FINAL REPORT EVALUATION REPORT USAID/BANGLADESH WORKERS’ EMPOWERMENT AND PARTICIPATION (WEP) MID-TERM PERFORMANCE EVALUATION April 7, 2022 This document was produced by ME&A, Inc., at the request of the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared independently by the USAID Bangladesh Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (BMEL) Activity. FINAL REPORT WORKERS’ EMPOWERMENT AND PARTICIPATION (WEP) ACTIVITY MID-TERM PERFORMANCE EVALUATION April 7, 2022 Contract No./Order No. GS-10F-154BA/72038819M00001 USAID Bangladesh Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (BMEL) Activity Prepared by ME&A, Inc. 4350 East-West Highway, Suite 210 Bethesda, MD, 20814 USA DISCLAIMER The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................... I INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................... I FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS............................................................................................................... I RECOMMENDATIONS .........................................................................................................................III I. INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................1 1.1 CONTEXTUAL BACKGROUND...................................................................................................... 1 1.2 THE WORKERS’ EMPOWERMENT AND PARTICIPATION (WEP) ACTIVITY ........................................... 2 1.3 EVALUATION PURPOSE AND AUDIENCE ....................................................................................... 3 1.4 EVALUATION QUESTIONS.......................................................................................................... 3 2. METHODOLOGY...........................................................................................................................4 2.1 EVALUATION LIMITATIONS ........................................................................................................ 5 3. EVALUATION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................6 3.1 EQ 1: TO WHAT EXTENT IS THE SC ON COURSE TO MEET WEP’S OBJECTIVES BASED ON PROGRESS ACHIEVED THUS FAR? .............................................................................................................. 6 3.1.1 Findings......................................................................................................................... 6 3.1.2 Conclusions................................................................................................................... 9 3.2 EQ 2: TO WHAT EXTENT HAS THE SC BEEN ABLE TO IMPROVE THE CAPACITY OF FACTORY-BASED TUS, TUFS, AND WCAS AS A RESULT OF THE WEP ACTIVITY? ............................................................... 9 3.2.1 Findings......................................................................................................................... 9 3.2.2 Conclusions.................................................................................................................15 3.3 EQ 3: TO WHAT EXTENT HAS WEP ADVANCED GENDER EQUALITY OR FEMALE EMPOWERMENT TOWARD WOMEN’S LEADERSHIP, AND HOW SUSTAINABLE ARE THESE OUTCOMES? ........................16 3.3.1 Findings.......................................................................................................................16 3.3.2 Conclusions.................................................................................................................18 3.4 EQ 4: HOW EFFECTIVE HAS SC BEEN AT MANAGING WEP’S PERFORMANCE? ................................18 3.4.1 Findings.......................................................................................................................18 3.4.2 Conclusions.................................................................................................................21 3.5 EQ 5: TO WHAT EXTENT ARE THE ACTIVITY’S OBJECTIVES STILL RELEVANT TO THE CURRENT BANGLADESH CONTEXT IN THE RMG AND SFP SECTORS? ............................................................22 3.5.1 Findings.......................................................................................................................22 3.5.2 Conclusions.................................................................................................................23 3.6 EQ 6: HOW SUSTAINABLE ARE THE INTERVENTIONS OF THE WEP ACTIVITY? ..................................23 3.6.1 Findings.......................................................................................................................23 3.6.2 Conclusions.................................................................................................................28 4. RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................................................29 ANNEXES .........................................................................................................................................31 ANNEX 1: SCOPE OF WORK ..............................................................................................................31 ANNEX 2: DATA COLLECTION TOOLS (KII AND FGD GUIDES AND MINI-SURVEY) .......................................34 ANNEX 3: LIST OF STAKEHOLDERS INTERVIEWED ..................................................................................83 ANNEX 4: RESULTS OF MINI-SURVEYS ................................................................................................87 ANNEX 5: ANALYSIS OF WEP TRAININGS ..........................................................................................108 ANNEX 6: LIST OF SOURCES CONSULTED ...........................................................................................115 ANNEX 7. EXAMPLE OF THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE OF THE QUARTERLY REPORT.....................................117 ACRONYMS Acronym Definition BCWS Bangladesh Center for Workers Solidarity BGIWF Bangladesh Garment and Industrial Workers Federation BGMEA Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters Association BGTLWF Bangladesh Textile and Garments Workers League BGTWL Bangladesh Garments, Textile & Leather Workers' Federation BIGUF Bangladesh Independent Garment Workers Union Federation BILS Bangladesh Institute of Labor Studies BKMEA Bangladesh Knitwear Manufacturers and Exporters Association BMEL (USAID) Bangladesh Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning BNWLA Bangladesh National Woman Lawyers' Association BRGWF Bangladesh Revolutionary Garments Workers Federation BWB Better Work Bangladesh CAPI Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing CBA Collective Bargaining Agreement CBO Community-Based Organization CDCS Country Development Cooperation Strategy CLA Collaborating, Learning, and Adapting CLE Continuing Legal Education COD Charter of Demands COP Chief of Party COVID-19 Coronavirus Disease 2019 CPD Center for Policy Dialogue CPD Country Program Director CSO Civil Society Organization CSR Corporate Social Responsibility CTTCU Counter Terrorism and Transnational Crime Unit DEC Development Experience Clearinghouse DFID Department for International Development DI Democracy International DIFE Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments DIU Daffodil International University DLAC District Legal Aid Committee DO Development Objective DOC Department of Cooperatives DOF Department of Fisheries DOL (U.S.) Department of Labor DOS (U.S.) Department of State DOSW Department of Social Welfare DPR Democratic Participation and Reform DQA Data Quality Assessment DRG (USAID Office of) Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance DRRM Disaster Risk Reduction and Management ET Evaluation Team EU European Union FES Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung FGD Focus Group Discussion Acronym Definition FIQC Fish Inspection and Quality Control GBVH Gender-Based Violence and Harassment GDP Gross Domestic Product GFEMS Global Fund for the End of Modern Slavery GIZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit GOB Government of Bangladesh GRM Grievance Resolution Mechanism GSMA Groupe Spécial Mobile Association GSP Generalized System of Preferences GTWL Garments Tailors Workers League GWSF Garment Workers Solidarity Federation HDRC Human Development Research Centre HI Handicap International HPN Health, Population and Nutrition HQ Headquarters IBC IndustriALL Bangladesh Council IDLO International Development Law Organization IDR Industrial Dispute Resolution IED Institute for Environment and Development IG Income Generation ILO International Labor Organization IP Implementing Partner IPSA International Political Science Association IR Intermediate Result JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency KII Key Informant Interview LAC Legal Aid Committee LDP Leadership Development Program M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MEL Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning MIS Management Information System MSI Management Systems International MOU Memorandum of Understanding NGO Non-Governmental Organization NGWF National Garments Workers Federation NMDS Nielsen Media and Demographic Survey OLR Overseas Labor Recruitment OP Operation Plan OSH Occupational Safety and Health PC Participation Committee PIC Project Implementation Committee PIMS Promoting Inclusive Market Systems PMP Performance Monitoring Plan POP Period of Performance PPE Personal Protective Equipment PPP Public-Private Partnership Q Quarter RESC Revised European Social Charter RMMRU Refugee and Migratory Movements Research Unit Acronym Definition RMG Ready-made garment ROLI Rule of Law Initiative RUPSA Rural and Urban Poor’s Partner for Social Advancement SANEM South Asian Network on Economic Modeling SBGWKF Shadhin Bangla Garments Sramik Karmachari Federation SC Solidarity Center SCA Swedish Committee for Afghanistan SDC Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation SFP Shrimp and fish processing SGSF Sommilito Garments Sramik Federation SIDA Swedish International Development Agency SME Subject Matter Expert SPL Strengthening Political Landscape TAF The Asia Foundation ToT Training of Trainers TU Trade Union TU CapSAT Trade Union Capacity Index Scale TUF Trade Union Federatio TVET Technical and Vocational Education Training UFGW United Federation of Garments Workers ULAB University of Liberal Arts Bangladesh UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund U.S. United States USAID United States Agency for International Development V-Dem Varieties of Democracy VE Violent Extremism WCA Worker Community Association WCC Worker Community Center WEWF Wage Earners Welfare Fund WEP Workers’ Empowerment and Participation WPC Workers’ Participation Committee i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) in Bangladesh issued a Tasking Request for the USAID/Bangladesh Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (BMEL) activity to conduct a mid-term performance evaluation of the Workers’ Empowerment and Participation (WEP) Activity implemented by the Solidarity Center (SC). The SC began implementing the WEP Activity in August 2019. The WEP activity strives to strengthen the capacity of independent Trade Unions (TUs), Trade Union Federations (TUFs), and Worker Community Associations (WCAs) in the Ready-Made Garment (RMG) and Shrimp and Fish Processing (SFP) sectors to collectively advocate for their rights and interests, and enhance productive interventions with management to constructively participate in improving industrial relations. This mid-term performance evaluation aimed to answer the following six key questions: 1. To what extent is the SC on course to meet WEP’s objectives based on progress achieved thus far? 2. To what extent has the SC been able to improve the capacity of factory-based TUs, TUFs, and WCAs as a result of the WEP Activity? 3. To what extent has WEP advanced gender equality or female empowerment toward women’s leadership, and how sustainable are these outcomes? 4. How effective has the SC been at managing WEP’s performance? 5. To what extent are the Activity’s objectives still relevant for the current Bangladesh context in the RMG and SFP sectors? 6. How sustainable are the interventions of the WEP Activity? The Evaluation Team (ET) used a combination of qualitative and quantitative data collection methodologies to conduct this evaluation—including a desk review; Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) with 76 stakeholders; 20 Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with 117 participants; and 111 mini-surveys with WEP partners, stakeholders, and beneficiaries. The ET conducted fieldwork from August 27 to September 29, 2021, in the greater Dhaka area, Khulna and Chattogram divisions. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Evaluation Question (EQ) 1: To what extent is the SC on course to meet WEP’s objectives based on progress achieved thus far? The SC continued implementing the WEP activity during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, which created obstacles for the SC, WEP partner TUFs, and Worker Community Centers (WCCs) when conducting regular day-to-day activities. This forced the SC to postpone more than half of WEP’s activities (more than 218 in total), during the first two years of implementation. Eighty-one (81) activities were delayed due to COVID-19 under Intermediate Result (IR) 1, while 63 activities were delayed under IR 2. Workers faced adverse challenges from their employers during the pandemic, resulting in worker representative organizations increasingly engaging with the employers to bring positive outcomes for workers. As a result, WEP was able to implement significantly more programmatic activities under IR 2. ii EQ 2: To what extent has the SC been able to improve the capacity of factory-based TUs, TUFs, and WCAs as a result of the WEP Activity? The SC has been successful in increasing the skills of factory workers, strengthening constructive dialogue, and supporting workers suffering from unfair labor practices, however, there is still a need to improve TUFs’ performance in strengthening the capacity of factory-level unions. While there was an improvement in the signing of Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBAs), factory-level union leaders were dissatisfied with the follow-up to ensure that the CBAs were being adhered to and enforced. Worker Community Centers and WCAs were effective in linking community members to social services and improving the responsiveness of local governments. The ET learned of 19 examples where WCCs/WCAs had positively impacted workers’ communities, especially during the pandemic, by distributing face masks, handwashing soap, and disinfectants; developing advocacy campaigns to improve infrastructure; assisting with access to affordable healthcare; and addressing family issues including stopping forced marriage and domestic violence. WEP also had an impact on increasing workers’ understanding of their rights and labor law, however, there is still a lot of work needed to create a strong support base in the community in favor of workers’ rights in the RMG and SFP sectors. EQ 3: To what extent has WEP advanced gender equality or female empowerment toward women’s leadership, and how sustainable are these outcomes? The SC increased awareness of gender equality by supporting initiatives such as employing female organizers, offering women’s leadership training, and encouraging TUFs to include women on the factory TU executive committees. The ET observed positive developments in terms of promoting gender equality and inclusion in the workplace; however, bringing positive changes in gender development among RMG and SFP workers and within the community is complex, and will require progress to be made in other labor areas, e.g., sustaining the presence of women in senior leadership positions and as labor organizers is challenged by gender roles and cultural issues, where women are expected to tend to family issues and adhere to patriarchal social norms that often subordinate them to men and deprive them of access to networks and other resources. EQ 4: How effective has the SC been at managing WEP’s performance? The SC’s ability to manage the WEP Activity effectively was hampered by several factors including turnover of leadership, the activity’s low visibility, and COVID-19 restrictions. Despite these issues, the SC, WEP TUF and Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) partners were able to adapt their activities to respond to COVID-19 obstacles by providing legal support to terminated workers, facilitating humanitarian aid access to community members and workers, and spreading COVID-19 health awareness guidance. Areas where effectiveness could be improved include -- coordination (i.e., between WEP’s components, with the Government of Bangladesh (GOB) at the national level, with factory management, with WEP NGO partners, and among WEP partner TUFs, and the activity’s Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) system, which needs to be strengthened to better capture the Activity’s achievements, challenges, lessons learned, and best practices. EQ 5: To what extent are the Activity’s objectives still relevant for the current Bangladesh context in the RMG and SFP sectors? The activities of the TUFs and TUs are immensely relevant and should be continued. Most workers are not yet unionized—only 4.2 percent of the total labor force are active TU members, and just 11.6 percent of active TU workers are involved in TU-related activities in the RMG sector. Workers’ rights have not been ensured in unionized factories.1 Workers’ understanding of their rights and the importance of TUs 1https://www.dw.com/en/has-bangladesh-made-progress-on-the-rights-of-garment-workers/a-52277347 iii is limited.2 Registered and active TUs are still absent in an overwhelming majority of factories in the SFP sector. There are 100 seafood processing plants in Bangladesh,3 and only 13 registered TUs.4 Community activities constitute a unique experiment that attempts to include community people in activities related to workers’ rights. Worker Community Associations are important for creating a support base in favor of workers. If successful, WCAs could be WEP’s legacy, encouraging other local and international organizations working in the RMG sector to follow the same approach. EQ 6: How sustainable are the interventions of the WEP Activity? Workers’ Empowerment and Participation (WEP) reinforced TUFs with organizational strengthening, but their financial autonomy is limited. Overall, the sustainability of WEP interventions will depend on the availability of funds. There was no indication that WEP partners and sub-grantees are confident about the continuation of full-scale WEP activities. It will require stable income-generating sources (in the case of the community component) and/or funding from local or international sources (in the case of the TU/TUF component) for the project’s achievements to be sustained. The improved collection of membership dues would be one way of raising some of the funds needed to ensure sustainability. Worker Community Association registration is challenging due to many factors, including a lack of understanding of the registration mechanism for rights-based community organizations in Bangladesh. RECOMMENDATIONS ● Due to the impact of COVID-19 related delays during the first two years of the WEP activity, the SC should consider revising the activities included in the Work Plan and determine updated numbers of activities to be implemented by the end of WEP. ● The SC should reactivate the work of the Project Implementation Committee (PIC) to ensure frequent stakeholder meetings and exchange of information about the TUF/TU component and the community component. ● The SC should emphasize the visibility of WEP among external stakeholders to showcase the unique features of the Activity. ● WEP technical partners should explore avenues to strengthen the interaction/relationship with government offices at the local and national levels. ● The SC should consider advocating for further streamlining of TU registration process and providing more orientations to WEP supported union leaders and members on union registration process and formalities. ● The SC should continue to advocate and ensure that WCAs get registered, where possible. ● The SC should continue to emphasize the need to increase the number of active women leaders and union members. 