The term “forced labour” is defined in the ILO Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) as any work or service that is exacted from any person under the menace or threat of a penalty, and which the person has not entered into of their own free will. Three elements of forced or compulsory labour are considered below:

• Work or service should be distinguished from “education or training”. The principle of compulsory education is recognized in various international instruments as a means of securing the right to education. This includes a compulsory scheme of vocational training, which does not constitute forced labour. With regards to work or service, this includes all types of work and employment, regardless of the industry or sector within which it is found, including the informal sector.
• Threat of penalty should be understood in a broad sense. It covers penal sanctions, as well as various forms of coercion, such as arrest or jail, refusal to pay wages or forbidding a worker from travelling freely. Threats of retaliation can take different forms, including the threat or use of violence, physical obligations or even death threats, to psychological threats, such as denouncing an illegal worker to the authorities. The penalty might also take the form of a loss of rights or privileges.
• Work or service is undertaken involuntarily. Involuntariness refers to the notion of consent, which is the key element. Free and informed consent must exist throughout the labour relationship and the worker must be able to withdraw their consent at any time. Involuntary work involves external and indirect pressures, such as partially withholding a worker’s salary as a condition of a loan repayment, the absence of wages or remuneration, or the seizure of the worker’s identity documents. Workers may also find themselves in the situation of forced labour because of fraudulent, deceptive employment practices, where workers (often migrant) are hired for a specific job and terms (voluntarily) but are then forced to do a different job, under exploitative conditions (involuntarily).

The hidden nature of forced labour and its many forms can add to the difficulty that companies face in addressing this issue. Forced labour can take several different forms, including the following:

• Debt bondage, which occurs where a worker is either forced to work for little or nothing in order to repay a debt (either their own debt or that of another) or is forced into debt in order to access work. The former is straightforwardly understood as a matter of forced labour, the latter may not be so obvious. It is common in some parts of the world for recruitment agents to charge migrant workers large fees in order to obtain work overseas. These fees are often set at illegally high levels and are a form of extortion of already vulnerable people. The issue of excessive recruitment fees has received considerable focus in the last 10-15 years and it is now a recognised marker of modern slavery. In some countries and for some roles, fees can be more than $5,000. Most workers cannot afford to pay such fees from their own or their family’s resources so they may take on debt from informal money lenders at high rates of interest. The resulting fees and interest payments can take a large percentage of the worker’s pay for months or years into their employment.
  • This form of debt bondage also acts as a lever to facilitate further labour rights abuses, such as wage theft, contract substitution, poor housing and physical or sexual abuse as the worker cannot afford to lose their job and risk defaulting on their loan. The ‘employer pays’ model has been promoted by the ILO and others to ensure that the costs of recruitment and deployment are absorbed by employers, so that migrant and other vulnerable workers are not forced into debt during their search for work. See the IHRB ‘Employer Pays’ campaign for more information.
• Compulsory work occurs where people are legally required, often by the Government, to work on certain projects, and it is prohibited under the ILO Convention No. 105. This includes the use of forced labour as a punishment for the expression of political views, for the purposes of economic development, as a means of labour discipline, as a punishment for participation in strikes and as a means of racial, religious or other discrimination.
• Prison labour constitutes forced labour when undertaken for private entities without the free and informed consent of the prisoner and when the conditions of work do not approximate those of a free labour relationship. For instance, prisoners engaging in such work receive little or no compensation or are unable to withdraw their consent at any time. ILO Convention No. 105 prohibits the use of compulsory prison labour. Individuals in this category may include prisoners of conscience or prisoners being “re-educated” to manufacture garments or components for electronic goods.
• Human trafficking occurs when people are moved from one location to another (often across borders) to be exploited either sexually or for their labour. Once they are away from their families and support networks, victims are highly vulnerable and may find themselves forced to work in conditions to which they had not consented or working in a completely different job or with altered contract terms.

