the livelihoodsof tobacco growing communities.
The ALP Program was developed and is being implemented in partnership with
Verité, a global social compliance and labor rights NGO. Control Union Certifications(CU) was commissioned by PMI to develop the external monitoring component of
the ALP Program working in tandem with Verité to assess PMI affiliates or PMI’s leaf
tobacco suppliers and tobacco farms worldwide. All PMI suppliers submit internal,
annual reports and are assessed regularly on their performance. For the ALP
Program implementation, internal reviews are also being performed to assess the
progress and challenges in the program’s implementation. Third party assessments
are periodic reviews undertaken by CU of PMI leaf tobacco suppliers and tobacco
farms worldwide.
In this initial stage of implementing the ALP Program, these third party
assessments focus solely on the ALP Program implementation. They specificallyfocus on each leaf tobacco supplier´s progress in implementing the ALP Codeframed against the strategic objectives set by PMI.
The ALP Code contains seven (7) principles:2
1.
2.

3.

4.
5.

6.
7.

Child Labor
There shall be no child labor.
Income and Work Hours
Income earned during a pay period or growing season shall always be enough to meet workers’ basic needs and shall be ofa sufficient level to enable the generation of discretionary income. Workers shall not work excessive or illegal work hours.
Fair Treatment
Farmers shall ensure fair treatment of workers. There shall be no harassment, discrimination, physical or mental
punishment, or any other forms of abuse.
Forced Labor
Farm labor must be voluntary. There shall be no forced labor.
Safe Work Environment
Farmers shall provide a safe work environment to prevent accidents and injury and to minimize health risks.
Accommodation, where provided, shall be clean, safe and meet the basic needs of the workers.
Freedom of Association
Farmers shall recognize and respect workers’ rights to freedom of association and to bargain collectively.
Compliance with the Law
Farmers shall comply with all laws of their country relating to employment.

1

For the purposes of this Code, “PMI” means Philip Morris International, Inc. or any of its direct orindirect subsidiaries.
2
The full ALP Code is contained in appendix 2.

6

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

The implementation of PMI’s ALP Program by leaf tobacco suppliers that purchase
tobacco for PMI has been divided into two phases:3
Phase 1Management personnel and field technicians at supplier level understand the
ALP Code and the implementation approach, ensuring capacity of people andthe processes in place to roll-out and manage the Program;
Communicate the ALP Code, requirements and expectations to all farmers;
Document Farm Profiles for every contracted farm, identifying risk areas andtracking communication efforts to farmers;
Being aware and engaged to identify situations and incidents at farms thatshould be both reported and addressed immediately.

Phase 2








Collect detailed information about labor practices on every contracted farm;
Systemically assess each farm for status of the Measurable Standards
outlined in the ALP Code;Create and implement an improvement plan for each farm to improve theimplementation of all required standards;
Identify and implement corrective and/or preventive measures to identify
and address the root causes of potential situations not meeting thestandards and risks found on the farms;
Report systematically on the progress that is being made;Support mechanism in place.

(Source: Verité & PMI, 2011)
3

Often, there is not a strict distinction between the two phases of the ALP implementation. In practicesuppliers in many countries start considering how to address and respond to situations that do not meet
the Code and to monitor changes before formally finishing Phase 1.

7

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

2. PMPL-T assessment: Scope and methodology

THIRD PARTY ASSESSMENT
PHILIP MORRIS POLAND
AGRICULTURAL LABOR PRACTICES PROGRAM

DRAFT

8

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

In 2011, PMI launched its global ALP Program. This report was the sixth external
assessment undertaken by Control Union (CU). The review of Phillip Morris Polska
Tobacco (PMPL-T) was conducted in July 2014 when it was completing its third crop
season under the ALP Program and its first year of implementing Phase 2.
2.1 Opening meeting
CU started the assessment on 14 July with a meeting in Warsaw with PMPL-T senior
management, the ALP Country Team representatives and coordinators,
representatives of PMI Operations Center (OC) and Verité. In this meeting PMPL-T
provided an overview of the continuing implementation of ALP in Poland and CU
presented the objectives of the assessment.
2.2 Staff interviews and ALP Program documentation
CU conducted individual interviews with PMPL-T’s senior management and the staff
involved in the ALP Program implementation. In addition, 21 field technicians (91%of the total number of field technicians) and three regional supervisors wereinterviewed. All interviews were conducted individually so that interviewees felt
comfortable to speak freely and raise any issues. Interviews covered the following
topics:












General awareness of the ALP Program and knowledge of the ALP Code;
Implementation of the ALP Program at PMPL-T level;
Responsibilities of management personnel;
Internal training and communication on the ALP Program;
Communication of the ALP Code to farmers;
Internal system to collect information through Farm Profiles;
Mechanism for reporting Prompt Actions;
Steps taken to prepare for Phase 2;
Methods and tools used for monitoring labor practices;
Initiatives implemented to address widespread issues; andSupport mechanism.

CU then reviewed all relevant documentation related to the ALP Program
implementation, including: Farm Profiles, farmer communication materials,
purchase contracts, Prompt Action reports, training records, personnel records,
monitoring forms, and annual job objectives.
2.3 Overview of PMPL-T tobacco growing areas
The farms contracted by PMPL-T were divided into four regions: Leżajsk (36%),
Kazimierza Wielka (29%), Biłgoraj & Lublin (32%) and Oleśnica (3%). Oleśnica
produces only Burley tobacco, Leżajsk mostly Virginia Flue-Cured tobacco (98%).
The Kazimierza Wielka and Biłgoraj & Lublin regions produce both types of tobacco.
Of the farmers assessed, 61% were growing between 0.1 and 1 hectares, 27%
between 1.1 and 2 hectares, and 12% more than 2 hectares. The graphs and tables
below provide demographic information on the farms visited.

9

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

2.4 Selection of CU farm sample
At the time of the assessment PMPL-T purchased tobacco from 3,468 farms. CU
randomly selected 65 farms to visit unannounced, constituting a meaningful sample
based on the square root of the total number of farms contracted by PMPL-T. The
CU sample was purposely skewed towards bigger farms as a larger number ofworkers were expected to be present on such farms. Consequently the numberspresented in this report do not necessarily represent a statistical reflection ofpervasive behavior.
2.5 Demographics of farms sampled by CU
The graphs below reflect specific demographic information on the sample of 65
farms visited.

Regional distribution CU sample
65 farms **Type of farm
CU sample 65 farms**

Leżajsk
23%

35%

14%
28%

Kazimierza
WielkaOleśnica

42%

Family farm with only
family members working

58%
Farm with family members
and local workers

Bilgoraj & Lublin

Farm size (ha contracted by PMPL-T)
CU sample 65 farms**

Contract status
CU sample 65 farms**
2%

0-1
40%

45%

Newly contracted

1< - 2>2

98%

Formerly contracted

15%

Tobacco typeCU sample 65 farms**

Flue-Cured
Burley

35%
65%

10

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

2.6 Farm visits
Farm visits were only announced to the field technician on the day of the visit. CU
used a variety of methods to collect information on the practices at each farm.
These included: interviews with farmers and workers, verification of documentationand visual observation in the field, storage rooms, curing barns, working areas andhousing. Before each interview, CU explained the purpose and objectives of theassessment and assured interviewees that all information would be completely
anonymous.
On each farm, CU also conducted an individual interview with the farmer to assess
the effectiveness of PMPL-T’s communication efforts and initiatives to verify:






If the farmers had been made aware of the ALP Code;The farmers´ level of understanding and attitude towards ALP CodePrinciples;
The key messages received;
Perception on and participation in initiatives implemented;
Their willingness and ability to meet the standards of the ALP Code.

2.7 External workers and family members of the farmers interviewed
In total, 157 external workers and family members of the farmers visited wereinterviewed. All interviewees were local workers that travelled home daily. The
graphs below illustrate the demographics of the sample.
100%

100%

80%

80%
External
workers60%

Occasional

60%
Seasonal

40%

40%
Familymembers

20%

20%

Permanent

0%0%Type ofemployment*

Type ofinterviewee(Only external workers = 33)
100%

100%

80%

80%

60%
40%
20%
0%

<13

Women

60%

Men

40%

16-17

20%

Adults**

13-15

0%

GenderAge* Occasional (<1 month), Seasonal (1-11 months), Temporary (year round)**Adults (≥18)

11

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

To avoid bias, interviews with workers were conducted without the farmer present.
On each farm, CU also attempted to interview different “types” of workers
i.e. workers with different types of employment, men and women, family members
and external workers. Additionally, visual observation of the working conditions wasan important technique during the farm visits.
2.8 Closing meeting
CU presented the initial findings of the assessment at the closing meeting held at
PMPL-T´s head office in Warsaw on 23 September 2014 attended by PMPL-T senior
management, the ALP Country Team representatives and coordinators, andrepresentatives of the OC.
2.9 Preparation of the final report
The CU assessment is an important external measurement of the progress of theeffectiveness and progress of the ALP Program implementation in all countries
where PMI sources tobacco. Public release demonstrates PMI’s commitment totransparency as an important component of the ALP Program. CU authors the final
assessment report with quality control provided by Verité.
While drafting the report, PMI and the local PMI affiliate and/or tobacco leaf
supplier may request clarifications on specific findings. After both PMI and the leaf
tobacco supplier feel findings have been clarified and understood, a market action
plan is prepared or the market revises the existing GAP/ALP Program plans to
respond to the findings.

