WORKING PAPER

JULY 2016

Addressing Workers’ Rights inthe Engineering and Construction
SectorOpportunities for Collaboration

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration1

About This Report
This report was written by Jean-Baptiste Andrieu, Aude Ucla, and Michaela Lee from BSR with input frommany colleagues including Peter Nestor, Salah Husseini, and Angie Farrag-Thibault. Any errors thatremain are those of the authors. Please direct comments or questions to Jean-Baptiste Andrieu at
jbandrieu@bsr.org

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thank Catherine Chen and Rola Abimourched from Humanity United as well as
Tawny Chritton from CH2M for the guidance provided throughout the research. Their input and detailed
review of the early drafts of this report have been invaluable.
The authors would also like to acknowledge CH2M’s leadership in working to foster collaboration among
the engineering and construction companies by co-hosting three roundtables in June 2015, November
2015, and April 2016. At these roundtables, representatives from over 15 major engineering andconstruction companies, international civil society organizations, and high-level government officials
discussed issues around workers’ rights in the sector as well as the potential for increased industry
collaboration. This provided BSR with a fantastic platform to engage many large companies in the sector
and their stakeholders. CH2M also facilitated the connections with many of the people who wereinterviewed for this research.

DISCLAIMER
BSR publishes occasional papers as a contribution to the understanding of the role of business in society
and the trends related to corporate social responsibility and responsible business practices. BSR
maintains a policy of not acting as a representative of its membership, nor does it endorse specificpolicies or standards. The views expressed in this publication are those of its authors and do not reflect
those of BSR members.
Working papers contain preliminary research, analysis, findings, and recommendations. They arecirculated to stimulate timely discussion and critical feedback and to influence ongoing debate on
emerging issues. Most working papers are eventually published in another form, and their content may berevised.

SUGGESTED CITATION
Andrieu, J.-B.; Ucla, A.; Lee, M. 2016. “Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction
Sector – Opportunities for Collaboration” Working Paper. BSR, San Francisco

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

2

This report was supported and fully funded by Humanity United.
Humanity United is a foundation dedicated to bringing new approaches to global problems that have long
been considered intractable. We build, lead, and support efforts to change the systems that contribute toproblems like human trafficking, mass atrocities, and violent conflict. Humanity United is part of the
Omidyar Group, which represents the philanthropic, personal, and professional interests of the Omidyar
family.
For more information visit www.humanityunited.org

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

3

Contents
About This Report ..................................................................................................................................... 1
Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................................................. 1
Disclaimer ............................................................................................................................................................................. 1
Suggested Citation............................................................................................................................................................... 1
Contents ...................................................................................................................................................... 3
Executive Summary and Key Recommendations .................................................................................. 4
General Context ................................................................................................................................................................... 4
The Business Case for Collective Action in the Engineering and Construction Sector ............................................... 5
Proposed Options for Collaboration in the Engineering and Construction Sector on Workers’ Rights ..................... 6
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 9Context ……………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………9Background Research Objectives and Methodology.................................................................................................... 10
State of Play .............................................................................................................................................. 12
Overview of the Construction Industry in the Gulf States .............................................................................................. 12
Issues Facing Migrant Construction Workers................................................................................................................. 14
Current Practices and Challenges Faced by Engineering and Construction Companies to Uphold Workers’ Rights………………………………………………………………………………………………………………16
Growing Clients and Civil Society Expectations and Tightening Regulatory Frameworks ....................................... 21
Tackling Workers’ Rights in the Construction Sector—The Case for Collective Action ................. 27
Realizing Companies’ Expressed Interest in Collaborating .......................................................................................... 27
Responding to Growing Expectations from Clients, Civil Society Actors, and Regulators ....................................... 28
Clarifying Companies’ Community of Interest and Addressing Overlapping Challenges ......................................... 31
Proposed Options for Collaboration ...................................................................................................... 35
Review of Existing Collaborative Initatives Tackling Workers and Broader Human Rights Issues ......................... 35
Recommendations ............................................................................................................................................................ 38
Annex 1: Table of the Proposed Options for Collaboration ................................................................ 48
Annex 2: Civil Society’s Expectations on Engineering and Construction Companies .................... 51
Annex 3: List of Key Desktop Resources Analyzed ............................................................................. 55

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

4

Executive Summary and Key Recommendations
From January to April 2016, Humanity United contracted BSR to conduct research toassess the feasibility of setting up a collaborative initiative to address some of thechallenges engineering and construction companies face to uphold workers’ rights intheir operations. This research is based on a review of recent literature as well as aseries of interviews with representatives from engineering and construction companies
and their clients, international organizations, and civil society organizations.

GENERAL CONTEXT
The construction industry relies on large numbers of low-skilled workers and, as such, is a major providerof formal employment opportunities around the world. In the Gulf States in particular, the construction
boom has attracted millions of migrant workers, primarily from South and Southeast Asia, to work on large
infrastructure projects. The nature of the industry and the scale of the projects in this region havegenerated specific challenges to workers’ rights and led to growing expectations from international
stakeholders that large engineering and construction companies are keen to tackle.
Over the past year, U.S. engineering firm CH2M and the Institute for Human Rights and Business coorganized a series of industry roundtables in London at which representatives from over 15 major
engineering and construction companies, international civil society organizations, and high-levelgovernment officials discussed issues of workers’ rights in the sector, as well as the potential forincreased industry collaboration. Building on the momentum from these events, BSR’s research included
interviews with select roundtable participants to investigate companies’ readiness for more formalized
collaboration.
The award of World Cup 2022 to Qatar and World Expo 2020 to Dubai have put the Gulf States’
engineering and construction sector in the spotlight. In addition to intense media scrutiny, civil society
organizations and other external stakeholders have set strong expectations on the different actors
involved in building the infrastructure needed in the coming years. Many civil society organizations havehighlighted the challenging conditions migrant construction workers face, particularly in the Gulf States.
Recruitment practices in countries of origin place a heavy financial burden on workers, and debt incurred
during the recruitment process and deception about the nature and remuneration of the work promised
are often associated with forced labor and exploitation. Poor working conditions, long working hours, anddelays in payment of wages frequently remain unreported because workers are too scared of losing theirjobs to raise any grievances. Restrictive legislations on freedom of association and the right to collective
bargaining further limit the possibility of workers to raise grievances and promote their collective interests.
High temperatures and humidity levels in the Gulf States also expose migrant workers to heat stress,
which constitutes a very serious health hazard. Finally, workers generally have no other choice than tolive in the accommodations provided by their employer. Although this is slowly improving, there havebeen a number of reports highlighting the unsafe and squalid conditions in which migrant workers arehoused.
In a highly competitive environment, efforts by companies to implement commitments on workers’ rights
in their operations can be undermined, particularly when construction tenders focus primarily on costs

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

5

with little or no mention of workers’ rights. In addition, companies operating in the Gulf States face a very
restrictive legal environment. The short-term nature of construction projects also creates challenges bylimiting the financial means to dedicate resources to managing workers’ rights issues or monitoring
subcontractors’ practices. In addition, these management structures and subsidiaries generally enjoy ahigh degree of autonomy in the management of their projects and subsidiaries will likely not seek orreceive much support or guidance on workers’ rights. Over the past 25 years, subcontracting has
increased significantly to allow large engineering and construction companies at the top of theconstruction chain to concentrate on project management, rather than on physical work. As a result, large
international companies’ level of oversight on working conditions across a wide range of project scales
and types is often limited, while subcontractors seek to minimize their costs, often at the expense ofworkers’ pay or living and working conditions.

THE BUSINESS CASE FOR COLLECTIVE ACTION IN THE
ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION SECTOR
Growing scrutiny from external stakeholders goes hand-in-hand with an expressed interest from someengineering and construction companies to further develop and implement responsible business practices
in their supply chains that a collaborative initiative could effectively support.

1.

Responding to growing expectations from external stakeholders and regulators

Some engineering and construction companies have already started developing and implementing morerobust workers’ rights standards and practices. However, many are still feeling overwhelmed, wondering
how they can best identify and address growing expectations from external stakeholders, including
sometimes their clients such as public institutions in charge of infrastructure programs or major oil andgas companies. This is particularly true when expectations involve significantly amending some of theircore business practices. Beyond increasing expectations from civil society organizations and clients,
engineering and construction companies also have to take into account tightening regulatory frameworks
such as the 2015 U.K. Modern Slavery Act. In this context, collaboration among companies could enable
them to share challenges, learn from each other, and collectively develop solutions to address thesegrowing expectations while reducing individual exposure.

2.

Responding to companies’ expressed interest in collaborating

Engineering and construction companies have limited experience with collaboration. This is probably due
to the highly competitive nature of the construction market, lack of trust among companies, and lack of a“safe space” for companies to discuss their key challenges, as well as lack of a mechanism to help themmove forward together. Companies that were interviewed about their workers’ rights and welfare policies
and practices for this project generally identified a need for collaboration and confirmed that they would
be interested in participating in a collaborative initiative that would give them the opportunity to learn fromtheir peers, share best practices on managing workers’ rights and welfare, effectively address some of
the challenges they are facing, and bring more legitimacy to their approach.

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

3.

6

Clarifying the community of interest among engineering and construction
companies and overcoming overlapping challenges

Many engineering and construction companies are committed to“There are no sustainableimproving workers’ conditions in their operations and to working
individual solutions towith partners that share their values. However, given thetackling workers’ rights
complexity of contractual requirements, scale of abuse, andchallenges.”overlapping challenges faced by engineering and construction
A representative from anengineering company
companies, their commitments have had limited impact onworkers’ rights. While a company alone does not have enoughleverage to make a shift in its supply chain, working collectively companies committed to high labor
standards could set clear business expectations, agree on joint approaches to improve workers’ rights,
and gain leverage in their overlapping supply chains.

PROPOSED OPTIONS FOR COLLABORATION IN THE ENGINEERINGAND CONSTRUCTION SECTOR ON WORKERS’ RIGHTS
On the basis of the identified challenges and needs of engineering and construction companies,
expectations outlined by their stakeholders, and key lessons drawn from in-depth analysis of goodpractices and challenges faced by five collaborative initiatives (Bettercoal, EICC, IPIECA, ICMM, and
MACN),1 BSR proposes a series of recommendations that provide a baseline for discussion between
stakeholders and engineering and construction companies interested in setting up a collaborative
initiative in the construction sector.
BSR suggests setting up an initiative that clearly focuses on promoting workers’ rights and welfare
through developing, sharing, and promoting guidance, best practices, and tools on recruitment andworking and living conditions of construction workers, and by supporting the improvement of suppliers’
practices in these areas. In the absence of strict compliance requirements in the operating context ofconstruction and engineering companies, BSR suggests that participating companies should uphold basic
membership requirements at the start of the initiative, which will be progressively strengthened over thecourse of the project. In addition, BSR has built into the recommendations the importance of stakeholder
representation, whether it is to improve the quality of the initiative’s outputs or enhance its credibility.
Finally, BSR proposes beginning with informal collaboration before formalizing the group’s governancestructure and legal status to allow for making adjustments that will guarantee long-term viability andrelevant evolution.
Below is an overview of the immediate recommendations organized against each key component of afunctioning collaborative initiative.

1

Links to the relevant initiatives: Bettercoal, EICC, IPIECA, ICMM, and MACN

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

7

Key recommendations for engineering and construction companies on setting up acollaborative initiative
Dimension

Aspects

BSR recommendations

Vision-»An engineering and construction industry that upholds andpromotes the rights and welfare of workers.

Mission-»

The initiative seeks to uphold and promote the rights andwelfare of workers by developing, sharing, and promoting
guidance, best practices, and tools on the recruitment andworking and living conditions of construction workers, bothwithin their companies and through their supply chains.

Scope

Sector»Start the initiative with a leading group of U.S./U.K./European
based companies that are directly involved in large
construction projects.

Geography»

Keep the initiative global in its reach, but focus on issues thatare particularly relevant to construction projects in the Gulf.

Focus Areas»

Focus on the three priority areas identified by both companies
and stakeholders as key for collaboration, namely recruitment
practices, working and living conditions, and supply chain
practices.

Modus operandi Operational
model

»

At the outset, determine an operational model for the initiativethat promotes peer learning, the development of guidance,
and the implementation of good practices and tools in theareas of focus of the initiative. Ensure in its design a flexibility
to evolve as the initiative matures and trust is built between
members and stakeholders.
Recruit an individual or an organization to manage the workof the initiative in the next couple of years including:organization and facilitation of working groups; member
engagement; stakeholder outreach; recruitment of experts/
expert organizations needed to progress the work of theinitiative in some areas (background research, benchmark
reports, etc.).

»

Governance

Financial
model»

Develop a mixed financial model that reflects the needed
membership contributions from companies (recommended:
US$10,000-US$15,000) to ensure the basic functioning of theinitiative. In addition, seek funding from other organizations tofurther the work of the initiative on specific research or
projects implemented by the working groups and wherelearning can be shared with a broader audience.

Legal status»

Start the collaborative initiative as an informal group ofcompanies, managed by a hired-in secretariat function.

Leadership»

The leadership group (i.e., Steering Committee) is made up
of senior company representatives who are elected by themembers of the initiative.
The leadership group meets on a quarterly basis to discuss
strategy, budgets, working groups, and membershipexpectations.

»

Workinggroups»Working groups are set up to manage the different work
streams of the initiative including the key areas of focus(recruitment practices, subcontractor/supply chain
management, and living and working conditions).

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

Dimension

Accountability

Benefits forcompanies8

Aspects

BSR recommendations

Membership»

Membership is open to engineering and construction
companies.

Membership
requirements»

Stakeholder
engagement»

Measuring
impacts»

Membership to the initiative is open to companies that havepublically endorsed the vision and mission of the initiative(senior executive level), and that are committed to sharing
good practices and implementing guidance and tools that aredeveloped by the initiative as well as supporting theimprovements within their supply chain.
Consider how stakeholders will be engaged as part of thedevelopment of the collaborative initiative and make sure they
are involved early to provide meaningful input as well as
alternative perspectives on the challenges and possible
solutions.
Ensure that the measurement of impact is incorporated into
the initiative from its inception.

Reporting to
public»Consider which aspects of the work of the initiative and its
participants could be used for public reporting.

-»Consider developing a business case short report that details
the expected benefits of joining the initiative.

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

9

Introduction
The construction industry represents a staggering $8.4 trillion worldwide and provides formal employment
opportunities to millions of workers. This is particularly true in the Gulf, one of the busiest regions forconstruction in the world, where countries from the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC)2 are investing asignificant amount in infrastructure development. This is driven in part by efforts to reduce thedependency on hydrocarbon exports and promote economic diversification. In this region, theconstruction industry has seen steady growth—above 5 percent on average—over the past five years,
attracting large engineering and construction companies, a myriad of subcontractors, and millions of lowskilled migrant workers, primarily from South and Southeast Asia. The nature of the industry and its
unprecedented growth comes with some challenges, particularly around workers’ rights and worker
welfare, that large engineering and construction companies are keen to tackle.

CONTEXT
1.

Issues facing migrant construction workers

Many reports from media and international civil society organizations have highlighted the conditions
migrant construction workers face, particularly in the Gulf States. Recruitment practices place a heavy
financial burden on workers due to recruiters and their subagents charging workers high fees tofacilitate job placement and migration. Debt incurred by workers during the recruitment process anddeception about the nature and remuneration of the work promised are often associated with forcedlabor and exploitation. This is particularly the case in most of the Gulf countries where immigration laws
and regulations, referred to as the sponsorship (or kafala) system, make workers completely dependent
upon their sponsor (usually their employer). The system gives employers a lot of control over workers,
who have little negotiating power over the terms and conditions of their work, leaving them vulnerable toexploitation and rights violations. As a result, poor working conditions, long working hours, and delays inpayment of wages frequently remain unreported because workers are too afraid of losing their job toraise any grievances. In addition, restrictive legislations on freedom of association and the right tocollective bargaining further limit the possibility of workers to raise grievances and promote theircollective interests. Workers’ representatives are rare and the scope of their mandate is generally
limited to discussing basic welfare issues. High temperatures and humidity levels in the Gulf States also
expose migrant workers to heat stress, which constitutes a very serious health hazard. As in othercountries where large numbers of migrant construction workers are under the complete control and careof their employer, workers generally have no other choice than to live in the accommodations provided
by their employer. Although the conditions have recently improved, there have been a number of reports
highlighting the unsafe and squalid conditions in which migrant workers are housed.

2.

