Response from adidas

Proposal A1:

Require suppliers to issue 'Right to Organize' guarantees to workers.

Adidas endorses the right to organize in their own code and audits against that. They don’t, however, require suppliers to issue or communicate their own Right to Organize Guarantee to their workers. With 45% of their suppliers located in China and Vietnam, where freedom of association is restricted, they question the applicability of this provision.

Full response

"The adidas Group’s Workplace Standards are derived from ILO conventions. As such, FOA and the right to form and join a trade union of a worker’s own choosing is a right that we seek to promote and protect. It is also a key performance measure for our suppliers and is communicated to workers in open letters in their own language. Moreover, a positive climate of non-interference is encouraged through the encouragement and implementation of effective systems of worker-management communication.

"At the enterprise level FOA and other trade union rights are being closely monitored by our Social & Environmental Affairs (SEA) team. Where we see breaches of this right by our business partners, we do take direct action. However, before doing so, we first look to the relevant government authorities to take the necessary steps to enforce their own labour laws, and for workers and unions to find redress through mediation and labour arbitration processes.

"We would be interested to learn how the ‘Right to Organise Guarantee’, which was been referenced in the Clearing the Hurdles report, has been applied in practice by other brands. For example, has it been communicated to workers in the Peoples Republic of China and in Vietnam, where a single government-backed union is mandated by law? Some 45% of our suppliers are located in these two countries."

Response Key

The brand claims to implementing all components of this proposal or has agreed to implement them within Play Fair's proposed timeframe.

The brand is currently implementing or has agreed to implement some of the essential components of the proposal but has refused to implement, has overlooked, or has raised issues with one or more important components; or, the brand agrees to implement the proposal but not within Play Fair’s proposed timeframe.

The brand has refused to implement the essential components of the proposal.

The brand has misunderstood or failed to comment on the proposal; or the brand is considering the proposal, but has yet to make a decision.