12

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

3. Assessment of the Implementation of Phase 1 of
the ALP Program

THIRD PARTY ASSESSMENT
PHILIP MORRIS POLAND
AGRICULTURAL LABOR PRACTICES PROGRAM

DRAFT

13

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

This chapter documents the findings of the assessment of PMPL-T’s implementation
for Phase 1 of the ALP Program. Phase 1 began with the training for management
personnel and field technicians globally including:1) PMPL-T’s objectives and expectations;2) The meaning of the ALP Code Principles and Measurable Standards;
3) Techniques to communicate the ALP Code to farmers;
4) Tracking progress of communication and how to build a Farm Profile;5) Identifying problems when PMPL-T visits the farmers they support.
3.1 Conduct of the assessment
CU was satisfied with the cooperation and access to information provided by
PMPL-T. All interviewees demonstrated a willingness to explain internal processes
and provide their professional feedback. Both management and field personnel
were fully transparent and provided all support requested by CU. In addition,
PMPL-T provided all the relevant documentation related to the ALP Program
implementation.
3.2 People and processes to manage the ALP Program
3.2.1 Internal structure for ALP implementation
At the time of the assessment, PMPL-T had established both an ALP steeringcommittee and ALP Country Team. The steering committee was providing guidance
to the ALP Country Team, whereas the ALP Country Team was focused on theactual execution of the ALP Program. The relevant departments (Agronomy,
Corporate Affairs and Law) were represented in the ALP Country Team. Regional
supervisors also participated in this team and functioned as intermediaries between
the management and field personnel. The supervisors worked in close collaboration
with the field technicians and regularly joined during farm visits.
Organizational chart for ALP implementation

14

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

3.2.2 Internal communication and reporting
The ALP steering committee held semi-annual meetings specifically on the ALP
Program and was informed on developments by the ALP coordinator. PMPL-T
reported quarterly to the ALP Regional Coordinators and OC on the status ofinitiatives to address widespread issues, the progress of the ALP implementation,
farm monitoring and Prompt Actions. The ALP Country Team, responsible for the
implementation of the ALP Program met more frequently and held bi-weekly
conference calls to update each other on new developments and progress. Field
technicians attended weekly meetings with their regional supervisors to discuss andreport, among other things, topics on the ALP Program.
3.2.3 ALP training, roles and responsibilities
All personnel involved in the ALP implementation had been trained and their ALP
related responsibilities were included in their annual job objectives. Regular training
sessions for management personnel were conducted by the ALP coordinator andPhase 1 and 2 workshops were conducted in association with Verité and PMI.
As they were responsible for maintaining close contact with the farmers, fieldtechnicians received special training to ensure tobacco was produced in accordancewith PMI´s ALP Code standards. In December 2011, field technicians were trained
during an ALP orientation program in which the ALP Program was first introduced.
In June 2012, they again participated in a training session which covered the full
ALP Code and the approach for implementation. To start the implementation of
Phase 2, field technicians and regional supervisors participated in a workshop heldin April 2014. In addition, in May and July 2014 field technicians were provided withrefresher training sessions on Prompt Actions and the ALP Code in general tofurther increase their knowledge on the ALP Code Principles and Measurable
Standards. After these refresher trainings, their knowledge was assessed with awritten test containing ten questions on ALP. All training sessions were conductedby the ALP coordinator.
3.2.4 Understanding of the ALP Code Principles
Field technicians had a good understanding of the ALP Code Principles on childlabor, income and work hours, fair treatment, and safe work environment. These
were also the principles chosen by PMPL-T as focus areas. However, theirunderstanding of the remaining ALP Code Principles was limited:
1. Principle 4 (forced labor): field technicians (100%) were unaware of therisks that could be associated with forced labor regarding financial
agreements between farmers and workers, such as end of harvest
payments. As these situations were not common in the Polish market andworkers mainly received daily payments, field technicians were not familiar
with the associated risks.
2. Principle 6 (freedom of association): The theory of the principle was known
by field technicians, however, as no worker associations were active in thevisited regions, field technicians (100%) were not familiar with the conceptof an association in practice.

15

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

3. Principle 7 (compliance with the law): None of the field technicians (100%)
were able to explain whether any workers would be entitled to a written
employment contract under Polish employment laws.
The knowledge gaps of field technicians were mainly related to factors uncommon
in the Polish market. However, a thorough understanding of the full ALP Code isimportant to prevent field technicians from developing a blind spot to potential
risks. In addition, better knowledge of the legal framework is needed to guidefarmers.
PMPL-T response: “As of the 2015 crop season, PMPL-T will organize additional training sessions
for its FTs on all of the ALP Code principles and measurable standards, at least twice a year. Special
emphasis will be given to Forced Labor, Freedom of Association and Compliance with the Law, the ALP
Code Principles identified by CU which field technicians were less aware of and found more difficult to
explain to growers. After each training session, field technicians will be given a test to assess theirknowledge of all ALP Principles and measurable standards, and to gain feedback to tailor future
training sessions.”

3.2.5 Interpretation of relationship between farmers and workers
According to PMPL-T, workers on tobacco farms are not subject to the Polish Labor
Code. Instead workers are considered independent service providers because they
are not subordinate to the farmers as they “already know what to do”. In PMPL-T’sview, the Labor Code does not relate to farm workers and instead it has applied thePolish Civil Code.
Due to this interpretation of the relationship between farmers and workers, thelatter are not entitled to any legal benefits, holidays or annual leave, a written
employment contract and legal minimum wage by law. Although not required bylaw, PMPL-T has decided to recommend that farmers pay the legal minimum wage
as stated in the Labor Code, nevertheless none of the other items listed above werecovered in their program.
PMPL-T response: “It is important to understand the situation of the Polish tobacco farm sector
and through this perspective look at employer-employee relationships. Polish tobacco is produced
mainly by smallholder farmers who grow on average 1-2 ha of tobacco using limited external labor. In
addition, for tobacco most of the tasks require qualified and skilled personnel. With tobacco growing
in Poland, the relationship between the farmer and his workers is often impacted by the fact that mostof workers are also tobacco farmers themselves.”
3.3 Communicating the ALP Code requirements to all farmers
3.3.1 The ALP communication strategy
At the time of the assessment, all farmers had been included in thecommunications on the ALP Code, which were done by means of both group andindividual meetings. Two series of group meetings were conducted for farmers in2012 and 2013. The first round took place in June and August 2012. In March and
September 2013, a refresher training session was held during the second round ofgroup meetings. Both series of meetings were conducted by the regional

16

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

supervisors. In addition to the group meetings, field technicians informed andtrained farmers on the ALP Code Principles during their regular farm visits.
Interviews with 65 farmers confirmed that they were familiar with the ALP Code.
When farmers were asked about the ALP Code they could easily remember childlabor (92%), safe work environment (89%), income and work hours (66%) and fairtreatment (63%).4 These results were in line with the priorities previously identified
by PMPL-T. The principles farmers remembered less easily were forced labor(45%), freedom of association (25%) and compliance with the law (25%).4 These
results are a reflection of field technicians’ limited understanding of these three ALP
Code Principles (see also chapter 3.2.4). More information on farmer and worker
awareness can be found in chapter 4.
Another way to communicate the ALP Code to farmers included a clause in theirgrowing contracts. As farmers in Poland were not directly contracted by PMPL-T,
but via Tobacco Producer Groups (TPG), there were two contracts in place, namely:(1) the contract of PMPL-T with the TPG, and (2) the contract of the TPG with thefarmers. A clause requiring the implementation of ALP was included in bothcontracts and the full ALP Code was referenced as an annex. In total, PMPL-T had
contracted six TPG’s at the time of the assessment.
3.3.2 ALP communication methods and materials
PMPL-T developed several communication materials to communicate the ALP Codeto the farmers supplying tobacco. The ALP Code was described in full in a leaflet
while a more condensed message was conveyed in an ALP calendar. At two buying
stations TV screens were installed on which a presentation on the principles of the
ALP Code was shown.

ALP leaflet

4

Percentages refer to farmers interviewed.

17

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

The leaflet contained the full ALP Code with a description of
all seven Principles and 32 Measurable Standards. This
provided the farmer with a clear overview of the topics
related to the ALP Code. However, the leaflet was a directtranslation into Polish and there was only a limited
adaptation of the Principles and Standards to the local
market. More specific information on the legal minimum
wage, minimum working age and other local regulations that
apply to farmers and workers on Polish tobacco farms would
give farmers a more direct perspective to check whether
their current practices are meeting the standard. The
language could also be better adapted to farmers as they areless familiar with technical and administrative terminology.
As previously mentioned, condensed ALP messages wereconveyed in the ALP calendar with short statements on all
ALP Code Principles. Caps branded with the ALP logo were
useful reminders of the program’s influence in their tobacco
production.
Most farmers confirmed that they learned about the ALP
Program during group and individual meetings. In generalfarmers declared that they learned more from verbal
communication methods than from written materials as theyoften did not read them.

ALP Poster
PMPL-T response: “As a result of the refresher training sessions to improve field technicians’
knowledge of ALP, farmers’ understanding of all ALP principles is expected to increase over time.
Communication materials will also be tailored to the Polish market to make them more effective andreadable for growers.”
3.4 Building Farm Profiles for all contracted farms
As a requirement of Phase 1, PMPL-T is expected to build Farm Profiles for every
farm in its supply chain. PMI has developed a global template for its tobacco
sourcing affiliates and leaf tobacco suppliers to collect socio-economic indicators
including farm size, number of workers, age and number of children in the farmer’sfamily, working status (part time, full time, and migrants), worker pay period andliving conditions.
3.4.1 Data gathering system for Farm Profiles
At the time of CU’s assessment, all farms visited had a complete Farm Profile fromthe previous crop season (2013). For the current season (2014), 91% of the farms
visited had updated Farm Profiles. For one newly contracted farmer visited, no
Farm Profile was available.
For the current crop season, CU verified that 95% of the Farm Profiles of the farms
visited were accurate and matched the conditions on the farm. For the remaining
5%, either the size of the contracted tobacco field or the number of workers was