Growing stakeholder expectations

The award of World Cup 2022 to Qatar and World Expo 2020 to Dubai have put the Gulf States’
construction sector in the spotlight. In addition to increasing media coverage of the conditions
construction workers face, civil society actors have developed strong expectations for all companies
directly or indirectly involved in building the infrastructure needed in the Gulf States in the coming years.
While strong calls are now made to the Gulf States to reform their immigration and sponsorship systems
and improve law enforcement to better protect migrant workers’ rights, the governments of sending
2

The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) is the key representative economic and political alliance comprising Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar,
the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), Oman, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The group was established in 1981 with theobjectives of harmonizing regulation (notably on religion, finance, and trade), fostering greater scientific progress, unifying militaryefforts, and supporting cooperation within the private sector.

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

10

countries are expected to strengthen regulations around recruitment processes to prevent abuses fromlocal recruitment agencies and other intermediaries. In addition, there are growing expectations directed
at large engineering and construction companies to implement better recruitment practices, improve
workers’ freedom of movement, and ensure that wages are paid on time throughout their subcontracting
chains.

3.

Challenges for engineering and construction companies

Most engineering and construction companies operating in the Gulf in particular are facing similar
challenges. In a highly competitive environment, efforts by companies to implement commitments on
workers’ rights in their operations can be undermined, particularly when construction tenders focus
primarily on costs with little or no mention of workers’ rights. In addition, companies operating in the Gulf
States face a very restrictive legal environment with which they must comply while simultaneously
working to mitigate the potential negative impacts on people involved in their operations.
The short-term nature of construction projects also creates challenges for engineering and construction
companies that operate with a relatively small management structure because they are unlikely to havethe financial means to dedicate resources to managing workers’ rights issues or monitoring
subcontractors’ practices. In addition, these management structures and subsidiaries generally enjoy ahigh degree of autonomy in the management of their projects. Beyond the strict monitoring of health andsafety standards from their parent companies, subsidiaries will likely not seek or receive much support
or guidance on workers’ rights.
Over the past 25 years, subcontracting has also increased significantly and is no longer restricted to
specialized tasks. This has allowed large engineering and construction companies at the top of theconstruction chain to concentrate on project management, rather than on physical work, and to become
genuine professional services companies. As a result, large international companies’ level of oversight ofworking conditions across a wide range of project scales and types is often limited. At the same time,
subcontractors are generally smaller outfits and are more likely to seek to minimize their costs, often at
the expense of worker conditions.

BACKGROUND RESEARCH OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY
1.

Objectives

From January to April 2016, Humanity United contracted BSR to conduct research to assess thefeasibility of setting up a collaborative initiative to address some of the challenges engineering andconstruction companies face to uphold workers’ rights in their operations.
In the context described above, a number of large engineering and construction companies—mostly fromthe United States, U.K., and Europe—have made strong commitments to uphold workers’ rights, but they
are still struggling to implement their commitments, particularly in their subcontractor chains. In 20152016, U.S. engineering firm CH2M and the Institute for Human Rights and Business (IHRB) co-organizeda series of industry roundtables in London at which representatives from over 15 major engineering andconstruction companies, international civil society organizations, and high-level government officials
discussed issues around workers’ rights in the sector, as well as the potential for increased industry
collaboration.
Building on the momentum from these events, BSR’s research assesses the opportunity to set up acollaborative initiative within the construction sector focused on workers’ rights.

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

11

To this end, BSR identified the primary concerns and challenges facing workers in the construction supply
chain, in particular in the Gulf States, as outlined by industry bodies and human rights groups, reviewed
companies’ current practices to manage workers’ rights, and explored engineering and construction
companies’ willingness to collaborate on these issues. On the basis of the information collected, BSR
developed recommendations that provide a baseline for discussion between stakeholders andengineering and construction companies interested in setting up a collaborative initiative in theconstruction sector. The recommendations are developed against each of the main components of afunctioning collaborative initiative: the vision, the mission, the scope, the modus operandi, the governancestructure, and the accountability mechanisms.

2.

Methodology

At the outset of the project, BSR participated in a series of roundtables organized by CH2M and the
IHRB. These roundtables brought together 35 senior representatives from the U.K. government, theengineering and construction industry, and civil society. BSR used these opportunities to present the
research and its findings and organize group exercises with all the participants to identify the main drivers
and challenges for companies to participate in a collaborative initiative and contribute feedback on the
proposed structure of the potential initiative.
BSR also conducted extensive desktop research to identify key workers’ rights challenges andexpectations from stakeholders. Given the number of reports available, BSR selected and analyzed 20
key resources3 from different groups of stakeholders who are particularly active, including civil society
organizations (Engineers against Poverty, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and Verité),
relevant UN bodies (International Labour Organization and the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human
Rights of Migrants), and workers organizations (International Trade Union Confederation, Building andWood Worker’s International, and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Trade
Union Advisory Committee). The research also benefited from the analysis of articles and reports frommedia groups and consulting and auditing firms (Guardian, DLA Piper, and Nardello & Co).
Finally, BSR conducted a series of semi-structured interviews with representatives from engineering andconstruction companies and their clients, high profile civil society organizations, and internationalorganizations. In total, BSR reached out to nearly 40 organizations and conducted interviews with 27 ofthem, including:
»
»
»
»
»

9 representatives of engineering and construction companies
3 representatives of engineering and construction companies’ clients
8 representatives from civil society organizations (international NGOs, academics, unions)
2 representatives from international organizations
5 representatives from collaborative initiatives

Although BSR reached out to a range of global companies, all the companies interviewed haveheadquarters in the United States, U.K., or Europe.
This report reflects their input.

3

See Annex 3 for the full list of resources analyzed.

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

12

State of PlayOVERVIEW OF THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY IN THE GULF
STATES
The construction sector is a multibillion-dollar industry worldwide. In the Gulf States, where the industry is
steadily growing, the number of high-profile construction projects and the sheer number of migrant
workers involved have put the industry in the spotlight.

1.

Introduction to the construction industry

In 2015, the construction sector output represented about $8.4 trillion worldwide—comparable to China’s
GDP—and this number is expected to expand by 85 percent to $15.5 trillion in 2030, with China, India,
and the United States accounting for up to 57 percent of this growth. Today 52 percent of construction
activity is already in emerging markets.4 Despite globalization and concentration in the industry, themajority of activities (design, planning, construction, and maintenance) still involve small and local firms,
and remain labor-intensive. Although it is difficult to get an accurate count of the number of workers
involved in the construction sector, Building and Wood Workers’ International (BWI) estimated that theindustry already represented 180 million workers in 2006. The union also insisted that the construction
sector provides employment for many of the world’s poorest and most vulnerable people, including thelandless poor and a large number of rural-to-urban migrants5.

2.

The specificities of the construction industry in the Gulf States

The Gulf is one of the busiest regions in the world for construction. The total value of infrastructure andcapital projects planned and underway in the region in 2015 was valued at $172 billion.6 The constructionindustry has seen steady growth—above 5 percent per year on average—over the past five years, in partdue to efforts to reduce the dependency on hydrocarbon exports and promote economic diversification in
the Gulf States (see chart below). Activity in sectors across transport infrastructure, residential,commercial, hospitality, and retail has attracted large engineering and construction companies.
The Gulf States also have one of the fastest growing populations in the world. According to the population
estimates from the World Bank,7 the total population in the Gulf States in 2013 was 60.4 million, and it
was expected to surge to 68.7 million by 2020 and to 88.2 million by 2050, representing an expected
increase of 13 percent and 46 percent, respectively. This will translate into higher demand for housing,healthcare, education, and transport infrastructure.
International events such as the upcoming World Expo Dubai 2020—which is expected to attract 25
million visitors—and World Cup 2022 are also boosting the construction sector in the United ArabEmirates (UAE) and in Qatar specifically, with new development of hotels, retail centers, and transport
infrastructure. In Saudi Arabia, the increasing number of pilgrims visiting Mecca (about 2 million Muslims
from around the world during the hajj) also contributes to the boom in infrastructure development.

4

Global Construction Perspectives and Oxford Economicus, Global Construction 2025 (2013).

5

BWI, Defending Workers’ Rights in Construction (2006).

6

Deloitte, GCC Powers of Construction 2015 | Construction – The economic barometer for the region (2015).

7

Statistics retrieved from World Bank Data Bank http://data.worldbank.org/.

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

13

Contribution of the Construction Sector to the GDP in the GCC8

The construction boom in Gulf States is also driving a steady influx of both skilled and low-skilled migrant
workers in the region. In the past decade, wage discrepancies between South and Southeast Asian
countries and Middle Eastern countries have fueled a constant flow of low-skilled migrant workers to theregion, as employers in the Gulf are likely offering higher salaries than what the workers could obtain in
their countries of origin, as well as more stable contracts. In 2013, Gulf countries hosted a staggering 22
million migrant workers, an increase of 5 million compared to 2010 (see table below). Construction
workers represent the largest component of this workforce.
Migrant workers in Gulf countries from selected Asian countries of origin (2013)9This rapid expansion of the construction industry also comes with increased pressure on international andlocal players driven by a surge in the cost of raw materials used for construction activities (cement, steel,
and wood, among others), decreasing oil prices, and slow payments. In the Gulf States, the collection
cycle—the period between completing work and collecting payments—can typically take around 225 days
for a company in the construction sector. 10 This context contributes to overall deterioration of low-skilled
8

Alpen Capital, GCC Construction Industry, June 23 (2015).

ILO, Realizing a Fair Migration Agenda: Labour flows between Asia and the Arab States Experts’ Meeting, background paper for
discussion (2014).
910Deloitte, GCC Powers of Construction 2015: Construction – the Economic Barometer for the Region (2015).

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration14

migrant workers’ conditions. Despite detailed regulations on workers’ rights, the level of enforcement isgenerally low, and countries in the Gulf are facing a lot of criticism from civil society organizations,
including allegations of labor exploitation and forced labor in the construction sector.
There is an opportunity for large engineering and construction companies to stand out from thecompetition by further improving migrant workers’ conditions throughout their subcontracting chain. Under
increasing scrutiny, clients—including private companies and public authorities—are likely to raise their
expectations with respect to construction workers' working and living conditions and seek companies thatare able to demonstrate their commitments and the implementation of good practices in the future.

ISSUES FACING MIGRANT CONSTRUCTION WORKERS
The working conditions of migrant construction workers are often difficult. In addition to performing jobs
that are by nature physically demanding, they sometimes face challenges related to their migration status
and level of skills and education. This is particularly true in the Gulf countries that rely heavily on lowskilled migrant workers from South and Southeast Asia.

1.

Beyond the “Dirty, Difficult, and Dangerous” cliché, challenges faced by workers in
the construction sector

In a 2001 ILO report, 11 the construction industry was described as “dirty, difficult and dangerous,”
qualifications stemming as much from the conditions in which workers are recruited as from the nature of
the work itself. This image of the industry is primarily due to the rates of accidents and fatalities and theadoption of flexible labor practices and increased reliance on subcontractors. Though multinational
construction companies are large providers of employment opportunities, the work has become
temporary and precarious. As a result, workers generally enjoy lower economic and training opportunities
and social security benefits. The ILO also notes that subcontracting negatively affects occupational healthand safety conditions and undermines collective bargaining agreements.

2.

Specific issues faced by construction workers in the Gulf States

Many recent media headlines and reports from international civil society organizations have highlighted
some of the abuses associated with the employment of migrant workers in the construction sector.
Based on these articles and reports, as well as interviews with key actors in the sector, BSR has reviewed
and mapped the key issues faced by migrant workers in the Gulf States12, and have categorized thesekey issues across five themes:»

Migration and recruitment: The construction industry makes use of large numbers of low-skilledworkers, and as such is a major employer worldwide. In the Gulf, the number and size of
construction projects and relatively limited local workforce have resulted in large-scale labor
migration. The engineering and construction industry relies on millions of migrant workers, primarily
from South and Southeast Asia, to come to the Gulf region. Migrant workers usually have limited
financial resources and education as well as no alternative employment opportunities in theircountries of origin. This makes them vulnerable to exploitation.

11

ILO, The construction industry in the twenty-first century: Its image, employment prospects and skill requirements (2001).

12

See Annex 3 for the full list of articles and reports reviewed.

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

15

This vulnerability is particularly apparent during the recruitment process. Employers regularly
underpay or do not pay for the recruitment of lower-skilled workers, so recruitment agencies orintermediaries charge high fees to workers to cover the cost of their recruitment. Over time this has
become a norm in countries of origin, where workers in urgent need of employment almost always
end up paying intermediaries to secure a job. As a result, debts incurred by workers during therecruitment process and/or deception about the nature and remuneration of the work promised areoften associated with forced labor when workers are paid late, little or nothing at all, or experience
physical violence or simply threats, and cannot leave their jobs or the country, or simply seek help
because they need to repay their debts or their passports are withheld. This is more likely to takeplace in the Gulf States where labor markets and immigration regulations make workers completelydependent upon their sponsor (usually their employer) for their work visa and immigration status. As
noted by the International Labour Organization (ILO) Committee of Experts in its 2015 Observations
on Qatar,13 such laws place restrictions on the ability of workers to leave the country or to change
employers before the end of their contract without their employers’ permission. Workers who fallvictim to abusive practices cannot leave their jobs or they run the risk of becoming irregular and canface immediate deportation back to their countries of origin. These systems have been widely
criticized for the abuses they induce and many stakeholders (including civil society organizations andmultilateral institutions) are advocating for reforms.
»

Working conditions: Construction remains among the most hazardous industries in the world. As aresult, health and safety continues to be the number one priority for the sector. In addition, hightemperatures and humidity levels in the Gulf States expose migrant workers to heat stress that issometimes fatal. Long working hours are also reported as a factor of accidents, in particular whendeadlines tighten schedules and overtime is required. Some commentators also stressed that thewithholding of wages or delays in payment can occur. Poor working conditions, long working hours,
and delays in payment of wages frequently remain unreported because workers are too afraid oflosing their job to raise any grievances. Finally, freedom of association and the right to collective
bargaining is also limited in some countries in the region. Where workers’ representative are inplace, the scope of their mandate is generally limited to discussing basic welfare issues.

»

Living conditions: Where workers migrate for work, their employers are generally responsible for
their accommodation. In some countries, this requires building and using dedicated facilities. In the
Gulf States in particular, migrant construction workers have no other choice than to live in theaccommodations provided by their employer. Although the conditions are generally improving, anumber of reports from mainstream media and civil society groups in recent years have highlighted
the unsafe and squalid conditions in which migrant workers sometimes live and emphasized therestrictions of workers’ freedom of movement inherent to life in closed camps.

»

Subcontractors’ practices: Subcontracting has always been important in the construction industry
because projects are divided into various sequences and require multiple areas of expertise.
Engineering companies and main contractors at the top of the chain generally already have welldeveloped policies addressing workers’ rights and needs, but expectations for, and oversight of, theirsubcontractors’ practices can be limited. Subcontractors are generally smaller outfits with few
incentives to improve working conditions, and are more likely to seek to minimize their costs anduphold lower workers’ standards. François Crépeau, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human
Rights of Migrants, notes in the report on his mission to Qatar that the “most serious abuse of13

ILO Committee of Expert Observations Qatar, 2015.

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration16

migrants is not committed by large transnational companies, but rather by small companies which
act as subcontractors.”14»

Access to remedy: Migrant construction workers generally lack effective access to justice andremedies. Multiple factors come into play, including the fact that workers’ immigration status is tied totheir employers as well as the complexities of the judicial process. When workers end up in
exploitative situations with their employer-sponsor, it is very difficult to raise labor-related grievances
because workers are generally afraid to speak for fear of losing their job and being detained ordeported. Even where complaint mechanisms are available for migrants (through the Ministries ofLabor, the Ministries of Interior, or directly at the National Labor Courts), migrants have difficulty
accessing these mechanisms. They lack information, legal aid, and interpreters, as noted by UN
Rapporteur Crépeau.15 Where translation services are not available, filing a simple complaint to the
Labor Ministry is impossible for illiterate migrant workers who do not speak Arabic. Hidden fees toregister cases before the Labor Courts can also act as strong deterrents for workers. In a report from
the Middle East Center of the London School of Economics and Political Science, 16 the authors also
noted that Labor Courts generally have a low level of understanding of the issues migrant workers
face in the justice system. Other factors cited by the authors that further restrict workers’ access tojustice include the long time it takes for courts to make a determination in a case, the inability ofworkers to seek other remunerative work during active cases, and the lack of punitive measures andpenalties for employers who are not attending hearings or are withholding wages. In a recent
report,17 Amnesty International added that the embassies of sending countries are not doing much tohelp their citizens. As a result, migrant workers try to access justice mechanisms only as a last resort
or not at all. Workers often rely on informal advice given by fellow workers on potential ways tosuccessfully confront their employers.

CURRENT PRACTICES AND CHALLENGES FACED BY ENGINEERINGAND CONSTRUCTION COMPANIES TO UPHOLD WORKERS’ RIGHTS
In this section, BSR briefly reviews how engineering and construction companies currently manage theissues workers face in the Gulf. BSR then reviews the various challenges to upholding high labor andhuman rights standards for workers.

