Editorial: ‘due diligence’ and a changing regulatory landscape

A long and winding path has led from 1976 when, as Nilsson reports for this edition of IUR, the OECD became “the first international organisation to adopt guidelines for multinational enterprises on responsible business conduct”. It was quite some time later when the UN Sub-Commission on Human Rights started work to draft a set of international principles specifically focussed on ‘human rights’ impacts of multinationals, culminating in 2003 with the publication of the Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises with regard to Human Rights.

This path has taken us, in the late 2000s, through Professor John Ruggie’s framework and the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, which began well enough (but soon shifted the focus away from binding legal responsibilities and towards an emphasis on the ‘voluntary’ activity of ‘due diligence’). And it led most recently into the campaign for a ‘legally binding treaty’, which is now the remit of a UN Working Group. In the current process, the importance of ‘non-voluntary’ approaches, characterised as ‘binding due diligence’, have been returned to the fore, and with it a renewed sense that the treaty might actually deliver.

When the ‘treaty’ campaign began, Schroter reminds us in this edition of IUR, it was originally a project backed by countries in the Global South and resisted by countries in the Global North, which “hosts most multinational companies”. This has changed. Not only did the Global North get ‘on board’ with the treaty proposal, but European countries began enthusiastically to take up the call for ‘binding due diligence’. As Hoffman reports, this began to be cemented “in 2017 with the adoption of the “Loi de Vigilance” in France … followed by the German Supply Chain Act in 2023, and the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive in 2024”. And they are not alone, “other countries are taking steps to codify at least some elements of the Principles”.

We open this edition of IUR with three contributions that discuss how this framework has been developing and converging around this concept of ‘binding due diligence’, to ask what ‘binding due diligence’ frameworks offer to trade unionists, to understand how trade unions can participate, and to look at what the frameworks might allow unions to accomplish.

But ‘due diligence’ is not the only development to which we turn our attentions. We welcome to this edition Smythe’s commentary on how the European Works Councils system functions in practice, on what makes the EWC Directive “a critical instrument for promoting social dialogue and democracy at work”, and we consider what trade union demands are being put forward for the proposed revision of the Directive.

Meanwhile, of profound importance for the future of work is the explosive growth of the platform sector. Sometimes referred to as the ‘Wild West’ of modern employment, this new style of work has presented a challenge to traditional employment law and to union organising alike, prompting a great deal of reflection, but so far finding few concrete solutions. With hopes pinned on the ILO for a possible solution, Thomas explains exactly what is taking place within the ILO in terms of a process to negotiate an international legal instrument for the sector. Also in the platform sector, China’s ACFTU reports remarkable success by adopting a ‘service provision’ approach, and IUR takes a look at how this approach allowed the union to connect with platform workers.

Also in this edition, UNI’s Bergfeld returns to IUR to share with us news of how Europe-wide labour shortages (a problem reported in numerous sectors) have helped cleaners and their unions muster the bargaining power to begin implementing a switch away from night work towards day time cleaning in commercial offices, and finds that the switch can be a “triple-win” for workers, for companies, and for the environment. And finally, the new Labour Government in the UK has wasted no time in introducing a major employment law reform Bill. IUR looks at what the Bill means for workers and trade unions.

Daniel Blackburn, Editor

● Get full access to IUR journal

IUR journal brings together the latest news, views and information on trade union rights worldwide, covering key issues from varied perspectives. IUR has an accessible format that is appreciated around the world by an audience of trade unionists, legal practitioners and academics. The journal is available in print and digital formats, with an online archive dating back to 1993.

Previous editions:

Corporate legal accountability: what emerging laws on
human rights due diligence mean for trade unions
Christy Hoffman

The growing interest in due diligence as an instrument
for improving workers’ rights and working conditions
Veronica Nilsson and Bianca Cuciniello

Addressing the power imbalance: Making human rights
and environmental due diligence laws effective
Luise Schroter

30 years on, where do European
Works Councils stand?
Agathe Smyth

ICTUR in Action: Interventions
Colombia, Guatemala, India, Mexico,
Panama, Philippines, Tunisia, Turkey

Invisible labour, daytime cleaning,
and the fight for justice
Mark Bergfeld

The fight for a new labour standard
to regulate platform work
Huw Thomas

UK Labour Law Reform: the
Employment Rights Bill 2024
Daniel Blackburn

ACFTU’s strategies for reaching
outdoor and platform workers
Daniel Blackburn

Worldwide (union / labour news)
Amazon, Business and human rights treaty, Chile, EU: Minimum
Wage Directive, Palestine: ILO, Philippines, Platform workers:
Singapore, Right to strike: resource centre, Right to strike: UK
position changes, Saudi Arabia, Spain: Global Charter of Labour
Rights, Supply chain “de-risking”, US

● Get full access to IUR journal