Get Four
Free Issues

Subscribe to BW
Customer Service


Full Table of Contents
Cover Story
Asian Cover Story
European Cover Story
Special Report -- Executive MBAs
Special Report -- Exec Education
Up Front
Readers Report
Corrections & Clarifications
Technology & You
Media Centric



The Barker Portfolio
Business Outlook
News: Analysis & Commentary
In Biz This Week
Washington Outlook
Asian Business
European Business
Global Outlook
Economics
Science & Technology
The Corporation
Energy
Sports Biz
Information Technology
Finance
Social Issues
Developments To Watch
Personal Business
Plus
Inside Wall Street
Ideas -- Books
Ideas -- Viewpoint
Ideas -- Editorials
Figures of the Week


INTERNATIONAL EDITIONS
International -- Readers Report
International -- Finance
International -- Int'l Figures of the Week




OCTOBER 24, 2005
SOCIAL ISSUES/Online Extra
Back to Main Story

Raising the Bar for Corporate Consciences
Increased focus on human-rights issues has more companies turning to social-audit firms, but Freeport-McMoRan has set a new standard

So what is a social, or labor, audit, anyway? It's a concept that has boomed in the past decade, as clothing and consumer-product companies have adopted so-called codes of conduct to fend off allegations of sweatshop manufacturing and other abuses. Roughly 60% of the 500 largest U.S. companies have such codes today, according to one 2004 survey. The codes spell out principles the company vows to follow -- everything from no child labor to respecting human rights and abiding by local labor laws.


Some companies, including Walt Disney (DIS ), Nike (NKE ), and Wal-Mart Stores (WMT ), have built up entire staffs to make sure the codes are being met. They monitor labor conditions in overseas factories that make each company's goods.

Many companies also tap a small army of social-audit outfits that has sprung up to fill the growing demand for such expertise. Some are units of giant factory-quality auditing companies such as Geneva's SGS. Others are small nonprofits such as Vérité in Amherst, Mass., which specializes in labor and human-rights inspections.

EXTERNAL EYE.  No single definition covers what such audits should entail. They run the gamut from perfunctory factory walk-throughs by auditors who don't talk with workers to full-scale, months-long investigations such as that the International Center for Corporate Accountability (ICCA) undertook for Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold's giant Indonesian mine.

One reason for the variability is that most companies haven't really figured out why they're doing the audits. Most start by seeing the process as an internal inspection intended to catch problems that critics might pounce on. But that approach usually doesn't satisfy labor and human-rights critics, who argue that abuses just get buried unless companies agree to external accountability.

"Mere assertions of compliance, without external assessment and public disclosure, undermine an industry's entire effort," says S. Prakash Sethi, ICCA's founder and a management professor at Baruch College in New York who has written extensively on corporate codes of conduct.

"NEW GROUND."  Such complaints have prompted companies to join several industry/human-rights oversight bodies, such as the Fair Labor Assn. (FLA) and Social Accountability International (SAI). In both cases, companies and auditors have designed industrywide codes of conduct and set up external inspection systems to police them. These joint associations have brought some improvements in overseas working conditions, experts on both sides say, easing attacks on companies such as Nike, Liz Claiborne (LIZ ), and Reebok International (RBK ), all members of the FLA.

Few of these audits are as thorough as the ICCA inspection of Freeport's mine, though. Nor do the FLA and the SAI require nearly as much disclosure. "Freeport seems to be breaking new ground here, and groups like Amnesty International will be watching closely to see what other companies do," says John O'Reilly, an Amnesty volunteer who until 2003 headed the human-rights program at BP (BP ).

Unprecedented as it is, the Freeport-ICCA collaboration took more than a year just to set up, as the two groups worked out what the audit would entail and how it would be done. The ICCA tapped five professors and two graduate students from Baruch, a part of the City University of New York. It also hired four professors and 10 grad students from the University of Papua New Guinea who speak the local languages to conduct interviews of employees and managers.

Then the group developed four questionnaires for different parts of the operation and used them to do 373 interviews individually -- with no Freeport managers present. ICCA took the results to New York for analysis without showing anything to Freeport management. The result: an unvarnished view of what really goes on. It remains to be seen whether other companies will subject themselves to similar scrutiny.



By Aaron Bernstein in Washington
 BW MALL   SPONSORED LINKS
Buy a link now!

Get BusinessWeek directly on your desktop with our RSS feeds.XML

Add BusinessWeek news to your Web site with our headline feed.

Click to buy an e-print or reprint of a BusinessWeek or BusinessWeek Online story or video.

To subscribe online to BusinessWeek magazine, please click here.

Learn more, go to the BusinessWeekOnline home page

Back to Top



TODAY'S MOST POPULAR STORIES

  1. What Dubai Means for Emerging Markets
  2. In Hunt for Students, Business Schools Go Global
  3. Stock Picks: Apple, eBay, U.S. Bancorp
  4. Online Retailers: An Early Holiday Peak?
  5. IBM vs. SAS: The Battle over Data Analysis Software

Get Free RSS Feed >>
  MARKET INFO

Portfolio Service Update

Stock Lookup

Enter name or ticker



Media Kit | Special Sections | MarketPlace | Knowledge Centers
McGraw-Hill Cos.