1.

Companies’ current good practices

All the companies reviewed and interviewed for this research are implementing robust health and safety
standards throughout their operations and generally have fully developed HSE management systems intheir operations. They are also keen to improve workers’ rights in their operations. This is usually reflectedin their human rights statements, workers’ welfare policies, and other supply chain codes of practice.

14

UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Migrants, Mission to Qatar (2014).

15

Ibid.

16

LSE, Labour Migrants and Access to Justice in Contemporary Qatar (2009).

17

Amnesty International, Exploited Dreams: Dispatches from Indian Migrant Workers in Saudi Arabia (2014).

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

17

Sample of existing human and workers’ rights commitments taken by engineering and construction
companies
Aecom’s Code of Conduct
As part of our commitment to our global community, we uphold individual human rights and follow employment
laws in all the locations where we conduct business. In support of this commitment, we provide reasonable
working hours and fair wages for those who work on our behalf. Further, AECOM has a zero tolerance policy
regarding the use of forced labor or human trafficking. We will never knowingly conduct business with
subcontractors, business partners, suppliers, or third parties who violate these laws.
Atkins’ Supply Chain Policy Statement
Under the Supply Chain Policy Statement, Atkins’ partners must share Atkins’ commitment to protecting thehealth, safety, and security of employees, clients, and others who could be affected by their activities; pay
everyone a fair wage and provide good working conditions; supply good quality products and materials fromsustainable, local, and ethical sources; ensure everyone has the right competency and appropriate training toundertake their job; ensure all accidents and incidents are reported and undertake investigations as appropriate;
protect Atkins’ assets including confidential information; comply with all relevant legislation and, whereappropriate, work towards or maintain ISO 9001, ISO 14001, EMAS or BS8555, and OHSAS 18001.
Bechtel’s Code of Conduct and Sustainable Development Policy
Bechtel does not tolerate activities that support trafficking in persons or the use of child labor or forced labor in theperformance of Bechtel contracts by our employees or our subcontractors. Bechtel also expects all to maintain awork environment that promotes respect for all employees and for the human rights of co-workers, partners,
suppliers, customers, and community neighbors. Contractors are also expected to comply with all relevant national
legislation, export-import compliance, regulatory requirements, and project-specific environmental and social
requirements established by our customers; act with full respect to the highest standards in labor rights and fairworking conditions (including the right to association, where legal, and worker safety); prohibit and eliminate alluse of forced or child labor; and practice nondiscrimination in recruitment, hiring, training, and promotion.
Carillion’s Board Policies
Carillion supports the belief that human rights are universal and adheres to the principles of human rights in its
operations. Carillion supports the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights and works hard to ensure that in allareas of interaction with its employees, clients, suppliers, third parties, interviewees, and joint venture parties thateveryone is protected and treated absolutely fairly. Carillion has a Health & Safety Policy and an Equal
Opportunities and Diversity Policy. Carillion respects the rule of law in all our dealings and has minimum standard
compliance with all law and regulation to which its businesses are subject.
CH2M’s and Worker Welfare Policy
CH2M strives to lay the foundation for human progress in the face of the world’s most complex challenges.
Expanding upon our world-class health and safety culture, we recognize we have a role to play in improving
conditions for workers on any project we touch. Thus, we are working to effect systemic change on this issue.

Fluor's Business Conduct Expectations for Suppliers and Contractors
Our suppliers and contractors are expected to support and respect human rights and avoid complicity in humanrights abuses; treat all their workers with dignity, respect, and fairness; and conduct all their operations in asocially responsible, nondiscriminatory manner and in accordance with applicable laws including those associatedwith equal opportunity, child labor, forced and compulsory labor, working hours, wages and benefits, freedom of
association, data privacy, and harassment-free work environment.

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

18

Jacobs Supplier Code of Conduct
Jacobs respects and protects the rights of those who work for and with us; and for the people in the communities
where we do business. You must always: Treat all your workers with dignity and respect; support and respecthuman rights and avoid any involvement in human rights abuses; conduct all operations in a socially responsible,
harassment-free, and nondiscriminatory manner; comply with applicable laws concerning equal opportunities, childlabor, forced labor, human trafficking, working hours, freedom of association, and fair wages; ensure that theconfidentiality of supplier and employee whistleblowers is maintained and that they are protected against
retaliation.
Vinci’s Human Rights Statement and Manifesto
Vinci is committed to supporting and promoting respect for human rights within its sphere of influence, and toensuring that Group companies are not complicit in human rights abuses. The Group acts on this commitment by
including clauses relating to human rights in its framework agreements with suppliers.

However, the translation of these high-level statements and supplier codes into practical and operational
tools and their implementation is sometimes patchy, particularly among subcontractors.
BSR has outlined below a few good practices in areas where companies are facing significant challenges.
»

Recruitment: As mentioned above, there are many human rights abuses associated with therecruitment process. Even when user companies have robust zero-recruitment policies, it is not rare
for workers to have to pay fees to subagents in order to secure their employment. In addition, there
are many cases of contract deceptions. To mitigate these risks, Vinci’s subsidiary in Qatar has
started engaging its recruitment agencies to better understand the recruitment upstream process andthe associated fees and costs. As a result they have increased the fees paid to the agencies andcommitted to cover all the associated costs (medical check, visa, transport, etc.). In addition, Vinci’s
subsidiary finalizes the recruitment of new workers by sending a team of human resources andrecruitment specialists, together with a technical manager, so they can test their skills in-country andprovide them with information about their employment contracts and conditions.

»

Worker accommodation: Notable improvement has been made in the standards of worker
accommodations in general. It is worth noting the work of Daruna Development, which was set up in
Qatar to build worker accommodations with high standards. Their accommodations are developedon a guest concept. In addition to complying with the robust Qatar Foundation’s mandatory
standards18 and providing good housing, washing, leisure, and canteen facilities, the company islooking at ways to add value to better serve their customers (workers). This includes, for instance,developing medical facilities and improving the health surveillance of workers. To-date, Daruna has
not started construction of these facilities.

»

Subcontractor management: As mentioned above, the use of subcontractors in the constructionindustry has increased and has diluted companies’ sense of responsibility over working conditions.
Despite some robust and/or detailed policies and procedures addressing workers’ rights, companies
are still struggling to implement their requirements—beyond health and safety—with subcontractors
at the bottom of the supply chain. CH2M engaged a world-leading labor expert, Verité, to help
develop a global Worker Welfare Policy. This policy applies to CH2M operations and suppliers. In
addition, CH2M developed a workers welfare screening into their subcontractor prequalification
process and a toolkit of practical resources for implementing the new policy, including detailed

Qatar Foundation, QF Mandatory Standards of Migrant Workers’ Welfare for Contractors and Sub-Contractors (2013).

18

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

19

worker accommodation standards, prequalification questionnaires, auditing checklists, and key
performance indicators.
»

Freedom of association: Despite restrictions on workers’ freedom of association, a stakeholderinterviewed noted that a few companies have started implementing good practices, looking at ways
to use their canteen or health and safety committee to discuss with their workers about their key
working conditions, training needs, and accommodations standards.

However, despite these good practices, engineering and construction companies are facing many
challenges to uphold high labor standards within their operations in the Gulf and throughout theirsubcontracting chain.

2.

Companies’ challenges

BSR has included below a high-level summary of the key challenges engineering and construction
companies operating in the Gulf States are facing to uphold workers’ rights.
»

Clients’ expectations drive competition on cost: Most companies interviewed insisted on theimportance of client requirements. They confirmed that it is much easier to uphold workers’
standards when specific clauses are included in the bidding process. Such clauses not only promotea level playing field among companies that benefits the workers involved on the projects, but theyalso make the implementation of workers’ rights much easier. However, most construction contracts
are still primarily based on purely technical requirements (ability of the company to do the work) andcosts. In this context, any efforts from companies to implement robust workers standards can beundermined. This is particularly true where clients are public entities with limited knowledge of theindustry, poor technical evaluation capacity, and no mandate to promote social factors. In a highly
competitive, cost-driven bidding process, engineering and construction companies that pay lessattention to the recruitment and working and living conditions of the workers involved in theiroperations are likely to develop proposals that—while responding to the basic technical requirementsof the tenders—are cheaper than those developed by companies upholding stronger standards fortheir workers and subcontracted workers.

»

Decentralized operations and short-term nature of projects limit investments in workers andthe implementation of good practices: Construction activities are always project-based. Whilesome projects might require only a few months to complete, large projects can take up to two years
or more. Depending on the size of the projects, companies will deploy a complex management
structure that is unlikely to include human resources and human rights specialists. However, in somecountries where construction activities are intense, such as Qatar or the UAE, some engineering andconstruction companies might develop a more robust structure and set up a local subsidiary. Even inthis context, the local companies might be reluctant to invest significantly in the development andimplementation of specific policies and procedures to tackle workers’ rights challenges, including at
the subcontractor level. In addition, these management structures or subsidiaries generally enjoy ahigh degree of autonomy in the way they manage their projects. Beyond the strict monitoring of theimplementation of robust health and safety standards from their parent companies, they will likely
receive limited support and guidance.

»

Contractors and subcontractors dilute companies’ sense of responsibility: Many stakeholders
noted that over the past 25 years subcontracting has increased significantly and that this practice is
now no longer restricted to specialized tasks. This has allowed large construction companies toconcentrate on project management, rather than on physical work, and to become genuine
professional services companies. Engineering companies and main contractors at the top of theBSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

20

chain generally have well-developed policies addressing workers’ rights and needs, but they have
limited expectations and oversight of their subcontractors’ working conditions.
In a recent report, the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC)19 particularly insisted that
construction companies have a responsibility under the OECD Guidelines for Multinational
Enterprises to respect the rights of workers—not only the workers they directly employ but also thoseof their subcontractors and other businesses. The ITUC also stressed the importance of their
responsibility, noting that subcontractors are generally smaller outfits that have few incentives toimprove working conditions and are more likely to seek to minimize their costs and uphold lower
workers’ standards.
»

Use of large pool of low-skilled migrant workers creates specific rights challenges: The
construction sector in the Gulf countries relies heavily on low-skilled migrant workers coming
primarily from South and Southeast Asia, in particular India, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, thePhilippines, and Indonesia. Risk factors for ending up in exploitative and abusive work conditions
include: workers’ often low levels of education, the absence of alternative employment in theircountries of origin, and notoriously corrupt recruitment systems. As a result, any company recruiting
workers from one of these countries has to tackle a series of challenges that are endemic to thesending countries. In addition to stories about countless kickbacks expected from recruitment agentsand subagents, a workers’ rights expert interviewed by BSR explained that, in some countries,
potential candidates believe that paying a huge recruitment fee is a guarantee of getting a good
construction job. As a result, migrant workers may find it too-good-to-be-true or not believable thatagencies are implementing a fully employer-paid recruitment process.

»Restrictive legal frameworks further limits workers’ rights: Companies operating in Gulf
countries also face a very restrictive legal environment that they need to respect while ensuring thatthey mitigate the potential negative impacts on various workers’ rights in their operations. As
mentioned above, immigration regulations (often involving the employer acting as a sponsor for theworker) in the region have primarily aimed at managing and controlling the entry and stay of foreign
workers. This system requires companies to plan their operations and request work visas for each of
their workers. A worker’s regular status is dependent on the sponsorship of his/her employer. As aresult, workers cannot change jobs or leave the country without their employer’s authorization, which
unduly limits their freedom of movement and freedom of work. This system has been under intense
criticism for the abuses it induces, and many stakeholders (including civil society organizations andmultilateral institutions) are advocating for reforms. In addition, in most of the Gulf countries, the laws
strictly deny workers (and employers) freedom of association.

Against these challenges, BSR has reviewed the growing stakeholder expectations on companies’
practices as well as the recent development of increasing regulatory frameworks that cover companies’
behavior abroad, including in their supply chains.

19

ITUC, Frontline Report 2015, Qatar: Profit and Loss – Counting the Cost of Modern Day Slavery in Qatar: What Price is Freedom?

(2015).

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

21

GROWING CLIENTS AND CIVIL SOCIETY EXPECTATIONS AND
TIGHTENING REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS
Engineering and construction companies are facing increasingly higher expectations around laborcompliance and human rights issues from large-scale clients, both public and private. In addition,companies must take into account tighter regulations and international standards around nonfinancial
disclosures, including forced labor and supply chain transparency. Finally, companies will continue to facegrowing civil society’s demands to improve their practices in these areas, particularly around high-profile
projects and events.

1.

Clients expectations

Public-sector clients such as federal and local governments, as well as multilateral organizations andinternational institutions such as the World Bank and its private sector arm, the International FinanceCorporation (IFC), have in the last decade tightened regulations and standards with regard to forced laborand human trafficking—and labor standards in general—to reflect the expectations laid down in the 2011
UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. They also reflect the numerous high-profile
industrial accidents and scandals involving forced labor and human trafficking. Additionally, privatesector clients such as major extractive and energy-sector companies, as well as major event organizers
such as FIFA, now expect tighter oversight of such issues, incorporating such expectations into contracts
and agreements.
»

Private sector clients: Private clients of large-scale construction projects such as major extractive
and energy-sector companies, as well as event organizers such as FIFA, tend to be public-facing
entities that are highly scrutinized by the press and civil society organizations. Increasing stakeholderpressure and government regulations around supply chains, subcontractor relationships, andexpanding definitions of ownership and control over human rights and labor violation issues have ledthese organizations to invest significantly in the development of robust codes of conduct as well as tointegrate compliance requirements into contracts and agreements with their contractors andsuppliers.
In response to tremendous criticism around labor conditions at construction sites for future World
Cup games, FIFA announced the launch of a monitoring system to ensure decent working conditions
in stadium construction. For the 2018 World Cup in Russia, the FIFA Local Organizing Committee(LOC) has appointed an independent third party to conduct evaluations of labor conditions at all
event stadiums every three months.20
Energy-sector companies have also identified construction activities as representing a particular areaof risk for human rights, in particular with respect to the implementation of the 2015 U.K. Modern
Slavery Act. Many companies have already strengthened their suppliers and contractors’ codes ofconduct. Some oil and gas companies have also developed tender and contractual requirements thatclearly encourage their business partners to respect human rights. A number of standard model
contracts with oil and gas giant BP now include human rights clauses that require contractors andsuppliers to respect internationally recognized human rights in their work for BP. In some location,
BP also conducts social compliance and performance audits that include human rights aspects.

20

FIFA, Working conditions monitoring system launched at World Cup stadiums (2016).

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

22

BP’s work on improving working conditions in its operations in Oman 21
BP has had an upstream presence in Oman since 2007 and is a major investor in the country. It
was expected that at peak development in 2016 BP’s Khazzan gas project would involve more than
10,000 people working in the remote desert. In preparation for this, BP developed minimum
workforce welfare standards that set requirements for contractors with respect to working and living
conditions and addressing workforce concerns.
BP also held workshops with contractors to discuss BP’s requirements and develop a sharedunderstanding of the importance of delivering a standard of workforce welfare that respects workers
and adheres to BP’s human rights policy. These workshops also act as a channel for escalating andaddressing grievances raised.

Along the same line, Chevron frequently discusses workers and human rights topics with its directcontractors. In 2015, the company also sent a letter 22 to the senior leaders of more than 400 goods
and services companies. The letter outlined Chevron’s commitment to respecting human rights andthe company’s expectation that its business partners treat their employees and interact with
communities in a manner consistent with Chevron’s Human Rights Policy and the ILO’s core labor
principles.
At industry level, the oil and gas association for environmental and social issues (IPIECA)—together
with member companies and representatives of engineering, procurement, and construction
contractors (EPC) and service companies—initiated a collaborative project on human rights issues in
the industry supply chain.
IPIECA’s collaborative project on human rights issues
IPIECA’s project is bringing contractors and operators (IPIECA members) together to build
awareness and understanding of the UNGPs, define what human rights impacts, risks, andresponsibilities mean across the industry and explore good practice for engagement between
contractors and operators on human rights due diligence efforts. The initiative has the goals ofdeveloping a shared understanding of the UNGPs, looking at opportunities for dialogue and goodpractices during the project lifecycle including:»»»

Building a shared awareness of what is directly and indirectly impacting on value chain
human rights
Strategies for collaboration for joint identification and mitigation of human rights risks andimpacts between contractors and operators
Building clarity on definition of terms

The rise of regulations around supply chain transparency, discussed in greater detail below, also
reinforces private sector clients’ incentives to ensure that all their business partners respect humanrights and track and share with them relevant information that can feed into their due diligencesystems.