18

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

inaccurate. Due to fluctuations in the labor demand during the season, which isinherent to the agricultural sector, these inaccuracies were not unexpected.
At the end of the season, field technicians entered the data obtained from FarmProfiles into a database and paper versions were archived. To gain a better
understanding of their farmer base, PMPL-T analyzed the Farm Profile data using atemplate provided by PMI. This analysis was conducted for both the 2012 and 2013
crop seasons.
3.5 Prompt Actions
PMI defines a Prompt Action as:“a situation in which workers’ physical or mental well-being might be at risk,children or a vulnerable group – pregnant women, the elderly - are indanger, or workers might not be free to leave their job.” (Source: PMI, 2011)
A Phase 1 requirement is for PMPL-T to address Prompt Actions found on the farms
from which they source tobacco. Any Prompt Action should be reported immediately
to the ALP coordinator, who provides guidance on how to address the issue orescalates it within the organization.
3.5.1 Prompt Action reporting mechanism
The reporting of Prompt Actions was combined with the collection of information formonitoring labor practices (see chapter 4.1). “Continuation Sheets” were used forboth Prompt Actions and situations not meeting the ALP standard. In the form,
special sections were provided to describe the situation, the agreed action with thefarmer and reference to the applicable ALP Code Principle and Measurable
Standard. Field technicians marked a specific box to indicate an identified situation
as a Prompt Action. After identification, the field technician should take corrective
actions on the spot and provide additional training on the issue to the farmer.
Thereafter the regional supervisor should be informed, and he then notifies thecountry team in order to investigate the potential scale of the problem and provide
feedback on the issue to the responsible field technician and regional supervisor.
Only one Prompt Action had been reported by a field technician during the 2013
crop season and at the time of the assessment no Prompt Actions had beenreported for the 2014 crop season. The fact that CU identified four cases in which
farmers declared the involvement of children in hazardous activities, such as
harvesting and sticking (see chapter 5.1.1) during what was just a two-weekassessment, implies that this number should have been higher. Moreover, themonitoring results of the second quarterly report of 2014 showed that PMPL-T
identified 21 farmers who declared they would involve their children in hazardous
related activities.
One reason for not reporting cases as Prompt Actions could be the limited ability offield technicians to recognize Prompt Actions at the farm (see chapter 3.5.2).
However, as was mentioned by PMPL-T during the closing meeting, field technicianspossibly would first try to find a solution on the spot before reporting the issue,

19

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

even though this was not PMPL-T’s policy which was for field technicians to always
report identified issues.
3.5.2 Understanding and reporting Prompt Actions
As described in chapter 3.2.4, field technicians had a good theoretical knowledge ofPrompt Actions. However, in practice their ability to recognize Prompt Actions at thefarm level was limited. During interviews with CU, they could not determine
whether specific situations should be considered Prompt Actions or regularsituations not meeting the standard. Their main response was that they would
consult one of the regional supervisors when encountering these situations. To
ensure an effective Prompt Action reporting mechanism, it is crucial fieldtechnicians can distinguish Prompt Actions from other situations not meeting thestandard.
PMPL-T response: “Field technicians were instructed to take a proactive approach to identify,
report, and address prompt action situations during farm visits. During the 2014 crop season, fieldtechnicians recorded 21 prompt actions. As a result, PMPL-T provided additional training to thefarmers on the relevant principles and conducted follow-up visits to monitor progress. Only one
situation leading to a prompt action was observed later on. However, PMPL-T acknowledges theimportance of continuing to improve the ability of field technicians to record prompt action issues,particularly those related to child labor.
Therefore, PMPL-T will conduct additional trainings for field technicians on prompt actions based onreal examples. As of crop 2015, field technicians’ ALP toolbox will include a list of potential prompt
action issues to help them properly classify observed situations as prompt actions and to increase theirconfidence to correctly record and escalate issues to their supervisors.”“Additionally, an ALP monitoring recognition and rewards system is being considered for fieldtechnicians to promote their understanding of the importance of recording prompt actions to address
issues, keep track of agreed solutions with farmers and, ultimately, to bring about a change in living
and working conditions on farms.”

20

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

4. Assessment of the current status of Phase 2 of
the ALP Program

THIRD PARTY ASSESSMENT
PHILIP MORRIS POLAND
AGRICULTURAL LABOR PRACTICES PROGRAM

DRAFT

21

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

This chapter describes the findings on the current status of PMPL-T’s
implementation of Phase 2 of the ALP Program. As PMPL-T had recently initiatedPhase 2, certain requirements such as improvement plans were not yet
implemented.
PMI introduces its affiliates or leaf tobacco suppliers to Phase 2 when they decide
they are ready to implement the requirements. This does not necessarily mean that
all Phase 1 requirements have been achieved. PMI and Verité then provide training
to the ALP Country Team which includes:
1) Preparation of the ALP Country Team to train staff to systematically monitor
labor practices on farms;2) ALP status update;3) Introduction to Phase 2;
4) General approach for monitoring before, during and after a farm visit; and
5) Next step and planning for the upcoming season.
4.1 Monitoring of labor practices farm by farm
In Phase 2, PMI’s affiliates and leaf tobacco suppliers are expected to start
monitoring labor practices on individual farms and select at least 2 ALP CodePrinciples to focus their efforts on in the first year of Phase 2 implementation,
progressively monitoring all ALP Code Principles and Measurable Standards. By
selecting 2 Principles, efforts can be focused and systems and skills are piloted andembedded by the end of the first year towards the integration of more Principles.
4.1.1 Building capacity of PMPL-T staff for Phase 2
In February 2014, management personnel received a special training from Verité toensure that all relevant staff were prepared for Phase 2. Subsequently, in March
2014, the field technicians and regional supervisors responsible for visiting thefarms received a special workshop on Phase 2.
4.1.2 Selection of focus areas
PMPL-T focused the implementation of Phase 2 on three Measurable Standards;
child labor in a family setting (PMPL-T specifically identified children involved inhazardous tasks), payment of a minimum salary, CPA and PPE practices. Even withthis focus, all ALP Code Principles were monitored at the time of assessment.
4.1.3 Methods and tools for monitoring labor practices
PMPL-T chose to monitor all ALP Code Principles and Measurable Standards at thestart of the Phase 2 implementation. To collect information PMPL-T developed anevaluation form covering all Measurable Standards. During farm visits, fieldtechnicians had to complete the evaluation form and immediately fill in acontinuation form when identifying a specific issue including a detailed descriptionof the situation, a follow-up action with space for additional comments.
Subsequently, the unique identification number of the continuation form wasrecorded on the evaluation form under the applicable Measurable Standard so bothforms were linked to each other. It was noted that information on the farm’s

22

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

production stage at the moment of monitoring was not recorded, while this could be
useful as the risk of an issue varies according to the phases of production. At thetime of the assessment, evaluation sheets were available and completed for nearly
all of the farms visited (97%).
For 5% of the forms, information relating to CPA storage was found to beinaccurate. While the evaluation form stated that the storage was ‘meeting thestandard’, CU identified improper CPA storage. In these cases the CPAs were stored
on an open shelf or in an old fridge which were freely accessible to children.
CU identified that field technicians completed the entire form during the first or
second visit, with the risk of missing important findings during the later stages oftobacco production. At the time of the assessment, the evaluation sheets were not
updated after each visit for 48% of the farms visited creating a gap in theevaluation process.
Monitoring of the non-prioritized principles was being conducted at the time of theassessment while gaps in the field technicians’ knowledge of these topics wereidentified. In order to prevent the development of blind spots on issues regarding
non-prioritized topics and to create a reliable monitoring system, the topics being
monitored need to reflect the understanding of field technicians.
PMPL-T response: “During the 2014 crop season, each field technician conducted at least threefield visits covering the different stages of the crop. In order to improve farm-by-farm monitoring andallow FTs more time to gather information and verify its accuracy, PMPL-T decided to increase thenumber of farm visits. As of 2015, each field technician will conduct one additional visit, totaling atleast four field visits per year. In addition, PMPL-T re-trained all field technicians on all of the ALP Codeprinciples and measurable standards.”

4.2 Address widespread issues
Phase 2 requires PMI’s affiliates or leaf tobacco suppliers to investigate the root
causes of the different challenges found in the implementation of the ALP Program.
These challenges can be diverse and are addressed under the ALP Program withtwo distinct but complementary approaches. First, initiatives are implemented tomitigate specific risks and improve the overall socio-economic conditions ofcontracted farms. Other initiatives involve all relevant stakeholders, including
projects sponsored by the PMI Contributions department addressing problems
identified at the community level.
4.2.1 Investigation of root causes
As explained in chapter 4.1.2, based on the analysis of the information that wascollected via the Farm Profiles, PMPL-T chose to focus on three Measurable
Standards; child labor in a family setting; payment of the minimum salary; and CPA
and PPE practices. At the time of the assessment, PMPL-T was still assessing theroot causes of the issues identified. See chapter 5 for the farm findings and root
causes identified by CU during the assessment.

23

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

4.2.2 Initiatives to mitigate risk and improve socio-economic conditions
PMPL-T had developed a concrete initiative to address unsafe CPA and PPEpractices. This initiative is described in chapter 5.5.2.
PMPL-T had also implemented an initiative in which farmers were provided with a“farmer book.” This book contained a form for the cost of production, tabs toorganize administration and a sticker for the
CPA lock-up. 66% of the farmers visited hadreceived this book and 79% of those farmers
declared they found the initiative useful.
Farmers reported that the folder helped them
organize their administration. One farmer said
he would use the cost of production form to
improve his budgeting.
In addition, PMPL-T set the target to fully
eliminate child labor on family farms by 2015. At
the time of the assessment, the extent of theFarmer bookpotential
child
labor
issueswas
being
investigated by means of monitoring labor practices farm by farm as described inchapter 4.1.
PMPL-T response: “CU’s findings are generally in line with the priority areas previously identified
by PMPL-T through its internal monitoring processes. Therefore, PMPL-T will continue to focus on thefollowing priority areas:•Child labor: children helping on family farms with a particular emphasis on hazardous tasks;•
Income and work hours: minimum wage and payment registration;•
Safe work environment: proper CPA storage, re-entry period warnings, general safety on
farms (e.g. tools and equipment storage).”

4.3 Support mechanism
4.3.1 Pilot government help line
At the time of the CU assessment, PMPL-T was promoting the National Labor
Inspectorate’s help line to farmers. This was part of a broader campaign of the
National Labor Inspectorate and included a phone number to be contacted toreceive free legal advice on the Labor Code and employment related issues.
PMPL-T had distributed a flyer in order to promote the help line among their
farmers. For every region, a separate flyer with the local phone numbers wasavailable. CU concluded that the content of the flyer was not tailored to thesituation of farmers and workers, as the information provided mainly referred to the
Labor Code while PMPL-T considered that these workers were subject to the Civil
Code (see chapter 3.2.5). PMPL-T promoted the help line as a temporary solution to
give farmers and workers access to information and advice from an independent(government) service. PMPL-T had explored other options for support, however,none had been successfully adopted at the time of the assessment.