2 Mia Mahmudur Rahim and Sk Samidul Islam. “Freedom of association in the Bangladeshi garment industry: A policy schizophrenia in labor regulation,” International Labor Review, October 2019. 3 Department of Fisheries (DOF), 2019. Yearbook of Fisheries Statistics of Bangladesh 2018–2019, Fisheries Resources Survey System (FRSS), Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock, Bangladesh. 4 KII with Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishment (DIFE). 1 I. INTRODUCTION The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) in Bangladesh issued Tasking Request S036 for the USAID/Bangladesh Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (BMEL) activity to conduct the mid-term evaluation of the Workers’ Empowerment and Participation (WEP) Activity. The WEP Activity is implemented by the Solidarity Center (SC) under the Bangladesh Mission’s former Country Development Cooperation Strategy (CDCS) Development Objective (DO) 1: Citizen Confidence in Governance Institutions Increased. Currently WEP activity falls under USAID/Bangladesh’s new CDCS DO 1: Improved Democratic Systems that Promote Transparency, Accountability, and Integrity. The Period of Performance (POP) for this evaluation was July to November 2021. The ET Team conducted its fieldwork in the greater Dhaka area, Khulna and Chattogram divisions, where the WEP Activity has worked most intensively. 1.1 CONTEXTUAL BACKGROUND Labor standards and workplace safety have emerged as serious issues for Bangladesh due to two tragic and deadly industrial accidents—the fire at Tazreen Fashions5 and the collapse of Rana Plaza.6 These accidents were mainly due to non-compliance with building safety and construction laws and regulations, and lack of adherence to labor laws. Trade Union Federations (TUFs) and labor leaders had limited incentives to organize and represent factory workers to improve overall labor conditions. Though TUFs faced challenges with organizing, a critical factor was the role of anti-union activities by government authorities and employers. The Government of Bangladesh (GOB) has resisted registering Trade Unions (TUs)—which, in turn, has limited workers’ ability to safeguard the legal protections necessary to bargain with employers. The Rana Plaza disaster, followed by the United States’ (U.S.) suspension of its Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) trade benefits, provided the catalyst for a new wave of union organizing in the RMG sector in Bangladesh. The RMG sector is a key contributor to the economic growth of Bangladesh and is the country’s main export industry. This sector is also the most important provider of formal employment in Bangladesh— in particular, low-skilled, entry-level jobs for young women and men with low or no educational attainment. Current estimates indicate that the RMG sector directly employs approximately 4.2 million people—of whom approximately 60 percent are women (a downward trend in the recent past)7—and indirectly supports as many as 40 million Bangladeshis (about 25 percent of the population).8 Nearly 97 percent of workers in the RMG sector do not enjoy union rights. Between 2010–2018, the GOB rejected 46 percent of the applications filed for TU registration in the RMG sector.9 Without representation, workers in RMG factories have been experiencing constant unfair labor practices including dismissals for union activism and verbal and physical abuse by management and hired enforcers. Moreover, in spite of the large number of female workers and their contributions, their involvement in managerial positions has been consistently lower than men. To date, female union members lack the confidence and skills to negotiate with management about occupational safety and health, wages, working hours, and other issues. Labor rights abuses are also prevalent in other export sectors in Bangladesh. For example, according to a U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) report, Bangladesh’s frozen shrimp and fish processing (SFP) industry relies on goods that are often produced by children and/or under forced labor conditions.10 Further, human rights groups have documented examples of hazardous working conditions, bonded labor, pay 5 On November 24, 2021, the fire at Tazreen Fashions killed 112 workers. 6 On April 24, 2013, a poorly constructed eight-story building called Rana Plaza collapsed, killing more than 1,130 factory workers. 7https://www.emerics.org:446/issueDetail.es?brdctsNo=302491&mid=a10200000000&systemcode=02 8https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---asia/---ro-bangkok/---ilo-dhaka/documents/publication/wcms_735614.pdf 9https://www.newagebd.net/article/73817/97pc-rmg-workers-devoid-of-trade-union-rights-report 10https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ILAB/child_labor_reports/tda2019/Bangladesh.pdf 2 withholding, excessively low wages, health and safety violations, restricted union activities, verbal abuse, and extreme working hours in the FSP industry. Between 2018–2019, the fisheries sector contributed 3.5 percent to the national Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and more than one-fourth (25.7 percent) to the agricultural GDP.11 There are more than 70 factories approved to operate by the Department of Fisheries (DOF) in Bangladesh, but only 40 to 50 are operational.12 Over 80 percent of the shrimp and seafood are being exported to the European Union (EU), while the U.S. market share is at about 4 percent, and other countries account for the remaining 16 percent of exports (DOF, 2019). There are about 1.5 million people involved in the entire shrimp value chain—including farmers, fry producers, depot owners, transport workers, and other traders engaged in ancillary activities.13 It is estimated that there are over 50,000 workers employed in processing factories alone, of whom more than 70 percent are women. Permanent employees are mainly men, while about 80 percent of the contracted workers are women—not supported directly by the factory or the contractors—and kept outside the purview of labor rules and regulations. 1.2 THE WORKERS’ EMPOWERMENT AND PARTICIPATION (WEP) ACTIVITY The Workers’ Empowerment and Participation (WEP) activity began its implementation in August 2019. The WEP activity strives to strengthen the capacity of independent TUs, TUFs, and Worker Community Associations (WCAs) in the RMG and SFP sectors. Further, the activity aims to collectively advocate for workers’ rights and interests and enhance productive interventions with management to constructively participate in improving industrial relations. Workers’ Empowerment and Participation is a follow-on activity to the USAID Workers’ Empowerment Program Component 1: Improving Representation in the Workplace and Component 2: Promoting Rights and Interests in Targeted Garment Communities implemented by the SC from April 2015 to September 2019. The Workers’ Empowerment and Participation activity currently supports USAID Bangladesh CDCS DO1: Improved Democratic Systems that Promote Transparency, Accountability and Integrity, and contributes toward the achievement of IR 1.1: Enhanced Governance and Fiscal Integrity of Institutions and sub-IR 1.1.2: Governance and systems strengthened for workforce, labor, education, resource management, and health. The development hypothesis for the WEP Activity is “If workers and their organizations build the skills and knowledge to negotiate, work collectively, and advocate effectively both in workplaces and in communities, they will be empowered to protect their rights, promote their interests, and, ultimately, improve both labor and living conditions.” As the Results Framework in Figure 1 shows, the WEP Activity comprises two IRs: ● IR 1: Workers are better represented, both inside and outside the workplace, within sustainable, democratically organized, well-managed, and independent worker organizations. ● IR 2: Enabling atmosphere for constructive industrial relations and protection of labor standards enhanced. 11 DOF, 2019. Yearbook of Fisheries Statistics of Bangladesh, 2018–2019. FRSS, DOF, Bangladesh: Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock, 2019. Volume 36, March 2020. 12https://seafood-tip.com/sourcing-intelligence/countries/bangladesh/shrimp/ 13https://www.tbsnews.net/economy/frozen-shrimp-export-drops-10000-tonnes-five-years 3 Figure 1: WEP Activity Results Framework14 The following assumptions underlie WEP’s ability to achieve its objectives: ● GOB support for union registration and enforcement of labor laws does not further decline. ● No major relocation of RMG or SFP factories occurs over the term of the project. ● Garment sector continues to grow at a moderate pace, with the United States and EU as primary markets. ● Influential stakeholders, including employers and the police, do not prevent, threaten, or intimidate workers from participating in training or other activities under the project. ● The political environment in Bangladesh remains stable. 1.3 EVALUATION PURPOSE AND AUDIENCE The overall purpose of this evaluation is to 1) review the progress made toward achieving intended results/outcomes, 2) assess the SC and its sub-partners’ performance in achieving targeted results, 3) identify any lessons learned, and 4) recommend possible programmatic adaptations at the halfway point of WEP’s implementation to maximize results. The Period of Performance (POP) for this mid-term evaluation covers the timeframe from August 2019 to June 2021.The primary intended audience for the evaluation findings and recommendations is the Office of Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance (DRG) of USAID/Bangladesh. 1.4 EVALUATION QUESTIONS This mid-term performance evaluation provides answers to the following six Evaluation Questions (EQs) and three sub-questions: 1. To what extent is the SC on course to meet WEP’s objectives based on progress achieved thus far? 2. To what extent has the SC been able to improve the capacity of factory-based TUs, TUFs, and WCAs as a result of the WEP Activity? 14WEP Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Plan. 4 2a. To what extent has WEP contributed to improving the workers’ living and working conditions? 2b. To what extent has WEP contributed to strengthening constructive dialogue between workers and the organizations that represent them, employers, and other stakeholders? 2c. To what extent has the SC achieved success in assisting, organizing, and registering new unions—especially in factories supplying to major U.S. and EU brands? 3. To what extent has WEP advanced gender equality or female empowerment toward women’s leadership, and how sustainable are these outcomes? 4. How effective has the SC been at managing WEP’s performance? 5. To what extent are the Activity’s objectives still relevant for the current Bangladesh context in the RMG and SFP sectors? 6. How sustainable are the interventions of the WEP Activity? 2. METHODOLOGY The ET used a combination of qualitative and quantitative data collection methodologies to conduct this evaluation. During the inception period, the ET conducted a thorough desk review of documents— including the predecessor activity final report, WEP program description, quarterly and annual reports, Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) Plan, Data Quality Assessment (DQA) Report, annual work plans, baseline study report, factory mapping, activity reports, training materials (agenda and short description of modules), and examples of Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBAs). In addition, the ET reviewed academic and journal articles about the political context in Bangladesh on labor rights and the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) response and impact on the RMG/SFP sectors. Annex 6 includes a full list of documents that the ET reviewed. In coordination with USAID and SC, the ET selected fieldwork sites based on the locations where WEP had worked most intensely. The ET started fieldwork on August 24, 2021—first in the greater Dhaka area and, subsequently, in the Khulna and Chittagong divisions. As Table 1 shows, over the course of five weeks of fieldwork, the ET conducted 76 key informant interviews (KIIs) with WEP stakeholders including: USAID, SC, WEP technical partners (TUFs and Non￾Governmental Organizations [NGOs]), the GOB, employers’ organizations, labor rights organizations, WCC service providers, factory management (RMG/SFP), TU leaders (RMG) and Workers Representatives (SFP), 20 Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with TUF and WCC organizer participants, TUF RMG program participants (workers), TUF members (factory-level union leaders), the WCA Executive Board and leaders, and WCC, RMG, and SFP participants. The ET administered a face-to-face mini-survey to all FGD participants-to collect quantitative data to triangulate participant responses. A total of 117 participants engaged in the FGDs and 111 participants responded to the mini-surveys. Please see Annex 3 for a full list of KII and FGD participants. Table 1: Total of KII, FGD, and Mini-Survey Respondents Category of Stakeholders KII FGD Mini-Survey USAID 4 - - Implementing Partner (IP) 4 - - WEP technical partners 11 - 3 GOB 5 - - 5 Category of Stakeholders KII FGD Mini-Survey Employers’ organizations 4 - - Labor rights organizations 13 - 3 Other development partners 7 - - Factory management (RMG/SFP) 10 - - TUs (RMG)/workers’ representatives (SFP) 10 - - WCC service providers 8 - - TUF organizers/outreach workers - 6 6 WCC coordinators/organizers - 7 7 TUF RMG program participants (workers) - 22 21 TUF members (factory-level union leaders) - 34 34 WCA Executive Board and leaders - 20 15 WCC RMG program participants - 12 12 WCC SFP program participants - 16 16 Total 76 117 111 Upon completing fieldwork, the ET coded the KII and FGD transcripts to synthesize and analyze the data. The team held outbriefs with USAID/Bangladesh on October 19, 2021, and the SC on November 3, 2021, where the team leader presented the evaluation preliminary findings, conclusions, and recommendations. 2.1 EVALUATION LIMITATIONS Selection bias is an inherent risk when implementers facilitate contact with project beneficiaries. Given the sensitivities involved in conducting data collection with workers, the ET coordinated closely with the SC to organize FGDs with select SC stakeholders (technical partners, organizers, and training and service recipients). There was a risk that the SC would select the most active, responsive, or engaged stakeholders—meaning that the ET might only hear from key informants or trainees who reported positive experiences. To mitigate the risk of selection bias, where possible, the ET identified individuals from the initial sample of partners and beneficiaries provided by the SC. Selection bias was more difficult to mitigate with stakeholders such as factory owners, as they tend to have more positive relations with the SC. The ET mitigated this risk by triangulating factory owners’ responses with those from other stakeholders (including beneficiaries and external stakeholders) to provide a balanced view of WEP’s overall relationship with owners. Response bias risk may happen when key informants provide responses that would be considered socially desirable or influential in obtaining donor support. For example, a training participant may provide positive remarks about an activity because s/he would like to attend such trainings in the future or because s/he wants to please the interviewer or other participants in a group. Response bias is connected to cultural and social norms and affected by gender and social ranking; if the first person who speaks in an FGD is the most senior person in the group, other participants might take their cues from this person and only echo his/her responses. The ET mitigated this bias by prefacing KIIs and FGDs with an introduction explaining the learning nature of the evaluation. Further, the ET explained that responses would not directly affect participants’ access to services. The ET triangulated responses from each KII and FGD with information from other stakeholders and data sources throughout the report. Ready-made garment (RMG)and SFP workers often could not be reached due to in-migration, job changes, or incorrect contact information. Due to the emergence of the COVID-19 Delta variant, Bangladesh went into lockdown from July 23 to August 10, 2021.15 After the RMG factories reopened, workers had a 15https://www.aa.com.tr/en/asia-pacific/bangladesh-extends-lockdown-with-worsening-pandemic-situation/2323382 6 limited number of days off. To address this limitation, the team scheduled a number of FGDs on Friday— which is considered a day of rest for workers. Also, they collected data in the SFP sector in Khulna during the full-moon period, the peak of the fishing season. As a result, the team prolonged fieldwork for two additional days to be able to meet with the SFP workers. Finally, participants often recalled the predecessor project activities that were implemented in the past. Therefore, the ET handled the situation carefully and, through probing, guided the key informants to think about recent WEP activities. Notwithstanding the limitations, the team was able to obtain sufficient information to adequately answer the EQs. 3. EVALUATION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 3.1 EQ 1: TO WHAT EXTENT IS THE SC ON COURSE TO MEET WEP’S OBJECTIVES BASED ON PROGRESS ACHIEVED THUS FAR? 3.1.1 Findings Level of Implementation based on the SC Work Plans Workers’ Empowerment and Participation progress reports show that as of June 2021, the SC completed only 36 percent of planned activities during last 23 months, while 13 percent of activities are planned for Quarter 4 (Q4). By the end of Year 2, 51 percent of activities (218 activities) have been postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic (see Figure 2). Figure 2: Overall Status of Implementation of Activities by WEP During Years 1-2 (Q1-Q3) Source: WEP Progress Reports. The biggest number of postponed activities fall under Sub-IR 1.3 on community level advocacy (81) and Sub-IR 1.1 on capacity building of workers’ organizations and community associations (63). Due to pandemic-related restrictions and safety, the SC was not able to conduct all planned capacity-building activities with the TUFs and WCCs. As a result, in each quarter starting from Year 1, Quarter 2 (Q2), between 37 and 50 activities were postponed because of the GOB’s ban on gatherings with more than 10 people. 