According to the ILO, indicators that can help identify persons who are possibly trapped in a forced labour situation and who may require urgent assistance include:

• Abuse of vulnerability
• Deception
• Restriction of movement
• Isolation
• Physical and sexual violence
• Intimidation and threats
• Retention of identity documents
• Withholding of wages
• Debt bondage
• Abusive working and living conditions
• Excessive overtime

The presence of a single indicator in a given situation may in some cases imply the existence of forced labour. However, in other cases, businesses may need to look for several indicators which, taken together, point to a forced labour case.

Two ILO conventions and one protocol form the international legal framework on the prohibition of forced labour and are used by most countries as guidance to their own national laws. These instruments define the conditions and circumstances that amount to forced labour and serve as a point of reference for national legislation that conforms to international standards. The elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labour is one of the ILO’s five fundamental rights and principles at work, which member states have to promote regardless of whether they have ratified the respective conventions.

• ILO Forced Labour Convention, No. 29 (1930): The convention sets the general obligation to suppress the use of forced labour in all its forms and provides the definition of forced labour.
• ILO Convention on the Abolition of Forced Labour, No. 105 (1957): The convention prohibits certain forms of forced labour that were allowed under the ILO Convention No. 29, including punishment for strikes and holding particular political views.
• ILO Protocol of 2014 to the Forced Labour Convention, No. 29 (2014): The Protocol supplements Convention No. 29 to address implementation gaps to effectively eradicate forced labour.

In March 2021, the 50 for Freedom campaign, led by the ILO, ITUC and IOE, met its goal of having 50 countries ratify the Protocol. The Protocol encourages Governments to support due diligence by public and private sectors to prevent forced labour. The Protocol is of particular relevance for businesses since it contains specific provisions referring to enterprises and employers. For example, Article 2 on prevention measures refers to:

• “Educating and informing employers, in order to prevent their becoming involved in forced or compulsory labour practices”; and
• “Supporting due diligence by both the public and private sectors to prevent and respond to risks of forced or compulsory labour”.

ILO instruments on forced labour are almost universally ratified. The ILO supervisory bodies, especially the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations (CEACR) and the Committee on the Application of Standards (CAS), regularly assess the manner in which ratifying States implement their obligations under these conventions.

However, ratification does not guarantee that these countries are free from forced labour, as the existence and enforcement of national laws to address forced labour varies. In due diligence, it is, therefore, important to check the ratification status for particular countries as an indicator of potentially more limited state protections against forced labour.

The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) set the global standard regarding the responsibility of business to respect human rights in their operations and across their value chains. The Guiding Principles call upon States to consider a smart mix of measures — national and international, mandatory and voluntary — to foster business respect for human rights.

The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises are also a useful and authoritative source of human rights and sustainability best practice for organisations. They were updated in 2023 to respond to urgent social, environmental and technological issues businesses and societies are facing.

Companies are increasingly subject to non-financial reporting and due diligence obligations in the jurisdictions in which they operate, which often include disclosures on their performance. There are several high-profile examples of national legislation that specifically mandate human rights-related reporting and other positive legal duties, including the United Kingdom Modern Slavery Act 2015, Australian Modern Slavery Act 2018, the California Transparency in Supply Chains Act 2010, the French Corporate Duty of Vigilance Law 2017, German Act on Corporate Due Diligence Obligations in Supply Chains 2021 and the Norwegian Transparency Act 2022.

Also, in 2021 the Netherlands submitted a Bill for Responsible and Sustainable International Business Conduct, and the European Commission announced its Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD). This Directive is likely to come into force between 2025 and 2027 and will make human rights and environmental due diligence mandatory for larger companies.

In September 2022 the EU Commission also announced the introduction of a Forced Labour Ban, which aims to ensure that products made with forced labour are kept out of the EU single market. These mandatory due diligence and disclosure laws require companies to publicly communicate their efforts to address actual and potential human rights impacts, including forced labour. Failure to comply with these obligations could involve significant legal risk for companies.

The prevention of forced labour requires an understanding of its underlying causes and the consideration of a wide range of issues, from poor legal protections to restriction of movement.