24

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

Of the farms visited during the assessment, 69% of the farmers and 38% of theworkers were aware of the existence of the National Labor Inspectorate’s help line.
None of the interviewees had used the line as they reported that they did not see
the need for it. CU tested the help line in two regions several times and while theline in Lublin was available, attempts to contact the line in Zamość were
unsuccessful.
PMPL-T response: “In July 2015, PMPL-T launched a support mechanism pilot. It consisted of aneffective process for collecting farm workers’ grievances or concerns, as well as farmers and workers’
questions. The support mechanism provided both workers and farmers with a telephone number anda third-party NGO to assess each situation, providing advice and follow up on grievances. In addition,
the support mechanism provided support to field technicians for those prompt action issues which
they did not know how to deal with. For the pilot implementation, PMPL-T selected the region withthe highest concentration of contracted farmers (around 800 Flue Cured farmers, accounting for up to
3,000 workers). This region was near to the Ukrainian border where several migrants were foundworking in 2014. PMPL-T will evaluate the effectiveness of the support mechanism in 2015.”

25

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

5. Farm level assessment of ALP Code standards

THIRD PARTY ASSESSMENT
PHILIP MORRIS POLAND
AGRICULTURAL LABOR PRACTICES PROGRAM

DRAFT

26

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

Chapter 5 describes the findings of the field assessment and the current status of
ALP’s implementation at the farm level. At the time of assessment, PMPL-T was inPhase 2 of the ALP Program and was expected to engage directly with farmers toaddress those dynamics on farms that do not meet the ALP Code standards. As
PMPL-T had just initiated Phase 2, the farm assessment should be viewed as abaseline for supporting further implementation.
Before presenting the findings, it is important to clarify the structure of the ALP
Code as this determines CU´s analysis of farm practices. The ALP Code (inAppendix 2) has seven ALP Code Principles enshrined in short statements designed
to guide farmers on specific practices to achieve safe and fair working conditions on
their farms. Each ALP Code Principle has several Measurable Standards.
A Measurable Standard defines a good practice and over time can be objectively
monitored to determine whether and to what extent the labor conditions andpractices on a tobacco farm are in line with each ALP Code Principle. Each of thefollowing chapters includes one of the seven ALP Code Principles and CU’s findings.
It also covers the risks (situations that may lead to problems in the future or about
which a conclusion cannot be reached due to lack of evidence). As discussed in 4.2,
PMPL-T’s initiatives to address widespread issues are also included in this chapter.
Section 5.7 provides a complete explanation about the simultaneous application of
the Labor and Civil Codes to the legal nature of relations between farmers and theirworkers. Therefore, even for those relations agreed under the Civil Code, it will stillbe necessary to refer to the Labor Code as a point of reference because its rules areoften the only ones regulating working conditions in a detailed manner.
5.1 ALP Code Principle 1: Child labor
Background
Minimum age regulations: According to thePolish Labor Code the minimum legal working
ALP Code Principle 1
age is 16 years old. Children under 16 may
only: (1) work or perform other gainfulChild labor
activities for an entity engaged in cultural,´There shall be no childartistic, sports or advertising activities, subject
labor.´
to
the
prior
consent
of
their
legal
representative or guardian, and subject to thelabor inspector’s authorization. There are otherregulations
that
need
to
be
fulfillede.g. specific legal requirements such as graduation from school; or (2) work for the
purpose of “vocational training” if the children do not have occupational
qualifications. There are specific regulations, principles and conditions related to“vocational training”, including specific principles related to the remuneration ofadolescents.
A juvenile (16 to 17 years old) may be employed under a contract of employment
but only to perform “light work.” This includes work that does not cause health risks
and does not affect the juvenile’s physical and mental development, nor shall it
affect the juvenile’s schooling obligations. The list of activities considered as “light27

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

work” shall be set out by the employer and approved by the relevant labor
inspector. Juveniles should not be employed to perform “prohibited work” the list ofwhich is specified by the Council of Ministers and forbids juveniles from doing
certain activities such as: (i) heavy work, (ii) work affecting the body’s position andwhich is therefore dangerous to the juvenile’s mental or physical progression,(iii) work exposing juveniles to chemical and biological substances, dust,
electromagnetic pulses, noise, radiation, vibrations, low and high temperatures,pressure, or exposing juveniles to the risk of accident or harm, and (iv) work atheights above three meters.
The Family and Guardianship Code (art. 91 paragraph 2) grants thatchildren/juveniles who are financially supported by their parents and living withthem may help them with the housekeeping and are allowed to do “light work” ontheir parents’ farm.
Child labor: Overall findings and challenges
5.1.1 Prevalence of children working
At 5% of the farms visited, farmers declared a total of four of their own children
below 18 who were involved working on tobacco related activities and then only
during the school holidays. The farms were located in Burley growing regions(Kazimierza Wielka, Biłgoraj and Lublin and Oleśnica).
One of the children that was declared working was nine years old and was brought
along to the tobacco field when her mother had to work as she reported that she
had no one else to supervise. The child was primarily involved in the harvesting of
tobacco. At another farm, a farmer declared that two of his children aged 14 and 15
were involved in harvesting, stringing and several non-hazardous activities such as
seedbed management, transplanting and cultivation. The fourth child was aged 17
and helped with the harvesting of tobacco.
All four children were involved in hazardous activities as set out in the graph below(one child may have done more than one activity).

5
4
3
2
1
0

28

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

5.1.2 Awareness of legal minimum working age
95% of the farmers visited were aware of the legal minimum working age according
to the Labor Code.
Child labor: Risks
5.1.3 Awareness of hazardous work
86% of the farmers interviewed were aware of the meaning of hazardous activities.
The remaining 14% of farmers were unaware of the health hazards related toworking with green tobacco leaves.
5.1.4 Underlying factors that increase risk
The farmers visited who declared involving their own children in tobacco related
activities reported different reasons for doing so. One child was working due to alack of available supervision when the parents were working in the field. Anotherfarmer reported that it was important for his children to learn how to work on
tobacco. Finally, one farmer said that his child was working to contribute to theworkload.
Child labor: Analysis and Priorities
PMPL-T´s communication efforts on child labor seem to have been effective as mostof the farmers were aware of the legal minimum working age (95%) and thehazardous activities (86%). In addition, no hired children were found at the farms
visited and the four children helped on their family farm. Despite the highawareness, these children were all involved in hazardous activities.
As PMPL-T targets to fully eliminate child labor in 2015 (see chapter 4.2.2), it will
be important to address the root causes of children working on their family farms.
Currently the investigation of child labor is done by closely monitoring farm
practices (see chapter 4.1).
PMPL-T response: “PMPL-T identified one of the root-causes for child labor on family farms was
the lack of options for child care during the school holidays. For this reason, parents are forced to taketheir children to the field with the risk that they are then involved in child labor.
PMPL-T will take additional steps to raise awareness and educate farmers on child labor. Refresher
training will cover all ALP principles and measurable standards during the pre-season meetings andfield days (group), as well as being part of regular farm monitoring visits (individual) throughout the2015 crop season. PMPL-T will focus its efforts on continuous improvement to ensure that farmers areaware of their obligations and the ALP standards.
Given that the observations of Control Union were not confirmed by field technicians, PMPL-T will
intensify its efforts to monitor and record every case of child labor.”

29

PMI Third Party Assessment
5.2 ALP Code Principle 2: Income andwork hours
Background
Minimum salary regulations: The Civil Code has
no specific requirements on minimum salary.
However, PMPL-T referred to the legal
minimum wage from the Labor Code using it asa benchmark and therefore recommended
farmers to pay tobacco workers an hourly wageof at least 10 PLN.
Work hours and benefits regulations: The Civil
Code has no specific requirements on working
hours or benefits.

Control Union Certifications

ALP Code Principle 2
Income and Work Hours‘Income earned during apay period or growing
season shall always beenough to meet workers’
basic needs and shall be ofa sufficient level to enable
the generation of
discretionary income.
Workers shall not work
excessive or illegal work
hours.’

Income and work hours: Overallfindings and challenges
5.2.1 Minimum salary
The majority (95%) of the farmers visited with hired labor paid their workers atleast the legal minimum wage, paying them from 10 PLN to a maximum of 20 PLN
per hour. The remaining 5% paid their workers 7 PLN per hour, i.e. less than thelegal minimum wage. Because of the scarcity of manual labor, most workers
secured a wage above the legal minimum.
5.2.2 Payment schedule
95% of the farmers that hired labor paid their workers in cash on a daily basis. In
general, workers worked on more than one farm during the week and the farmer’slabor needs were dependent on the stage of the crop and the harvest schedule.
Due to these dynamics and because most farmers had small tobacco fields, thedemand for labor fluctuated on a daily basis. On only two of the farms visited were
workers paid weekly.
5.2.3 Regular and overtime hours
In the Civil Code, there are no regulations limiting regular and overtime hours.
Workers typically stayed on one farm for three to four days a week. If someone
worked on more than one farm a week, it was difficult for a farmer to control the
total number of weekly work hours. In these cases, it was the worker’s choice.
Hired labor mostly worked during the harvesting period, and then for an average ofeight hours a day. However, at 8% of the farms that hired labor, regular hours
were approximately 10 hours a day. This included the 5% of farms paying below 10
PLN per hour (as described in chapter 5.2.1).
Overtime was uncommon and workers mainly booked the number of hours agreed
at the start of the day. At one farm, workers received a higher hourly rate forovertime of 20 PLN instead of 14 PLN.