7 Figure 3: Status of WEP’s Implementation of Activities by Sub-IRs Source: WEP Progress Reports. To assist in responding to the volatile public health emergency and resulting economic strife, the SC—in consultation with USAID, reallocated 5 percent of the total WEP budget for COVID-19 redirection activities. Since May 2020, the SC has implemented eight redirection activities as per its COVID-19 redirection plan.16 It focused activities on awareness raising to stop the spread of COVID-19 and its prevention, advocacy, legal support for worker rights protections related to the COVID-19 crisis, and the distribution of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) such as face masks, gloves, soap, and disinfectants. Level of Achievement of Targets Based on the ET’s review of the SC’s monitoring data, the SC is on track to achieve just over half of its primary indicators. As of Year 2, Q3, six of 18 IR 1 indicators were above the expected level of achievement, eight were partly achieved, and four were not achieved (Figure 4). For IR 2, two of five indicators were above the expected level of achievement, one was partly achieved, and two were not achieved (Figure 4). Two of the outcome indicators on sustainability have not been achieved. Trade union federations have neither developed nor implemented staff management policies, and unions could not collect membership dues from their members according to the set annual targets because of COVID19’s impact on workers’ lives. Figure 4: Level of Achievement of Targets for Years 1–2 (Q1–Q3) Source: WEP Performance Monitoring Plan (PMP). 16 Background information: WEP’s COVID-19 Redirection Plan includes the following activities: 1) mass voice message and SMS; 2) remote negotiation with factory management; 3) advocacy support for worker rights protections related to the COVID-19 crisis; 4) increasing mobile and cellular data plans for union and WCC organizers/coordinators; 5) maintaining the number of union organizers; 6) remote training and/or sharing public health information on COVID-19; 7) distribution of face masks, gloves, soap, and disinfectants; and 8) tracking worker rights violations related to COVID-19 and providing legal assistance. 8 Main Challenges Based on the ET’s document review and accounts from key informants, WEP faced numerous external challenges that affected implementation during the period under review. Due to the COVID-19 outbreak, two out of five key assumptions included in the WEP results framework were no longer relevant, namely, 1) the garment sector will continue to grow at a moderate pace, with the United States and the EU as primary markets, and 2) GOB support for union registration and enforcement of labor laws does not further decline. These two factors had major direct and indirect consequences on WEP’s implementation, according to multiple accounts from stakeholders (USAID, IP, WEP TUF partners, WEP NGO partners, TUF and WCC organizers, labor rights organizations, and other development partners). The RMG sector faced considerable challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, including disruption in production and value chains, postponement/cancellation of payments, lower global demand for goods, and increased price competition both globally and within Bangladesh.17 The pandemic also negatively affected the SFP sector, as the first lockdown coincided with the country’s major annual shrimp farming cycle (February to August). National shutdowns placed limitations on restaurants—leading to an increase in global demand for frozen grocery food items, including shrimp products. Unfortunately, disruption to supply chains due to export restrictions and limited freight shipping of agricultural goods has hampered transportation of goods both locally and internationally.18 According to key informants across multiple stakeholder categories (the SC, USAID, WEP technical partners, labor rights organizations, and other development partners) the number of new union registrations dropped drastically in 2020 due to the prolonged closure of the Directorate of Labor caused by COVID￾19-related lockdowns and the accompanying inability to submit TU registration applications. Other factors affecting the registration process, mentioned during KIIs, included time-consuming and complex union registration procedures19 and the arbitrary rejection of TU registration applications. Due to periodic lockdowns and/or closure of factories, WEP’s factory- and community-level activities either temporarily ceased to operate or slowed down severely. Workers’ Empowerment and Participation partner NGOs kept the WCCs closed for an extended period of time, which understandably obstructed regular activities. The WCAs struggled to operate at the community level since domestic migration of members and non-members increased due to retrenchment20 in the RMG sector. “TU registration is problematic … nepotism, bribe[s], and employers’ interests are acute. There was an ILO Standard Operating Procedures for TU registration, but it did not work.” – KII, Labor Rights Organization 17 Background information: During March–April 2020, brands and retailers of major apparel importing countries cancelled/deferred their orders worth $3.16 billion (Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters Association [BGMEA], 2020). During April 2020, the country’s RMG export growth saw a historic decline of 84.86 percent (BGMEA, 2020). Contract law experts say that applying “force majeure” to cancel orders for which wages have been paid is questionable. The next phase of the crisis began when the government announced “public holidays” due to the COVID-19 outbreak, which lasted from March 29 to May 31, 2020. Most factories were forced to shut down. The remaining open factories had questionable health and safety measures. Still, after all factories became operational, production remains at a level of 50 to 60 percent of capacity. 18 Background information: Eight-five (85) percent of frozen shrimp exported from Bangladesh goes to Europe, while the rest is exported to the United States. However, the second wave of the pandemic has forced Europe and the United States to bar imports from other countries, bringing shrimp exports to a standstill (Khulna Fisheries Inspection and Quality Control Office, 2021). The strict countrywide lockdown in Bangladesh has forced the supply chain system to come to a halt, freezing shrimp distribution across the country as well. This has led to the decline in shrimp prices in local markets, which are forced to sell Galda and Bagda variants of shrimp locally at 600–1,400 taka per kilo, depending on its size and quality—less than half the retail price before the second wave of the pandemic arrived. 19 Background information: As per the Labor Act, the 20 percent threshold constitutes a hurdle for the workforce to organize in large companies. Trade unions formed in a group of establishments can only be registered if they have a membership of at least 20 percent of the total number of workers employed in all establishments. 20 Background information: BGMEA data indicate closure of 113 factories and the loss of 51,529 workers due to retrenchment since the pandemic. 9 At one point, WEP decided to begin implementing activities remotely, but that proved to be challenging. The absence of necessary tools21 (smartphone, computer, and internet connection) for trainings/workshops and the ability of the participants to take full advantage of online events have been challenging. Focus Group Discussions with RMG workers and factory-level unions revealed that they were dissatisfied with online trainings due to excessive noise levels, which resulted in the participants’ inability to fully understand the materials presented to them. Further, as the IP indicated, in addition to the pandemic’s impact on organizing TUs at the factory level and TU registration numbers, COVID-19 also negatively affected the defense of workers’ rights (e.g., to take initiatives against retrenchment, secure regular wages, or secure health-hygiene and social distancing inside factories). 3.1.2 Conclusions ● SC continued implementing the WEP Activity during the COVID-19 pandemic, which created unprecedented obstacles for the SC, and WEP partner TUFs and WCCs, when it came to conducting regular day-to-day activities. ● During the first two years of implementation, over half of WEP’s activities were postponed (more than 218 in total). Intermediate Result 1 activities focusing on TU organizing and defending workers’ rights have been impacted more by the COVID-19 pandemic than IR 2. 3.2 EQ 2: TO WHAT EXTENT HAS THE SC BEEN ABLE TO IMPROVE THE CAPACITY OF FACTORY-BASED TUS, TUFS, AND WCAS AS A RESULT OF THE WEP ACTIVITY? 3.2.1 Findings EQ 2a: To what extent has WEP contributed to improving the workers’ living and working conditions? Access to Services and Improvement in Community Infrastructure Several KII and FGD participants stated that WCA-arranged meetings with local-level government officers and elected officials helped facilitate services for the local community. They also noted that WCAs also consulted with non-government and private-sector actors. The WCA Executive Board and leaders believe significant changes in the communities were attributed to WEP activities. For example, due to WCA initiatives, local bank officials are able to recognize ordinary community members. As a result, workers are able to open bank accounts effortlessly. WCAs prepared maps of the local areas which show important government and related facilities (bank, school/college, government office, health clinic, etc.). In the Savar area, government and nurses can use the WCC resulting in easier access to health services for community residents. In Hemayatpur, the WCA plays a role in overseeing waste management and advocated successfully for the deployment of traffic police in front of two schools. Similarly, WEP is effective in linking WCCs with social service providers in the community. Workers’ Empowerment and Participation reported that 29 service providers (13 public and 16 private) deliver services to participants of WCC activities. Services include access to microcredit and vocational training as well as a variety of health-related interventions such as blood pressure and weight measurement checks, vaccinations, and basic and prenatal health checkups. Three WCA board members helped 20 workers to find new employment by linking them with Ahsania Mission, a training provider. They also established links with Marie Stopes and CARE Bangladesh and negotiated price discounts for caesarian births (12,000 taka vs. the ordinary price of 20,000 taka) for pregnant community members. 21Background information: According to the Groupe Spécial Mobile Association (GSMA) and the Association of Mobile Telecom Operators of Bangladesh (AMTOB), 41 percent of mobile phone users have smartphones in Bangladesh, and only 28 percent of Bangladesh’s total population subscribe to mobile internet services. This is on a par with Pakistan, but less than its peers in South Asia—with India at 36 percent and Sri Lanka at 50 percent. 10 Also, WEP is focusing on building a community of engaged and skilled workers and community members able to solve community-level problems. The SC reported that 19 out of 33 advocacy campaigns initiated by WCAs resulted in improved infrastructure at the community level, e.g., repair/construction of drainage systems, road repairs, and road light installations. Table 2: Number of Successful Advocacy Campaigns Implemented During Years 1–2 (Q1– Q3) Year Location # of Advocacy Campaigns Type of Campaign Year 1 Tongi 2 ● Repair of drainage system ● Repair of damaged road Year 2 Boardbazar 3 ● Road and drainage system modification in front of Oxford School ● Roadside lamp post installation ● Police patrolling the road to reduce muggings Year 2 Fatullah 2 ● Light arrangement on dark road ● Cleaning small canals Year 2 Hemayetpur 2 ● Waste management in front of CP factory ● Road and drain construction Year 2 Mirpur 1 ● Assistance in supporting disabled child Year 2 Konabari 4 ● Raising awareness of using bank accounts ● Construction of drains ● Traffic guard deployed near bridge for workers’ security ● Waste management team poured cleaning agent (bleaching powder) in dustbin near locality Year 2 Rupsha, Khulna 5 ● Collecting donations for treatment of Laily Begum ● Construction of drainage system at Bagmara ● Road light installation ● Repair of drainage system ● Prevented early/child marriage Total: 19 The SC also observed changes in the WCCs’ capacity for resolving community-level problems. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, WCCs advocated for road repairs to enable a safer commute for workers and better garbage disposal in their communities—a key factor of mosquito-borne disease prevention such as malaria and dengue fever. During the pandemic, WCCs were able to negotiate with local hospitals to provide greater access to community members. Even when the hospitals were overrun, the WCCs enabled pregnant workers to be seen quickly in the hospitals. They were also able to provide essential awareness-raising materials about Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) and health and hygiene. Worker Community Centers engaged in these initiatives without seeking support from the SC. As noted in one SC KII, “They [the WCCs] just snapped into action because they had built that infrastructure, they had the skills, and we saw that they did not need us, which is really exciting to see.” Yet, WCA members and WEP NGO partners also cited numerous enduring community problems such as poor road conditions, absence of gas connection, inadequate education facilities, widespread gender￾based violence, and drug addiction. In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on livelihoods as many workers and their family members lost their jobs. In the words of one respondent during a KII with WEP NGO partners, “Many working-class people in the local community have been suffering from financial problems caused by the pandemic, and the WCA could not do anything about it.” 11 Access to Legal Aid Services The COVID-19 pandemic has had a continuing adverse impact on the RMG sector in Bangladesh. Workers have been frequently retrenched and faced wage and leave-related issues. In response to these challenges, WEP partner TUFs and the SC provided legal assistance to 1,169 RMG workers (47 percent male, 53 percent female) from Dhaka and Chattogram to obtain their wages and benefits. As of June 2021, 97 labor court cases have been resolved—resulting in 133 workers receiving unpaid wages and compensation from management in the amount of $41,413, and 21 workers being reinstated in different factories. Yet, these successes represent only 53 percent of all cases that reached the resolution stage of the process. The SC suggests they could not meet the targets due to the labor courts being closed for almost a year-and-a-half and the large backlog of cases. Focus Group Discussions with TUF and WCC program participants from the RMG and SFP sectors confirmed that they had access to legal services, often mentioning examples of grievances with management that unions were able to help resolve. Frozen shrimp and fish processing sector participants mentioned that they received legal services from GOB (Upazila Legal Aid Committee/District Legal Aid Committee [LAC/DLAC]) and also from the SC through the Ruspsha WCC. Working Conditions Most surveyed respondents (96 percent of WCC RMG and SFP participants, 92 percent of factory-level unions, and 75 percent of TUF RMG workers) stated that WEP trainings allowed them to gain a better understanding of labor law and labor rights (e.g., wages, benefits, festival bonus, and compensation). Overall, more than 70 percent of surveyed beneficiaries perceived the WEP trainings as being very effective (86 percent of RMG workers and 73 percent of factory unions) and important for their professional life (100 percent of WCC RMG and SFP participants). Ninety-one (91) percent of surveyed RMG workers stated that they shared the knowledge learned about union organizing, benefits (maternity, leave, health, and termination), health safety, and working hours with coworkers working in the same factories. During the FGDs, organizers and union leaders stated that workers have become more protective of their rights and livelihood, more sensitive about their children’s education, and more aware of their health and safety. Conversely, when worker organizers visited the factories, they noticed that workers wore clean clothes, maintained good hygiene in dining halls, and cleaned their offices regularly. During FGDs, interviewed factory-level union representatives mentioned that they too have been observing changes in conversation with factory management about worker safety and working conditions. For example, new ceiling fans have been installed on the factory floors, which helped to maintain a comfortable factory-floor temperature for workers. The factories have also installed new tiles on the floor of the toilets to ensure that workers do not slip and fall. At the end of every week, management and union leaders analyze all of the complaints received. In many cases, they are able to solve the problems by talking to factory union leaders. According to KIIs with TU leaders, each member of a factory union is now responsible for supervising workers on their floor. Since TU leaders have close contact with both workers and management, when problems arise on the factory floor, TU leaders can immediately contact management to negotiate a solution. Therefore, the RMG workers felt that they now have someone they can count on when faced with hazardous working conditions. “We work on a conditional basis. The salary for an hour of work is only 40 taka. Currently, our salary has increased to 45 taka per hour. Before we did not have the courage to speak at all about this issue.” – FGD, SFP contractual workers “Now all the factories have an attendance bonus of around 400 taka but before it was about 150 taka.” – FGD, WCAs 12 EQ 2b: To what extent has WEP contributed to strengthening constructive dialogue between workers and the organizations that represent them, employers, and other stakeholders? Collective Ability to Articulate Demands During FGDs, the majority of RMG workers stated that they were previously unaware of their rights, but as a result of WEP’s trainings, they became informed. According to 80 percent of surveyed factory-level unions and 81 percent of WCC RMG and SFP participants, WEP has improved workers’ negotiation and bargaining skills and increased their confidence to interact with high-level officials to solve work-related