Key risk factors include:

• Inadequate legal framework offering a poor standard of legal protection against forced labour. A lack of strong laws against forced labour or inadequate criminal sanctions can result in a lack of deterrence.
• Poor enforcement of domestic labour laws as a result of inadequate training, an under-resourced labour inspectorate or high levels of corruption.
• High levels of poverty, inequality and unemployment, particularly in countries where the informal economy constitutes a high percentage of the overall workforce. Where there is a lack of State support or formal contracts enshrining workplace rights, workers face greater vulnerability to poor working conditions that may amount to forced labour.
• High levels of migration, particularly of low-skilled and low-paid labour, exacerbates the likelihood of forced labour and other labour rights violations (see Migrant Workers issue). Migrants make up a much larger proportion of those subject to forced labour in specific sectors and locations. Undocumented migrants or those who have their legal employment status tied to their employer under sponsorship visa programmes may be unwilling to report labour rights violations or may be unable to leave or return home without the explicit permission of the sponsor.
• Lack of understanding of what constitutes forced labour among workers. Migrant workers, in particular those who may not speak the local language or be aware of their rights under the law, are more vulnerable to exploitation by third-party agencies or employers. This puts them at a greater risk of practices that could constitute conditions amounting to forced labour, such as being subject to excessive recruitment fees or having their identity documents retained.
• The use of recruitment agencies and other labour intermediaries raises the risk of labour rights violations. The most common violation is the charging of excessively high recruitment fees that leave migrant workers in substantial debt leading to conditions amounting to forced labour or debt bondage.
• Unskilled or low-skilled work where the barriers to entry are low may lead to a higher risk of exposure to forced labour. This includes what is often known as “3D”, or “dirty, difficult and dangerous” jobs. Industries that have low barriers to entry may be at a greater risk of trafficking. While low wages are not necessarily linked to trafficking, pressure to keep labour costs low creates a “race to the bottom”, which in turn may be associated with exploitative working conditions that amount to forced labour.

While forced labour is present in many industries, the 2022 ILO report suggests that the sectors where it is most prevalent include; services, construction, agriculture, domestic work and manufacturing. To identify potential forced labour risks for other industries, companies can access the CSR Risk Check.

The construction industry is estimated to be responsible for 16.3% of identified forced labour exploitation cases as of 2022 (ILO). Male victims make up most cases in the construction industry, at 86%. Construction is a rapidly growing industry, and the proliferation of third-party recruitment agencies increases the risk of workers, the majority of whom are migrants, to excessive recruitment fees. High levels of debt to such agencies leave workers in a position of debt bondage. For example, migrant workers in the United Arab Emirates are reported to have paid more than five months of wages in recruitment fees.

Construction-specific risk factors include the following:

• Dangerous working conditions: Working conditions are notoriously demanding and dangerous, with high levels of industrial accidents. Workers employed under forced labour conditions are more vulnerable to being coerced into working in unsafe conditions that disregard occupational safety and health.
• Project complexity: The complexity of construction projects exacerbates the risks of workers being subject to late or non-payment of wages, thus increasing their vulnerability and opportunity for abuse. Construction projects may involve hundreds of subcontractors, including labour agencies, with frequently changing workers. In many instances, contractors are not obliged to pay subcontractors until they have received payment from the client.
• Remote worksites: Construction worksites may be remote or difficult to reach, which puts workers under greater control of their employers. Workers may face greater restrictions on movement and may be unable to seek assistance if they are subject to forced labour.

The electronics manufacturing industry poses forced labour risks, with major electronics, telecommunications and technology brands facing forced labour allegations. The 2022 findings of a benchmarking report by KnowTheChain found that despite increased profits during the pandemic, the vast majority of ICT companies scored poorly in their efforts to address labour rights abuses in their supply chains. Companies received a median score of just 14/100, demonstrating the continued poor progress shown in previous years’ reports.

Industry-specific risk factors include the following:

• • China and Malaysia: The US Department of Labor’s 2022 report suggests that electronics produced in China and Malaysia have been found to be linked to forced labour. Migrant workers, particularly in Malaysia, are subject to excessive recruitment fees, which often plunge them into debt bondage even before the start of employment.
  • Job competition: Competition for jobs in the industry can be strong, particularly with respect to famous brands. This can result in workers working excessive hours without adequate rest. Combined with underpayment or non-payment of already low wages and excessive recruitment fees, workers may find themselves in working conditions amounting to debt bondage or forced labour.
  • Internships: Student workers are given compulsory placements in electronics manufacturing factories, modelled as “internships,” where they are forced to work excessive hours and often go unpaid or earn extremely low wages.
  • Mineral supply chains: Electronics companies may be linked to forced labour via their mineral supply chains given that some of the minerals and metals used to manufacture electronic components carry forced labour risks (i.e. during the mining process) — see the section on mining.