30

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

5.2.4 Legal benefits
The Civil Code does not include regulations concerning the legal benefits to beprovided to agricultural workers. The workers were not registered and did notreceive any form of insurance or social security, which meant they could not becovered for potential work related accidents and injuries. Workers were mainly
provided with meals during the day and in one case also received fuel for transport.
5.2.5 Awareness of legal minimum wage
97% of the farmers and 87% of the workers interviewed were aware of the legal
minimum wage referred to in the Labor Code. Workers were paid according to themarket price for labor which was higher than the legal minimum at the time of theassessment.
Income and work hours: Risks
5.2.6 Record keeping
84% of the farmers visited with hired labor did not record the payments to workers.
71% of the farmers that hired labor did not record hours/days worked or tasks
completed. As the majority of payments were flat daily rates, (chapter 5.2.2)
farmers said that they did not see the benefit of keeping records.
5.2.7 Pay slips
None of the farmers with hired labor provided their workers with pay slips. As
workers were paid on a daily basis without a formal contract of employment, thiswas not perceived as necessary by either the farmers or the workers.
Income and work hours: Analysis and Priorities
As there is no minimum salary requirement under the Civil Code, PMPL-T
recommended farmers to pay at least the legal minimum salary set by the Labor
Code, as explained above. This is an important step which increases the level offormality of the relationship between farmers and workers. Applying more
provisions of the Labor Code (for example legal benefits and social security) as
PMPL-T´s benchmark would further increase the protection of workers on tobacco
farms. As this would require structural changes in the way these workers areincorporated in the legal framework, it is likely that PMPL-T will not be able toaddress these issues without the engagement of external stakeholders.
PMPL-T response: “Regardless of the legal relationship with their workers, PMPL-T recommends
that farmers pay at least the equivalent to the minimum legal wage as per the ALP standards andPolish Labor Law, which is stricter than the civil law that covers workers.
Farmers were trained to record payments to workers properly. Additionally, during the 2014 crop
season, field technicians distributed a simple form to all farmers for the registration of their cost of
production which included fields for labor cost registration. In 2015, PMPL-T’s field technicians willconduct additional training on how to register the cost of production, including labor-related costs,

31

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

during regular visits.
There is also a need to implement a program for growers to gradually increase compliance with ALP in
their relationship with workers. If workers are not covered by the Labor Code, there is no legal
instrument to compel farmers to incorporate the legal benefits and social security. In particular, thelatter is governed by specific regulations. PMPL-T will explore further opportunities to engage withexternal stakeholders in order to find support to such initiatives.”

5.3 ALP Code Principle 3: Fair treatment
Background
Regulations: For workers hired on the basis of
the Civil Code, regulations regarding fair
ALP Code Principle 3
treatment are provided under the Act of 3
December 2010 regarding the implementation of
Fair treatment
certain provisions of the European Union in thefield of equal treatment (Journal of Law of‘Farmers shall ensure fair
Dec 30, 2010 No, 254 item 1700, as further
treatment of workers. Thereamended). This Act provides that: (a) eachshall be no harassment,
worker employed on the basis of the Civil Codediscrimination, physical orcontract has the right that their dignity and othermental punishment, or any
personal interests are respected by the person
other forms of abuse.’
who hired them and by other workers. In thecase the violation continues, the worker canmake a claim to the court; (b) unequal treatment
is prohibited, such as harassment in general, sexual harassment, and unfair
treatment.
Fair treatment: Overall findings and challenges
5.3.1 No evidence of practices suggestive of unfair treatment
CU did not identify any examples of unfair treatment such as physical, sexual orverbal abuse or any form of discrimination. As agricultural workers were relatively
scarce in the regions visited, farmers were providing them with good working
conditions.
Fair treatment: Analysis and Priorities
During the assessment CU did not find any evidence of unfair treatment.
PMPL-T response: “Despite the fact that CU’s audit found no evidence of unfair treatment, thisprinciple remains important for avoiding potential blind spots. All field technicians were re-trained to
be able to clearly explain this principle to growers. This should help ensure that activities likediscrimination, the use of violence or harassment do not go unnoticed.”

32

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

5.4 ALP Code Principle 4: Forced labor
Background
Regulations: As a member of the EU, Poland is
obliged to comply with EU regulations (based
ALP Code Principle 4on the Treaty of Rome and the EU directives)
relatedtohumantrafficking,including
Forced labor
provisions on forced labor. The human‘All farm labor must be
trafficking definition has been incorporated into
voluntary. There shall be no
the Polish Criminal Code and is punishable withforced labor.’
imprisonment for a minimum of three years. In
addition, the Polish Criminal Code (art. 286)
prohibits actions that take advantage of aperson for the purpose of gaining a material
benefit by misleading them or by exploiting
them or through their inability to understand their actions.
Forced labor: Overall findings and challenges
5.4.1 No evidence of workers unable to leave their job
All of the workers interviewed stated that they were free to leave their employment
if they wanted and that they were not required to make any financial deposits orhand over their identity documents.
Forced labor: Analysis and Priorities
No evidence of forced labor was found and no risks of forced labor were identified
at the farms visited. Workers were mainly coming from the same villages, or fromnearby, where labor was relatively scarce which encouraged the farmers tomaintain good work conditions to ensure they returned in future.
PMPL-T response: “Although CU’s audit found no evidence of forced labor, field technicians willcontinue to pay attention to the possible risks associated with this principle. It will require FTs toincrease and maintain their own level of knowledge. PMPL-T has re-trained all of its field technicianson all of the ALP Code Principles, including forced labor.”

33

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

5.5 ALP Code Principle 5: Safe work environment
Background
Regulations: The Labor Code is applicable toany
workplaceandsets
requirements
regarding safety, sanitary conditions andhealth protection.
Agricultural equipment and machines must be
used in accordance with their user manuals,
must have covers and the tools necessary forsafe usage, and must be switched off before
they are regulated or repaired. It is forbidden
to use agricultural equipment and machines
without safety precautions.

ALP Code Principle 5
Safe work environment‘Farmers shall provide asafe work environment toprevent accidents andinjury and to minimize
health risks.
Accommodation, where
provided, shall be clean,safe and meet the basic
needs of the workers.’

There are separate rules issued under the
Labor Code provided in the Ordinance of the
Minister of Agriculture 2002, regarding the use
and storage of crop protection agents andfertilizers. Employees working with these products must obey strict safety rules.
They must use special working clothes, face masks, wash their whole body after
finishing working with these products (especially toxic ones), work in pairs whileworking with toxic products, and be equipped with a first aid kit. Warehouses forthe storage of CPAs and fertilizers must be labeled to warn about the danger.
Safe work environment: Overall findings and challenges
5.5.1 Training and awareness of Green Tobacco Sickness (GTS)
84% of the farmers and 74% of the workers interviewed were aware of theexistence and symptoms of GTS. However, at 25% of the farms visited workers
were involved in harvesting without having received training on avoidance of GTS.
Nevertheless, the majority of workers used protective clothing to protect against
GTS. Workers involved in harvesting stated that they use long pants (90%), gloves(87%), long sleeves (82%) and rain gear (41%).
5.5.2 CPA handling and training
During the assessment, no CPA spraying was observed in the field and so CU did
not find any evidence that persons who applied chemicals did not wear the proper
PPE. In general, farmers were aware of the PPE to be used during the application of
CPAs. They stated that they used gloves (92%), a mask (90%), an overall/apron(79%) and boots (55%). In most cases, farmers reported that they personallyapplied the CPA, usually from an open cab tractor. However, suckercide wassometimes applied manually.
70% of the farmers said that they respected the re-entry time after CPA applicationand verbally informed their family members and workers not to enter the field. The
remaining 30% of farmers maintained that they were not aware of the re-entry

34

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

period for CPAs. Only two of the farmers visited reported using warning signs after
CPA application.
80% of the farmers visited had their CPA stored safely. The remaining 20% did nothave a closed and locked CPA storage and in most cases the door was simply left
unlocked. There were also farmers who did not have any storage at all andsometimes the CPA bottles were stored on an open shelf. In two cases the farmers
used an old fridge to store the CPA which could lead to confusion with consumables.
These practices pose a risk not only to workers but also to those children withaccess to storage areas, which was the case at 20% of the farms visited.
21% of the farmers visited did not store, triple wash and discard empty CPA
containers correctly. These farmers stored the containers in plastic bags, scatteredthem around the farm area and/or burned them.

Initiative to address unsafe farm practices
To improve safety practices at the farm,
PMPL-T distributed a PPE set to allparticipating farmers. Of the farmers visited,
97% reported that they had received PPE
equipment. This set was meant to improve theusage of PPE and contained goggles and a facemask (FFP25) for the application of CPAs andwoven gloves to protect against GTS.
PPE setCU found the mask was inadequate forprotection against chemicals as it was only a dust mask. Moreover, farmers
reported that the woven gloves were unsuitable for harvesting because they
absorbed moisture. Inadequate PPE increases the risk as the user may feel more
protected and may change their behavior. It is important that only suitable safety
equipment is provided to farmers.
81% of the farmers that received the PPE set declared that they found thisinitiative useful and it made them aware of the need for protection against
chemicals. The findings imply that these farmers and their workers did use the PPE
when provided.

PMPL-T response: “In 2014, Field technicians provided every farmer with a promotional kit aimed
at improving farm safety, particularly during harvesting and the preparation and application of crop
protection agents. The kit included gloves primarily for preventing GTS and CPA exposure during
harvesting, as well as protecting tobacco from contamination with non-tobacco related materials (e.g.
plastic, rubber), goggles for use when handling crop protection agents and a face mask to protect
farmers and workers against, among others: dust, fumes and aerosols of solid and liquid particles witha maximum acceptable concentration of 10 units. Going forward, PMPL-T will ensure that allmaterials provided to farmers are adequate for the purpose for which they were intended. Double
checks will be made of product specifications versus requirements.”“Field technicians will continue to raise awareness of GTS prevention during their regular farm visits.
Field technicians will also pay special attention to the risks of exposure to GTS as part of the farm-by5

A dust mask of the FFP2 category is not suitable for use as protection against chemicals.

35

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

farm monitoring.”“During the 2015 crop, field technicians will continue to pay particular attention to how farmers
handle and store CPAs (e.g. proper marking, including warning labels and proper lockers). PMPL-T will
distribute additional warning labels to farmers for their CPA lockers.”