disputes. According to WEP partner TUFs, the WEP trainings helped workers to voice their demands in a systematic way. After training, workers knew how to negotiate in favor of their rights with management. Worker arguments referencing the Bangladesh Labour Act 2006 and human rights perspectives resonate with factory management; and as a result, employers engage with workers more cautiously due to their increased awareness of their rights. Such approaches increased the levels of responsibility and accountability among employers and had a positive impact on industrial relations more broadly. According to labor rights organizations, WEP training educated workers, so they were able to raise legitimate and priority-based demands with management during negotiations. The WCC built good relationships with workers and, as a result, encouraged SFP workers to address community issues and identify effective solutions to benefit the community as a whole. In the past, workers were afraid to voice their concerns; however, now they are comfortable challenging their employers regarding sudden layoffs, lack of benefits, e.g., during long working hours, pregnancy benefits, and cuts to 60 percent of salary during COVID-19. As a result, the perceived level of courage and bargaining power of SFP workers has increased. During KIIs, participants mentioned that WEP technical partners and sub-grantees realize the importance of constructively involving the brands and buyers to effectively pressure employers. In their view, the SC’s support has been crucial in this regard. “A girl had been fired by the factory authorities. I gave her the lawyer’s phone number. She was reinstated in her job.” “I negotiated with the manager of the lab aid clinic to get a discount on the actual medical costs.” “A woman worker did not get her maternity allowance. I talked to [the human resources] admin about it and two days later, she was paid her dues.” Mini-surveys, WCC participants Engagement with Employers Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and associated lockdown, workers faced deprivation of their rights in increasing numbers. Workers’ Empowerment and Participation partner TUFs effectively engaged with employers and achieved successful outcomes for workers’ interests. Monitoring data show that the WEP organized 133 dialogues in Years 1-2 (Q1-Q3); however, most dialogues (69 percent) were informal. In general, garment workers and union leaders trained in negotiating skills under the WEP utilized their ability to constructively engage with management to protect rights and safety and ensure compliance with the labor law. This is demonstrated by the fact that Charters of Demands (CODs) and CBAs were concluded by WEP￾supported TUFs/TUs during the pandemic. Yet, although 15 CODs were submitted by unions to the management, only five CBAs were signed (out of which two were prolonged) as of June 2021. “Now dialogue between TU and management is a regular practice in WEP factories. TU can talk to management directly. For example, on leave during the Eid festival or delay in payment.” – KII, WEP partner TUF “After the WCA has started working, we can say the behavior of the management has changed around 50 percent.” – FGD, WCA Executive Board Members 13 According to the SC program’s management team, although the number of signed CBAs is not large, this is a massive achievement in the context of Bangladesh, where it is not easy to register a union and it is even more challenging to negotiate a CBA that goes beyond the law. Also, at the very beginning of this program, WEP partner TUFs did not have much experience negotiating CBAs; and those that were negotiated did not win much for the workers in terms of new rights. Instead, these CBAs reinforced what the employers were already required to do under the law. After nearly six years of engagement with USAID’s workers’ empowerment related activities, one federation created very strong CBAs and won significant benefits, such as an increase in the incremental wage for workers, better maternity benefits, and increased maternity leave. One even included paternity leave, which was unheard of before WEP’s involvement. Seen collectively, this is a huge step in the right direction considering all the constraints. During KIIs and FGDs, six union leaders stated that not all the provisions of CBAs are always followed by the management. In their view, two main factors affect the lack of adherence to CBAs: 1) employers’ reluctance to implement actions, and 2) union leaders’ insufficient skills to convince management to implement CBA provisions. The SC notes that though it provides capacity building support and CBA guidance to TUFs, the CBA process ultimately involves two parties -- the employer and the union, that work together to come to a final CBA. The SC/WEP cannot dictate the CBA writing process as it is not a party to the CBA. However, the ET’s review of three available CBAs included in the WEP framework showed that there may be opportunity for the TUs and employers to negotiate certain areas further when new agreements are worked out. Some of these areas are: a. Technical terms should be explained in a reader-friendly way in Bangla. b. Stated demands can be more precisely backed by evidence, data, law, and rules. c. Why and how a decision and/or concession has been made needs to be mentioned, at least in brief, in the text for different parties (workers and management, and stakeholders) to understand the entire bargaining process. d. SC could emphasize during training the importance of CBA discussion notetaking and retaining notes for later reference. e. The reason behind the withdrawal of a demand should be mentioned by employers, e.g., the demand proved unworkable, employers need more time, etc. f. Overall, WEP technical partners think that WEP helped to improve worker-management relations. However, partners also mentioned several challenges: difficulties with factory management involvement in stakeholder meetings and conducting TU activities in factories where pressure from management scares union members22; the management-centric structure of Participation Committees (PCs); and factory management sometimes intentionally blacklisting workers and uploading their names into the BGMEA database. In the opinion of interviewed factory management, they stated that they would welcome more coordination with the SC, employers, workers, DOL, DOF, and the Fish Inspection and Quality Control (FIQC) to help improve workers’ conditions in the SFP sector. Establishment of Grievance Procedures So far, the WEP has achieved limited progress in establishing grievance procedures in organized RMG factories. As of June 2021, only three participating factories, instead of the six planned for Years 1 and 2, have set up Grievance Resolution Mechanisms (GRMs) with mandatory arbitration rules. 22 During KIs, WEP partner TUFs mentioned that some factories experienced pressure from management, but they did not specify how many. 14 At the same time, unions became more capable in dealing with disputes through GRMs and developed better capacity for dispute resolution. This is evidenced by the fact that all 46 disputes (Termination, 10; Payments, 4; Violence and Harassment, 16; Others, 16) submitted through established grievance procedures were settled in favor of workers. WEP partner TUFs’ strong efforts were key in these achievements. KIIs revealed management and unions generally have good relationships when grievance procedures are in place as GRMs enable quick resolution of disputes. “These days we are more effective in [the] GRM instead of going to court straightaway. We learned the effective use of GRM from SC.” – KII, WEP partner TUF EQ 2c: To what extent has SC achieved success in assisting, organizing, and registering new unions, especially in factories supplying to major U.S. and EU brands? Workers’ Empowerment and Participation (WEP) monitoring data indicate that the activity is generally achieving its indicator targets for Sub-IR 1.1, Worker Organizations in Targeted Factories Organized. WEP activity exceeded its Year 1 targets for the number of new worker organizations and met 89 percent of its Year 2 targets (Figure 5). While WEP only achieved 79 percent of its Year 1 target for the number of workers (union and non-union) in organized factories covered by union/independent Workers’ Participation Committee (WPC) benefits, it has already exceeded its Year 2 target. This happened because some of WEP’s partner TUFs made a strategic decision to organize in larger factories. During the first 23 months of WEP implementation, a total of 40 new unions and worker-driven organizations in the garment and shrimp processing sectors were organized and22 new garment unions were registered (14 unions in Year 1 and eight in Year 2, Q1-Q3). Most of the organized and/or registered unions under WEP are in factories that supply to major U.S. and EU brands, thus demonstrating that WEP is successful in organizing workers among factories supplying major U.S. and EU brands. Figure 5: Worker Organizations in Targeted Factories (August 2019–June 2021) Document reviews and KII and FGD participant observations indicate that challenges to TU organizing have increased since WEP began implementation. Between 2010 and 2020, 593 TUs were registered in the RMG sector. There was a significant increase in TU applications and registrations after the 2013 Rana Plaza collapse, but registrations have steadily declined since then. According to SC data, new TU registrations have decreased from a high of 182 in 2014 to 11 in 2020. On average, the GOB approved only 54 percent of union applications. 15 Figure 6: Trade Union Registration in the RMG Sector 2010-2020 (#) Focus Group Discussion participants (RMG workers and factory-level unions) described employers and management using their significant financial and political power to effectively suppress TU formation and consolidation through direct threats of violence against TU leaders and active members, and unlawful dismissals or forced resignations of union activists. Four out of eight interviewed RMG TU leaders reported losing their jobs. Leaders received TUF protection and launched legal proceedings to reclaim their jobs and lost compensation in a lengthy legal process that is often very burdensome for all parties involved. In the SFP sector, TUs are officially allowed; however, there are only 13 registered unions and no new unions have been registered since 2012. Focus Group Discussions with WCC organizers indicate that TU positions in these unionized factories consist of workers who side with employers in exchange for financial benefits. Key Informant Interviews with SFP employers and employers’ organizations demonstrate negative attitudes toward unions in general. In their view, union leaders always focus on accruing power and personal benefits rather than advocating for workers’ rights. For that reason, WEP works through owner-sanctioned PCs, which include management representatives. 3.2.2 Conclusions ● Despite successes in different areas such as increasing the skills of factory workers, strengthening constructive dialogue, and supporting workers suffering from unfair labor practices, there is still room for improving the TUFs’ performance in strengthening the capacity of factory-level unions. Nevertheless, there was a slight improvement in signing the CBAs. However, dissatisfaction exists among factory-level union leaders about the follow-up implementation of CBAs. ● WEP has increased workers’ understanding of their rights and labor laws. ● WCAs have yet to maximize their potential (e.g., create a support base in the community in favor of workers’ rights in the RMG/SFP sectors). ● WCCs/WCAs appear effective in linking community members to social services, facilitating advocacy, and improving the responsiveness of local government. There are specific examples of how WCCs/WCAs have positively impacted worker communities, especially during the pandemic. For instance, WCCs/WCAs distributed PPE, engaged in advocacy campaigns to improve infrastructure, assisted with providing affordable healthcare, and addressed family issues—including cases of forced marriage and domestic violence. “Unions could not work successfully as personal gain got priority over workers’ life and livelihood.” “If we could fully functionalize PC and Safety Committee, it will serve the purpose of union.” KIIs, SFP factory management 16 3.3 EQ 3: TO WHAT EXTENT HAS WEP ADVANCED GENDER EQUALITY OR FEMALE EMPOWERMENT TOWARD WOMEN’S LEADERSHIP, AND HOW SUSTAINABLE ARE THESE OUTCOMES? 3.3.1 Findings Advancing gender equality and female empowerment toward women’s leadership Based on document review and KIIs, WEP advanced three main strategies to increase the role played by women in TU leadership, namely: 1) employing female organizers, 2) offering women’s leadership training, and 3) encouraging TUFs to include women on factory TU executive committees. Under the TUF/TU component, the ratio of female TUF worker organizers remained the same as in the previous USAID WEP. This ratio stands at 40 percent, i.e., 14 out of 36 TUF worker organizers supported by the SC are female. A total of 268 women were elected to leadership positions in unions (131 in Year 1 and 137 in the first three quarters of Year 2), and 94 percent were elected for the first time. According to KIIs with WEP TUF partners and the FGD with TUC organizers, there is a noticeable behavioral change among male members of TUs. Prior to WEP, male TU members were not comfortable accepting women on TU committees, and women workers lacked interest in joining unions. Now, WEP partner TUFs prioritize supporting women to run for and be elected to leadership positions. They try to ensure that a woman is either the President or the Secretary in TUs, and two-thirds of TU members in the garment factories are women. Solidarity Center data reveal that, currently, 40 percent of WEP partner TUFs affiliated union leaders are women. In KIIs, WEP partner federations claimed that they have started emphasizing women’s committees. One WEP partner TUF formed a central-level committee at the beginning of 2021, and the committee is now working to form women’s committees at the factory level. Another TUF planned to submit a TU registration application for a factory and a proposed TU committee comprising 20 out of 24 female members. Further, unions are now engaging more with women workers in factories to better understand women’s specific needs (e.g., Charters of Demands [CODs] submitted by unions to the employers and the CBAs concluded in the framework of WEP). All 15 CODs and five CBAs have gender-responsive clauses about maternity benefits, paternity leave, ultrasonography services for pregnant female workers, sanitary napkins for female workers, daycare center facilities on factory grounds, promotion of female workers to higher positions, separate prayer halls and restrooms for male and female workers, and formation of anti-sexual￾harassment committees. In addition, a WEP partner TUF sent grievance letters to the RMG Sustainability Council on behalf of 125 pregnant female workers—which resulted in all of them getting rehired. According to the KII with WEP TUF partners, these kinds of successes tend to attract and inspire women workers. However, KII and FGD participants reported that, in spite of these positive developments, there are continuing challenges in engaging women in TU activities. The SC senior program managers affirmed that retention of factory-level women leaders is an issue, explaining that women leaders drop out due to pressure from families and communities. Several KIIs highlighted that although SC was making progress in building a cadre of mid-level women leaders, the majority of top TUF leaders and TU leaders are men, indicating there is more work to be done. Shifting the mindsets and helping to transform power structures within TUs requires time. Similarly, the number of women in RMG TUs is still low due to social and family￾level obstacles as well as lack of security. During one FGD, RMG workers noted, “Women workers [are] scared a lot since they live here alone, without their family. They know if they participate in the union activities, they may be harassed by the local gang.” Further, the RMG workers also stated that the wage disparity “We are doing something taboo-breaking … in meetings in the presence of religious leaders, a discussion takes place on the importance of the use of sanitary napkins. It is something extraordinary in the context of our society.” – KII, WEP NGO partner 17 between male and female workers is still present in factories. “When we discuss gender equality, for example, we are considered to be requesting a special privilege. They see it as a benefit, despite the fact that it is our right.” Under the community component, the ratio of WCC women and male worker organizers is equal. Most of WCA Executive Board members and leaders are also women, i.e., 74 percent and 65 percent respectively. In addition, 16 women were elected to WCA leadership positions where they represent the needs of workers and families in their community—particularly issues that disproportionately impact women. According to KIIs, WEP activities broke the silence among women, encouraged them to speak up, and enabled them to engage in community issues besides family and work. Women are now aware of workers’ rights and basic legal issues, and the sense of empowerment has increased among them. The survey among the WCA Executive Board members and leaders showed that most of them (80 percent) were able to prevent local and labor disputes between factory workers and among family members in the communities (husband and wife, sons and parents, and between brothers). Awareness raising on gender equality and inclusion The SC has expanded the coverage of gender-related topics to include Gender-Based Violence and Harassment (GBVH). Gender-Based Violence and Harassment topics were covered in PIC meetings, consultations on staff management and professional development of TUFs, and mentoring meetings with WCC staff. During FGDs, factory-level union representatives stated that the number of sexual harassment and abuse cases has been reduced in their factories due to the unity among and awareness of workers. However, in KIIs with several labor rights organizations, participants mentioned that many employers are not aware of the transgressions of factory management (specifically, supervisor-level staff). Participants highlighted that women workers face the prospect of being fired if they refuse the advances of supervisors. Ready-made garment workers interviewed also highlighted during FGDs that workers are hesitant to complain to the authorities, as they must provide identification (their name and factory designation)— which also might end in them losing their employment. One of the main goals of the WEP technical partners is to prioritize women’s participation. The ET desk review revealed that 71 percent of women (4,821) participated in WEP activities. Further, the SC reported over 2,784 participants (73 percent female) in WCC training activities, OSH, Civic Education, Health and Hygiene, and Family and Community Support during the last 23 months. After participating in WEP trainings, female workers were more aware of their rights; and when those rights are not being adhered to, they are now able to raise their voices to demand them. All surveyed WCC RMG and SFP program participants who attended WEP trainings learned how to access public health-related services (e.g., COVID-19 treatment, doctor visits, etc.), and 79 percent assisted co-workers with accessing these services. Based on feedback from FGDs, participants found trainings offered in the WCCs to be highly relevant. Data on how training programs changed participant behaviors are limited to anecdotal evidence provided in SC reports and by participants during FGDs. Women’s participation has increased significantly in activities such as protesting against child marriage and harassment, using family dispute resolution, and engaging the community. However, improvement is slower as women continue to juggle family/home responsibilities with their jobs. For example, single mothers face social pressures, the legacy of an uncompromising mindset, and poverty. Workers’ Empowerment and Participation reports indicate that more than 40 events focused on gender could not take place during the first 23 months of the Activity, including 26 gender awareness￾raising workshops; 10 gender equality and inclusion trainings with RMG, SFP, and WCA leaders; three “For us, gender is a big issue. At one point, we fixed a target of 80 percent women in a TU. We are yet to reach the target. Now we have 60 percent women in our TUs, but previously, it was just 15-20 percent.” – KII, WEP partner TUF 18 women’s leadership workshops for TUF and factory-level union leaders; and four gender dialogues with male and female workers (RMG, SFP, and WCC). In Year 1, these trainings and events did not happen due to COVID-19; while in Year 2, the SC prioritized OSH, health, and hygiene trainings instead because these topics were urgent during the ongoing pandemic. 