Tag Archives: Bangladesh Centre for Worker Solidarity (BCWS)

Kalpona Akter calls on Wal-Mart shareholders to stand-up for garment workers internationally

This past Friday, Kalpona Akter, of the Bangladesh Center for Worker Solidarity (BCWS), addressed Wal-Mart shareholders at their annual meeting to present the NYC Pension Funds’ shareholder proposal for Wal-Mart Supplier Human and Workers’ Rights Reporting, with the support of New York City Comptroller John C. Liu.

You can listen in on her empowered speech here (you’ll have to move ahead in the video—she addresses the shareholders from 2:14:30 – 2:19:22). You can also hear from Akter in a recent interview on Free Speech Radio News.

As we have reported, Akter is facing a potential life sentence, even possibly the death penalty, on what she says are fabricated charges from an alleged Wal-Mart subcontractor, among others.

Why is Wal-Mart such a big player to have on board in the struggle for decent work in Bangladesh? According to Akter, 12-15% of garments made in the country are produced for Wal-Mart. What’s more, of the 11 cases filed against labour activists as a result of the large-scale protests last year, 4 have allegedly come from a Wal-Mart subcontractor.

The New York Times reports that the Pension Funds’ shareholder “proposal states that there is a ‘significant gap between general policies against labor and human rights abuse and more detailed standards and enforcement mechanisms required to carry them out.’

It asks vendors to publish yearly reports that ‘include the supplier’s objective assessments and measurements of performance on workplace safety, and human and worker rights, using internationally recognized standards, indicators and measurement protocols.’ (New York Times)

Wal-Mart’s initial response claimed that such a policy would threaten access to certain products, acknowledging the difficulty in convincing their suppliers to get on board. “The company contends that even if it could enforce such a plan, to do so might threaten the availability of certain products from those who did not comply.” (New York Times)