Centering Rightsholders: Lessons on Effective Grievance Mechanisms from the UN RBHR Asia-Pacific Forum

By Sanchita Saxena

The 2025 UN Responsible Business and Human Rights Forum held in September in Bangkok, Thailand convened stakeholders from across Asia and the Pacific to advance business and human rights during a time of compounding crises. Under the theme “Anchoring Progress and Strengthening Regional Leadership on Human Rights through Crisis,” the Forum focused on accelerating implementation of business and human rights standards, strengthening cross-border cooperation, and centering leadership from Asia-Pacific. There were over 150 partners and 80+ sessions focused on driving conversations on policy, markets, inclusion, and sustainability to advance responsible business in Asia.

On behalf of Article One and in partnership with the Fair Labor Association (FLA), I co-organized a workshop, “Leading by Example: Effective Grievance Mechanisms Centering Rightsholders in Asia,” showcasing how rights holders can shape and strengthen the Business and Human Rights (BHR) agenda, particularly in contexts where civic space is shrinking and accountability gaps persist. Below I share some of the key takeaways for businesses looking to establish or improve their grievance processes.

Recent and forthcoming mandatory Human Rights and Environmental Due Diligence (mHREDD) legislation requires companies to implement effective grievance mechanisms (GMs) in their supply chains. These mechanisms are vital for detecting and addressing risks before violations occur and for ensuring remediation in line with the UN Guiding Principles. However, many existing GMs are seen by workers as inaccessible, ineffective, or lacking in trust—often because rights holders are excluded from their design and evaluation. Our workshop highlighted examples of two successful GMs that go beyond “check the box” solutions and that are grounded in the lived experiences of rights holders in Asia. We focused on the FLA grievance process and the GM that is part of the Dindigul Agreement (an Enforceable Brand Agreement with three apparel brands and the Tamil Nadu Textile and Common Labour Union-TTCU- as signatories).

Rakesh Narayana, Director at People’s Courage International, described the reality of the conditions of most workers in the Global South, including the blurring of lines between formality and informality, inefficient and often corrupt State-led inspections, and extremely low levels of unionization. Given this reality, GMs are essential, he argued, because they can empower workers who may otherwise have few alternatives for raising concerns. Mr. Narayana pointed to three important elements needed to ensure GMs are effective: 1) Clear standards that are communicated to workers; 2) Mechanisms to ensure there is no backlash or retaliation; and 3) The involvement of unions or other forms of worker representation.

Veronique Rochet, Senior Director of Sustainability at PUMA Group, explained that grievances filed by workers not only support workers in getting their problems resolved, but they also provide the supplier and the brand with valuable insights into what is happening at the factory.

It’s very important to work collaboratively with suppliers to ensure a strong mechanism is in place and provide multiple viable options. Sif Thorgeirsson, Senior Vice President at the FLA, highlighted that member companies must adhere to the Principles of Fair Labor and Responsible Sourcing. The FLA recently released a toolkit for companies to support them in creating and operating effective grievance systems that promote worker voice and provide for effective remedy. If the factory and brand level mechanisms either do not work or are not the appropriate channels, Fair Labor Investigations offers an alternative route to file a complaint regarding significant and persistent noncompliance with FLA’s code and benchmarks.

Suppliers and brands need to know that grievances are not necessarily a bad thing. Some suppliers see grievances as a failure–however, a grievance mechanism that does not receive any grievances is a failure. The mechanism should be receiving complaints from workers. What would be a failure is if grievances go unresolved or if the root causes of the grievances are not addressed and the same problems arise repeatedly.

All the speakers highlighted the importance of considering the cultural context of where the grievance mechanism will be implemented and the role of trust. For a mechanism to be successful, the workers need to know about it, know how to use it, trust it, and receive a response to any complaint filed. “Trust is a vital element of establishing functioning and effective grievance mechanisms and establishing that trust often requires a good understanding of the culture in which it operates,” stated Sif.

In interviews with workers in the factories covered by the Dindigul Agreement, there is a high level of trust in the GM. Workers express no hesitation in raising their grievances and believe that their grievances will be handled confidentially and without negative consequences. In addition, the main elements of this GM that make it successful include several channels to report grievances that are independent of management, employing the “train the trainer” model to empower trained workers to handle grievances, and provision of remedy for workers who are victims of violations.

The workshop provided audience members the opportunity to participate in interactive breakout groups and engage with role-playing exercises to foster honest, multi-stakeholder dialogue on challenges and opportunities in implementing such mechanisms. Participants shared group reflections and co-developed concrete action plans using a provided template. As they were thinking about developing effective GMs, Rakesh challenged the audience by saying, “If we are being aspirational about the efficacy of the GRMs being set up, we need to ask ourselves two questions: 1) How likely is it for the workers with the least voice and least power to use this GM? and 2) How well does this GM set up for the factory floor compare with our GMs in the corporate office?”

“If we are not listening to the ones closest to the problem, then how can find the best solutions?” This was one of the many insightful messages I heard at the Forum. Our workshop and others throughout the week demonstrated what we can achieve when we create solutions by listening to those who are closest to the problem, those who understand lived realities, and those who advocate to improve lives daily.

To learn more and explore what steps you and your company can take to advance effective grievance mechanisms, please reach out at hello@articleoneadvisors.com.