The fashion and apparel industry has had many documented cases of forced labour, particularly in the manufacturing stages. An increasing reliance on workers performing precarious work in the industry puts vulnerable groups such as migrant workers and women at greater risk of labour rights violations, including forced labour. 2021 findings from KnowTheChain’s benchmarking report for the apparel and footwear industry show that despite some improvements in previous years, companies’ efforts to address forced labour in their supply chains were hampered by the COVID-19 pandemic. The report found that the average benchmark score of the global apparel companies assessed was 41/100, with luxury brands performing the worst, demonstrating significant gaps that continue to exist in company efforts to combat forced labour.

Fashion and apparel specific risk factors include the following:

• Tracing difficulties: This industry features a lot of outsourcing, subcontracting and homeworking, making tracing where a product was made and by whom difficult. A joint ILO-OECD report states that outsourcing, particularly when it is unauthorized, can increase risks of forced labour and human trafficking as it involves informal labour that can remain off the radar of auditors or labour inspectors.
• Labour market intermediaries: Outsourcing can also involve the use of labour market intermediaries who themselves subcontract further, thus making informal labour in supply chains more opaque. The use of subcontractors, especially informal ones, increases the risk of forced labour, as they may charge workers excessive recruitment fees, which could subject workers to debt bondage. Workers may also face restrictions on mobility, illegal wage deductions and threats of penalty under subcontractors or labour intermediaries.
• Delivery times: Pressure around delivery times in the apparel sector is another potential driver of labour rights violations. According to a joint ILO-OECD report, suppliers seeking to cope with time pressures may turn to outsourced labour, overtime and/or the use of informal labour contracting, which in turn increases the risks of labour rights violations, including forced labour.
• Cotton production: Beyond textile and manufacturing value chains, forced labour risks are also present in cotton production. Although much progress has been made in the last decade in ending systemic forced labour in cotton production, state-sponsored forced labour in the cotton industry still exists.

According to the 2022 ILO report, an estimated 12.3% of forced labour exploitation cases can be found in the agriculture and fishing sectors. Male victims outnumber female victims by more than twice, at 68%, compared to 32% of women. The most severe cases of forced labour in the fishing sector have resulted in physical brutality and even loss of life, as has been documented in a report of forced labour on deep-sea fishing vessels in the Asian region. The US Department of Labor’s 2020 report suggests that the most common items produced by forced labour in agriculture and fishing include cotton, sugarcane and seafood. Cocoa is another agricultural commodity that is often linked to forced labour risks.

Agriculture or fishing-specific risk factors include the following:

• Informal sector: Due to extremely high levels of informality in the agriculture and fishing sectors, workers are more vulnerable to underpayment, late payment or non-payment of wages, which may place them in situations amounting to debt bondage or forced labour.
• Cost cutting pressures: Pressure to cut costs in the agricultural sector is one of the key drivers of labour exploitation. Low prices received for agricultural produce can lead to workers experiencing underpayment and manipulation of wages. Workers may also face elements of forced labour, such as debt bondage, physical violence, threats, verbal or sexual abuse.
• Cotton production: State-orchestrated forced labour is prevalent in cotton production. Reports of state-imposed forced labour in Xinjiang (China) have put the spotlight on cotton and tomato production in the region. The elimination of forced and child labour in Uzbekistan is an example of how countries can demonstrate major progress through coordination and collaboration with international organizations such as the ILO and other civil society groups.
• Migrant workers: The agricultural sector traditionally relies heavily on migrant workers, who are more vulnerable to forced labour conditions through the withholding of passports and restriction of movement. They may also be more subject to excessive recruitment fees leading to conditions of debt bondage.
• Labour providers: A common feature of the agricultural sector is the presence of labour providers, such as employment or recruitment agencies. If such agents are unscrupulous or illegitimate, this can result in a range of abuses such as non-payment or late payment of wages, restriction on physical movement, violence and threats.
• Isolation: Fishing industry workers may be at sea for long periods, away from the reach of national labour inspection. Due to the isolation of the workplace, workers face restriction of movement and are unable to escape once a fishing vessel is at sea.
• Transhipment: The practice of transhipment — the act of offloading goods or containers from one ship and loading it onto another — increases the likelihood of forced labour. Transhipment activities are often illegal, involving the smuggling of criminal goods or human trafficking.