5.5.3 Clean drinking and washing water
All of the farmers visited provided clean drinking water near the field. However, at
two of the farms there was no washing water or soap available near the working
area. One of those farmers reported that this was not necessary because he could
always wash his hands when he arrived home after work, which was relatively far
from the field.
Safe work environment: Risks
5.5.4 General safety measures
In order to ensure a safe and sanitary work environment for both family members
and workers, it is important that farmers are aware of the general safety hazards at
the farm and to take measures to prevent accidents, injury and exposure to healthrisks. This was not the case at all farms visited with the following issues identified:None of the Burley farmers with high curing barns used harnesses toprevent injuries. The barns were three to five levels high. As a preventive
measure, one farmer reported that he had lowered the barn from five tofour levels and another farmer said that he had invested in a new ladder.
54% of the farmers visited did not have a first aid kit at the farm.
57% of the growers visited did not store all their equipment and tools safely.
This could pose a risk to those children with free access to the farm, as
documented at 20% of the farms visited.
Safe work environment: Analysis and Priorities

PMPL-T’s focus on PPE practices seems to have been effective as most of the
farmers and workers were aware of how to protect themselves against the hazards
of working with chemicals and green tobacco leaves. In addition, the majority of
the farmers (91%) were aware of the general safety hazards at the farm. It is
important to continue communication on this topic so all farmers and workers areaware of the required safety measures.
The provision of PPE kits by PMPL-T for CPA application is an effective measure to
improve practices at the farm. However, these kits should contain face masks andgloves of the correct specification. Also, more guidance is required on how andwhen to use the PPE to help farmers to improve their safety practices. At the timeof the assessment, only general statements on the ALP Code Principles wereattached to the PPE kits being distributed by PMPL-T.
Finally, more attention should be given to improve general safety on the farm
relating to the storage and disposal of CPA containers, tools lying around the farmand the availability of first aid kits.

36

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

PMPL-T response:“With regards CU’s findings, PMPL-T will implement the following initiatives in 2015:








Re-entry period: PMPL-T will check CPA documentation and include re-entry requirements in
the TPG’s contract clauses. PMPL-T will also organize a group training for growers which will
cover the re-entry period requirements. The training will take place prior to the 2015 crop
season (in pre-season meetings);
CPA storage: in addition to a refresher training to all growers, PMPL-T produced anddistributed additional CPA warning stickers. Field technicians will also pay special attention to
CPA storage during farm visits. Field technicians will record non-compliances in continuation
sheets, agree on improvement plans and follow-up with farmers on the agreed actions;
General safety on farms: PMPL-T will raise awareness on safe working conditions on farms,
including hazardous work such as working at heights (e.g. in Burley curing barns). PMPL-T
will conduct additional training to farmers about general safety on farms. In addition,
PMPL-T will distribute a first-aid kit to all contracted farmers. This kit will carry the ALP logo
and contain items that are needed in case of safety incidents on the farm or in the field. This
kit will comply with Polish standard DIN 13164 PLUS;
Tools and equipment storage: in order to improve farmers’ practices, PMPL-T will first
conduct a safety assessment survey during the 2015 crop. The aim of this initiative is tocollect information on farm safety as well as raising the awareness of farmers about safety
on farms. The survey was developed in collaboration with PMPL-T’s EHS department and thequestionnaire leveraged on similar questionnaires developed by the National Labor
Inspectorate.”

5.6 ALP Code Principle 6: Freedom of association
Background
Regulations: The freedom of association is
granted in Poland by international treaties andlocal regulations: (i) the Convention for theProtection of Human Rights and Fundamental
Freedoms; (ii) the Polish Constitution (art. 58);
and (iii) other statutes such as the Law on
Associations Act, the Trade Unions Act, theFoundations Act, and the Political Parties Act.

ALP Code Principle 6
Freedom of association‘Farmers shall recognize
and respect workers’ rights
to freedom of associationand to bargain collectively.’The
freedomofassociation
maybe
implemented in various forms. The following
rules apply to the creation of an association:(i) Polish citizens (as well as foreigners who have residence in Poland) can establish
an association or join an existing one. Foreigners who do not have residence in
Poland can join an existing association if the association’s statute provides for it;(ii) an association can be established by a minimum of 15 people; and (iii) toestablish an association it is necessary for founding members to adopt the following
resolutions on: (a) the appointment of the organization; (b) the selection of thefunding committee; (c) the adoption of the association’s statute; (d) the selectionof the association’s board and audit committee; (e) the registration of theassociation with the National Court Register (KRS) whereupon the association

37

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certificationsacquires its legal personality. An association may be established for any purpose aslong as it is legal.
Freedom of association: Overall findings and challenges
5.6.1 Workers´ right to freedom of association
CU found no evidence of farmers disrespecting workers´ rights to freedom of
association.
Freedom of association: Risks
5.6.2 Awareness of freedom of association
Although most of the farmers (95%) and workers (94%) understood the conceptbehind the ‘freedom of association,’ they had no practical experience and no worker
associations were found to be active in the region. Workers mainly responded thatthey did not need to associate because they reported that they earned a goodsalary.
Freedom of association: Analysis and Priorities
Workers were aware of the purpose of associating and farmers reported that they
did not interfere with the workers’ right to associate. There were no labor unions
active for workers to join in the regions visited and therefore this topic was more ofa theoretical concept to them. Also, as labor was relatively scarce and workers were
earning a fairly good wage, they did not see the need to formally organize
themselves.
PMPL-T response: “Although CU did not find any violation or risk related to their right to freedomof association, this remains an important ALP Code principle. PMPL-T will include the freedom of
association as part of the field technicians’ training sessions planned for 2015.”

5.7 ALP Code Principle 7: Compliance with the law
Background
Regulations: Workers on tobacco farms are
considered to be service providers rather thanemployees and so are not subject to the Labor
Code. The service contracts between a farmer
and their workers are covered under the scope of
the Civil Code. These service contracts can only
be executed when the person performing thework is not subordinate to the one who
commissions the work. It is a “contract for result”
which means that the objective is a result rather
than the performance the work itself.

ALP Code Principle 7
Compliance with the law‘Farmers shall comply withall laws of their country
relating to employment.’

38

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

Compliance with the law: Overall findings and challenges
5.7.1 Information on legal rights
Before starting work, farmers and workers mainly agreed upon the type of work,
the work hours and the wage.
Compliance with the law: Analysis and Priorities
As tobacco workers were not in the scope of the Labor Code, there were only
limited requirements on the service contract according to the Civil Code. Workers
were mainly informed about the type of work, the work hours and the wage theywould earn. Furthermore there were no additional requirements to the verbal
agreement.
PMPL-T response: “In line with the ALP Code, farmers and growers shall comply with the laborlaw. As verbal agreements are generally insufficient to achieve that aim, PMPL-T will encourage
farmers to produce evidence of such agreements which will be recorded in the toolbox as a minimum.
In addition, all field technicians will be re-trained before the beginning of the 2015 crop season, so
they are able to clearly explain this principle to growers.”

39

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

6. Concluding remarks

THIRD PARTY ASSESSMENT
PHILIP MORRIS POLAND
AGRICULTURAL LABOR PRACTICES PROGRAM

DRAFT

40

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

PMPL-T had recently entered into Phase 2 of the ALP program and made progress
towards its full implementation, including monitoring and support initiatives toimprove labor practices. The impact on communication efforts has led to highawareness levels of farmers on the prioritized principles. Moving forward, PMPL-T
will need to further increase and develop the reliability and quality of the data
gathered by their ALP systems, such as Prompt Action reporting and the monitoringof labor practices. Gaps were identified, for example, in the knowledge of fieldtechnicians regarding the non-prioritized principles and enhancements are required
for the systems and forms used to collect and process data. With these
improvements, PMPL-T will increase their understanding of the root causes of issues
which will contribute to developing more successful initiatives at the farm level.
CU identified a minor number of widespread issues regarding the ALP Code. In
addition, the most important systemic issue is the legal status of tobacco workers.
As these workers are not subject to the Labor Code, they only receive limited legal
protection as these agricultural workers are considered to be service providers
rather than employees by law.
PMPL-T’s response and the proposed ALP Program action plan demonstratethat PMPL-T has analyzed CU’s findings and is undertaking steps to address theissues presented by CU in this report. Future assessments will determine whether
these action plans have had the desired effect but CU believes that they arefeasible as PMPL-T has a strong internal structure for the implementation of the
ALP Program which is supported by senior management.

41

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

Appendices

THIRD PARTY ASSESSMENT
PHILIP MORRIS POLAND
AGRICULTURAL LABOR PRACTICES PROGRAM

DRAFT

42

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

Appendix 1. PMPL-T response and ALP Program action plan

Philip Morris Polska Tobacco Sp. z o.o. (PMPL-T)
PMPL-T welcomes CU for its comprehensive assessment of the ALP Program
implementation and the living and working conditions of farmers and workers infarms contracted by Tobacco Producers Groups (TPG) from whom PMPL-T sources
tobacco. We believe that CU’s report will help PMPL-T to continuously improve andstrengthen the implementation of the ALP program.
Being a vertically integrated entity, PMPL-T purchases Flue Cured Virginia andBurley tobaccos directly from TPGs with whom it signs tobacco purchase contracts.
The TPGs in turn contract with tobacco growers, the TPG members. However, alladvisory activities, including technical assistance and support on theimplementation of agronomy programs, are delivered directly to the growers by
PMPL-T’s agronomy field force. The field technicians and regional supervisors are
responsible for implementing agronomy programs and providing information andsupport on safe and fair tobacco growing practices. This was acknowledged byControl Union during its assessment.
PMPL-T started implementing the ALP Program in December 2011, when it
delivered an ALP Phase 1 training to all field technicians. In March 2012, the ALP
Program was presented to the board of each of the Tobacco Producers Groups
supplying tobacco to PMPL-T that crop year. In June 2012, a comprehensive
training on ALP was delivered to all of PMPL-T’s field technicians, providing themwith information materials for their own use as well as for informing and training
farmers during field visits. From July to December 2012, all PMPL-T’s growers weretrained on ALP, either during group trainings or individual meetings. For the 2012
crop season, PMPL-T completed ALP farm profiles for 100% of contracted farms.
Since then, ALP has been integrated into PMPL-T’s way of doing business and is an
integral part of its relationship with the TGP and farmers.
During 2013, PMPL-T continued to focus on improving field technicians and growers’
knowledge of the ALP code, effort that included several refresher trainings on all
ALP principles for all contracted growers. PMPL-T also paid particular attention on
improving the process for identifying, reporting, and managing Prompt Actions. In
addition, to continuously improve internal processes, PMPL-T adapted the ALP FarmProfile forms to better capture the conditions in Poland. The new ALP Farm Profile
form was updated to cover 100% of the farms.
In 2014, following PMI’s internal review of Phase 1 progress, PMPL-T entered
Phase 2 of the ALP program implementation and started farm-by-farm monitoringof all 32 ALP measurable standards. CU’s ALP assessment also took place during
the 2014 crop season. Although encouraging, CU’s findings still reflect the need to
implement improvements to the current ALP Program. PMPL-T has developed a plan
to address those gaps and risk areas identified by Control Union which is reflectedin this document, as follows.