3.3.2 Conclusions ● The WEP Activity has increased awareness of gender equality and implemented initiatives (employing female organizers, offering women’s leadership training, and encouraging TUFs to include women on factory TU executive committees) to increase the number of women in TU/TUF leadership. There is a consensus about the need to further increase women members in TUs/TUFs. ● The ET has observed positive developments in promoting gender equality and inclusion in the workplace; however, bringing noteworthy positive changes in the gender development mindset of RMG/SFP workers and the community is challenging. ● WEP improves women’s access to decision-making roles through capacity building both in factories and in the community. However, until a significant number of TUs and factory-level committees are formed, it is difficult to measure improvement. ● Sustaining the presence of women organizers and leaders in organizing efforts is challenged by gender roles and cultural issues (e.g., women are expected to tend to family issues and adhere to societal expectations). 3.4 EQ 4: HOW EFFECTIVE HAS SC BEEN AT MANAGING WEP’S PERFORMANCE? 3.4.1 Findings WEP visibility Key informant interviews revealed that WEP is well known to the GOB and employers’ organizations in the SFP sector; however, in the RMG sector, WEP’s visibility appeared lower in comparison to the SFP sector among the GOB and employers’ organizations interviewed. The same is true for the other development partners,23 non-WEP-supported TUFs, and most labor rights organizations.24 While SC is well known to all stakeholders interviewed, opinions about it differ. Some consider SC to be one of the front runners among the international organizations working in the area of workers’ rights and TUs. Others perceive it as a very outspoken and activist-like organization. Some development partners were unaware that USAID funds and works on labor issues. This could be a result of the extended absence of a U.S.G. Labor Attaché in Bangladesh and the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic hindered the public visibility of the WEP Activity because: 1) the SC could not organize many public events and 2) the development partners, who support the RMG sector, could not conduct regular meetings. SC relationships with WEP technical partners and the donor Senior SC program staff and leaders from partner organizations highlighted the longstanding and supportive partnership the SC has developed with its local counterparts. Workers’ Empowerment 23 The International Labor Organization (ILO), Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), Canadian High Commission, Embassy of Netherlands, and Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). 24Non-partner TUFs: United Federation of Garments Workers (UFGW), National Garments Workers Federation (NGWF), Bangladesh Textile and Garments Workers League (BTGWL), Bangladesh Apparels Workers Federation (BAWF), Bangladesh Garments, Textile & Leather Workers' Federation (BGTLWF), Garments Tailors Workers League (GTWL), Shadhin Bangla Garments Sramik Karmachari Federation (SBGSKF), local think Tank/Research Organization and NGO Center for Policy Dialogue (CPD), Bangladesh Institute of Labor Studies (BILS), and Bangladesh National Woman Lawyers' Association (BNWLA). “Previously, there was violence towards female workers. Management used abusive language and humiliated workers, but this is no longer happens.” – FGD, WCAs 19 Program partner TUFs and NGOs confirmed that both sides interact on an as-needed basis and feel comfortable contacting the SC at any time. Key Informant Interviews with federations reported that the SC provides them with ample support when confronted with difficult tasks such as CBA placement, legal writing, and union organizing. They also noted that the SC is regularly in touch with WEP organizers. At the same time, technical partners also shared criticisms during KIIs. One federation mentioned that the SC should seek partners’ feedback during the design phase. As one participant stated: “SC can first ask for opinions from partners and then consult USAID. In fact, we as an organization follow this style. We talk to the beneficiaries first.” The ET has also observed that there is hardly any interaction between the TUF/TU and community components. As a result, these two components work almost like two distinct programs. During KIIs, only two of the six WEP partner TUFs were able to describe the community component; the remaining four stated that they are not aware of the work being done under that component. As per the Cooperation Agreement, the SC is supposed to engage in strategic collaboration with partners by establishing a PIC that links workplace and community organizing activities. As evident from the SC progress reports, only three PIC meetings took place (in October 2019, June 2020, and August 2020) over the last 23 months. In addition, leadership capacity and organizational ability vary among WEP technical partners. Two federations and one NGO partner have a better understanding of the WEP, international issues, and stakeholders related to the RMG sector. In contrast, the other two partner federations are mostly engaged with problems focused on factory-level issues of the workers, and the two remaining partners stand somewhere in between. In-person biweekly calls have taken place between the Mission and the SC Dhaka staff since before the COVID-19 period. Since May 2020, the SC headquarters (HQ) staff have regularly joined the virtual biweekly meetings. This ensured that there has been no gap in communication between the SC and USAID even after the SC CPD departed in February 2021.25 Engagement with Employer Organizations and GOB According to KIIs, although willing, WEP partner TUFs were not confident and comfortable in dialogues with employers’ associations—noting that they find these organizations very powerful and sometimes “arrogant”. The GOB officials interviewed agreed with TU/TUF representatives' assessment that employers have disproportionate power compared to workers. At the same time, these same officials are skeptical about the skills and capacity of TU/TUF leaders. Per KIIs with national-level government agencies, TUFs do not maintain regular contact with the GOB. For example, the DOL refused numerous TU registration applications due to problems with the lists of workers provided. According to a GOB KI, a TUF can get an accurate list of workers in a factory if it contacts DOL before applying for permission for a TU in a factory. According to the SC, workers’ rights are regularly infringed upon by some government entities. Therefore, it is not always feasible to maintain regular contact with the GOB on matters related to workers and 25 From February to June 2021, the WEP activity did not have a country-level senior manager. On April 15, 2021, the SC appointed AKM Nasim as the Deputy Country Program Director. “The relationship between SC and our federation cannot be described only in financial terms. It is bigger than that… it is a moral relation. We have a ‘sisterly’ feeling about SC.” – KII, WEP Partner TUF “Workers and employers cannot be in constant peaceful relations. It is a dialectic relationship. We try to minimize the gap in understanding between these two forces.” – KII, GOB 20 organizing. Nonetheless, ET recommends that TUF and TU leaders maintain regular communications with Ministry of Labour and Employment officials and invite them to participate in WEP training programs. Key informant interviews revealed that the GOB and SC interactions have not been smooth in the past due to the SC’s support for labor organizers, which pitted well-connected employers’ perceived interests against those of workers and their unions. Currently, the GOB cautiously interacts with the SC, but uneasiness exists. “.At one point, we … decided to work with the SC and start being involved as resource persons in trainings organized by them. It was a delicate decision … DOL and SC relations are better now. It mainly depends on how the DOL DG perceives these [labor rights] organizations. There is now a gap due to the pandemic.” – KII, GOB WEP links well to local government through WCCs/WCAs. Two representatives of the GOB in Khulna mentioned their collaboration with the WEP community component on awareness raising and connecting WCC participants with public social protection programs. The representatives also attended WEP trainings on Participation Committee and Safety Committee formation, noting that “SC activities in [the] SFP sector provide additional parallel support to [the] GOB.” Further, one WEP NGO sub-awardee cited collaboration with the Union Council, bank, Upazilla office, and government health centers. “In the past, the local government was not always supportive of women. But now they are more active about [women’s] concerns as they know [local government] will face troubles if they do not take suitable actions … they will be held responsible for the fact that they did not take action against offences. This is excellent support for ladies in the community which happened thanks to WEP.” – KII, WCC Service Provider Workers’ Empowerment and Participation NGO partners also mentioned that at the start of the pandemic, WCAs had a number of initiatives for creating linkages between WCC members and various public and private organizations to ensure humanitarian aid assistance. The WCC staff prepared lists of workers and community members who were in need of humanitarian assistance, and WCA leaders sent these lists to Upazila Nirbahi officers, social welfare officers, the local union parishad chairman, members, and ward councilors. Yet, according to KIIs, WEP’s communication with WCC service providers is not frequent due to the pandemic—as WEP has held only three of the nine public-private stakeholders’ roundtables planned with service providers over the past 23 months. WEP capacity development The SC conducts annual capacity assessments of WEP TUF partners. After reviewing the assessment tools, the ET found that they are in line with good practices of organizational development.26 Nevertheless, it is difficult to reflect on the actual level of usage of these instruments in WEP’s work as the SC did not share assessment reports with the ET. Information about organizational strengthening progress with WEP partner TUFs was not included in the progress reports; therefore, the ET was not able to evaluate the progress of democracy and governance, gender integration, collective bargaining, financial management, organizing and recruitment, and advocacy. According to KIIs and FGDs, the SC did not train the management or owners to improve communication with the workers—and this is perceived as an area that needs improvement. As WEP primarily provides capacity-building activities, the ET reviewed the available training module materials (see Annex 5 for more details). The review showed that short-term trainings (half- or one-day trainings) conducted under the Activity focused on too many topics, which negatively affected participants’ 26 SC is using the Trade Union Capacity Index Scale (TU CapSAT) to measure the level of organizational strengthening of TUFs. TU CapSAT looks at six core areas: democracy and governance, gender integration, collective bargaining, financial management, organizing and recruitment, and advocacy. 21 ability to learn/understand all concepts and, in turn, limited the time for discussion. On a positive note, FGDs revealed that the SC had started to involve more TUF worker organizers in delivering trainings. WEP monitoring and reporting The ET conducted a document review of WEP’s MEL Plan, quarterly reports, and monitoring data submissions. The MEL Plan is well written and contains all key aspects needed to establish a proper M&E system for the program. However, the implementation of this plan is challenging as WEP lacks an adequate number of M&E staff on the ground. According to KIIs, the biggest challenge for the SC is to ensure implementation of a Collaborating, Learning, and Adapting (CLA) approach to guide both internal project staff and local practitioners to systematically share and learn from their work and improve their performance. During several KIIs, it became apparent that staff of WEP NGO partners had not received a monitoring system from the SC. While WEP is focusing on providing capacity building to a very large number of workers and community members,27 the SC does not have a Management Information System (MIS)—which would allow the Activity to properly store data on trainees and conduct different analyses of training participants. The WEP’s database comprises several Excel spreadsheets. The selection criteria for participants in the trainings and workshops are not available for both the TUF/TU and community components. A review of WEP’s Performance Monitoring Plan (PMP) demonstrates that the indicators do not cover all aspects of the Activity. This includes the legal program, capacity-building activities under the TUF/TU component, and awareness-raising activities under the community component. Also, the Activity does not systematically collect and report on government officials’ and employers’ participation in program activities under both components. A template for progress reports was agreed upon by the SC with USAID. In the course of the WEP implementation, some adjustments were made to the reporting template, e.g., the WEP Snapshot28 started being reported in the Year 2, Q2 report, and a distinct section with summaries of activities implemented by Awaj Foundation began to be included in the Year 2 quarterly reports based on the Agreement Officer’s Representative’s (AOR) recommendation. At the same time, the ET noted that the reporting is not consistent with the activity’s description and/or thematic areas. As a result, it is not always easy to analyze the reported results against the planned activities and targets. 3.4.2 Conclusions ● The SC was hampered in its ability to manage the WEP Activity effectively by several factors including turnover of leadership, the activity’s low visibility, and limitations on SC’s ability to implement due to COVID-19 restrictions. Despite these issues, the SC, WEP TUF and Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) partners were able to adapt their activities to respond to COVID-19 obstacles by providing legal support to terminated workers, facilitating humanitarian aid access to community members and workers, and spreading COVID-19 health awareness guidance. ● Improvements in coordination are needed to improve management effectiveness (e.g., between WEP components, with GOB at the national level, with factory management, and among WEP partner TUFs). 27 As of June 2021, 184 capacity-building events were held—with 4,148 participants. 28 The WEP Snapshot includes the data on key indicators on union and community outreach accomplishments, with disaggregation on quarterly, annual, and cumulative results since May 1, 2015, under the ongoing WEP activity and former Workers’ Empowerment Program Component 1 and Component 2. 22 ● WEP’s M&E system needs to be strengthened to better capture the Activity’s achievements, challenges, lessons learned, and best practices. 3.5 EQ 5: TO WHAT EXTENT ARE THE ACTIVITY’S OBJECTIVES STILL RELEVANT TO THE CURRENT BANGLADESH CONTEXT IN THE RMG AND SFP SECTORS? 