The hospitality sector is linked to significant forced labour risks, with the ILO estimating that 32% of forced labour cases sit within the “services” category, which includes hospitality (in the 2017 report, hospitality described as “accommodation and food service activities”).

Much of the hospitality sector relies on the outsourcing of services, such as cleaning, maintenance and security. Workers who are recruited by outsourcing methods, such as through subcontractors or third-party labour suppliers, often lack social protections and face wage discrimination, exacerbating forced labour risks.

Forced labour takes place in parts of the artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM) industry, which is largely informal and highly labour intensive. The mining of “conflict minerals” — tantalum, tin, tungsten and gold — and other minerals such as cobalt in particular has been linked to forced labour. The US Department of Labor’s 2022 report suggests that coal, granite, gravel, iron and diamonds are also linked to forced labour.

Forced labour is also present in oil and gas extraction and infrastructure development such as around the construction of pipelines and offshore installations.

This section outlines due diligence steps that companies can take to eliminate forced labour in their operations and supply chains. The described due diligence steps are aligned with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs). Further information on UNGPs is provided in the ‘Key Human Rights Due Diligence Frameworks’ section below or in the Introduction.

While the below steps provide guidance on forced labour in particular, it is generally more resource-efficient for companies to ‘streamline’ their human rights due diligence processes by also identifying and addressing other relevant human rights issues (e.g. child labour, discrimination, freedom of association) at the same time.

Benchmarking initiatives such as KnowTheChain show that many companies have over the years made progress in relation to their standards and procedures on forced labour. However, their 2022 findings also show that the average score for ‘Commitment and Governance’, the theme that looks specifically at a company’s commitment to addressing forced labour, across companies of all sectors, is 45 out of 100 (a decrease from the previous report).

Although some companies publish stand-alone forced labour policies — for example, Wilmar International, Aldi South Group and Hewlett Packard — it is more common for businesses to integrate forced labour into their human rights policies with M&S, Unilever and BHP offering some examples. Where companies do not have a stand-alone human rights policy, forced labour is often addressed in other documentation, such as a business code of conduct or ethics and/or a supplier code of conduct. Colgate, Carrefour and Danone are examples of companies that integrate forced labour requirements into their supplier codes of conduct.

The ILO Combating Forced Labour Handbook for Employers and Business includes additional, detailed recommendations on forced labour policy content and applicability. Businesses may also want to check the ILO Helpdesk for Business, which provides answers to the most common questions that businesses may encounter while developing their forced labour policies — or integrating forced labour commitments into other policy documents. Examples include:

• What companies can do to prevent forced labour?
• Is it OK for a company to withhold the passports of migrant workers working in their factory?
• Is it considered forced labour when workers receive only accommodation and food?
• Does compulsory overtime constitute forced labour?

Businesses may also consider aligning their policies with relevant industry-wide or cross-industry policy commitments, for example:

• Responsible Business Alliance (RBA) Code of Conduct
• Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI) Base Code
• amfori BSCI Code of Conduct
• Fair Labor Association (FLA) Code of Conduct

The ILO Combating Forced Labour Handbook for Employers and Business includes suggestions on how to identify and assess actual and potential forced labour impacts. In particular, forced labour impact assessments should consider the following:

• Forced labour takes many forms, particularly when dealing with vulnerable groups such as migrant workers or student apprentices.
• Assessments should consider conducting off-site interviews as workers may not be comfortable talking about forced labour indicators on-site.
• There is also an increasing trend of assessing risks of forced labour and other labour rights violations through “worker voice” tools, such as technology-enabled worker surveys.

