Major companies in the resource extraction, agricultural and clothing industries

GB-DB3:“Companies Fail to Meet Human-Rights Benchmark, Study Finds,” By Samuel Rubenfeld | Wall Street Journal, Nov 11, 2018

LINK: https://blogs.wsj.com/riskandcompliance/2018/11/11/companies-fail-to-meet-human-rights-benchmark-study-finds/

SUMMARY: Major companies in the resource extraction, agricultural and clothing industries are failing to demonstrate respect for human rights, according to a study based on principles from the United Nations. The study, produced by the Corporate Human Rights Benchmark, a U.K.-based organization that draws expertise from think-tanks, investors and business foundations, tracks how companies perform across 100 indicators built on the U.N. Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, as well as additional industry-specific standards. It also uses publicly available information on issues such as forced labor, protecting human-rights activists and the living wage to score companies on a percentage scale. Two-thirds of companies scored less than 30% overall, the study found, with the average company at 27%. In the last edition of the index, released in 2017, the average score was 18%. “While we see clear progress from some companies, the majority are failing to make the grade,” Margaret Wachenfeld, independent director of the Corporate Human Rights Benchmark who co-leads the organization’s methodology committee, said in a statement. Of the 101 companies surveyed, 40% of them failed to show any evidence of identifying or mitigating human-rights issues in their supply chains. Virtually none demonstrated strong commitments to paying living wages to workers along the supply chain or in their own operations, the study found.

CLASSROOM APPLICATION: Human rights issues are being neglected in many organizations according to a benchmarking study by Corporate Human Rights Benchmark. Students can discuss the longer term, potential negative impact of this fact.

QUESTION: With a survey of 101 companies, 40% showed almost no evidence of mitigating human rights issues in their supply chains. Does this support proactive regulation to improve human rights?

Given the weight given in your grade to discussion boards you must be extra careful with your expression. This is not texting or informal chat. It is like writing a memo at work. Always express yourself in complete sentences. This is an opportunity to hone professional writing (which basically means, very clear) and earn a good grade by practicing it. Write your posting on a Word document before you post, use spelling and grammar software and, if needed, have someone else read to make sure that it makes sense.

The dark side of being well informed about something is that we assume that others are at the same level, for which we tend not to be clear enough when we explain. Since we are practicing professional writing, assume that you are talking to someone who knows nothing about what you are talking about. Also remember that the best way to learn something is to teach it or explain it to others.

As you know, it is best to produce your postings as soon as possible. Maybe tonight. Make sure that you apply grammar and spelling software before you post, though. If you post at the last minute without reviewing your posting it will show. Each discussion board is 25 points. Postings submitted past Thursday will not be graded or included in your grade.

You must make a minimum of 3 posts.

1- answer the question with a minimum of 25 words.

2- reply to someone else’s post with and insightful question.

3- reply to someone else’s post with an insightful comment that demonstrates your understanding of the course concepts. “I agree” is not an insightful comment.

Your score is also based on the 4 criteria: Quality, Quantity, Relevance and Manner.

Student reply:
Yes it does. Companies have a moral obligation to fulfill especially if it’s in things like human rights. What we currently see is the opposite.

A good example of this is Nestle, and bottled water. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPIEaM0on70, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GHpbscEPPM

This example shows us how companies disregard human rights by bottling water for pennies on the dollar around the world, and then sells it back for a profit. We also see Peter Brabeck arguing that water isn’t a human right, and should be given a price like any other food product to which I disagree with. There are places in the world without clean water, and selling bottled water for a massive mark up value isn’t solving a problem, but making it worse. This is especially the case in places where people can’t access clean drinking water, and afford to buy it either. So the fact that companies like Nestle can deny human rights is a big problem, and calls for more regulations on how companies should be allowed to operate.

Student reply:
Companies have an obligation to Human Rights; they have to take proactive steps to avoid damaging there companies reputation. According to the article,” Corporate Human Rights Benchmark a U.K based organization that draws expertise from thanks, investors and business”. They track how companies perform, as well as identify industry specific standards. Corporate responsibility is to respect Human Rights and increase standards in the industries and civil society. There are a lot of benefits from respecting Human Rights which will increase productivity in the business. Companies should care about people because it allows business continuity in the long run.