3.5.1 Findings Based on WEP program documents, the activity has a dual focus on worker communities and the workplace to strengthen workers’ ability to protect their rights, promote their interests, and improve labor conditions. In principle, this is a holistic approach that should allow real empowerment and change in workers’ lives. This strategy is also in line with ILO Convention No. 190 that recognizes the universal right to a world of work free from violence and harassment, including GBVH.29, 30 Guided by this Convention, USAID merged the predecessor program with the more encompassing WEP Activity in 2019. One key informant mentioned that WEP is more elaborate than ILO’s Better Work Program since it is working at both the factory and community levels. Nevertheless, the synergies and/or collaboration between the two components (TUF/TU and community) are difficult to notice under the current WEP Activity. The WEP Work Plan does not include any joint activities between these components, with the exception of participation in PICs. The continuation of support of the factory-level unions in their struggle to obtain recognition is still needed. In KIIs with union leaders and FGDs with RMG workers, stakeholders noted that they frequently experience the following challenges: threats from the factory owners and local syndicate, termination of employment, excessive workload, absence of leaves, and mental pressures. The participants stated that the employers and management dislike factory unions; however, the government generally sides with the factory owners. As one TU leader described, “During COVID, the management instructed us to perform additional duties. They told us that we had to follow the factory rules because management had imposed their own rules on us that we had to follow. We told them that the factory could not have any personal rules implemented and should follow the labor laws. As a result, we were let go.” Female RMG workers who were interviewed mentioned that management dislikes it when workers talk to them about their demands. Since workers became more aware of their rights if they join unions, management created a frightening environment so that no one would communicate with the union leadership, thus preventing them from joining the union. BFFEA officials believe that engaging in the formation of a factory-level union hampers workers’ productivity and, in turn, has a negative impact on the overall business. The Bangladesh Institute of Labor Studies (BILS) reported that the RMG sector lost approximately 350,000 jobs—representing 13.9 percent of the total employed labor force during the pre-COVID period (December 2020). While TUs should be playing a key role in addressing workers’ concerns, most workers are not yet unionized—only 4.2 percent of the total labor force are active TU members. Further, only 11.6 percent of the workers are involved in TU-related activities in the RMG sector.31 Therefore, other WEP objectives (supporting factory-level unions to bargain collectively with employers, preventing and ending GBVH both inside and outside the workplace) are relevant. While KIIs and FGDs indicate that, due to WEP support, workers understand the need for collective bargaining, development of it is in the very initial stages. Further organizing work is needed in the SFP sector as it does not yet 29 Article 4 states: “With a view to preventing and eliminating violence and harassment in the world of work, each Member shall respect, promote and realize the fundamental principles and rights at work, namely freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining, the elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labor, the effective abolition of child labor and the elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation, as well as promote decent work.” 30https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_INSTRUMENT_ID:3999810 31 BILS (2020). The Impact of COVID-19 on Employment in Bangladesh: Pathway to an Inclusive and Sustainable Recovery. Dhaka: Bangladesh Institute of Labor Studies. 23 have any active unions. Also, cases of GBVH are still present in the RMG sector, and 27 percent of surveyed RMG workers experienced gender-based violence in the workplace. Violence and harassment are major factors in both men and women workers leaving their place of employment. Other factors include pregnancy, which is the leading reason for women leaving the RMG sector, while work-related stress is the leading cause for men.32 Based on interviewed factory unions, negotiating with employers and management is the most effective way to resolve labor issues. In SC trainings, Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) communicate that though strikes can be an important tool, they are a risky strategy for workers given the possible harsh repercussions. These need to be seriously considered before such a decision is made. 3.5.2 Conclusions ● TUF/TU activities are immensely relevant and should be continued. o Workers’ rights have not been ensured in the unionized factories. o Workers’ information about their rights and the importance of TUs is rudimentary. o Registered and active TUs are still absent in an overwhelming majority of factories, especially in the SFP sector where they are entirely absent. ● Community activities are, to some extent, a unique experiment that attempts to include community people in workers’ rights activities. Worker Community Associations are important to create a community support base in favor of workers and workers’ rights. If successful, the WCA model could be the legacy of the WEP activity and encourage other organizations to follow the same approach. 3.6 EQ 6: HOW SUSTAINABLE ARE THE INTERVENTIONS OF THE WEP ACTIVITY? 3.6.1 Findings As per the Cooperation Agreement, one of WEP’s main focuses is to build strong, independent, and self￾sustaining workers’ organizations capable of withstanding intense employer resistance. The WEP planned to achieve this through organizational development, promotion of financial sustainability, and the strengthening of leadership capacity in the TUFs, factory unions, and WCAs. Sustainability of WEP partner TUFs Key informant interviews confirmed that the SC has provided support to four out of six WEP partner TUFs since 2000. Support for all current TUFs began in 2015 through USAID’s WEP. As is evidenced by the documents reviewed, WEP partner TUFs have different levels of experience. Four were established 15 to 24 years ago, while two were established only six to 10 years ago (Table 3). Table 3: Years of Registration of WEP Partner TUFs33 Year TUF 1997 BIGUF 2001 BRGWF 2003 BGIWF 2006 SGSF 32 ILO (2020). Issue Brief: “Understanding the Gender Composition and Experience of Ready-Made Garment (RMG) Workers in Bangladesh.” 33 Bangladesh Independent Garment Workers Union Federation (BIGUF), Bangladesh Revolutionary Garments Workers Federation (BRGWF), Bangladesh Garment and Industrial Workers Federation (BGIWF), Sommilito Garments Sramik Federation (SGSF), Akota Garment Workers Federation (AGWF), and Garment Workers Solidarity Federation (GWSF). 24 Year TUF 2010 AGWF 2014 GWSF Trade union federations differ in size, with the largest number of affiliated unions being 31 and the smallest 11. Figure 7 demonstrates how the capacities of WEP partner TUFs also vary. The Sommilito Garments Sramik Federation (SGSF) (31), Akota Garment Workers Federation (AGWF) (22), and the Bangladesh Revolutionary Garments Workers Federation (BRGWF) (19) achieved the best performance in TUF union registration, while the Garment Workers Solidarity Federation (GWSF) (11) delivered low performance. Figure 7: SC TUF Union Registration Data within WEP Activity (2015–2021) In the framework of WEP, USAID originally planned that SC would gradually decrease the number of supported organizer staff from 40 in Year 1 to 20 in Year 4. As per the WEP agreement, SC revised the number of organizers to 36 in Year 2. This number will be maintained throughout the life of the activity. Figure 8: Number of Organizers Receiving SC Mentoring and Support as of Year 2 In KIIs, WEP partner TUF leaders confirmed that their capacity has improved in preparing drafts and documents for the GOB and making informed and evidence-based arguments in tripartite meetings and in dialogue with employers and management. The capacity of the in-house trainers has also increased. Despite this, none of the WEP partner TUFs have developed and implemented staff management policies. Also, only two of four planned TUF Sustainability Planning Workshops and two of 11 planned Sustainability Planning Consultations with TUF leaders took place. Further, 50 percent of surveyed TUF organizers reported that the sustainability workshops for planning TU activities were somewhat ineffective, and only 33 percent rated them as very effective. All interviewed WEP partner TUFs stated that they need between seven to 15 years to become financially self-reliant and capable of running their organizations effectively. All indicated that they do not receive any financial support from other development partners to manage their organizing and union-strengthening 25 activities. Nevertheless, five of six WEP partner TUFs confirmed that they do obtain some technical assistance (e.g., campaign support and capacity building) from a variety of organizations.34 Moreover, KIIs with WEP partner TUFs showed that only one of six WEP partner TUFs was able to institute union dues check-off systems, which make it easier for affiliated factory unions to generate the financial resources needed to effectively represent their members. During KIIs, TUF leaders mentioned that they are not doing well with members’ dues collection. Trade union federations collecting dues from TUs during Year 1 was incredibly difficult as the pandemic commenced during Q2 of the project’s first year. Given the disruptive nature of the pandemic on factories and workers, TUFs were not well positioned to collect dues from TUs, as they were operating in a crisis environment with workers returning to home villages due to lockdowns, and significant worker terminations and retrenchments. As a whole, if WEP ends in two years, all WEP partner TUFs believe they will likely need to scale down their activities and appoint less qualified organizers with lower salary requirements. Six interviewed worker organizers mentioned that due to having been working in the federations for several years, they have “forgotten about” the garment job; therefore, it will be difficult for them to find new work. A few WEP partner TUFs stated that those federations which are not getting external assistance survive by working in favor of BGMEA and employers. Key informant interviews with SC, WEP TUF partners, labor rights organizations, other development partners, and FGDs with workers organizers and TU leaders brought up several obstacles that make institutional sustainability for RMG TUFs in Bangladesh a challenging task. Although TUFs are trying to raise workers’ voices, acceptance of TUFs across the workers’ community has yet to be established. There is also a lack of unity among TUFs. Consequently, TUFs cannot play a large role during worker unrest; instead, industrial police take that role. A concern raised in KIIs stipulated that certain TUs are well￾connected with the GOB and employers and thus independent TUs are afraid of being punished. The problem of disorganized TUs and workers is acute. Workers are afraid of being blacklisted. There is a biometric database of workers that is overseen by BGMEA and the Bangladesh Knitwear Manufacturers and Exporters Association (BKMEA). Employers can access all information about workers in this database. As a result, if a worker is blacklisted in one factory, all other factories have access to that information. Thus, factory management can deliberately inform and share information about an employee with other factories to prevent that person from being employed again. Also, as became evident from KIIs with development partners, the main sources of funding for worker rights local NGOs in Bangladesh are international donors. Sustainability of factory-level unions The unions have a much stronger base, but with a few caveats. As is evident from the SC reports, factory￾level unions are able to collect union membership dues. In Year 1, 33 unions collected membership dues (AGWF-13, BIGUF-7, BGIWF-4, BRGWF-2, SGSF-4, and GWSF-3). While WEP did improve the capacity of union leaders to organize, KIIs with union leaders indicate that the dues amount per worker amounts 34 Note: WEP partner TUFs receive technical support from the following organizations: IndustriALL Bangladesh Council or IBC (AGWF); Clean Cloth Campaign, Worker Rights Consortium, International Labor Rights Forum, Industrial Global Union, 3F, and others (BIGUF); Canadian Labor Union, International Labor Rights Forum (BGIWF); 3F (BRGWF); The Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung and ILO (SGSF). “We are very cautious about the future. The pandemic hit us hard.” – KII, WEP partner TUF “We have a union dues check￾off system and it is successful— 80 to 100 percent of workers contribute through this system.” – KII, WEP partner TUF “They [TUFs] would be able to continue to operate, but without support from USAID and SC that progress certainly will be slower.” – KII, SC 26 to only 10 to 20 taka. This sum is low and is generally used to organize small meetings and assist injured workers. Running a large program like they do with the WEP’s support would be impossible for factory-level unions without the support of external actors. It would be challenging for workers to pay the needed level of dues to sustain their unions and continue to organize workers. According to World Bank data, RMG workers’ nominal wages declined by 8 percent in September 2020 compared to December 2019. And the decline in income of salaried workers was much higher (49 percent) due to a sharp reduction in demand for their services.35 The future of independent TU/TUF activities will depend to a great extent on the successful collection of dues. Currently, this is often impeded by employers not allowing unions to collect dues through a check￾off system, which is a labor law violation. Union members are willing, but find it challenging, to visit the TU office to pay dues. Other than the issue of lack of awareness, workload, work-life balance, and distance from the residence to the workplace also limits dues collection. Initiating a mobile banking system (Bkash, Nagad, etc.) could make a difference in this regard. Options for paying membership dues quarterly, bi￾yearly, and yearly could be considered along with a regular monthly payment option. Sustainability of WCAs Key informant interviews and FGDs with WCA members showed that 70 percent stakeholders do not think that WCAs are ready to manage and sustain their associations without assistance from WEP. All WCAs were able to regularly collect dues from community members despite the COVID-19 pandemic; however, WCA membership fees are insufficient to ensure the associations’ financial sustainability after WEP activity ends. Also, the number of community members paying WCA membership dues is not large. A total of 477 members from all seven WCAs paid their membership fees in Year 1, and 485 paid fees in Year 2 (Q1–Q3). Further, the number of active community members is not high—it stands between 117 and 298 per association. The biggest WCA membership is in Boardbazar/Hemayetpur (RMG sector), and the smallest is in Khulna (SFP sector). Figure 9: Number of Community Members Actively Participating in WCAs 35 https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/34449/Losing-Livelihoods-The-Labor-Market-Impacts-of￾COVID-19-in-Bangladesh.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y. “The Solidarity Center … is like the shade of a large tree. If they exist, we gain courage. The owners will oppress and deprive us much more once they depart.”– FGD, factory unions “Though the donation which we are providing every month is not sufficient enough for us to operate properly … we are not thinking about raising the WCA membership fees; rather, we are planning to engage more workers in our association.” – FGD, WCAs 27 Figure 9 shows that the number of WCA members varies, and these numbers fluctuate largely due to the high level of migration of working-class people at the local level. According to a South Asian Network on Economic Modeling (SANEM) survey, approximately 49 percent of the pandemic-affected internal migrants returned to their villages in 2020 because of massive job cuts, non-payment of wages, and decreased salaries.36 During FGDs, WCA members stated that they have prepared action plans for further development of WCAs, including increasing the number of association members. Interviewed WCA members stated that they will work through their executive members to sustain their workers’ engagement. Meanwhile, WEP NGO partners consider Income Generation (IG) for WCA essential for their sustainability. The primary focus of the WCA component is to increase the skills of worker community members and their associations to collectively advocate for improved living and working conditions in their communities. Some WCCs have engaged in small income generation projects based on opportunities and interests. For example, one KII respondent provided an example of a successful IG activity in one of WEP’s WCAs. The WCA committee arranged additional skill-based training in tailoring for women so that they could earn more to support their family. In total, 100 women attended the training session. Twenty (20) of the women are now receiving bulk tailoring orders—resulting in both self-employment and wage/earnings generation. Skill-based additional training empowered women in the community, which directly impacted their livelihoods including the ability to pay for children’s schooling, better food, better clothing, etc. However, additional support (in the form of investments) is needed to launch IG activities across different WCAs. A review of program documents reveals that the SC planned to ensure the sustainability of WCAs by helping them to obtain their legal registration, as this is a prerequisite for opening bank accounts and receiving WCA membership fees, funds, and/or grants from other sources. Based on KIIs, only two of seven WCAs are currently registered as cooperatives, and another two are operating as Community￾Based Organizations (CBOs) under the supervision of WEP NGO partner – Bangladesh Center for Workers’ Solidarity (BCWS). Within WEP, no new registrations have been obtained thus far. The current status of WCA registrations is presented below: ● Boardbazar WCC: WCA registration was completed in January 2017 under the Department of Cooperatives (DOC). The WCA has been running activities; however, their challenge is in the leadership of the WCA. ● Mirpur WCC: WCA registration was completed in October 2017 under the DOC. The association members are confused because they have to follow the cooperative’s goals and objectives—which are focused on IG and not on community organization and rights-based issues. ● Unique WCC: WCA registration has not yet started. They are observing the activities and challenges experienced by the Mirpur WCA. Considering the findings and performance of WCC and WCA, Unique WCA will decide which registration type would work best for them. ● Fatullah WCC and Konabari WCC: Both WCCs are run by the BCWS. 36PowerPoint Presentation (sanemnet.org), slide 30. https://sanemnet.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Employment_Survey_Presentation_10th-March_Finalversion.pdf. “Migration in [the] RMG sector is huge and the management does not offer anything to stop it … In [the] SFP sector, workers are from local areas; therefore, migration is not an issue.” – KII, GOB “Launching a social business can be an option for WCA sustainability. WCC can be used for training purposes for some IG. There is a demand for training. It will generate some income.” – KII, WEP partner NGO 28 o Konabari WCC plans to run WCA activities as a CBO under the supervision of the BCWS, which is registered under the Department of Social Welfare (DOSW). The WCA should work on ensuring workers’ rights and community development. Registration under the Department of Women and Children might not be possible as there are more male than female members in the WCA. o Fatullah WCA started the registration process under the DOSW. However, DOSW required a lot of documents and banking information that the WCA did not have, so the process stopped. ● Hemayetpur WCC: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, migration is quite high in this location. The target for the total number of WCA members was 101; however, the organization was unable to reach that target. Once they reach the target, the WCC plans to start the registration process. ● RUPSA WCC: RUPSA WCC and WCA serve the SFP sector workers. RUPSA WCA registration is in progress. WCA members gathered public support, signed the application from the ward councilor, and visited both the DOC and DOSW to understand the process. The WCA will hold the board election soon. Once it selects the new executive board members, the WCA plans to move forward with the registration process either with the DOC or DOSW, whichever is a better fit. The SC explained that it is moving slowly on registration issues, as those WCAs that were registered as cooperatives (Mirpur and Boardbazar) experienced some challenges. The cooperatives’ constitutions focus on IG and, therefore, do not match the WCA’s objective of “ensuring workers’ rights and social work.” The SC is currently in the process of finding a solution. Key informant interviews revealed that WCCs are not financially resilient enough to continue running WEP activities. All surveyed WCC organizers stated that they would not be able to continue their work after the end of WEP activity. Factors limiting the WCCs’ continuation mentioned during KIIs include the absence of sufficient funding to cover the rent, utilities, and salaries of organizers/coordinators and lack of leadership capacity. The sustainability of WCC organizers is needed to lead the worker community. Moreover, none of the four planned Sustainability Planning Workshops with WCCs for Years 1-2 have, so far, taken place due to COVID-19 limitations. Therefore, much of WEP’s work to strengthen WCC and WCA sustainability are yet to be accomplished. 