Forced labour impact assessments are most often integrated into broader human rights impact assessments (for example Unilever, Freeport-McMoRan and Ajinomoto). The assessment of forced labour risks can also be incorporated into other internal risk assessments focused on evaluating potential impacts of company operations — see, for example, Danone, Glencore and Kellogg’s.

The ILO Combating Forced Labour Handbook for Employers and Business includes detailed measures on how companies can prevent or mitigate forced labour in their operations and supply chains.

The actions and systems that a company will need to apply will vary depending on the outcomes of its risk and impact assessments. Examples of such actions include training of company employees and suppliers and multi-stakeholder initiatives:

• Training of company employees and suppliers may cover forced labour laws, company policies and procedures to uncover hidden aspects of forced labour or modern slavery. Training can be delivered in a range of formats, such as online videos, e-learns, in-person sessions or supplier round tables. Coca-Cola, for example, conducts training on human rights (including forced labour) for employees, bottlers, suppliers and auditors. Another example is PepsiCo which conducts training for suppliers on PepsiCo’s Supplier Code of Conduct, which includes the prohibition of forced labour.
• Multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSIs) can provide the necessary expertise, guidance and economies of scale to address forced labour in a responsible, sector-specific way. Such MSIs can also help companies learn from different stakeholder groups including business, Government, civil society and inter-governmental and non-governmental organizations. Aldi South and Inditex are examples of companies that are taking action on forced labour in cotton supply chains through their membership in the Better Cotton Initiative (BCI). Brother Industries Ltd and Microsoft work on the protection of workers vulnerable to forced labour through their membership of the Responsible Business Alliance. The ILO Global Business Network on Forced Labour is another MSI that advances the business case for an end to forced labour. The network is aligned with Alliance 8.7 in aiming to achieve the SDG Target 8.7 of eradicating all forced labour by 2030.

Businesses should regularly review their approach to forced labour to see if it continues to be effective and is having the desired impact.

Audits and social monitoring are common ways to check performance in the first tier of the supply chain. Such monitoring or audits can be undertaken internally by the company or a third party contracted by the company. A common approach or first step taken by companies is to issue self-assessment questionnaires (SAQs) to suppliers, requesting information and evidence on their forced labour procedures, such as whether suppliers have implemented monitoring measures to identify groups vulnerable to forced labour. Repeated SAQs can give insight into improvements in supplier management systems and let suppliers self-report on actual or potential forced labour impacts.

Where SAQ results warrant it, companies can carry out on-the-ground (or in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic) remote suppliers audits. Common supplier audit frameworks that span most industries and include forced labour indicators include SMETA audits and SA8000 accredited audits. General Mills, for example, conducts SMETA audits of its suppliers and co-packers.

The ILO Combating Forced Labour Handbook for Employers and Business provides advice on steps to consider in conducting social audits on forced labour (see Booklet 5). In addition, Booklet 4 ‘A Checklist & Guidance for Assessing Compliance’ presents a series of questions to help compliance personnel perform better forced labour assessments. Examples of questions to include in social audits or SAQs include:

• Do workers have the freedom to terminate employment (by means of notice of reasonable length) at any time without a penalty?
• Are non-cash or “in-kind” payments used as a means to create a state of dependency of the worker on the employer?
• Is there any evidence that disciplinary sanctions require or result in an obligation to work, for example through punishment for having participated in a strike?
• Are workers forced to work more overtime hours than allowed by national law or (where relevant) collective agreement, under the menace of a penalty?
• Is there evidence that employers who engage private employment agencies have taken measures to monitor such agencies and prevent abuses related to forced labour and human trafficking?

If shortcomings are identified, corrective action plans should be developed jointly with the supplier, setting out clear targets and milestones for improvement. Progress should then be tracked regularly to completion.

Setting SMART targets on forced labour helps objectively track performance. SMART targets are those that are: specific, measurable, attainable, resourced and time-bound. Examples of indicators to be recorded and monitored include:

• Forced labour grievances recorded (number and nature)
• Audit findings on forced labour
• Progress on Corrective Action Plans
• Media reports on instances of forced labour
• Official inspection outcomes

Responsibility for data collection should be clearly allocated to relevant roles within the company and reported with a set frequency (for instance once a month).