21

BP, Sustainability Report (2014)22www.chevron.com/-/media/chevron/shared/documents/supplier-human-rights-letter-2015.pdf

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration»

23

States and public institutions: States and other public sector institutions are also major clients ofthe engineering and construction companies. Some have already established requirements aroundhuman and labor rights and human trafficking issues that they expect companies seeking businessfrom them to respect. One of the most emblematic set of requirements sprung from the 2015
Amendment to the U.S. Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), which applies to all contractors of the
U.S. federal government providing goods and services. The FAR prohibits a range of activities suchas denying access to identity documents, using misleading or fraudulent recruitment practices during
the recruitment of employees, charging recruitment fees, and providing accommodation that fails tomeet host country housing standards. For contracts over US$500,000, the regulation also requires
contractors to develop a compliance plan that includes an awareness program, a process for
employee reporting including a hotline, a plan to only work with recruitment companies that rely on
trained employees, a housing plan, and procedures to prevent agents and subcontractors fromengaging in human trafficking. It also requires contractors to monitor, detect, and terminate
subcontractors and their employees who breach these requirements.
In addition to State actors, many public authorities managing the development of large-scale
infrastructure have started developing and/or strengthening their expectations around human andworkers’ rights. For instance, as Qatar’s construction sector continues to expand ahead of the 2022
FIFA World Cup, public institutions in charge of building sports infrastructure such as the Supreme
Committee for Delivery & Legacy and Qatar Foundation Capital Projects have incorporated a seriesof detailed mandatory standards on migrant workers’ welfare for contractors and subcontractors in all
their contracts with engineering and construction companies. 23 In a similar vein, in the UAE, theTourism Development and Investment Company in charge of developing tourism, cultural, andresidential infrastructure adopted in 2009, an employment practices policy for contractors andsubcontractors which since 2012 has been independently monitored by PricewaterhouseCoopers(PwC) based on interviews with randomly selected workers.
World Bank Performance Standards provide another illustrative example of a public client
strengthening requirements that apply to engineering and construction companies responding to the
Bank’s infrastructure development tenders. The performance standards are the most developed setof standards that define the private sector companies’ roles and responsibilities for managing theenvironmental and social risks and impacts (including human rights and labor and working conditions
impacts) of their projects.24

2.

Tightening standard requirements and regulations at international and national
levelsBeyond these increasing expectations from clients, engineering and construction companies have to take
into account the strengthening international standards requirements and tightening regulatory
frameworks. In addition to the long-standing expectations related to the implementation of the ILO Core
Conventions on forced labor,25 child labor, discrimination, and freedom of association and right toSupreme Committee for Delivery & Legacy Workers’ Welfare Standards; Qatar Foundation Mandatory Standards of MigrantWorkers’ Welfare for Contractors & Sub-contractors.
23

24
25

World Bank Performance Standards For Private Sector Activities.

It is worth noting the recently adopted 2014 ILO Forced Labor Protocol that strengthens the international legal framework bycreating new obligations to prevent forced labor, protect victims, and provide access to remedy, such as compensation for material
and physical harm. The Protocol requires governments to take measures to better protect workers, in particular migrant laborers,
from fraudulent and abusive recruitment practices and emphasizes the role of employers and workers in the fight against forcedlabor.

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

24

collective bargaining26, in codes of practice such as the UN Global Compact Principles27 or the OECD
Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, 28 the 2011 UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human
Rights (UNGP)29 further clarified expectations for companies to respect human rights in general, definedas avoiding infringement on the rights of others and addressing adverse human rights impacts. To meetthis responsibility, the Guiding Principles call on companies to carry out human rights due diligence that
includes the following components:»»»»

Assessing actual and potential impacts on rights holders
Integrating and acting upon the findings
Tracking performance
Communicating how companies are addressing actual and potential impacts on rights holders

These international standards are increasingly translated into local regulations, to require moretransparency and due diligence from multinational companies in order to identify, avoid, mitigate, andremedy potential negative human rights impacts from their activities or across their supply chains:»

The 2010 California Transparency in Supply Chains Act requires certain companies to report on
their specific actions to eradicate slavery and human trafficking in their supply chains. At the federal
level, a similar bill (Business Supply Chain Transparency on Trafficking and Slavery) has recently
been introduced on House floor and also requires companies to disclose whether they have taken
any measures during the year to identify and address conditions of forced labor, slavery, humantrafficking, and the worst forms of child labor within the their supply chains.

»

The EU Directive 2014/95/EU30 on disclosure of nonfinancial and diversity information requires
certain large undertakings to prepare a nonfinancial statement containing information relating to, at aminimum, environmental, social and employee-related, respect for human rights, anti-corruption, andbribery matters.

»

The 2015 U.K. Modern Slavery Act requires companies with operations in the U.K. and a total
turnover of £36 million or more to develop a slavery and human trafficking statement each year,
setting out what steps organizations have taken to ensure modern slavery is not taking place in theirbusiness or supply chains.

In addition, there is a body of legislation on corruption that is relevant—the 1977 U.S. Foreign and
Corrupt Practices Act or the 2011 U.K. Anti-Bribery Act—as it relates to the recruitment of migrant
workers in particular. As highlighted by Verité in a recent report on the role of corruption in international
labor migration,31 corrupt activities are all too common in migrant worker recruitment. This creates
potential legal risk for companies because multinationals can be held liable for the acts of their foreignsubsidiaries, franchisees, joint venture entities, and even suppliers that use third-party employment
agencies.

26

For more information about the application by business of ILO International Conventions, see ILO Helpdesk for Business on
International Labour Standards.
27

www.unglobalcompact.org/what-is-gc/mission/principles.
http://mneguidelines.oecd.org/text/.
29
The framework has been unanimously adopted by the United Nations Human Rights Council, and has been widely endorsed bycompanies and international NGOs alike. For more information see www.business-humanrights.org/SpecialRepPortal/Home2830

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32014L0095

31

Verité, An Exploratory Study on the Role of Corruption in International Labor Migration (2016).

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

25

Finally, it is worth noting that a bill is currently being discussed in France that would require French
companies employing 5,000 employees or more domestically or 10,000 employees or moreinternationally to develop and publish due diligence plans for human rights and environmental and social
risks. Failure to do so could result in fines of up to €10 million. If such a law is passed in France, there is
speculation that it could generate spillover effects within the European Union according tocommentators.32

3.

Growing civil society demands

The upcoming World Expo 2020 and World Cup 2022 are respectively drawing attention to Dubai and
Qatar, and more generally to the Gulf States. In addition to intense media scrutiny, civil society
organizations and other external stakeholders have set strong expectations for all the actors involved inbuilding the infrastructure needed in the coming years.
Strong calls have been made to the Gulf States to reform their immigration laws and sponsorship systems
and improve law enforcement to better protect migrant workers’ rights, while origin country governments
are expected to strengthen regulations around recruitment processes to prevent abuses from local
recruitment agencies and other intermediaries.
Construction companies are also urged to strengthen their practices and their due diligence systems inorder to avoid abuses within their supply chain. Most of the stakeholder recommendations focus on
improving recruitment practices, “permissive” application of the sponsorship (Kafala) system—bysystematically granting exit visas for instance, better contractor monitoring, and implementation ofeffective grievance mechanisms.
In this study BSR has reviewed expectations from different groups of stakeholders who are denouncing
migrants’ rights abuses in Gulf countries. BSR has analyzed the expectations from leading civil society
organizations: Engineers Against Poverty (EAP), Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch(HRW). BSR has also taken into account recommendations from relevant UN bodies: the International
Labour Organization and the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Migrants, François
Crépeau. BSR has also reviewed the expectations from workers’ organizations: International Trade Union
Confederation (ITUC), Building and Wood Worker’s International (BWI), and the OECD Trade Union
Advisory Committee (TUAC). Finally, BSR has included reports from consulting and auditing firms,
notably a report from the law firm DLA Piper which was commissioned by the Qatari government following
the Guardian’s articles on abuses of migrant workers building the World Cup 2022 infrastructure and areport from Nardello & Co. investigating allegations of abuses in the construction of New York University’s
Abu Dhabi Saadiyat Island Campus.
The stakeholders BSR consulted and the reports BSR reviewed raised specific expectations forcompanies to improve the conditions of the direct or indirect migrant workers involved in their operations:
»

32
33

Migration and recruitment: Stakeholder requested that multinationals work on better recruitment
processes by blacklisting nonethical recruitment agencies and considering reimbursing recruitment
fees paid by workers. UN organizations also specifically called for training migrant workers on theirrights and for considering using the International Recruitment Integrity System (IRIS)33 to promote

http://oecdinsights.org/2015/04/15/legislation-on-responsible-business-conduct-must-reinforce-the-wheel-not-reinvent-it/.

The International Recruitment Integrity System (IRIS) is a voluntary and value-based accreditation and monitoring process forinternational labor recruitment, being developed by the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and the International

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

26

fair recruitment practices. Stakeholders also insisted that companies should contribute to improving
migrant workers’ freedom of movement—making sure that workers can keep their identity
documents in safe storage facilities and systematically granting exit visas that will enable them toleave the country.
»

Working conditions: Large engineering and construction companies generally have goodmanagement systems in place regarding occupational health and safety. Therefore, stakeholders
focus more on wages and wage discrimination across nationalities. The TUAC recommended that all
workers be paid the same wage rate per job, rather than per nationality as it is currently practiced.
They also mentioned the necessity of providing a proper forum for workers and employers to discuss
working and living conditions, and for workers to be able to bargain collectively. The ITUC also
specified that multinational companies and their contractors have the duty to set up workers’organizations that fairly represent the workforce, and to provide workers with information needed toorganize meaningful negotiations. In addition, the workers’ organizations requested an increase inminimum wages.

»

Living conditions: This is a topic generally well covered by Gulf countries legislation, though all
stakeholders noted that enforcement of the current regulations is generally poor and thatmultinational companies have to implement their own due diligence processes to ensure that theirsubcontracted workers are accommodated in adequate conditions. BWI also insisted on theimportance of health aspects: proper insurance coverage needs to be provided to migrant workers
by their employers and health education is key to improve living conditions. Nardello & Co. also
recommended that companies require contractors to be transparent during the bidding process
around line item quotes for costs associated with migrant workers’ living conditions and suggeststhat companies appoint third-party monitors to evaluate their practices and their subcontractors’
compliance.

»

Subcontractors’ practices: Stakeholders insisted that companies should take full responsibility for
their entire workforce, including subcontracted workers. They also stressed the importance ofincluding workers’ interviews as part of due diligence and monitoring processes and mentioned thatpenalties need to be applied when noncompliances are encountered. DLA Piper stated that leadcontractors should be made responsible for disseminating guidelines and standards to theirsubcontractors. It also recommends the implementation of a targeted verification requirement with
migrant workers, which would cover recruitment fees, employment contracts, whether the migrant
worker has been properly informed of the position, the conditions, and the wage.

»

Access to remedy: Most stakeholders interviewed emphasized the importance of implementing
safe (anonymous) and effective grievance mechanisms.

In addition to the expectations listed above, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch alsomentioned that they would like to see companies make public commitments to respect workers’ rights anddisclose reports detailing the actions undertaken to improve migrant workers’ conditions and their results.
The multiple challenges faced by engineering and construction companies to uphold high labor standards
described and the increasing stakeholders’ expectations and tightening regulations should focus
companies’ attention on the need to collaborate and find meaningful and sustainable solutions to theissues migrant workers face in the Gulf.

Organization of Employers (IOE), in order to increase the integrity and transparency of the international recruitment industry andmaximize the gains of labor migration.

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

27

Tackling Workers’ Rights in the Construction
Sector—The Case for Collective Action
Looking at the complex environment in which engineering and construction companies operate andsimilarities in the challenges they face, this section takes stock of the findings of BSR’s research anddevelops a business case for collective action. In such a difficult context, the implementation ofmanagement and compliance systems by one company might be rendered ineffective to address
workers’ rights issues, in particular where these issues result from an intricate chain of events andstructural causes.
Below, BSR highlights a series of factors that support the move towards setting up a collaborative
initiative in the sector:

REALIZING COMPANIES’ EXPRESSED INTEREST IN
COLLABORATING
Engineering and construction companies have limited experience with collaboration. While someinterviewees explained that the construction sector is a highly competitive market that is not prone tocollaboration, others pointed out the general lack of trust among companies in the sector. Companies
interviewed also noted that there was little “safe space” to discuss these key issues and few formal orinformal mechanisms for helping them move forward together. As one company put it, “collaboration is a
far-fetched concept in the sector.” This contrasts sharply with the results of BSR’s research that suggest
there is a strong appetite among engineering and construction companies to work together to implement
responsible business practices and tackle some of the challenges identified.

1.

Limited forums for collaboration on workers’ rights

Existing collaborative structures in the construction sector generally address commercial, management,
and technical issues. In addition to professional associations representing the commercial interests ofengineering and construction companies, two organizations were mentioned by interviewees: CIOB34—
the world's largest professional body for construction management and leadership, and ECRI 35—aninternational risk management consulting forum focused on the engineering and construction industry.
Neither of these organizations have workers’ rights in their mandate. However, it is worth noting that
CIOB published an unequivocal report on the dark side of construction 36 that called on companies tochange their business model “that consists on passing risks down the supply chain” and “start facing up
to [their] responsibilities.” CIOB is now looking at developing a toolkit to help organizations become moresocially responsible. U.K.-based Constructing Excellence is another example of collaboration across theentire construction industry (clients, consultants, contractors, manufacturers, and suppliers) whose
mandate is to promote a better industry through collaboration. Since 2011, Constructing Excellence relies
on an alliance of organizations promoting collaboration at the international level. In Qatar for instance,
Constructing Excellence’s work aims at improving briefing, procurement, employment, integrated designand construction, productivity, sustainability, value, legacy, and more.
In addition to their occasional participation in these industry groups and collaborative initiatives that do not
specifically focus on workers’ rights, some companies interviewed mentioned instances of ad-hoc
34

www.ciob.org

35

www.ecrionline.org

36

CIOB 2015, Modern Slavery: The Dark Side of Migration.

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration28

dialogues or collaboration with peers and stakeholders, in particular through their participation in theWorld Economic Forum, their memberships to the UN Global Compact, their participation in other industry
groups working on sustainability issues such as IPIECA, as well as discussions they have at the local
level with relevant institutions or civil society organizations promoting workers’ rights.

2.

Companies’ strong appetite for collaboration

Against this landscape of limited collaboration and despite strong competition, all the companies
interviewed identified a need for collaboration and confirmed that they would be interested in participating
in a collaborative initiative of the construction sector. Most companies mentioned that they would like tolearn from their peers and share best practices on managing workers’ rights. Others also affirmed thatcollaboration would enable the sector to effectively address some of the challenges it is facing and would
bring more legitimacy to the approach.
The turnout of companies at the roundtables organized by CH2M and IHRB37 in London to discuss theimplications of the U.K. Modern Slavery Act and broader labor challenges faced by workers andengineering and construction companies on projects worldwide illustrates this appetite for collaboration.
Despite challenging topics and the presence of numerous vocal stakeholders around the table includingAmnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and Engineers Against Poverty, representatives from over
15 engineering and construction companies participated. In addition to discussing the implementation of
the U.K. Modern Slavery Act, one of the roundtable discussions gave participants an opportunity to
discuss the advantages of working collaboratively. Among expected advantages of collaboration,
participants highlighted the following:
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»

Generating ideas collectively
Sharing knowledge
Collecting more intelligence on issues on the ground
Saving cost
Avoiding wasting resources on duplicating efforts around the development of tools and frameworks
Harmonizing practices among contracts/projects
Overcoming potential reticence from clients, and government clients in particular, to work on theseissues
Better addressing issues in the supply chain
Communicating more clearly on actions
Bringing more legitimacy to the approach

Against these benefits identified for collaboration, participants highlighted only a limited number ofconsiderations to take into account (including time commitment, resources, and possible anti-trust
breaches associated with working with competitors), demonstrating the opportunities for successfully
setting up a collaborative initiative in the construction sector.

RESPONDING TO GROWING EXPECTATIONS FROM CLIENTS, CIVIL
SOCIETY ACTORS, AND REGULATORS
Although some engineering and construction companies have started developing and implementing
robust workers’ rights standards and practices, many are still feeling overwhelmed, wondering how they
can best identify and address growing expectations from clients and external stakeholders, in particularwhere they involve amending significantly some of their core business practices. In this context,

37

CH2M, IHRB, Roundtable Discussions for the International Engineering/Construction Industry, London, November 10.

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

29

collaboration can enable companies to share their challenges, learn from each other, and develop
collective solutions to address these growing expectations while reducing individual exposure.

1.