3.6.2 Conclusions ● WEP progressed in reinforcing TUFs’ organizational strengthening, but financial autonomy is limited. ● Overall, the sustainability of WEP will depend on the availability of funds: o There is no indication that WEP partners and sub-grantees are confident about the continuation of WEP activities. o Stable funding sources for the community activities from other local or international sources are needed for sustainability. o The system for WCA membership dues collection needs to be improved and expanded to ensure sustainability. o WCA registration is challenging due to the non-permanent residence status of members and the lack of a registration mechanism for rights-based community organizations. 29 4. RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendations for SC Area Recommendation WEP Work Plan ● Consider the revision of activities included in the Work Plan and determine realistic numbers of activities to be implemented by the end of WEP. As the biggest number of postponed activities were under IR 1.1 and IR 1.3, pay particular attention to them. Internal Coordination ● Reactivate the work of the PIC to ensure frequent stakeholder meetings and an exchange of information between the TUF/TU component and the community component. External Coordination ● Include factory management in WEP implementation through capacity building. ● Explore more interaction and rapport building with relevant government offices. Capacity Development ● Develop clear selection criteria for training participants. ● Begin to offer more advanced trainings on Labor Rights, Labor Law, Nutrition, Health and Hygiene, OSH, and Active Participation. ● Consider including visuals, stickers, and posters during trainings to ensure easier recall of information and enhance the learning experience. Visibility ● Put more emphasis on the visibility of WEP among external stakeholders to showcase the unique features of the Activity. M&E ● Consider revising the progress report template as suggested in Annex 8. ● Set up the MIS to create performance data for all indicators. ● Provide training courses on M&E for WEP technical partners. PMP ● Consider including additional indicators that would cover the effectiveness of the legal program as per standard indicator DR.6.3-1 recommended at the Request for Application, capacity building, and COVID-19 redirection activities. Some custom indicators to consider: o Legal program: Number of legal consultations provided, number of persons receiving compensation and/or job reinstatement. o Capacity building: Level of satisfaction with trainings, percent of knowledge increase among trainees. WCAs ● Develop the fund raising capacity of NGO partners to support the WCAs beyond the life of the WEP activity. ● Continue advocacy to register all WCAs. External Coordination ● Extra attention is needed to find avenues for strengthening the interaction/relationship with government offices at both the local and national levels. 30 Area Recommendation Capacity Development ● Because the COVID-19 pandemic might continue for some time, remote trainings will continue to be needed. SC should consider technological upgrades (e.g., equipment required for online trainings) for WEP technical partners. M&E ● Emphasize lessons learned. Digitization of membership collection system ● Improve union membership dues collection mechanisms. The efficient collection of union dues is highly related to sustaining WEP’s achievements. Registration of unions ● Consider advocating for further streamlining of TU registration process and providing more orientations to WEP-supported union leaders and members on union registration process and formalities. Biometric database ● Dissatisfaction prevails among the TUF leaders and labor rights organizations about the potential use/misuse of the biometric database by BGMEA, e.g., employers using worker information to blacklist and prevent them from finding employment. KIIs/FGDs mentioned that biometric database could be maintained by DIFE and operated by a body consisting of representatives of workers, employers, and the government to ensure protections and checks are in place to prevent the misuse of worker data. ● The ET understands that WEP cannot effect this change single-handedly; however, WEP partner TUFs and sub-grantees could take a lead in raising awareness about current concerns/instances of abuse and the need for protections to be put in place to prevent future abusive practices. Women leadership ● Efforts should be continued to increase the number of active women leaders (TUs/WCAs/PCs) and members of the unions by organizing women’s leadership and gender awareness-raising workshops, and gender dialogues. Active women TU leaders can be a game changer. Efficient, active women TU leaders could attract the attention of civil society and media as well. Advocacy ● Discuss revising basic worker wages with the GOB. ● Continue discussions with the GOB to further sensitize them on the importance of quick Industrial Dispute Resolution (IDR). Design of future interventions ● Ensure involvement of WEP technical partners in program planning and design to secure the ownership of program activities and sustainability of results and outcomes. ● Consider developing software that can provide detailed information about the factory-level TUs as well as overall information about a factory (workers’ demography, committees, anti-harassment initiatives, brands, etc.). 31 ANNEXES ANNEX 1: SCOPE OF WORK USAID/Bangladesh Tasking Request: Democracy, Human Rights and Governance (DRG) Date of Request: April 22, 2021 Type of Task: Mid-term Performance Evaluation for “Workers’ Empowerment and Participation (WEP) Activity” Description of Activity: (Guidance – please provide a short summary of the activity that will receive service/s; it should contain at minimum the objectives of the activity, anticipated results (or results if available) major challenges to implementation, and major successes); (Guidance – if this an assessment or special study, please provide topic, necessary explanation, and rationale for undertaking) Workers’ Empowerment and Participation (WEP) Activity is a four-year, $4 million labor rights activity implemented by Solidarity Center (SC). The program aims to improve conditions for workers in two critically important employment sectors in Bangladesh: ready-made garments (RMG) and shrimp and fish processing (SFP). The program objective is to strengthen the capacity of independent trade unions, trade union federations, and worker community associations in the RMG and SFP sectors to collectively advocate for their rights and interests, and to enhance constructive participation towards improving industrial relations between workers and management. The objective of this mid-term performance evaluation is to review the progress made toward achieving intended results/outcomes, identify any lessons learned, and recommend possible programmatic adaptations at the halfway point of WEP’s implementation. The findings of the evaluation report will be used to improve SC’s implementation of WEP activity by making appropriate adjustments to the activity and to inform future labor sector programming. Its primary audiences are USAID/Bangladesh’s Office of Democracy, Human Rights and Governance (DRG) and SC. Depending on the sensitivity of the findings of the evaluation report, USAID will decide on publishing the report in the Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC). USAID may request for two versions of the report, i.e., a public version and a version for USAID’s internal use. Research Question: (Guidance – If an evaluation, please provide at least 3 research questions the evaluation team will consider) The evaluation will cover WEP activity performance from August 2019 to June 2021. Proposed evaluation questions are: ● To what extent is the Solidarity Center (SC) on course to meet WEP’s objectives based on progress achieved thus far? ● To what extent has the SC been able to improve the capacity of factory-based trade unions, trade union federations, and worker community associations as a result of the WEP activity? o To what extent has WEP contributed to improve the worker’s living and working conditions? (sub-question) o To what extent has SC achieved success in assisting in organizing and registering new unions, especially in factories supplying to major U.S. and EU brands? (sub-question) ● To what extent has WEP advanced gender equality or female empowerment towards women’s leadership and how sustainable are these outcomes? 32 ● To what extent are the activity’s objectives still relevant for the current Bangladesh context in the RMG and SFP sector? ● How sustainable are the interventions of the WEP activity? Geographic Coverage (Guidance – If this is third-party monitoring, please provide locations of sites to be visited) The evaluation should cover implementation sites in Dhaka, Khulna, and Chittagong region. Dates of performance and timeline: (Guidance – Please provide an anticipated start date and or completion date. Please note that, depending on the complexity of the requested services, the period of performance, from initiation to completion, can be significant) The period of performance for evaluation is roughly 10 weeks, based on a five-days work week, from o/a August to o/a October 2021. This period includes literature review, field work, in and out-briefing for USAID, report writing, and final report submission. Team Composition/Qualifications of Consultants: This Evaluation Team will comprise five personnel: a team leader (US/TCN Evaluation Specialist), three team members (one US/TCN Sectoral Specialist and two Local Sectoral Specialists), and one evaluation assistant/translator. Qualifications: 1. Team Leader: An international Senior Evaluation Specialist with Ph.D. or equivalent degree and relevant experience in Democracy, Human Rights and Governance (DRG) sector. Knowledge on labor rights and experience in evaluating programs to promote improved compliance with international labor standards including freedom of association and collective bargaining, are required. At least 10 (ten) years of experience in conducting and managing complex evaluations is required. Experience in conducting other assessments of projects/programs/activities and designing evaluations on international level or in developing countries is required. Ability to produce high￾quality evaluation reports in English is essential. The Team Leader will direct the team, finalize the evaluation design and methodology, coordinate activities, meetings, group discussions and the Key Informant Interviews, consolidate individual input from team members, coordinate the process of assembling the key findings, and develop appropriate recommendations. S/he also will lead in the preparation and presentation of key evaluation findings and recommendations to USAID/Bangladesh. 2. International Team Member: A mid-level evaluation specialist with an advanced degree in a relevant discipline and at least five (5) years of experience. Experience in program design, management, monitoring and evaluation of workers’ rights in the ready-made garments sector, and DRG programs in developing countries, are required. Prior experience and ability to conduct evaluation and to write well in English are required. S/he will work with the Team Lead and national team members to manage focus group discussions and KIIs; quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis; analyze findings and draft the evaluation report. 3. Two National Team Members: Senior or mid-level evaluation specialists should have at least seven years of experience in designing and conducting field-based evaluations and assessments of programs related to labor rights and DRG. Relevant experience in Bangladesh is preferred, especially related to the dynamics of ready-made garment workers, trade union and collective bargaining. 33 Deliverables: (Guidance – In a bullet format, please provide a list of anticipated deliverables (e.g., Design proposal; Draft questionnaires, protocols and other data collection instruments; Updated SOW, if applicable; Draft Report; Mission Presentation; Final Report in electronic version that incorporates comments, statements of difference (if applicable) and appendices; Data sets; etc.). ● Literature Review ● Evaluation Team planning meetings ● Evaluation Design and Work Plan ● Evaluation Design Matrix and Data Collection instrument ● In-brief meeting with USAID ● Mid-term briefing and interim meetings with USAID (as required) ● Debriefing with USAID ● Debriefing with Partners ● Draft Evaluation Report ● Final Report (due within two weeks after USAID provides comments on the draft report; total length, excluding references and annexes, should not exceed 30 pages.) 34 ANNEX 2: DATA COLLECTION TOOLS (KII AND FGD GUIDES AND MINI-SURVEY) KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEW GUIDES Consent Script Hi, my name is [insert name], and I work for ME&A, Inc., which implements the USAID/Bangladesh Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (BMEL) Activity. We are collecting data about the USAID Workers’ Empowerment and Participation (WEP) Activity that was launched in August 2019 and is planned to end in July 2023. As you may know, the Activity was designed to strengthen the capacity of independent trade unions, Trade Union Federations (TUFs), and Worker Community Associations (WCAs) in the Ready￾Made Garment (RMG) and Shrimp and Fish Processing (SFP) sectors to collectively advocate for their rights and interests and enhance product interventions with management to constructively participate in improving industrial relations. The evaluation intends to inform 1) the Activity’s implementation for the remainder of the activity period and 2) USAID’s strategic decisions about future programming in this area. We selected you because we understand that you may have perspectives on the WEP Activity itself and/or on relevant subject matter. We expect the duration of this [interview/small group discussion] to be between 45 to 90 minutes (depending on the type of stakeholder to be interviewed). There is no direct benefit to you for being part of this study, but we hope that the results of our study will help improve the WEP Activity and the services it provides. There will be no compensation for participating in this interview. All information that you share will be kept confidential. We will aggregate and present our findings to USAID in a way that cannot be attributed to any individual. Therefore, please feel free to speak openly and candidly with us. Your participation is voluntary. Please feel free to ask to skip any question that you do not feel comfortable answering, end this interview at any point, or withdraw your responses after the interview. If you have questions about this evaluation, please contact Mr. John Roscoe via email at Jroscoe@engl.com. Do you confirm your consent to participate in this [interview/small group discussion]? ◻Yes ◻No Do you have any questions before we begin? 35 INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR USAID Name and Designation of Interviewee Name of Institution Date of Interview Mode of Interview (in-person/virtual) Name of Interviewer Name of Note Taker (if relevant) Interview Start Time Interview End Time Interview Questions Responses Anticipated Duration of the Interview: 60-90 Minutes Introduction Please describe your role/involvement with the WEP activity (length of time, responsibilities, nature of interactions, etc.). Questions related to EQ1, EQ2, and EQ3 Which SC/WEP Sub-IRs, including activities, do you consider particularly successful/unsuccessful? Why? How do you evaluate the effectiveness of the WEP Activity in advancing gender equality and female empowerment toward women’s leadership? Please elaborate and provide examples. What external factors are best facilitating WEP’s achievement of its set goals and objectives? What are the major factors that prevent the WEP Activity from achieving its goals and objectives? Are there any unintended results of the Activity identified or perceived? What changes (if any) to existing strategies and activities are needed to improve WEP Activity effectiveness? Questions related to EQ4 To what extent has the SC effectively managed the WEP Activity thus far (programmatic, administrative, management of technical partners)? Has the SC shown flexibility in adjusting any inadequacy/invalidity of the assumptions underlying the WEP’s Theory of Change? Do you have any particular concerns about any of the SC implementation modalities? How would you assess the performance of the WEP’s technical partners (TUFs/NGOs/sub-grantees)? How can SC improve its management moving forward? What examples are there (if any) of the SC/WEP coordinating with the GOB (national/local levels) and other U.S. and/or other donor-funded programs aimed at improving labor rights in the RMG and SFP industries? Are there any areas for improvement? To what extent are you satisfied with the quality of the WEP Activity’s monitoring and reporting system under the Activity? Questions related to EQ5 Do you consider the WEP’s design logical and coherent? Why/why not? Do its indicators measure their intended results and produce information that enables performance monitoring of WEP’s intended results? Why/why not? Was a sufficient degree of flexibility embedded in the program design to rapidly respond to emerging needs and/or changes in the context? In your view, how well is the WEP Activity aligned with the GOB and other U.S.