Although both SAQs and audits are commonly used by companies in various industries, both tools have limitations in their ability to uncover hidden violations, including forced labour. Unannounced audits somewhat mitigate this problem but even these are not always effective at identifying violations given that an auditor tends to spend only limited time on-site. Furthermore, human rights violations, including forced labour, often happen further down supply chains, whereas audits often only cover ‘Tier 1’ suppliers.

New tools such as technology-enabled worker surveys/‘worker voice’ tools allow real-time monitoring and partly remedy the problems of traditional audits. An increasing number of companies complement traditional audits with ‘worker voice’ surveys (e.g. Unilever and VF Corporation), which can be easily adapted to different languages to accommodate workers’ needs.

Some companies go further and adopt ‘beyond audit’ approaches, which are built on proactive collaboration with suppliers rather than on supplier monitoring (‘carrots’ rather than ‘sticks’). Collaborating with other stakeholders, including workers’ organizations, law enforcement authorities, labour inspectorates and non-governmental organizations to proactively identify, remediate and prevent forced labour can also prove to be effective in tracking performance on forced labour. Partnering with other stakeholders to design an effective monitoring mechanism will allow companies to better track progress.

As forced labour is a severe human rights violation, companies are expected to communicate their performance on forced labour in a formal public report, which can take the form of a standalone report such as Nestlé’s Responsible Sourcing of Seafood reports. More commonly, however, an update on progress with addressing forced labour risks is included in a broader sustainability or human rights report such as Unilever’s Human Rights reports, or in an annual Communication on Progress (CoP) in implementing the Ten Principles of the UN Global Compact. Additionally, other forms of communication may include in-person meetings, online dialogues and consultation with affected stakeholders.

Mandatory reporting now requires companies in certain jurisdictions to publish annual statements on modern slavery or identify forced labour risks in their supply chains. Hewlett Packard, Intel and Cisco Systems Inc. are among the top performers of KnowTheChain 2022 Benchmark and have communicated their performance on forced labour through their mandatory reporting requirements.

The ILO Combating Forced Labour Handbook for Employers and Business provides recommendations on how companies may want to communicate their activities to wider stakeholders, including through the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) or the UN Global Compact.

Grievance mechanisms can play an important role in helping to identify and remediate forced labour issues in operations and supply chains. Grievance mechanisms should be:

• Created with input from the affected groups they are intended to help; and
• Available in multiple formats and languages to accommodate workers’ needs. For instance, a high prevalence of migrant labour means a mechanism will need to be available in different languages, or illiteracy may require the mechanism to be explained to workers in a format other than writing (for example a video or presentation).

In addition to conventional grievance mechanisms operated through a hotline or online system, emerging “worker voice” technology allows workers to submit grievances in real-time through text messages and without fear of reprisal.

Forced labour is a crime under national and international law and remedial actions should involve cooperation with authorities. Other forced labour-focused remedial actions can include:

• Ensuring that freed workers receive enough support to reintegrate into society in a positive way, including providing shelter and medical support.
• Assisting released forced labourers in finding alternative sources of income and employment, including providing training to help with re-employment, or providing support for placement into new positions.
• Cooperation with third parties to remediate forced labour, including education officials, NGOs, public health officials and other companies using the same supply chain.

Companies could use the results of impact assessments to determine corrective actions, with the most severe prioritized. Some companies may decide that — as a last resort — a failure to remediate or correct the situation should result in termination of relationship with the offending supplier. Examples of companies with forced labour remediation programmes include Unilever and Marks & Spencer.

This section includes examples of company actions to address forced labour in their operations and supply chains.