Responding to expectations from clients and civil society actors

The Guardian newspaper, international trade unions including BWI and ITUC, and nongovernmentalorganizations such as Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and Engineers Against Poverty havecontributed to raising the profile of issues that migrant construction workers in the Gulf States are facing.
In recent years, these organizations have become more vocal and are now formulating more detailed andnuanced demands on companies to take responsibility and improve construction workers’ recruitment andworking and living conditions in their operations and throughout their supply chains.
Almost 20 years ago, companies from various sectors came together successfully under the umbrella ofdifferent initiatives such as the Ethical Trading Initiative,38 the Fair Labor Association,39 or more recently
the Electronic Industry Code of Conduct (now Electronic Industry Citizenship Coalition) 40 in order to
respond to similar pressure from external stakeholders and push workers’ standards through the supply
chain effectively. Despite facing many challenges, these organizations have successfully enabled theirmembers to collectively develop their practices and sometimes agree on common standards andapproaches that have become baseline requirements in their respective sectors and have led to theimprovement of working conditions in their supply chains.
Engineering and construction companies also face additional pressure from some of their direct clients.
Clients—including private companies from the oil and gas sector in particular and States and public
institutions such as the U.S. government or the World Bank—have already developed robust humanrights expectations for their contractors and are likely to continue raising them as well as strengthening
their monitoring activities. In the years to come, these clients will only direct business to companies thatare able to demonstrate their commitments and the implementation of best practices. One of the oil andgas companies interviewed insisted that adequately managing workers and human rights in operations
and subcontracting chains will become a minimum requirement to win work in the future.
The U.S. Federal Acquisition Regulation
The Regulation applies to all federal U.S. contractors or goods and services, and prohibits a range ofactivities such as denying access to identity documents, using misleading or fraudulent recruitment
practices during the recruitment of employees, charging recruitment fees, and providing
accommodation that fails to meet host country housing standards. For contracts over US$500,000, theregulation also requires contractors to develop a compliance plan that includes an awareness program,a process for employee reporting including a hotline, a plan to only work with recruitment companies
that rely on trained employees, a housing plan, and procedures to prevent agents and subcontractors
from engaging in human trafficking. It also requires contractors to monitor, detect, and terminate
subcontractors and their employees who breach these requirements.

Reflecting on the success of the collaborative initiative in the oil and gas sector, an interviewee insisted
that companies working together on tackling workers and human rights is “common sense.” This would38

www.ethicaltrade.org.

39

www.fairlabor.org.

40

www.eiccoalition.org.

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

30

allow engineering and construction companies to develop common approaches to tackle the key
challenges they face and engage meaningfully with other collaborative actors. It would also give theirwork in this area more visibility and legitimacy.
In addition to responding clients’ expectations to see the engineering and construction sector work
collaboratively, collaboration can also provide a meaningful platform for engineering and construction
companies to engage clients collectively to inform them about their current practices and standards, get abetter understanding of clients’ expectations, and anticipate and shape future evolutions of theirrequirements.

2.

Responding to tightening standards and regulations promoting companies’ humanrights due diligence and transparency

Since the adoption of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights in 2011, a number ofglobal codes of practice have been amended to include direct references to companies’ responsibility torespect human rights through the implementation of human rights due diligence. This is the case for thegovernments-backed OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises 41 or the UN Global Compact
Principles42 that are endorsed by more than 8,000 companies across the world. Despite wide international
endorsement, there remains many challenges with respect to the effective implementation of such codesby the private sector that can effectively be tackled through collaboration. In particular, collaboration canbe useful to help companies translate the codes’ requirements to the specificities of their sector or the
positions of the companies in the supply chain.
Examples of collective initiatives developed to help companies implement OECD due diligenceguidance on responsible supply chains of minerals from conflict-affected and high-risk areas
Individual companies bear the primary responsibility for implementation of due diligence, although they
may use industry programs and initiatives to assist them in specific due diligence tasks. A number of
initiatives have been developed by companies and industry associations to help companies implement
due diligence, particularly to help them establish traceability or chain of custody systems, and to
identify, assess, and manage risk.
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»

Conflict-Free Sourcing Initiative/Conflict-Free Smelter Initiative (CFSI)
Dubai Multi-Commodities Center’s Responsible Sourcing of Precious Metals
ICGLR Regional Initiative against the Illegal Exploitation of Natural Resources
ITRI Supply Chain Initiative iTSCi
London Bullion Market Association’s Responsible Gold Program
Responsible Jewellery Council’s Chain of Custody Certification
World Gold Council’s Conflict-Free Gold Standard
Conflict-Free Tin Initiative
Solutions for HopeIn addition, recent legislations are increasing nonfinancial disclosure requirements and holding
companies accountable for human rights infringement in the absence of adequate due diligence. This is
the case of the EU Directive 2014/95/EU43 on disclosure of nonfinancial and diversity information or the41

www.oecd.org/corporate/mne/oecdguidelinesformultinationalenterprises.htm.

42

www.unglobalcompact.org/what-is-gc/mission/principles.

43

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014L0095&from=FR

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

31

2010 California Transparency in Supply Chains Act44 and the 2015 U.K. Modern Slavery Act45 that
requires companies to report on their specific actions to eradicate slavery and human trafficking in their
supply chains and represent a significant step forward in promoting transparency in relation to company
actions to curb modern slavery. Although one might argue that such legislations provide clarity on what is
expected from companies and foster harmonization of practices and a level playing field, implementation
often constitutes a challenge that collaboration can help tackle. The Ethical Trading Initiative’s approachto the U.K. Modern Slavery Act is a good example of the benefits of collaboration in this area.
The Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI) and the adoption of the 2015 U.K. Modern Slavery Act
The Modern Slavery Act came into effect in October 2015. Section 54 of the Act requires companies
with operations in the U.K. and a total turnover of £36 million or more to develop a slavery and humantrafficking statement each year. This Act was not only endorsed by companies’ members of the ETI, it
was actively promoted. In its contribution to the legislative debate, 46 the ETI noted that it did not believethat voluntary initiatives alone will be enough to ensure that all companies take the necessary steps toeradicate slavery from their supply chains and demanded that transparency in supply chain be includedin the Act. ETI believed that effective and strong regulation can ensure changes occur acrossindustries, not just in the supply chains of responsible companies.
According to the Act, the slavery and human trafficking statement should set out what steps
organizations have taken to ensure modern slavery is not taking place in their business or supply
chains. Although the law does not prescribe any positive actions, it should allow organizations
campaigning against modern slavery to monitor the statements and name companies that are nottaking any action. As a result, companies are expected to take a broader human rights approach. As
international labor expert Steve Gibbons noted, 47 this might also involve engagement with publicbodies, other companies, trade unions, and NGOs to seek broader collaborative solutions.
Since the adoption of the Act, the ETI is actively supporting its implementation by its members throughguidance, training, workshops, and master classes.

In an environment of increasing stakeholders’ expectations and tightening regulations, collaboration canhelp companies better understand and respond to these expectations and support the development andimplementation of common policies and processes that bring positive changes and protect theirreputation. Thus, stakeholders interviewed for this research insisted that collaborative action only would
allow engineering and construction companies to provide meaningful responses to the external
expectations and lead to credible impacts on workers.

CLARIFYING COMPANIES’ COMMUNITY OF INTEREST AND
ADDRESSING OVERLAPPING CHALLENGES
Over the last few years, media articles and reports from stakeholders have highlighted the exploitative
conditions that prevail in the construction sector in the Gulf and have “named and shamed” someengineering and construction companies and their clients that are benefiting from such conditions.48 While44

www.state.gov/documents/organization/164934.pdf.

45

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/30/contents/enacted

46

www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmpublic/modernslavery/memo/ms23.htm.

47

http://ergonassociates.net/?p=1161&option=com_wordpress&Itemid=161.

48

Examples of media articles and NGOs report on Abu Dhabi Saadyiat Island www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/22/abu-dhabimigrant-workers-conditions-shame-west; Lusail Project in Qatar www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/25/revealed-qatars-worldcup-slaves; Qatar world cup infrastructures www.ituc-csi.org/IMG/pdf/the_case_against_qatar_en_web170314.pdf ,www.amnesty.org/en/documents/MDE22/010/2013/en/; construction sector in Saudi Arabia
www.amnesty.org/en/documents/ASA20/025/2014/en/ etc.

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

32

construction workers are still facing abuse and exploitation, it is important to note that many engineeringand construction companies are committed to improving workers’ conditions in their operations and to
working with partners who share their values. However, given the complexity of contractual requirements,
the scale of the abuse, and overlapping challenges faced by engineering and construction companies,
their commitments have so far had limited visibility and impacts on workers’ rights.

1.

Better implementing companies’ commitments to workers’ rights in the supply chain

All the companies interviewed for this research are keen to improve workers’ rights in their operations.
This is generally reflected in the various commitments they make with respect to human rights andworkers’ rights and to working with partners that share their values. These are materialized within their
human rights statements, workers’ welfare policies, and other supply chain codes of practice.
Despite some robust and/or detailed policies and procedures addressing workers’ rights, companies arestill struggling to implement their requirements with the subcontractors at the bottom of the supply chain.
While stakeholders insisted that companies should take full responsibility for their entire workforce,
including subcontracted workers, a business stakeholder noted that one company alone does not haveenough leverage to make a shift in its supply chain.
In recent years, outsourcing and subcontracting have significantly increased in the industry, reducing thevisibility and diluting the sense of responsibility companies have across the subcontracting chain.
Engineering companies and main contractors at the top of the chain generally have well developed
policies to tackle workers’ rights but have more limited expectations and oversight over the conditions of
their subcontractors. At their level, subcontractors have no incentives to implement better standards
because they are working under severe resource constraints and can still choose to work for companies
that are not imposing such strict expectations. This greatly limits the potential positive outcomes of thosecompanies that want to implement robust workers’ rights commitments in their supply chain.
However, engineering and construction companies often use the same subcontractors, which in turn use
the same recruitment agencies. The solution that needs to be implemented will affect each company inthe sector. Transparency in the subcontracting chain is therefore crucial in order to prevent abuse.
Working collectively, companies committed to high labor standards could better identify all subcontractors
in the supply chain, set clear business expectations, and agree on joint approaches to implementationthat would make it more difficult for subcontractors to maintain a double standard system for their clients.

2.

Pushing for workers’ rights expectations to be included in construction contracts

Engineering and construction companies’ commitments to uphold workers’ rights can be undermined byclients, in particular public entities, who sometimes have limited knowledge of the industry, poor technicalevaluation capacity, and do not include in tenders any relevant expectations outside of cost. In a highly
competitive, cost-driven bidding process, engineering and construction companies who pay less attention
to the recruitment and working and living conditions of the workers involved in their operations are likely
to develop proposals that—while responding to the technical requirements of the tenders—are cheaper
than those developed by companies upholding stronger standards for their workers and subcontracted
workers. Large engineering and construction companies upholding robust standards generally agreed
that “getting things right requires a lot of investment and there is always the threat that companies withlesser standards win the work.”

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

33

Conversely, most interviewees agreed that including specific clauses on workers’ rights in the bidding
process has very positive impacts. Such clauses not only promote a level playing field among companies
that benefits the workers involved on the projects, but they also make the implementation of workers’
rights much easier. Included in the tenders, clauses on workers’ rights ultimately form part of the contract
requirements that are closely monitored by the client. In recent years, very tangible impacts have resulted
from the incorporation of such requirements on worker accommodations. The same could be true withother issues such as the payment of fees during the recruitment process, the retention of identity papers,or the on-time payment of wages, in particular within the subcontracted chain. However, contract
requirements tend not to cover these aspects specifically nor do they require the development of a robust
mechanism to effectively monitor their enforcement in the supply chain. In addition, some abuses thatworkers might be facing, in particular during the recruitment process, are much more difficult to assess
and remediate for lack of proof that payments have been made.
In addition, in some countries such as Qatar, there are various competing standards,49 and clients may or
may not reference them in their tenders. This creates a level of uncertainty for companies bidding forthese projects as they need to benchmark their own practices against the standards included in thetenders and calibrate their proposals accordingly, absorbing the costs associated with upholding higher
workers’ standards when the tenders do not ask for them. Otherwise, they can be undercut.
In this context, collective action from companies dedicated to upholding workers’ rights in theirconstruction operations would allow them to make their commitments more visible to clients and potential
clients and collectively push for the integration of robust workers’ rights expectations in construction
contracts without undermining their commercial positions. For engineering companies that are developing
and managing projects on behalf of the clients, this would also enable them to start a constructive
dialogue with their clients and overcome potential resistance to include workers’ rights in the bidding andcontractual process.

3.

Addressing complex and systemic issues workers are facing

Finally, engineering and construction companies are often confronted by the endemic issues that workers
are facing in the Gulf countries, such as the payment of exorbitant recruitment fees; the dependency on
their employers for their regular status, which puts them at the mercy of their employers; poor living
conditions; and an unreliable wage payment system. These issues result from a series of factors that are
not necessarily in the hands of engineering and construction companies, including pervasive corruption in
the recruitment industry of the sending countries, restrictive immigration regulations in countries ofdestination (i.e., sponsorship systems), restrictions on the freedom of association and the freedom of
movement of migrant workers, and limited enforcement of labor laws by local authorities. In such context,“there are no sustainable individual solutions to tackle workers’ rights challenges,” a company noted.
Interviewees also generally agreed that meaningful and credible changes will require the collective
pressure from a group of committed companies.
This is particularly the case for tackling the challenges arising from weak recruitment practices that posecomplex challenges. There are endemic issues associated with migration corridors to the Gulf States inparticular, and “companies tend to see recruitment as being far away from their scope of responsibility[…] but if you are not paying attention to recruitment, workers are in debt bondage before they even startworking,” a stakeholder remarked. In its current form, recruitment of migrant workers sometimes involves
bilateral agreements between sending and receiving countries that cover the main conditions under which49

Qatar Foundation / Supreme Committee / Other clients standards.

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

34

workers can be recruited. However, even when they exist, these agreements are difficult to enforce andthere are many intermediaries, from both the origin and the destination countries, who require paymentsfrom workers to help facilitate the migration process and are willing to abuse workers by, for example,
extorting exorbitant fees. Individual companies can change their practices by either moving toward amore direct recruitment process or a fully employer paid recruitment process. The impact of such changes
will remain limited, and companies that adopt these changes will run the risk of not being able to compete
on costs against companies that are still relying on workers willing to pay for their recruitment.
Conversely, a group of committed companies could meaningfully engage both sending and receiving
governments as well as the recruitment industry to make the case for the development andimplementation of better practices.
In the same way, although a stakeholder noted that “companies operating in countries in total
noncompliance with ILO standards are benefiting from modern slavery, full stop,” it was generally agreed
by interviewees that companies with the intention to push for better standards are a positive presence inthese countries. However, individual companies are unlikely to be in a position to effectively lobby their
host governments (who might also be their clients) to request changes in the legislative system, and suchdiscussions could be easier coming from a group of companies representing the industry and calling forchanges from a general business perspective.
To summarize, many companies are already interested in improving worker’ rights in their operations andsupply chains and, given the type and nature of the challenges they face, their efforts could be effectively
supported through collective action.

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

35

Proposed Options for Collaboration
In this section, BSR has developed a series of recommendations that provide a baseline for discussion
among engineering and construction companies interested in setting up a collaborative initiative in theconstruction sector, and their stakeholders. To develop these recommendations, BSR used the learningand good practices from an in-depth benchmark of five successful collaborative platforms addressing
sustainability challenges of companies from various sectors. On the basis of these recommendations,
BSR is proposing a practical time-bound road map for implementation that takes into account many
practical and logistical considerations as well as the time needed to develop trust between participants
and build momentum to ensure the successful creation of a collaborative initiative.

REVIEW OF EXISTING COLLABORATIVE INITATIVES TACKLING
WORKERS AND BROADER HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES
Companies, governments, and civil society are all struggling as the problems they face outpace theircurrent ability to solve them. Sustainability issues in particular are often very complex, making individual
efforts to tackle them inadequate at best and debilitating to the cause at worst. Rather, the developmentof systemic solutions depends on the ability of individual actors to come together to share new ideas,
promote best practices, and align action for mutual benefit.
Collaboration is essential to resolving the three major features that characterize complex sustainability
issues: wide-reaching, deep-rooted, and chronic. By leveraging the competencies and resources ofmultiple stakeholders, collaborations are better suited to address wide-reaching issues compared toindividual actors. Furthermore, collaborations enable stronger alignment, either vertically within a sector
or across sectors, helping get to the root cause of the issue instead of merely the symptoms. And finally,
cooperative and concerted efforts have greater capacity for longer periods of time, helping to ensure thesolutions for chronic issues can be designed for scale and sustained impact.

1.