43

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

People and processes to manage the ALP program
Since the inception of the ALP program in Poland, PMPL-T has focused its attention
on building internal capability, including dedicating resources and providing regulartraining sessions to all staff involved in its implementation. This has been critical forthe successful transfer of knowledge on the ALP Code standards to the TPGs andtobacco farmers.
As of the 2015 crop season, PMPL-T will organize additional training sessions for its
FTs on all of the ALP Code principles and measurable standards, at least twice ayear. Special emphasis will be given to Forced Labor, Freedom of Association andCompliance with the Law, the ALP Code Principles identified by CU which fieldtechnicians were less aware of and found more difficult to explain to growers. Aftereach training session, field technicians will be given a test to assess theirknowledge of all ALP Principles and measurable standards, and to gain feedback totailor future training sessions.
Building Farm Profiles for all contracted farmers
Farm profiles are the cornerstone of the implementation of the ALP program,providing PMPL-T and its field technicians with baseline information for a better
understanding of the socio-economic conditions on farms, farmers and workers’
needs, as well as potential risks of labor abuse. Therefore, field technicians are
required to gather and update the farm profiles to ensure that the data provided by
farmers is consistently accurate. In order to better reflect the local reality andcapture all relevant information for the implementation of the ALP program in
Poland, PMPL-T tailored the ALP Farm profile form for the 2013 crop. The new farm
profile form included additional information on food security (food crops grown), as
well as country specific regulations relating to the legal working age. PMPL-T
analyzed the information collected from the farm profiles each year and, coupledwith the information collected by field technicians during farm-by-farm monitoring,
provided the baseline for identifying risks and defining key improvement areas forthe current and future crop seasons.
As an immediate action after the CU Assessment, PMPL-T analyzed all existing farm
profiles, for new and previously contracted growers. At the time of the analysis,
PMPL-T verified that the vast majority of farmers had an updated farm profile forthe 2014 crop season. All the remaining farm profiles referred to the 2013 crop
season and were updated before the end of 2014.
Prompt Actions
Field technicians were instructed to take a proactive approach to identify, report,
and address prompt action situations during farm visits. For the 2014 crop season,
field technicians recorded 21 prompt actions. As a result, PMPL-T provided
additional training to the farmers on the relevant principles and conducted followup visits to monitor progress. Only one situation leading to a prompt action wasobserved later on. However, PMPL-T acknowledges the importance of continuing to
improve the ability of field technicians to record prompt action issues, particularly
those related to child labor.

44

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

Therefore, PMPL-T will conduct additional trainings for field technicians on prompt
actions based on real examples. As of crop 2015, field technicians’ ALP toolbox will
include a list of potential prompt action issues to help them properly classify
observed situations as prompt actions and to increase their confidence to correctly
record and escalate issues to their supervisors.
The process for handling prompt actions is as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Field technician identifies prompt action issue
The activity qualified as a prompt action is stopped
Field technician has a conversation with the farmer
Field technician assesses the situation and agrees on an improvement planwith the farmer
5. Field Technician records the prompt action issue and reports to thesupervisor and/or ALP Country Team, providing information on the action
taken, solution agreed with the farmer, and next steps
6. Field technician’ supervisors and/or ALP Country team assesses potential
scale of the problem and provides feedback to the field technician.
Depending on the severity of the issue, escalation to ALP Steering
Committee might take place.
7. Continue monitoring to ensure the implementation of the improvement plan
agreed with the grower, as well as to assess unintended consequences(e.g. retribution to workers)

Additionally, an ALP monitoring recognition and rewards system is being considered
for field technicians to promote their understanding of the importance of recording
prompt actions to address issues, keep track of agreed solutions with farmers and,ultimately to bring about a change in living and working conditions on farms.
Monitoring of labor practices farm by farm
During the 2014 crop season, each field technician conducted at least three fieldvisits covering the different stages of the crop. In order to improve farm-by-farmmonitoring and allow FTs more time to gather information and verify its accuracy,
PMPL-T decided to increase the number of farm visits. As of 2015, each fieldtechnician will conduct one additional visit, totaling at least four field visits per year.
In addition, PMPL-T re-trained all field technicians on all of the ALP Code principles
and measurable standards.

45

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

Communicating the ALP Code requirements to all farmers
As a result of the refresher training sessions to improve field technicians’ knowledgeof ALP, farmers’ understanding of all ALP principles is expected to increase overtime. Communication materials will also be tailored to the Polish market to makethem more effective and readable for growers. In addition, a recognition system
will be implemented and those farmers fully complying with the ALP Code will beawarded a certificate of ALP leadership for the 2015 crop season.
People and processes to manage ALP Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

2015
Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

ALP Compliance certificate design andprocurement
Establish and approve the regulations of thecompetition "Farms comply with ALP"ALP Compliance certificate information
campaign
ALP competition results and certificate
distribution
Re-vamp of ALP handouts and procurement
ALP handouts distribution (part 1 - pens)
ALP handouts distribution (part 2 - posters
and reflective armband)

Address systemic and widespread issues
CU’s findings are generally in line with the priority areas previously identified by
PMPL-T through its internal monitoring processes. Therefore, PMPL-T will continue
to focus on the following priority areas:Child labor: children helping on family farms with a particular emphasis on
hazardous tasks;
Income and work hours: minimum wage and payment registration;
Safe work environment: proper CPA storage, re-entry period warnings, generalsafety on farms (e.g. tools and equipment storage).

PMPL-T will take additional steps to raise awareness and educate farmers on childlabor. Refresher training will cover all of the ALP principles and measurable
standards during the pre-season meeting and field days (for groups), and will form
part of the regular farm monitoring visits (individual) throughout the 2015 crop
season.
Regarding the ALP Code Principle Income and Work Hours, and although Polishfarmworkers are subject to civil law, PMPL-T implemented CU’s recommendationthat farmers pay workers according to the labor law, which ensures they get paid
above the minimum wage. PMPL-T will continue to monitor the payment practices
of farmers to workers.
During the 2014 crop, a “farmer book” was delivered to all farmers to help them
improve the way they manage their farms. PMPL-T will develop additional solutions
to enhance the organization and efficiency of their farms (e.g. store all documents
related to tobacco business in one place, crop calendar, CPA registration sheet,invoices, expenses, worker payment’s records, etc.).

46

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

During the 2015 crop, field technicians will continue to pay particular attention to
how farmers handle and store CPAs (e.g. proper marking, including warning labels
and secure lockers). PMPL-T will distribute additional warning labels to farmers fortheir CPA lockers.
ALP Code Principle 1: Child labor
CU’s findings concerning child labor are consistent with PMPL-T’s preliminary
analysis of the farm profiles and the priorities that were set for the 2014 crop
season. The potential risk of children being engaged in tobacco production on
family farms, including harvesting and other hazardous tasks, had been identified
by the PMPL-T’s field technicians and considered a priority area.
CU’s report clearly states that PMPL-T’s communication efforts on child labor seemto have been effective as the majority of the farmers was aware of the legal
minimum working age and hazardous tasks.
PMPL-T identified one of the root-causes for child labor on family farms was the lackof options for child care during the school holidays. For this reason, parents areforced to take their children to the field with the risk that they are then involved inchild labor.
PMPL-T will take additional steps to raise awareness and educate farmers on childlabor. Refresher training will cover all ALP principles and measurable standards
during the pre-season meetings and field days (group), as well as being part ofregular farm monitoring visits (individual) throughout the 2015 crop season. PMPLT will focus its efforts on continuous improvement to ensure that farmers are awareof their obligations and the ALP standards.
Given that the observations of Control Union were not confirmed by fieldtechnicians, PMPL-T will intensify its efforts to monitor and record every case ofchild labor.
ALP Code Principle 2: Income and work hours
In Poland it is common practice that the workers helping farmers with the tobacco
crop are themselves farmers and thus insured. In other cases where an
employment contract is signed, insurance is mandatory and is in place.
Regardless of the legal relationship with their workers, PMPL-T recommends that
farmers pay at least the equivalent to the minimum legal wage as per the ALP
standards and Polish Labor Law, which is stricter than the civil law that covers
workers.
Farmers were trained to record payments to workers properly. Additionally, during
the 2014 crop season, field technicians distributed a simple form to all farmers forthe registration of their cost of production which included inputs for labor cost
registration. In 2015, PMPL-T’s field technicians will conduct additional training on
how to register the cost of production, including labor related costs, during regular
visits.
There is also a need to implement a program for growers to gradually increase
compliance with ALP in their relationship with workers. If workers are not coveredby the Labor Code, there is no legal instrument to compel farmers to incorporate

47

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

the legal benefits and social security. In particular, the latter is governed by specificregulations. PMPL-T will explore further opportunities to engage with external
stakeholders in order to find support for such initiatives.
ALP Code Principle 3: Fair treatment
Despite the fact that CU’s audit found no evidence of unfair treatment, this principle
remains important for avoiding potential blind spots. All field technicians were retrained to be able to clearly explain this principle to growers. This should help
ensure that activities like discrimination, violence or harassment do not go
unnoticed.
Support mechanism
During the 2014 crop season, PMPL-T promoted a state-operated grievancemechanism in order to assess its effectiveness. Given the lack of information about
its usage and in line with CU’s findings, PMPL-T intensified its efforts to implement a
new approach in 2015.
In July 2015, PMPL-T launched a support mechanism pilot. It consisted of aneffective process for collecting farm workers’ grievances or concerns, as well as
farmers’ and workers’ questions. The support mechanism provided both workers
and farmers with a telephone number and a third-party NGO to assess eachsituation, providing advice and follow up on grievances. In addition, the support
mechanism provided support to field technicians for those prompt action issues
which they did not know how to deal with. For the pilot implementation, PMPL-T
selected the region with the highest concentration of contracted farmers (around
800 Flue Cured farmers, accounting for up to 3,000 workers). This region was nearto the Ukrainian border where several migrants were found working in 2014. PMPLT will evaluate the effectiveness of the support mechanism in 2015.