Examples of further guidance on forced labour include:

• United Nations Global Compact, The Ten Principles of the UN Global Compact: The Ten Principles of the UN Global Compact provide universal guidance for sustainable business in the areas of human rights, labour, the environment and anti-corruption. Principle 4 calls on business to uphold the elimination of all forms of forced and compulsory labour.
• United Nations Global Compact, Business: It’s Time to Act: Decent Work, Modern Slavery & Child Labour: This brief guide offers an overview of the steps businesses can take to help eliminate forced labour while highlighting key resources, initiatives and engagement opportunities to support business action.
• ILO, OECD, IOM and UNICEF, Multi-Stakeholder Initiative on Ending Child Labour, Forced Labour and Human Trafficking in Global Supply Chains: This resource provides recommendations on responsible business conduct on labour and human rights, including developing due diligence on forced labour.
• ILO, General Principles and Operational Guidelines for Fair Recruitment and Definition of Recruitment Fees and Related Costs: This resource lays out the ILO general principles and guidelines for fair recruitment and the definition of recruitment fees and related costs.
• ILO, Fair Recruitment Initiative: This ILO initiative was launched in 2014 and has been critical to ILO’s work in the area of national and international recruitment of workers. This website includes links to many helpful resources including guidance documents and training courses on fair recruitment.
• ILO, Global Database: Definition of Fees and Related Costs in National Laws and Policies: A map developed by the ILO that displays a global database of national laws, policies and regulations that have defined recruitment fees and related costs.
• ILO, Ending Child Labour, Forced Labour And Human Trafficking In Global Supply Chains: This report aims to help businesses develop policies and practices to prevent forced labour and human trafficking in global supply chains.
• ITC-ILO, Training Toolkit on Establishing Fair Recruitment Processes: This training toolkit, developed under the framework of the ILO Fair Recruitment Initiative, is composed of five modules, which tackle specific topics pertaining to fair recruitment. It is available in English, French and Spanish.
• ILO and IHRB, Promoting Fair Recruitment and Employment: Guidance Tool For Hotels in Qatar: A set of resources tailored for hotels to promote decent work and reinforce fair recruitment practices. This includes sector-specific guidance for engagement with labour recruiters and service providers, easy-to-use checklists as well as examples of good practice that managers can adapt.
• ILO, Global Business Network on Forced Labour (GBNFL): Comparison of Recruitment Fees and Related Costs: A table developed by the GBNFL providing an overview of current definitions of recruitment fees and related costs by selected industry initiatives compared to the ILO definition of recruitment fees and related costs. It is intended to act as a supporting resource to those looking to adopt, adapt or implement a definition on recruitment fees and costs.
• ILO Helpdesk for Business, Country Information Hub: This resource can be used to inform human rights due diligence, providing specific country information on different labour rights.
• ILO, The Benefits of Fair Recruitment: Results of the Impact Study on the Nepal-Jordan Corridor: Research presented in an infographic, showcasing the benefits of fair recruitment practices for both workers and employers.
• Institute for Human Rights and Business (IHRB), Responsible Recruitment Resource Bank: The IHRB provides a range of resources, such as tools and guidance, to address forced labour and other labour rights issues. This includes guidance highlighting best practice models, briefings on migrant worker issues and toolkits for the prevention of labour exploitation.
• ITUC, How to Combat Forced Labour and Trafficking: A resource developed by the ITUC alongside the ILO that offers examples of good practices in order to encourage workers and unions to join the ITUC global trade union alliance against forced labour and to step up efforts to eliminate forced labour.
• Alliance 8.7, Delta 8.7 Knowledge Platform: A global knowledge platform providing resources on eradicating forced labour, modern slavery, human trafficking and child labour.
• Stronger Together, Resources: A range of multi-language resources for businesses on tackling modern slavery in their operations and supply chains.
• SME Compass, Standards Compass: This online tool offers guidance on what to pay attention to when selecting sustainability standards or when participating in multi-stakeholder initiatives. It allows comparing standards and initiatives with respect to their contribution to human rights due diligence and their potential limitations.
• SME Compass, Downloads: Practical guides and checklists are available for download on the SME compass website to embed due diligence processes, improve supply chain management and make mechanisms more effective.
• DCAF, ICRC und GCBHR, Working with Private Security Providers, Security and Human Rights Toolkit: Dieses Toolkit enthält hilfreiche Informationen zur Sicherstellung hoher Arbeitsstandards beim Einsatz privater Sicherheitsdienstleister, sowie zur Risikobewertung.