Defining collaboration

The United Nations definition for partnerships is generally applicable to collaborations in that they entail
participants agreeing to work together to achieve a common purpose or undertake a specific task and toshare risks, responsibilities, resources, and benefits. 50 In order for a collaboration to have its intended
impact, it should:
»
»
»
»
»

Create a shared purpose while supporting individual interests
Drive a commitment to best practices instead of setting a low bar
Leverage the strengths and skills of diversity rather than focusing on differences
Foster transparency and mutual learning rather than competitive behavior
Align incentives to integrate measurable performance rather than creating hindrances for individualand collective progress

Collaboration can take various shapes and forms that cater to different objectives and needs fromcompanies and their stakeholders. For example, a collaboration can involve a standalone structure with amembership fee, a standard, and an audit mechanism. And a collaboration can equally take the form of a
joint commitment with high level principles and a discussion platform.

50

United Nations. Guidelines on a Principle-based Approach to the Cooperation Between the United Nations and the Business
Sector. UN-Business Action Hub (2015).

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

36

In exploring these types of collaboration, it is important to understand the differentiations. BSR generallyclassifies collaborations into four broad categories:»»»»

Advocacy or Opportunity Identification
Code, Principle, or Standard Development
Discussion Platform
Norm Creation and Implementation

Each of these four categories has different drivers and outcomes. The advocacy or opportunity
identification type is most successful when the collaborators want to advance an agenda in anenvironment where “what good looks like” is uncertain. Collaborations focused on code, principle, or
standard development typically arise around emerging issues where companies face common
challenges. Discussion platforms generally take place when practitioners are isolated and seek sharedlearnings. Finally, collaborations focused on norm creation and implementation seek to develop
consistent methods and tools across an industry.

2.

Benchmark of successful company collaboration

In the absence of existing collaborative initiatives addressing workers and broader human rights in theconstruction sector, BSR reviewed a sample of five existing best practice initiatives representing different
sectors that parallel the construction industry: the Electronic Industry Citizenship Coalition (EICC), theInternational Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM), the global oil and gas industry association forenvironmental and social responsibility issues (IPIECA), the Maritime Anti-Corruption Network (MACN),
and the alliance of energy companies promoting responsible coal production (Bettercoal). The initiatives
reviewed provide insight into the range of styles, objectives, and governance structures that can be
pursued.
BSR evaluated these initiatives against several criteria in the benchmark including vision and mission,
governance structure, modus operandi, stakeholder engagement approach, and accountability
mechanisms.
As an overview, the EICC is a good example of a structured initiative that relies on the EICC Code of
Conduct and audit system. It was founded with the goal of creating an industry-wide standard on social,environmental, and ethical issues in the electronics industry supply chain. Because the EICC now
represents the entire supply chain, it has become much easier to implement the Code. It has a selfdescribed “traditional” governance structure, with a Board of Directors, secretariat, and a Senior
Executive Advisory Council.
ICMM is a CEO-led initiative that was founded in response to significant mining-sector problems in
reputation, sustaining profits, access to new assets, and maintaining investor and employee confidence.
All member companies are required to implement and measure their performance against a set of
performance standards known as the Sustainable Development Framework. The initiative is governed by
the Council of CEOs, the secretariat, and the Principal Liaisons Committee. The CEO involvement
ensures strong buy-in from the membership.
Conversely, IPIECA has no membership requirement and promotes knowledge sharing on corporatesocial responsibility issues more generally. Since IPIECA does not set standards, progress is much easierto achieve. The initiative was launched at the request of the UNEP and still serves as a channel ofBSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

37

communication between the petroleum industry and the UNEP. It is governed by a General Committee,
an Executive Committee, and a secretariat.
MACN was created through an industry interest in collaborating on anti-corruption efforts and is governedby a member-elected steering committee and the secretariat. It has expanded its efforts from developing
a set of principles to engaging with governments in collective action projects at corruption hotspots
around the world. A strong driver for the initiative has been legal compliance pressure, like the U.K.
Bribery Act. MACN also administers a self-accountability mechanism that reviews member progress on
implementation of the Anti-Corruption Principles.
Finally, Bettercoal was founded by a group of European energy companies to establish a new responsible
coal initiative. The Bettercoal Board and the secretariat led the initial development of the Bettercoal Codeand are responsible for oversight of the initiative. Initial investment and engagement from companies
allowed for the development of a large audit system developed to evaluate coal mining companies andsites against the Bettercoal Code.

3.

Key takeaways from benchmark analysis of successful collaborative initiatives

There are some common lessons to be learned from these five examples of collaborative initiatives.
»

Alignment of governance and methods are key to sustained group progress: It is establishedthat a common understanding of shared purpose is important for the creation of a collaborative
initiative. However, the coordination around the methods used to reach that purpose is often
underrated. Without a shared theory of change, a group can be subject to stagnation and lack ofconsensus. Instead, a mutual sense of what it will take to achieve the group’s goal enables thebuilding of momentum. For example, all five of the collaborative initiative case studies have achieved
a certain level of internal alignment around their theory of change, whether it’s sharing bestpractices, or advocating to governments, or holding companies accountable through audit systems.
Four of the five have developed a code or some set of standards for member implementation. The
one exception, IPIECA, does not set standards, but instead participates in UN processes and acts as
the industry’s principal channel of communication with the UN. This drives their partnerships work,
compared to other collaborative initiatives that focus more on good practice development. As acollaborative initiative is developed, each interested party may have a different idea of what the“right” theory of change may be. Thus, it is important that there is initial discussion devoted toclarifying how the group intends to reach its desired outcome. This determines where you spend
your time and resources, and is crucial to starting a collaborative initiative with a solid foundation.

»

Credibility is attained through member commitment and measurable impacts: Credibility of acollaborative initiative is reinforced by the actions of its members. Accountability measures, such as
requirements and indicators that evaluate members’ efforts, are critical to gaining internal buy-in andexternal respect. However, it should be clear that greater complexity does not entail greater
accountability. The most useful member requirements or key performance indicators will be clear,simple, and focused on driving performance. For example, the fact that ICMM is a CEO-led initiative
ensures strong buy-in from within each member company. In addition, they have robust membershipcommitments in the form of their Sustainable Development Framework, which is made up of threeelements: a set of commitments (10 principles and 6 supporting position statements), public
reporting, and independent third-party assurance. Member performance against this framework isevaluated annually and published as part of ICMM’s Annual Review. These kinds of commitments
signal to internal practitioners and external stakeholders that the member companies are serious andBSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

38

ambitious in their efforts to achieve a solution. As another example, MACN is testing the different
levels of impact of their Collective Action projects. For them, having impact measures are important
for attracting co-founders and partners. Having a structured accountability process throughmeasurable indicators reinforces the credibility of the collaborative initiative, which can result inincreased membership, greater resources and funding, opportunities for partnerships, andreputational benefits for members.
»

Stakeholder inclusivity is crucial for both assessing challenges and devising solutions: Inorder to be well positioned for meaningful impact, a collaborative initiative should prioritize engaging
key stakeholders. If the initiative is multi-stakeholder, clear decision-making boundaries will enable asmooth process. If the initiative is developed as company-only, continued dialogue and partnerships
would help inform and support the initiative’s efforts. For example, Bettercoal has formal, expert
Stakeholder Panels that review implementation and support on-the-ground efforts in coal producing
countries. Their Civil Society Panel is composed of organizations and individuals from workers’organizations, NGOs, and academia, and they consult with the Board of Directors on all criticalmatters pertaining to Bettercoal. Their Coal Supplier Panel likewise engages with the Board of
Directors to provide guidance and contribute to the development of solutions for mine improvement.
Comparatively, MACN does not formally include external stakeholders in their governance structure.
In an interview with a member of the MACN secretariat, it was noted that MACN is implementing
existing law, not creating new laws or standards, and thus has less of a need for external
stakeholders. Instead, they engage with those necessary to implementation and have direct
partnerships with local organizations for their Collective Action projects. As a collaborative initiative isdeveloped, the issue being addressed will have some impact on the level and type of stakeholder
inclusivity that the group undertakes. Some sustainability problems will require a more holistic
engagement process than others. Regardless, it is important for a new initiative to consider how
stakeholders will be engaged and make sure they are involved early to provide alternative
perspectives on the challenges and possible solutions.

»

The long-term viability of the initiative relies on its ability to evolve as the needs of the groupchange: When conceptualizing a collaboration, capacity for evolution should be built into its
structure. Strong leadership can help facilitate necessary changes, but an adaptable structure canenable proactive transitions and can smooth reactive transitions. For example, the EICC started off
committing to a theory of change around a highly structured audit program. Though this has
successfully led to the development of a common set of tools, it has also created an emphasis oncompliance and led to lessened overall impact in the long run. In 2012, members voted for a new
governance structure with a professional staff team to support a more forward-looking coalition.
Similarly, MACN has been branching out after the development of its Anti-Corruption Principles toaddress hot spots around the world with its Collective Action projects. Moving from code creation to
engagement with governments in target areas is a different way for the member companies toaddress the levels of corruption that affect their business. Realignment of a collaborative initiative’s
methods or theory of change may be necessary as the initiative grows or is impacted by external
factors. Collaborative initiatives are best able to adapt when they have a structure that can be more
flexible or expansive as needs arise.

RECOMMENDATIONSGiven companies’ expressed appetite for collaboration, BSR has developed the below recommendations
that support the setting up of a collaborative initiative in the construction sector against each of the main
components of a functioning collaborative initiative:

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

»
»
»
»

39

Vision and mission
Scope (sector, geography, and focus area)
Modus operandi (how work gets done)
Accountability (membership requirements, stakeholder engagement, measuring impacts, andreporting to public)
Governance structure (how decisions are made)Benefits for companies»»

The initiative BSR proposes reflects the needs of engineering and construction companies as well as the
expectations outlined by the stakeholders BSR interviewed. The initiative also takes into account key
lessons drawn from our analysis of good practices and challenges faced by the five collaborative
initiatives BSR benchmarked for this research (presented in section E.2—Bettercoal, EICC, IPIECA,
ICMM, and MACN).
On this basis, BSR suggests setting up an initiative that clearly focuses on promoting workers’ rights bydeveloping, sharing, and promoting guidance, good practices, and tools on recruitment and working andliving conditions of construction workers; and by supporting the improvement of working conditions in the
supply chain. In the absence of strict compliance requirements, BSR suggests that basic membership
requirements are required from participating companies from the start of the initiative and strengthened in
the future. In addition, BSR has also built into our recommendations the importance of stakeholder
representation, whether it is to improve the quality of the initiative’s outputs or enhance its credibility.
Finally, BSR proposes to give the initiative a couple of years before more strictly formalizing its
governance structure and legal status to allow for making adjustments that will guarantee its long-term
viability and relevant evolution.
For each section, BSR provides an overview of the issues at stake, an analysis of the best practices andchallenges identified among the benchmarked initiatives, as well as a transcription of the feedback BSR
received from the interviewees. On this basis, BSR developed recommendations designed to mitigate
potential challenges and support the development of positive outcomes for the initiative.

1.

Vision and Mission

A vision describes a common understanding of shared aspirations and allows alignment of the group’s
mid- to long-term goals. This vision should be combined with a mission statement that clarifies how theinitiative will work towards achieving its vision. Without a shared theory of change, a group can be subject
to stagnation and lack of consensus. Instead, a mutual sense of what it will take to achieve the group’s
goals enables the building of momentum.
Benchmarked collaborative initiatives have visions articulated around the contribution of the group ofcompanies to the general improvement of conditions (working, social, and environmental) in theiroperations and/or supply chains; and missions that detail the way they approach it.
Vision and Mission

IPIECA-

Vision: An oil and gas industry that successfully improves its operations and products to meet society’s
expectations for environmental and social performance.
Mission: IPIECA operates globally and seeks to achieve its vision by developing, sharing, and promoting
sound practices and solutions; enhancing and communicating knowledge and understanding; engaging
members and others in the industry; and working in partnership with key stakeholders

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

ICMM

-

40

Vision: Leading companies working together with others to strengthen the contribution of mining, minerals,
and metals to sustainable development.
Goals and Objectives: Working collaboratively with others to enhance the value-creation role and long-term
net contribution of the mining, minerals, and metals industry and its products to people, the environment, andeconomies.

MACN

-

Vision: A maritime industry free of corruption that enables fair trade to the benefit of society at large.
Mission: MACN and its members seek to promote good corporate practice in the maritime industry fortackling bribes, facilitation payments, and other forms of corruption by adopting the MACN Anti-Corruption
Principles; communicate progress on implementation, share best practices, and create awareness of industry
challenges; and collaborate with key stakeholders, including governments, authorities, and internationalorganizations, in markets where corruption is prevalent, to identify and mitigate the root causes of corruption in
the maritime industry.

EICC

-

Vision: A global electronics industry that creates sustainable value for workers, the environment, andbusiness.
Mission: Members, suppliers, and stakeholders collaborate to improve working and environmental conditions
through leading standards and practices.

-

Bettercoal-

Vision: A coal supply chain that respects the rights of people and the environment and contributes positively
to the social and economic livelihoods of workers, producers, and communities.
Mission: To advance the continuous improvement of corporate responsibility in the coal supply chain byimproving business practices through engagement with stakeholders and based on a shared set of standards.

During the roundtables organized by CH2M and IHRB in London in 2015, participants discussed thepositioning of a potential collaborative initiative around the promotion of workers’ rights and welfare.51 Our
research also clearly demonstrates that there was a community of interest among leading engineeringand construction companies committed to promoting workers’ rights and welfare in their operations, andto working with partners that share their values. All external stakeholders interviewed agreed with thisgeneral scope. It is also important to note that the construction sector faces specific challenges—such as
the implementation of workers’ rights and welfare within the supply chain and the subcontractors’ chain
specifically, where working conditions are often less favorable to workers—that can be meaningfullyreflected in the initiative’s vision and mission statements.
On the basis of the interviews conducted and the review of the visions and missions of the benchmarked
initiatives, BSR suggests the following:»

Vision: An engineering and construction industry that upholds and promotes the rights and welfare
of workers.

»

Mission: The initiative seeks to uphold and promote the rights and welfare of workers by developing,
sharing, and promoting guidance, best practices, and tools on the recruitment and working and living
conditions of construction workers, both within their companies and through their supply chains.

2.

Scope (Sector, Geography, and Focus Areas)

The scope of the initiative seeks to clarify which entities are the target participants to the initiative, what is
the geographical reach of the initiative, and what are the focus areas of work.
»

Sector. Interviewees generally agreed that the initiative should be primarily made up of engineeringand construction companies that are directly involved in large construction projects, irrespective ofWorkers’ rights are a group of legal rights and claimed human rights having to do with labor relations between workers and theiremployers, usually obtained under labor and employment law. The concept of worker welfare is less clear and may refer to all issues
related to the well-being and protection of workers such as standards of accommodation, quality of amenities available, healthservices, and retirement fund, etc., but it might also refer all things related to worker issues, including workers’ rights, or simply to thedevelopment of an environment for workers to have the ability to voice and address their needs and concerns.
51

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

41

the nature of the work (large real estate, public infrastructure, oil and gas, etc.). However, someinterviewees stressed the importance for the initiative to demonstrate quick progress “to catch theeyes of clients” and attract more companies. This approach, they explained, requires starting with asmall group of very committed companies—likely based in the United States, U.K., and Europe—and
then expand to additional companies, including from other geographies as well as smaller
companies, including subcontractors.
»

Geography. Interviewees all agreed that engineering and construction companies are facing similar
challenges in their operations around the world. The geographical focus of the initiative should
therefore be global. However, many interviewees also noted that the important scale of construction
projects in the Gulf countries may warrant an initiative that is relevant to the specific challenges
companies and workers are facing in this region.

»

Focus Areas. Interviewees globally agreed that the general scope of the initiative should beworkers’ rights and welfare. Within this broad scope, stakeholders interviewed and reports reviewed
have called on companies in the sector to address a broad range of issues from which three priority
areas can be determined and which correspond to priorities identified by engineering andconstruction companies.
o

Recruitment practices: This priority area covers issues such as implementing employer paid
recruitment systems; informing workers about their rights and conditions in their country oforigin; developing more direct recruitment systems; conducting due diligence on recruitment
agencies; conducting workers’ surveys; supporting the development of fair recruitment
agencies; engaging government authorities from sending and receiving countries, etc.

oWorking and living conditions: This priority area covers issues such as benchmarking existing
worker accommodation standards; working on further improvements of workers’ welfare in
the accommodation; improving access to communication and health services; providing
general and life skills training; enabling access to social and cultural activities; and promoting
workers’ freedom of movement in general.

oSupply chain improvements: This priority area covers issues such as improvement ofcompanies’ management of subcontractors’ conditions including recruitment practices; ontime payment of wages; hours, leaves, and other working conditions, through thedevelopment of contract clauses, audit mechanisms, checklists of useful documents toreview, training modules for key staff, etc.