ALP Support mechanism

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

2015
Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Define scope and objective
In co-operation with CA find external
company
Prepare contract and training for thecontractor
Prepare and run information campaign
Support mechanism operation
Support mechanism data evaluation
Corrective actions based on SM data
Project reporting preparation and publication

ALP Code Principle 4: Forced labor
Although CU’s audit found no evidence of forced labor, field technicians willcontinue to pay attention to the possible risks associated with this principle. It will
require FTs to increase and maintain their own level of knowledge. PMPL-T has retrained all of its field technicians on all of the ALP Code Principles, including forcedlabor.

48

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

ALP Code Principle 5: Safe work environment
In 2014, Field technicians provided every farmer with a promotional kit aimed at
improving farm safety, particularly during harvesting and the preparation andapplication of crop protection agents. The kit included gloves primarily forpreventing GTS and CPA exposure during harvesting, as well as protecting tobacco
from contamination with non-tobacco related materials (e.g. plastic, rubber),goggles for use when handling crop protection agents and a face mask to protect
farmers and workers against, among others: dust, fumes and aerosols of solid andliquid particles with a maximum acceptable concentration of 10 units. Goingforward, PMPL-T will ensure that all materials provided to farmers are adequate forthe purpose for which they were intended. Double checks will be made of productspecifications versus requirements.









With regards CU’s findings, PMPL-T will implement the following initiatives in2015:
Re-entry period: PMPL-T will check CPA documentation and include re-entry
requirements in the TPG’s contract clauses. PMPL-T will also organize a grouptraining for growers which will cover the re-entry period requirements. The
training will take place prior to the 2015 crop season (in pre-season meetings);
CPA storage: in addition to a refresher training to all growers, PMPL-T produced
and distributed additional CPA warning stickers. Field technicians will also pay
special attention to CPA storage during farm visits. Field technicians will record
non-compliances in continuation sheets, agree on improvement plans andfollow-up with farmers on the agreed actions;
General safety on farms: PMPL-T will raise awareness on safe working
conditions on farms, including hazardous work such as working at heights (e.g.
in Burley curing barns). PMPL-T will conduct additional training to farmers about
general safety on farms. In addition, PMPL T will distribute a first-aid kit to allcontracted farmers. This kit will carry the ALP logo and contain items that areneeded in case of safety incidents on the farm or in the field. This kit will comply
with Polish standard DIN 13164 PLUS;
Tools and equipment storage: in order to improve farmers’ practices, PMPL-T
will first conduct a safety assessment survey during the 2015 crop. The aim of
this initiative is to collect information on farm safety as well as raising theawareness of farmers about safety on farms. The survey was developed incollaboration with PMPL-T’s EHS department and the questionnaire leveraged on
similar questionnaires developed by the National Labor Inspectorate.

Furthermore, a tailor made communication on safety, environmental protection,and compliance with relevant regulations on farms will be provided to contracted
farmers, including handling crop protection agents, disposal of empty containers
and/or re-cycling. Farmers’ understanding of the information distributed will befurther assessed at the end of the 2015 crop season.
Field technicians will continue to raise awareness of GTS prevention during theirregular farm visits. Field technicians will also pay special attention to the risks of
exposure to GTS as part of the farm-by-farm monitoring.

49

PMI Third Party Assessment

Safety on farms

Jan

Control Union Certifications

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

2015
Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Evaluate results of 2014 survey (PPE)
Prepare conclusions and next steps
Select and order first aid-kit for growers
Establish scope and criteria in collaboration
with EHS
Identify and co-operate with stakeholders
Pepare safety assessment checklist/form
Prepare training materials and conduct FTs
trainings
Evaluate impact of PPE distributed in previous
year
Farm safety assessment and firs-aid kit
distribution
Project reporting preparation and publication

ALP Code Principle 6: Freedom of association
Although CU did not find any violation or risk related to their right to freedom of
association, this remains an important ALP Code principle. PMPL-T will include thefreedom of association as part of the field technicians’ training sessions plannedfor 2015.
ALP Code Principle 7: Compliance with the law
It is important to understand the situation of the Polish tobacco farm sector andthrough this perspective look at employer-employee relationships. Polish tobacco is
produced mainly by smallholder farmers who grow on average 1-2 ha of tobaccousing limited external labor. In addition, for tobacco most of the tasks require
qualified and skilled personnel. With tobacco growing in Poland, the relationshipbetween the farmer and his workers is often impacted by the fact that most ofworkers are also tobacco farmers themselves.
For workers hired on the basis of the Civil Code, the provisions of the Labor Code(which regulates in detail the fair treatment of employees) are in general notapplicable. However, there are special regulations regarding fair treatment which
relate to hired workers under the Civil Code, including provisions such as:(a) each worker employed on the basis of a Civil Code contract has the right that
their dignity and other personal interests be respected by the person for whom theywork and by other workers.
(b) there is a ban on unequal treatment (e.g. harassment, sexual harassment, as
well as less favorable treatment of the individual resulting from the rejection ofharassment or sexual harassment, or submission to harassment or sexual
harassment, and to encourage such behavior and ordering of these behaviors).
In line with the ALP Code, farmers and growers shall comply with the labor law. As
verbal agreements are generally insufficient to achieve that aim, PMPL-T willencourage farmers to produce evidence of such agreements which will be recordedin the toolbox as a minimum. In addition, all field technicians will be re-trained
before the beginning of the 2015 crop season, so they are able to clearly explain
this principle to growers.

50

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

PMPL-T understand that in most cases workers may prefer to have civil law
contracts, even if they do not have the same level of protection as labor codeprovisions. This is because the type of work is more typical of contractual andpartnership relations, than that of employer-employee. Moreover, workers often
find that the relationship with farmers under the civil law is more beneficial.

51

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

Appendix 2. ALP Code

ALP Code Principle 1: Child labor
There shall be no child labor.
Measurable Standards:
1) There is no employment or recruitment of child labor. The minimum age foradmission to work is not less than the age for the completion of compulsory
schooling and, in any case, is not less than 15 years or the minimum age
provided by the country’s laws, whichever affords greater protection.62) No person below 18 is involved in any type of hazardous work.
3) In the case of family farms, a child may only help on his or her family’s farm
provided that the work is light work and the child is between 13 and 157
years or above the minimum age for light work as defined by the country’slaws, whichever affords greater protection.
ALP Code Principle 2: Income and work hours
Income earned during a pay period or growing season shall always be enough tomeet workers’ basic needs and shall be of a sufficient level to enable the generationof discretionary income. Workers shall not work excessive or illegal work hours.
Measurable Standards:

1) Wages of all workers (including for temporary, piece rate, seasonal, andmigrant workers) meet, at a minimum, national legal standards oragricultural benchmark standards.

2) Wages of all workers are paid regularly, at a minimum, in accordance withthe country’s laws.

3) Work hours are in compliance with the country’s laws. Excluding overtime,
work hours do not exceed, on a regular basis, 48 hours per week.

6

As an exception, pursuant to ILO Convention 138, developing countries may under certain circumstances specify a minimum ageof 14 years.
7
The same ILO convention 138 allows developing countries to substitute “between the ages 12 and 14 in place of “between theages 13 and 15”.

52

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

4) Overtime work hours are voluntary.
5) Overtime wages are paid at a premium as required by the country’s laws orby any applicable collective agreement.

6) All workers are provided with the benefits, holidays, and leave to which they
are entitled by the country’s laws.
ALP Code Principle 3: Fair treatment
Farmers shall ensure fair treatment of workers. There shall be no harassment,
discrimination, physical or mental punishment, or any other forms of abuse.
Measurable Standards:
1) There is no physical abuse, threat of physical abuse, or physical contact with
the intent to injure or intimidate.
2) There is no sexual abuse or harassment.
3) There is no verbal abuse or harassment.
4) There is no discrimination on the basis of race, color, caste, gender, religion,
political affiliation, union membership, status as a worker representative,
ethnicity, pregnancy, social origin, disability, sexual orientation, citizenship,or nationality.
5) Workers have access to a fair, transparent and anonymous grievancemechanism.

ALP Code Principle 4: Forced labor
All farm labor must be voluntary. There shall be no forced labor.
Measurable Standards:
1) Workers do not work under bond, debt or threat and must receive wages
directly from the employer.

53

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

2) Workers are free to leave their employment at any time with reasonable
notice.
3) Workers are not required to make financial deposits with employers.
4) Wages or income from crops and work done are not withheld beyond thelegal and agreed payment conditions.
5) Farmers do not retain the original identity documents of any worker.
6) The farmer does not employ prison or compulsory labor.

ALP Code Principle 5: Safe work environment
Farmers shall provide a safe work environment to prevent accidents and injury andto minimize health risks. Accommodation, where provided, shall be clean, safe andmeet the basic needs of the workers.
Measurable Standards:
1) The farmer provides a safe and sanitary working environment, and takes all
reasonable measures to prevent accidents, injury and exposure to healthrisks.
2) No worker is permitted to top or harvest tobacco, or to load barns unlessthey have been trained on avoidance of green tobacco sickness.
3) No worker is permitted to use, handle or apply crop protection agents (CPA)or other hazardous substances such as fertilizers, without having firstreceived adequate training and without using the required personal
protection equipment. Persons under the age of 18, pregnant women, andnursing mothers must not handle or apply CPA.
4) Workers do not enter a field where CPA have been applied unless and until it
is safe to do so.
5) Workers have access to clean drinking and washing water close to where
they work and live.

54

PMI Third Party Assessment

Control Union Certifications

6) Accommodation, where provided, is clean, safe, meets the basic needs ofworkers, and conforms to the country’s laws.

ALP Code Principle 6: Freedom of association
Farmers shall recognize and respect workers’ rights to freedom of association andto bargain collectively.
Measurable Standards:
1) The farmer does not interfere with workers’ right to freedom of association.
2) Workers are free to join or form organizations and unions of their own
choosing and to bargain collectively.
3) Worker representatives are not discriminated against and have access tocarry out their representative functions in the workplace.

ALP Code Principle 7: Compliance with the law
Farmers shall comply with all laws of their country relating to employment.
Measurable Standards:
1) All workers are informed of their legal rights and the conditions of theiremployment when they start to work.
2) Farmers and workers have entered into written employment contracts whenrequired by a country’s laws and workers receive a copy of the contract.
3) Terms and conditions of employment contracts do not contravene thecountry’s laws.

55