In addition to these three obvious areas for collaboration, many of the other expectations outlined bystakeholders could be tackled collectively by companies in the sector. While some are very challenging(i.e., freedom of association or the payment of a living wage) and would require time and trust to be built
among the participants to the initiative, other are referred as “low hanging fruit” or “quick wins” that could
be easily implemented by companies and enable the initiative to show progress (i.e., safe storage forpassport to all workers, automatic granting of NOC, etc.).
On the basis of the above considerations, BSR suggests the following:»

Sectoro Start the initiative with a small group of U.S.-, U.K.-, and European-based companies that are
directly involved in large construction projects.
o In the future, consider reaching out to a larger group of engineering and construction
companies including from other geographies such as Turkey, India, China, and Korea.

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

»

»

3.

42

o In the future, consider opening membership to subcontractors.
Geographyo Keep the initiative global in its reach but focus on issues that are particularly relevant toconstruction projects in the Gulf countries.
o In the future, consider amending the geographical focus to reflect any shift in construction
activities or specific challenges faced by companies or workers in other regions.
Focus Areaso Focus on the three priority areas identified by both companies and stakeholders as key forcollaboration, namely recruitment practices, working and living conditions, and supply chain
practices.
o Ensure that any work in these focus areas responds to the relevant expectations outlined bystakeholders.
o In the next couple of years, engage with companies and stakeholders to allow the emergenceof additional priority topics for collaboration (grievance mechanism, workers’ representation,etc.).

Modus operandi (how works get done)

The operational and financial models determine the modus operandi of a collaborative initiative andshould support the objectives of the initiative.
»

Operational model. All five of the collaborative initiatives reviewed have achieved a certain level ofinternal alignment around their theory of changes with a variety of modus operandi; by enabling peer
learning and promoting the sharing of good practices through awareness briefings, case studies, andworkshops (IPIECA), toolkit development and benchmarking studies (ICMM), development of highlevel principles and tools, and sharing best practice (MACN), and/or through the development of very
structured groups with stringent membership requirements, specific standards, and mechanisms toensure their correct implementation by members.
Companies interviewed generally mentioned best practice sharing, peer learning opportunities, andtool development as the most important objectives of collaboration. While one interviewee made its
participation to a collaborative initiative subject to the absence of compliance requirements, anotherclearly advocated for the development of such requirements as well as auditable mechanisms in themid- to long-term. However, companies and stakeholders generally agreed on the importance of not
imposing too stringent of requirements at the beginning of the initiative and giving the participants anopportunity to first learn from each other by promoting peer learning, the development of guidance,
and the implementation of good practices and tools in the areas of focus of the initiative.
To conduct this work, the initiatives reviewed generally rely on a secretariat made up of an executive
director (or similar) and staff that are responsible for implementing the strategy of the initiative,
driving the initiative’s agenda, ensuring anti-trust and competition, and planning and organizing its
work. In addition, initiatives benchmarked also commonly rely on in-kind contributions from theirmembers (time commitment in particular), sometimes referred to as sweat equity. Financial
contributions may enable the secretariat to take up more of the work, thus reducing the required
sweat equity from its members. However, BSR has learned from interviews that there is an
important balance to be found to ensure that while the secretariat needs sufficient funding in order tomanage the initiative effectively and help steer direction, members’ active engagement is essential todrive the momentum and success in the longer term.

»

Financial model. Financially, all initiatives reviewed were heavily dependent on membership fees to
conduct their missions. Membership fees provide the initiatives with the funds necessary to pay forBSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

43

the secretariat, organize meetings, recruit experts to develop good practice notes, develop tools,
conduct fact-finding missions, or implement full-on audits against the initiative principles and codes.
Some initiatives also receive additional funding on an ad-hoc basis from other organizations(including multilateral funding or other donor organizations) to conduct specific work. This isparticularly feasible when the work to be conducted has a direct positive impact on a stakeholder
group that the organization invests in. Although it is clear that the recruitment of full-time staff caneffectively support the implementation of many activities and allow for quick progress on key issues,companies interviewed made it clear during the interviews that their financial contribution would be
limited. However, it is equally important to keep in mind that the funding available, as well as
members’ sweat equity, support the ambition levels of the initiative and that sustainability of theinitiative will be a factor in its capacity to levy membership fees and/or access stable funding streams
from donor organizations that support the objectives of the initiative.
On the basis of the interviews conducted and the review of the operational and financial models of thebenchmarked initiatives, BSR suggests the following:»

Operational modelo At the outset, determine an operational model for the initiative that promotes peer learning,the development of guidance, and the implementation of good practices and tools in theareas of focus of the initiative. Ensure in its design a flexibility to evolve as the initiative
matures and trust is built between members and stakeholders.
o Recruit an individual or an organization to be in charge of managing the work of the initiativein the next couple of years including: Organization and facilitation of working groups
 Member engagement
 Stakeholder outreacho Recruit experts/expert organizations needed to progress the work of the initiative in someareas (background research, benchmark reports, etc.).

»

Financial modelo Develop a mixed financial model that reflects the needed membership contributions fromcompanies (recommended US$10,000-US$15,000 per company) to ensure the basic
functioning of the initiative. In addition, seek funding from other organizations to further thework of the initiative on specific research or projects implemented by the working groups andwhere learning can be shared with a broader audience.
o Determine a level of expected nonfinancial contributions from members that includes timecommitment from company individuals as well as in-kind contributions from companies(participation in initiative’s leadership, participation in specific working groups, providing
venues for meetings, etc.).

4.

Governance structure (how decisions are made)The initiative’s statutes and governance structure clarifies how decisions are made within the initiative as
well as rules and obligations of members.
»

Legal status. To some extent, all initiatives reviewed started as informal groups of companies
committed to working together to address some complex challenge. For instance, while ICMM wasformed in 2001 to represent the world’s leading companies in the mining and metals industry and toadvance their commitment to sustainable development, its conception can be dated to two years
earlier, when the global mining firms accepted at the highest level that their sector was facingBSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

44

significant problems in maintaining reputation, sustaining profits, accessing new assets, andmaintaining investor and employee confidence. With the exception of MACN—which still operates as
an initiative run as a “working group” under the legal entity of its secretariat (BSR), despite thecomplexity of the work it undertakes—all the other initiatives are their own legal entities.
»

Leadership group (steering committee or board). Generally, the governance structure reflects thesize and level of complexity of the initiatives. However, all initiatives reviewed rely on a leadershipgroup (similar to a board) at the top, generally made up of senior company representatives, with the
exception of ICMM which is CEO-led. These leadership teams provide the initiatives the institutional
support they need for their credibility and direction on strategy and evolution, as well as ensuring agood level of ownership from the company participants, thus securing their involvement in the mid- tolong-term. The leadership groups reviewed provide strategic leadership and oversight of thefunctioning of their initiatives. They are responsible for strategic and budget planning, and generally
meet two to four times a year. It is also important that they are able to help facilitate changes toadaptation of the initiative where necessary. For smaller initiatives, leadership groups might include
representatives from all the members of the initiative. Larger initiatives are also likely to have a rangeof leadership committees in charge of advising and preparing the work for their board.

»

Working groups (task force or sub-teams). A series of working groups or other task forces are set
up to implement the leadership group’s strategic priorities and drive the work of the initiative. These
groups are generally made up of company representatives. Their chairs are designated by theleadership group or elected by the members of the group, and their work is supported by a memberof the secretariat and/or external experts. Depending on their specific objectives and budgets,working groups might meet as frequently as twice a month.

»

Membership. Finally, the initiatives reviewed give company participants (members) a formal role in
the governance structure of the initiative. The full membership usually meets formally once or twice ayear. These meetings serve to appoint the leadership group and endorse its strategic and budget
planning. Such meetings are also used to provide a forum for facilitated discussions about
challenges and opportunities, best practice sharing, and making progress on working group projects
and tools.

During the interviews conducted for this research, no specific information was collected on the preferred
governance structure—although there are sufficient learnings on setting up an initial governance structurethat is able to appropriately evolve as an initiative matures.
On the basis of the above considerations, BSR suggests the following:»»

Legal statuso Start the collaborative initiative as an informal group of companies, managed by a hired-in
secretariat function.
o Within the first two years, review the functioning of the initiative and consider setting up aformal legal entity that can be either incorporated as a private business or as a not-for-profit
organization.
Leadershipo The leadership group (i.e., Steering Committee) is made up of senior company
representatives that are elected by the members of the initiative.
o The leadership group meets on a quarterly basis to discuss strategy, budgets, working
groups, and membership expectations.

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

45

o

»

»

In two years, the leadership group structure is reviewed and adapted to the new context
before it is further formalized (i.e., Board).
Working groups
o Working groups are set up to manage the different work streams of the initiative, including
the key areas of focus (recruitment practices, supply chain management, working and living
conditions).
o Working groups’ objectives are set by the leadership group.
o Working groups are composed of company representatives, and their work is supported bysomeone from the initiative’s secretariat.
o In the future, the leadership group should consider developing additional working groups torespond to the initiative’s strategic direction (additional areas of focus or other issues
important for the progress of the initiative such as impact measurement or membership
requirements).
Membershipo Membership is open to engineering and construction companies.
o All company members meet at least annually to agree on the initiative’s budget and strategy,
and elect the leadership group of the initiative.
o In the future, the initiative should consider opening associate membership to associate
members including clients and suppliers of engineering and construction firms.
o In the future, the initiative should also consider the opportunity to open its membership tocivil society organizations.

5.

Accountability (membership requirements, stakeholder engagement, measuring
impacts, and reporting to public)»

Membership requirements. Credibility of a collaborative initiative is reinforced by the actions of its
members. Accountability measures, such as requirements and indicators that evaluate companies’
efforts to promote workers’ rights in their operations and within their subcontractors’ chains are
critical to gaining internal buy-in and external respect. As most of the external stakeholders
interviewed put it, “the initiative cannot be just a talking shop.” Real commitments have to be taken
and work commissioned.

»

Stakeholder engagement. In this context, it is crucial to set up a dialogue and seek partnerships
with the stakeholder community to help inform and support the initiative’s effort and drive meaningful
impacts. However, some companies are cautious about exposing the nascent initiative to formal
stakeholder scrutiny. The review of the benchmarked initiatives also shows that while all the
initiatives have on-going relationships with external stakeholders, only Bettercoal has stakeholder
panels—representing both the coal producers’ community and the civil society—formally included intheir governance structure. Their Civil Society Panel, for instance, is composed of organizations andindividuals from workers’ organizations, NGOs, and academia, and consults with the Board of
Directors on all critical matters pertaining to Bettercoal. During the roundtable discussion,
representatives from engineering and construction companies generally agreed that stakeholders
should be engaged within each working group at a minimum.

»

Measuring impacts. One of the most challenging areas of work for the initiatives reviewed relates to
impact measurement. With the exception of the EICC, which can report on the analysis of the audits
carried out at suppliers’ levels, initiatives generally are not measuring their impacts. IPIECA,
however, sends various surveys to its members to understand how they have taken up the guidancedeveloped by the group. MACN has established criteria to measure the impact of its in-country anticorruption projects in order to measure effectiveness and report to stakeholders. MACN has also

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

46

committed to reporting on members progress on implementing the MACN Anti-Corruption Principles
within its mission statement, which has been an effective way of ensuring that members recognize
their obligation to annually report their progress. MACN also measures members’ feedback on how
effective MACN is at supporting their progress on implementation (e.g., tools, resources, bestpractice sharing). Only a couple of companies interviewed insisted on the importance of developing
impact measurement and time-bound goals to show success. Although stakeholders generally
agreed that impact measurement is not key to the launching of an effective collaborative initiative,
this is something that participants should keep in mind from the inception because it will become
crucial to focus and professionalize the work of the initiative and bring more credibility to its work in
the future, particularly when seeking funding from multilaterals and donor organizations.
»Public reporting. While all initiatives reviewed have web pages and, to some extent, public
communication, most reporting is actually focused on the work of the initiative itself. Unless theinitiative has been set up to respond to expectations for increased transparency, only limited
information on companies’ work is made available. However, Bettercoal has strong public reporting
systems in place where members are expected to report annually against the obligations they
committed to implement as part of their membership agreement. As a result, a Members
Implementation and Reporting Obligations (MIRO) Progress and Conformity Review is publishedannually. In a similar way, a member performance table is published as part of ICMM’s Annual
Review. It is expected that MACN will publicly report members’ progress in the coming years also.

On the basis of the above considerations, BSR suggests the following:
»

»

»

»

Membership requirements
o Membership to the initiative is open to companies that have publically endorsed the visionand mission of the initiative (senior executive level), and that are committed to sharing goodpractices and implementing guidance and tools that are developed by the initiative as well as
supporting the improvements within their supply chain.
o In the future, membership requirements are strengthened and include reporting expectations
as well as a good level of transparency.
Stakeholder engagemento Consider how stakeholders will be engaged as part of the setting up of the collaborative
initiative and make sure they are involved early to provide meaningful input, as well as
alternative perspectives on the challenges and possible solutions.
o Include a form of stakeholder participation within each working group set up by the initiativeo At first, if non-business stakeholders are kept out of the governance structure of the initiative,
ensure that the initiative informs and engages them meaningfully about its work and seeks
their input and feedback on a regular basis.
o Commit to review the governance structure of the initiative within two years to consider thedevelopment of a formal stakeholder advisory panel.
Measuring impacts
o Ensure that the measurement of impacts is built into the work of the initiative from its
inception.
o Raise participants’ awareness of the importance of measuring impacts.
Reporting to public
o Consider which aspects of the work of the initiative and its participants could be used for
public reporting.

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

6.

47

Benefits for companies

Finally, the success of any collaborative initiative depends on the benefits the initiative offers to its
participants. In addition to articulating a business case that supports the setting up of the initiative (seesection above, “The Case for Collective Action”), it is important to clarify what benefits companies can
expect from their participation in the initiative. As suggested in the previous section, expected benefits will
primarily depend on the modus operandi of the initiative, which gives members opportunities to learn,collaborate, and share challenges, as well as the outputs available from the different working groups(guidance, good practices notes, benchmark reports, etc.). In addition to these obvious benefits, it isimportant to clearly articulate the less tangible benefits that might result from increased networking
opportunities with other international organizations and initiatives such as the ILO, the UN, IPIECA, orinternational civil society organizations, as well as the enhanced credibility and reputation gain that cancontribute to shielding companies from criticism and direct exposure by media and vocal stakeholders.
On the basis of the above considerations, BSR suggests the following:»

Benefit for companieso Consider developing a business case short report that details the expected benefits of joining
the initiative.

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

48

Annex 1: Table of the Proposed Options for
Collaboration
Dimension

Aspects

BSR recommendations

Vision-»An engineering and construction industry that upholds andpromotes the rights and welfare of workers.

Mission-»

The initiative seeks to uphold and promote the rights andwelfare of workers by developing, sharing, and promoting
guidance, best practices, and tools on the recruitment andworking and living conditions of construction workers, bothwithin their companies and through their supply chains.

Scope

Sector» Start the initiative with a small group of U.S./U.K./Europeanbased companies that are directly involved in large construction
projects.
» In the future, consider reaching out to a larger group ofengineering and construction companies including from othergeographies such as Turkey, India, China, and Korea.
» In the future, consider opening associate membership to
subcontractors.

Geography» Keep the initiative global in its reach, but focus on issues thatare particularly relevant to construction projects in the Gulf
countries.
» In the future, consider amending the geographical focus toreflect any shift in construction activities or specific challenges
faced by companies or workers in other regions.

Focus Areas» Focus on the three priority areas identified by both companies
and stakeholders as key for collaboration, namely recruitment
practices, working and living conditions, and supply chain
practices.
» Ensure that any work in these focus areas respond to therelevant expectations outlined by stakeholders.
» In the next couple of years, engage with companies andstakeholders to allow the emergence of additional priority topics
for collaboration (grievance mechanisms, workers’
representation etc.).

Operational
model

»

Modus
operandi»

Financialmodel»

At the outset, determine an operational model for the initiativethat promotes peer learning, the development of guidance, andthe implementation of good practices and tools in the areas offocus of the initiative. Ensure in its design a flexibility to evolveas the initiative matures and trust is built between members andstakeholders.
Recruit an individual or an organization to be in charge ofmanaging the work of the initiative in the next couple of years
including:o Organization and facilitation of working groups
o Member engagemento Stakeholder outreacho Recruitment of experts/expert organizations needed toprogress the work of the initiative in some areas(background research, benchmark reports, etc.)
Develop a mixed financial model that reflects the needed
membership contributions from companies (recommended:
US$10,000-US$15,000 per company) to ensure the basic
functioning of the initiative. In addition, seek funding from otherorganizations to further the work of the initiative on specificBSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration»

Governance

Legal status»»

research or projects implemented by the working groups andwhere learning can be shared with a broader audience.
Determine a level of expected nonfinancial contributions frommembers that includes time commitment from company
individuals as well as in-kind contributions from companies(participation in initiative’s leadership, participation in specificworking groups, providing venues for meetings, etc.).
Start the collaborative initiative as an informal group ofcompanies, managed by a hired-in secretariat function.
Within the first two years, review the functioning of the initiativeand consider setting up a formal legal entity that can be either
incorporated as a private business or as a not-for-profit
organization.

Leadership» The leadership group (i.e., Steering Committee) is made up ofsenior company representatives that are elected by themembers of the initiative.
» The leadership group meets on a quarterly basis to discuss
strategy, budgets, working groups, and membershipexpectations.
» In two years, the leadership group structure is reviewed andadapted to the new context before it is further formalized (i.e.,
Board).

Workinggroups

»»»»Accountability

49

Working groups are set up to manage the different work
streams of the initiative, including the key areas of focus(recruitment practices, supply chain management, working andliving conditions).
Working groups’ objectives are set by the leadership group.
Working groups are composed of companies’ representatives,
and their work is supported by someone from the initiative’s
secretariat.
In the future, the leadership group should consider developing
additional working groups to respond to the initiative’s strategic
direction (additional areas of focus or other issues important forthe progress of the initiative such as impact measurement or
membership requirements).

Membership» Membership is open to engineering and construction
companies.
» All company members meet at least annually to agree on theinitiative’s budget and strategy, and elect the leadership groupof the initiative.
» In the future, the initiative should consider opening membershipto associate members including clients and suppliers ofengineering and construction firms.
» In the future, the initiative should also consider the opportunity
to open its membership to civil society organizations.

Membership
requirements»

Stakeholder
engagement» Consider how stakeholders will be engaged as part of thesetting up of the collaborative initiative and make sure they are
involved early to provide meaningful input, as well as alternative
perspectives on the challenges and possible solutions.
» Include a form of stakeholder participation within each working
group set up by the initiative

Membership to the initiative is open to companies that havepublically endorsed the vision and mission of the initiative(senior executive level), and that are committed to sharing goodpractices and implementing guidance and tools that aredeveloped by the initiative as well as supporting theimprovements within their supply chain.
» In the future, membership requirements are strengthened andinclude reporting expectations as well as a good level oftransparency.

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

50»

At first, if non-business stakeholders are kept out of thegovernance structure of the initiative, ensure that the initiative
informs and engages them meaningfully about its work andseeks their input and feedback on a regular basis.
» Commit to review the governance structure of the initiative
within two years to consider the development of a formal
stakeholder advisory panel.

Benefits forcompanies

Measuring
impacts» Ensure that the measurement of impacts is built into the work of
the initiative from its inception.
» Raise participants’ awareness of the importance of measuring
impacts.

Reporting to
public» Consider which aspects of the work of the initiative and its
participants could be used for public reporting.

-» Consider developing a business case short report that details
the expected benefits of joining the initiative.

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

51











NardelloTrain relevant staff on workers’ rights

DLA Piper

Publicly report on measures implemented

BWI



ITUC



TUAC

ILO



UN RapporteurInternational
HRW

Publicly commit to respect workers’ rights

EAP

AmnestyAnnex 2: Civil Society’s Expectations on
Engineering and Construction CompaniesTrain migrant workers on their rights
MIGRATION & RECRUITMENT
Blacklist non-ethical recruitment companies



Inform migrant workers on conditions/translate their contracts



Reimburse recruitment feesKeep passport available/provide safe storage facilities


















Use the International Recruitment Integrity System (IRIS)

Provide and renew ID cards in due time







Ensure wage levels consistent across nationalities







Bargain in good faith with workers’ representatives







Systematically grant NOC/Exit visa







WORKING CONDITIONS
Promote electronic payment of wages



Set up mandatory OHS committees with workers’ representatives



LIVING CONDITIONSProvide adequate housing facilitiesAppoint workers’ welfare officers

Comply with national and international standards
Provide health insurance coverage at no cost for all workers

Provide health education and raise awareness on HIV

SUBCONTRACTORS’ PRACTICES
Conduct accommodation and administrative auditsAssess contractors’ compliance during bidding processes
Add clauses on migrant rights in contracts

Apply penalties/termination in case of noncompliance

Set up independent monitoring of workers’ conditions

Set up due diligence mechanisms to identify high risks of abuses







Conduct regular workers’ interviews to identify abuses









Implement reserve funds/escrow monitored by a third party

Establish labor guidelines for all employees

Require transparency on practices during the selection process

ACCESS TO REMEDY
Implement grievance mechanism available for all workers









Promote effective labor dispute and court systemImplement fast-track procedure for major complaints
BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

52

Key media headlines and reports calling on companies to improve migrant workers’ rights in Gulf
countries
2016 Verité, An Exploratory Study on the Role of Corruption in International Labor Migration
In this report, Verité examines three illustrative transnational migrant worker recruitment corridors—
including Nepal to Qatar—to identify the points in the recruitment process where bribes or illicit
payments are solicited and paid; the entities implicated; the range and nature of such payments; andthe corresponding benefit that accrues to the employers of migrant workers. Verité highlights theresultant fee burden borne by migrants in each of the recruitment corridors. The report urges
companies to consider corruption embedded in recruitment processes as a serious risk and to tackle
this challenge across their labor supply chain.
 Amnesty International, The Ugly Side of the Beautiful Game: Exploitation of Migrant Workers on a
Qatar 2022 World Cup Site
This reports details human rights violations and exploitative practices related to the Khalifa
International Stadium and the surrounding Aspire Zone, one of the main venues for the 2022 World
Cup. Amnesty specifically mentions that companies must address deception in the recruitment
process by engaging directly with the recruitment agents they use.

2015

 ITUC, Frontlines Report 2015, Qatar: Profit and Loss—Counting the Cost of Modern Day Slavery in
Qatar: What Price Is Freedom?
This report released on International Migrants Day criticizes Qatar for failing to deliver changes tolabor rights or compliance, and warns construction companies, hotels, retail chains, and U.K. and
U.S. universities about the cost of doing business in a slave state. The report demands thatcompanies afford workers in Qatar treatment which is equal to what they would provide in their homenations and insists on the following: Kafala systems and exit visa, workers’ representation andcollective bargaining rights, direct employment or use of large reputable recruitment companies, andnational minimum wage.
 Nardello & Co., Report of the Independent Investigator into Allegations of Labor and Compliance
Issues During the Construction of the NYU Abu Dhabi Campus on Saadiyat Island, UAE
In this report, the investigation firm shares what they learned about how workers involved in theconstruction of the NYU Abu Dhabi complex have been treated and their evaluation of the monitoring
system that had been implemented to protect migrant workers on this project. It also provides verypractical recommendations for companies to better control potential negative impacts across thewhole value chain: ensure that all workers benefit from the labor guidelines when those are set up;
establish an escrow account under the control of the compliance monitor; simplify the compliancemonitoring regime; establish and enforce strict penalties for compliance violations and make thepenalties public; publicly acknowledge enforcement policies; and hire an independent compliancemonitor.
 Human Rights Watch, Guidelines for a Better Construction Industry in the GCC: A Code of Conduct
for Construction Companies
In this report, HRW shares specific practices that companies should implement to improve migrant
workers’ conditions, focusing on the following four topics: employment and contracting; health, safety
and living conditions; monitoring, enforcement, and reporting; and solving labor disputes.

2014

 BWI, Decent Work for Migrant Workers in Qatar—The Role of Construction Companies in Qatar
This report highlights 11 key areas that construction companies need to address to ensure decent
work for migrant workers in Qatar: Kafala and exit visa-system; respect, dignity, and equality for
migrant workers; occupational health and safety measures in line with International Convention
standards; workers’ rights to organize and collective bargaining; joint liability of principal andsubcontractors and employment relationship; regulate recruitment agencies to prevent exploitation;
conduct effective, independent, and legally binding labor inspections; ensure effective labor disputeand court system; employment contracts; living wage; and safe and decent accommodations.
 ITUC, The Case Against Qatar
The report demands that companies afford workers in Qatar treatment which is equal to what theywould provide in their home nations and insists on the following: Kafala systems and exit visa,
workers’ representation and collective bargaining rights, direct employment or use of large reputable

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

53

recruitment companies, and national minimum wage. In the appendices section, the report includes
sample contracts provisions for Qatar 2022 contractors, written in 2012 by Human Rights Watch andthe ITUC covering the above aspects.
 Engineers Against Poverty, Improving Employment Standards in Construction in Qatar
This report presents the findings of EAP’s discussions with construction industry stakeholders in
Qatar in 2013. It recommends steps that the industry itself could take to address the main problems
workers are facing including with respect to their accommodation, recruitment, and payment ofwages. According to EAP: All public-sector clients should set up workers’ welfare department toundertake regular welfare audits of contractors and subcontractors and aim to work only with
contractors who comply with the Qatar Foundation Standards; all public sector clients should
investigate measures to improve the flow of funds down the subcontracting chain and consider
contract clauses requiring principal contractors to pay the workers employed by subcontractors if they
have not been paid; principal contractors should be required to set up a “hotline” for workers to alert
all stakeholders of delayed payment of wages by subcontractors; payment of workers’ wages throughelectronic bank transfer should be mandatory because this would provide workers with the evidence
needed to prove that they have not been paid and allow them to seek redress.
 DLA Piper, Migrant Labor in the Construction Sector in the State of Qatar
This report was commissioned by the government of Qatar to examine the state of affairs of Qatar’s
growing blue-collar workforce, following intense media coverage of various abuses. It covers
comprehensively all aspects of workers’ conditions, with recommendations for the State of Qatar andthe private sector on: recruitment; Kafala sponsorship system; contract misrepresentation andsubstitution; wages; health and safety; accommodation; inspections; freedom of association andcollective bargaining; access to justice.
 OHCR, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Migrants
The report notes that the private sector can play an important role in ending the abuse andexploitation of migrants in Qatar. This includes ending practices such as contract substitution, theconfiscation of passports, not providing identity cards, not paying employees on time, and inadequate
working and living conditions. On this basis, the UN Special Rapporteur recommends that the private
sector implement the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights; ensure that international
human rights and labor standards are respected for all persons working on their projects andthroughout the company’s value chain; integrate binding commitments to respect the rights of
migrants in contracts with suppliers, contractors, and business partners and put in place robust
systems for the oversight of suppliers and subcontractors at all levels; ensure that the migrants theyhire do not pay recruitment fees in their home countries; ensure that contracts signed by workers intheir home countries are respected and that the work they perform is in accordance with thosecontracts; provide adequate accommodation for their workers.
 TUAC, Qatar: Implementing the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises
This report submitted by the Trade Union Advisory Committee to the OECD (TUAC) calls forgovernment action to address the violations of the OECD Guidelines in Qatar. The report notes thatmultinational enterprises should develop plans to ensure that workers are in possession of their
passports at all times; workers are provided with the terms and conditions of employment offered at
the moment they accepted employment in Qatar; workers are paid the same wage rate per job;
recruitment fees paid by the worker are reimbursed; workers receive expeditiously a “No Objection
Certificate” (NOC) letter and/or exit visa if they want to change employer or leave the country; workers
have a right to form a representative workers’ organization; worker accommodation is compliant withnational and international standards.
2013

 Amnesty International, Qatar: The Dark Side of Migration Spotlight on Qatar's Construction Sector
Ahead of the World Cup
This report presents the conclusions of workers’ interviews conducted by Amnesty International
researchers in Qatar and solutions proposed by Amnesty International to improve workers conditions.
It urges companies employing migrant workers in Qatar to make public commitments to respecthuman rights, review their practices to ensure that they do not commit (directly or indirectly) humanrights abuses, comply with Qatari and international regulations, respect workers’ freedom of
movement, allow workers to move to other employers, and ensure sufficient reserve funds to be able
to pay wages in time. For large companies, the report also recommends that they conduct proper
human rights due diligence across their supply chains and with their contractors and implement

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration54

effective grievance mechanisms and effective remedy for their contractor workers, and that they
publicly disclose actions taken to prevent negative human rights impacts.
2012

 Human Rights Watch, Building a Better World Cup
This report documents exploitation and abuse of workers in Qatar’s construction industry andgovernment’s failure to enforce laws that could protect worker rights. It examines why violations ofworkers’ rights go largely undetected and looks at the barriers that workers face in reporting
complaints or seeking redress. Human Rights Watch strongly encourages all companies in thatindustry to publicly pledge to respect the rights of all workers associated with their projects and toundertake concrete measures to prevent, mitigate, and address abuses of worker rights. Specifically,
the report calls on companies to take all possible steps to ensure no workers have paid fees
associated with their recruitment and to commit to reimbursing workers who have paid any such feesin contravention of local law, including if the fees were paid to labor agencies or other intermediaries;
to strictly prohibit the retention of workers’ passports or other identity documents, including by
subcontractors or intermediaries, and ensure that safe storage facilities where they can access such
documents are made available; and to ensure that all workers receive and sign enforceable
employment contracts in a language that they understand prior to their migration.

2009

 Human Rights Watch, UAE: Exploited Workers Building ‘Island of Happiness’
This report examines abuses that migrant workers are facing in the UAE and warns the Guggenheim,
New York University, and the French Museum Agency (responsible for the Louvre Abu Dhabi
projects) about risks of forced labor in the country where they have initiated important construction
projects. The report also makes recommendations to construction companies and other companies
employing migrant workers including: make public any guarantees and protections given or sought
and obtained from subcontractors to protect the rights of workers in the UAE; penalize and terminate
relationships with any labor agencies or subagencies that charge workers fees and/or mislead
workers regarding conditions of employment upon arrival in the UAE; ensure that workers haveaccess to governmental grievance mechanisms and that workers are clearly instructed about theirright to file complaints without fear of reprisal; ensure that workers are informed of their rights under
UAE law, including rights to overtime rates, minimum numbers of days off and holidays, and extra
compensation; consider joining the UN Global Compact and implementing measures to ensure work
conforms to the human rights and labor law based “principles” contained therein.

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

55

Annex 3: List of Key Desktop Resources
Analyzed
2016»»

Verité, An Exploratory Study on the Role of Corruption in International Labor Migration
Amnesty International, The Ugly Side of the Beautiful Game: Exploitation of MigrantWorkers on a Qatar 2022 World Cup Site

2015

»

Amnesty International, Qatar: Promising Little, Delivering Less—Qatar and MigrantLabour Abuse Ahead of the 2022 Football World Cup
ILO, Good Practices and Challenges in Promoting Decent Work in Construction
ITUC, Frontlines Report 2015, Qatar: Profit and Loss—Counting the Cost of Modern Day
Slavery in Qatar: What Price Is Freedom?
Nardello & Co., Report of the Independent Investigator into Allegations of Labor andCompliance Issues During the Construction of the NYU Abu Dhabi Campus on Saadiyat
Island, UAE
CIOB, Modern Slavery: The Dark Side of Migration
Human Rights Watch, Guidelines for a Better Construction Industry in the GCC: A Codeof Conduct for Construction Companies
Amnesty International, Exploited Dreams: Dispatches from Indian Migrant Workers in
Saudi Arabia
BWI, Decent Work For Migrant Workers in Qatar—The Role of Construction Companies
in Qatar
ITUC, The Case Against Qatar
Engineers Against Poverty, Improving Employment Standards in Construction in Qatar
DLA Piper, Migrant Labour in the Construction Sector in the State of Qatar
ILO, Realizing a Fair Migration Agenda: Labour Flows Between Asia and the Arab States
Experts Meeting (background paper for discussion)
OHCR, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights Migrants
TUAC, Qatar: Implementing the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises
PwC, Tourism Development and Investment Company (TDIC) Employment Practices
Policy (EPP) Compliance Monitoring Report
Amnesty International, Qatar: The Dark Side of Migration: Spotlight on Qatar's
Construction Sector Ahead of the World Cup
The Guardian, Revealed: Qatar's World Cup 'Slaves'
ILO, Tricked and Trapped: Human Trafficking in the Middle East

»
»
»

»
»
2014

»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»

2013

»
»
»

BSR | Addressing Workers’ Rights in the Engineering and Construction Sector: Opportunities for Collaboration

About BSR
BSR is a global nonprofit organization that works with its network of more than
250 member companies to build a just and sustainable world. From its officesin Asia, Europe, and North America, BSR develops sustainable businessstrategies and solutions through consulting, research, and cross-sector
collaboration. Visit www.bsr.org for more information about BSR’s more than
20 years of leadership in sustainability.

www.bsr.org

56