-funded programs or development partners’ programs working on labor rights in Bangladesh? In your view, are the WEP interventions relevant to the current needs of target beneficiaries? Explain. Probe: Should the program strategy be adjusted vis-à-vis any new developments or changing situations? How? 36 Questions related to EQ6 To what extent has the SC built the capacity of its TUF partners and technical partners’ (WCC NGO) capacity to sustain activities beyond the conclusion of the WEP Activity? Are there any exit strategies developed/implemented by the SC/partners? What factors could jeopardize the sustainability of WEP’s interventions? What are the possible mitigation measures? Lessons learned/good practices What lessons have been learned in the implementation of the SC/WEP Activity to date? What (if any) have been the good practices used by SC WEP Activity that you think might be useful to other organizations working in labor rights for RMG and SFP workers? Closing Is there anything else you would like to share that we did not discuss? Thank you very much for taking the time to talk with us today. We appreciate your time. 37 INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR IMPLEMENTING PARTNER (IP) Name and Designation of Interviewee Name of Institution Date of interview Mode of Interview (in-person/virtual) Name of Interviewer Name of Note Taker (if relevant) Interview Start Time Interview End Time Interview Questions Responses Anticipated Duration of the Interview: 60-90 Minutes Introduction Please describe your role/involvement with the WEP Activity (length of time, responsibilities, nature of interactions, etc.). Questions related to EQ1, EQ2, and EQ 3 Toward which objectives has the SC/WEP Activity made the greatest progress so far? (Please provide examples.) Please highlight factors that have contributed to the progress toward this objective. (EQ1, EQ2) Toward which objectives has the SC/WEP Activity made the least progress thus far? (Please provide examples.) Please highlight factors that have hindered progress toward this objective. (EQ1, EQ2) Which activities would you say were the most effective under each IR? (IR 1: Workers are better represented, both inside and outside the workplace—within sustainable, democratically organized, well-managed, and independent worker organizations; IR 2: Enabling atmosphere for constructive industrial relations and protection of labor standards enhanced.) Please explain why you think these activities were effective. (EQ1, EQ2, EQ3) Which activities were least effective under each IR? Please explain why you think these activities were not effective. (EQ1, EQ2) What are the most significant obstacles/constraints in the WEP Activity’s ecosystem or implementing environment that hinder progress? How is the SC/WEP adapting its strategies to deal with unforeseen obstacles/constraints? (EQ1, EQ2) How do you evaluate the effectiveness of the WEP Activity in advancing gender equality and female empowerment toward women’s leadership? (EQ3) Please elaborate and provide examples. Are there any unintended results of the Activity identified or perceived? Questions related to EQ4 Have the implementation modalities for WEP (partnerships with TUFs, contracts with technical partners) performed as intended? What are the key mechanisms used for communication with WEP partners? Are there any changes needed to make these modalities more effective? Are there ways in which the SC might improve its management moving forward? What WEP Activity strategies have been the most effective in engaging employers and other key stakeholders in constructive labor relations dialogue with workers and the organizations that represent them? To what extent do you think the SC/WEP Activity has coordinated with the GOB (national and local level) and other USAID and/or other bilateral or multilateral donor-funded programs aimed at improving labor rights in the RMG and SFP industries? What are the main approaches to monitoring used by the SC partners? In your view, are they effective? Why/why not? 38 Questions related to EQ5 Do you consider the WEP’s design logical and coherent? Why/why not? Do its indicators measure their intended results and produce information that enables performance monitoring of WEP’s intended results? Why/why not? Was a sufficient degree of flexibility embedded in the program design to rapidly respond to emerging needs and/or changes in the context? In your view, how well is the WEP Activity aligned with the GOB, other USAID-funded programs, or development partners’ programs working on labor rights in Bangladesh? In your view, are the WEP interventions relevant to the current needs of target beneficiaries? Explain. Probe: Should the program strategy be adjusted vis-à-vis any new developments or changing situations? How? Questions related to EQ6 To what extent has the SC built the capacity of its TUF partners and technical partners’ (WCC NGO) capacity to sustain activities beyond the conclusion of the WEP Activity? Are there any exit strategies developed/implemented by the SC/partners? What factors could jeopardize the sustainability of WEP’s interventions? What are the possible mitigation measures? Lessons learned/good practices What lessons have you learned during the implementation of the SC/WEP Activity to date? What was the impact of SC’s inability to provide technical assistance during the ongoing pandemic? How has the SC mitigated these impacts on the WEP beneficiaries (e.g., lack of TA)? What (if any) have been some good practices used by the SC/WEP Activity that you think might be useful to other organizations working in the area of labor rights for RMG and SFP workers? Closing Is there anything else you would like to share that we did not discuss? Thank you very much for taking the time to talk with us today. We appreciate your time. 39 INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR WEP PARTNERS (TUFs) Name and Designation of Interviewee Name of Institution Date of Interview Mode of Interview (in-person/virtual) Name of Interviewer Name of Note Taker (if relevant) Interview Start Time Interview End Time Interview Questions Responses Anticipated Duration of the Interview: 60-90 Minutes Introduction Please describe your partnership with the SC as it relates to the WEP Activity. Please describe the types of support you received from the WEP Activity as part of this partnership. Questions related to EQ1 How would you define an active worker organization? To what extent has your partnership with the SC/WEP contributed to establishing and fostering active worker organizations in targeted factories (RMG/SFP)? What factors have enabled/constrained progress in this area? Probes: ● Have you been able to organize in new factories since the beginning of the WEP Activity? If so, in how many factories? ● How many unions were you able to register under your federation during the same time period? ● Has the membership in the existing worker organizations been affected? ● Were there other factors that helped you besides being affiliated with the WEP Activity? In which area (establishing active worker organizations, educating workers, improving understanding of constructive labor relations, provision of legal support, addressing the concerns of women workers, advocacy campaigns) have you made the most/least progress? Please explain. 40 Questions related to EQ2 To what extent has assistance provided by the SC/WEP to your federation contributed to your capacity to increase the knowledge and skills of workers to represent their rights and interests in the workplace? What factors have enabled/constrained progress in this area? Probes: ● Has the WEP Activity affected your ability to conduct worker education programs about labor laws and their rights? How? ● How would you describe the quality of the SC’s training curricula? ● What things learned in the SC’s training have you used to increase the knowledge and skills of workers to represent their rights and interests in the workplace? ● Has your federation signed new CBAs since the start of WEP activity? If so, how many? ● Have worker PCs been affected? How? Have outcomes for men and women workers been the same or have they differed? To what extent has your partnership with the SC/WEP Activity changed or influenced the relationship between workers and employers? What factors have enabled/constrained progress in this area? Probes: ● Has the way in which workers’ grievances are handled by your federation changed since the start of the WEP Activity in August 2019? How? ● Has there been any change in the number of disputes that go through grievance handling mechanisms (GHMs)? ● Has there been any change in the general climate of worker/employer relationships in unionized factories since the start of the WEP Activity? The SC/WEP is also assisting with improving workers’ living conditions in factory communities through the formation of WCAs. What is the interaction between your activities and the WEP activities in the community? Please provide examples. Have there been any improvements in working conditions in the target factories during the last two years because of the SC/WEP support? Toward which areas has the WEP Activity had the strongest contribution? Please provide examples. Have any unintended results of the WEP Activity been identified or perceived? Questions related to EQ3 To what extent has your partnership with the SC/WEP Activity contributed to building your capacity to address concerns of women workers? What are some specific concerns voiced by women workers? In what ways have these concerns been addressed? If they haven’t, please tell us why they haven’t been addressed. What factors have enabled/constrained progress in this area? Probes: ● Has the partnership contributed to a larger number of female TU leaders? Greater attention to issues affecting women such as discrimination, sexual harassment, access to maternity leave, childcare, etc.? ● Has there been any change in gender dynamics in the factories? Questions related to EQ4 Do you believe that the WEP Activity has been effectively managed? If yes, please provide examples. If not, do you have any suggestions on how the management of the WEP Activity could be improved? Probes: ● Has the level of communication between your federation and the SC personnel been adequate? ● Have the roles and responsibilities for program implementation been clearly defined? ● Are there ways that the SC might improve its management moving forward? What WEP strategies have been the most effective in engaging employers and other key stakeholders in constructive labor relations dialogue with workers and the organizations that represent them? Do you coordinate with the GOB (national and/or local level) and other USAID and/or other bilateral and multilateral donor-funded programs aimed at improving labor rights in the RMG and SFP industries? What are the main approaches to monitoring used by your federation? In your view, are they effective? Why/why not? 41 Questions related to EQ5 Do you consider the WEP’s design logical and coherent? Why/why not? Do its indicators measure their intended results and produce information that enables performance monitoring of WEP’s intended results? Why/why not? Was a sufficient degree of flexibility embedded in the activity design to rapidly respond to emerging needs and/or changes in the context? In your view, how well is the WEP Activity aligned with the GOB, other USAID-funded programs, or development partners’ programs working on labor rights in Bangladesh? Are the WEP Activity interventions relevant to your federation’s current needs/needs of target beneficiaries? Explain. Probe: Should the program strategy be adjusted vis-à-vis any new developments or changing situations? How? Questions related to EQ6 To what extent do you think that the results of your partnership with the SC/WEP will be sustained after the completion of the WEP Activity? Probes: ● In your opinion, how soon do you anticipate that your TUFs will reach sustainability? Are you taking any steps to prepare for when the WEP Activity ends? How? ● How do other TUFs that do not receive external technical/financial assistance manage their organizing and union-strengthening activities? Are you receiving technical or financial support from other international organizations, TUs, or NGOs? If you feel comfortable sharing, which other organizations provide you with financial support and what activities do they fund? Probes: ● How does the work of these other organizations complement the support you receive from the SC? How do you limit duplication of efforts, such as organizing two factory-level TUs? Do you report these two TUs to all of your funding/technical assistance providing partners? Lessons learned/good practices What lessons have you learned during the implementation of the SC/WEP Activity to date? What (if any) have been some good practices used by the SC/WEP Activity that you think might be useful to other organizations working on labor rights for RMG and SFP workers? Closing Is there anything else you would like to share that we did not discuss? Thank you very much for taking the time to talk with us today. We appreciate your time. 42 INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR WEP PARTNERS (WCCs/NGOs) Name and Designation of Interviewee Name of Institution Date of Interview Mode of Interview (in-person/virtual) Name of Interviewer Name of Note Taker (if relevant) Interview Start Time Interview End Time Interview Questions Responses Anticipated Duration of the Interview: 60-90 Minutes Introduction Please describe your role in the SC/WEP Activity. What types of support have you received from the WEP Activity that enabled you to carry out this role? Questions related to EQ2 and EQ 3 To what extent has your work with the SC/WEP influenced workers’ engagement with other community members and community-based organizations in worker communities? Please provide specific examples. What factors have enabled/constrained progress in this area? To what extent has your work with the SC/WEP changed community members’ access to social services in targeted worker communities? Please provide a few examples. What factors have enabled/constrained progress in this area? To what extent has your work within the SC/WEP contributed to empowering women to be leaders? Please provide examples. What factors have enabled/constrained progress in this area? Which types of interventions or strategies have been most effective in promoting community members’ rights and interests? Which have been the least effective? Have there been any improvements in living conditions in the factory communities during the last two years? How many of these improvements could be attributed to the SC/WEP activity interventions? Please provide examples. Have any unintended results of the Activity been identified or perceived? Questions related to EQ4 Do you think that the WEP Activity has been managed efficiently? Do you have any suggestions for how the management of the WEP Activity could be improved? Probes: ● Has the level of communication between your NGO and SC personnel been adequate? ● Have the roles and responsibilities for project implementation been clearly defined? ● Are there ways that the SC might improve its management moving forward? What is the relationship between your activities in the Centers and the WCAs for increasing worker representation in factories? Please provide examples. Probes: ● Do trade union organizers conduct activities in the WCC? ● Do you raise awareness about TUs and workers’ rights inside factories through WCC activities? Do you coordinate with the GOB (national and/or local level) and other USAID and/or other bilateral or multilateral donor-funded programs aimed at improving labor rights in the RMG and SFP industries? What are the main approaches to monitoring used by your federation? In your view, are they effective? Why/why not? 43 Questions related to EQ5 Do you consider the WEP’s design logical and coherent? Why/why not? Do its indicators measure their intended results and produce information that enables performance monitoring of WEP’s intended results? Why/why not? Was a sufficient degree of flexibility embedded in the program design to rapidly respond to emerging needs and/or changes in the context? In your view, how well is the WEP Activity aligned with the GOB, other USAID-funded programs, or development partners’ programs working on labor rights in Bangladesh? Are the WEP interventions relevant to your current needs/needs of target beneficiaries? Explain. Probe: Should the program strategy be adjusted vis-à-vis any new developments or changing situations? How? Questions related to EQ6 To what extent do you think that the WCAs will continue to operate after the WEP Activity ends? Please provide examples. What kind of initiatives has the WCA prepared to help ensure it will continue operating? Probes: ● In your opinion, how soon do you anticipate that your WCAs will reach sustainability? Are you taking any steps to prepare for when the WEP Activity ends? How? Have you been able to establish other sources of funding for WCC management? Are WCAs in need of additional skills for center management? Fundraising? Are you receiving support for your work to improve living conditions in factory communities from other international organizations, TUs, industry owners through Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) or NGOs? If you feel comfortable sharing the information, from which organizations are you receiving support (and what types)? Probes: ● How does the work of these other organizations complement the support you receive from the SC? ● How do you limit duplication of efforts? Do you report your achieved results to all of your funding/technical assistance-providing partners? Lessons Learned/Good Practices What lessons have you learned during the implementation of the SC/WEP Activity to date? What (if any) have been some good practices used by the SC WEP Activity that you think might be useful to other organizations working on labor rights for RMG and SFP workers? Closing Is there anything else you would like to share that we did not discuss? Thank you very much for taking the time to talk with us today. We appreciate your time. 44 INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR WEP ORGANIZED/UNIONIZED FACTORIES Name and Designation of Interviewee Name of Institution Date of Interview Mode of Interview (in-person/virtual) Name of Interviewer Name of Note Taker (if relevant) Interview Start Time Interview End Time Interview Questions Responses Anticipated Duration of the Interview: 45-90 Minutes Introduction How and when did you learn about the WEP Activity? What made your factory decide to get involved in the program? Does your factory supply to U.S. or EU brands? What impact has the COVID-19 pandemic had on the factory’s operations? How many unions are there in your factory? Do they hold any activities inside the factory? What types of challenges in the labor-management relationship have you faced in your factory before and during the COVID-19 pandemic)? Questions related to EQ2 and EQ3 Please describe your involvement (if any) with the SC/WEP Activity. How informed are you about the SC/WEP activities? Probes: ● Have you participated in any of the activities—i.e., training, meetings, workshops, or events—organized by the WEP Activity? ● Do you interact with the SC or its main partners (TUFs, factory-level TUs, WCCs, or WCAs)? In your opinion, has the SC/WEP Activity contributed to increasing worker representation in your factory? Probes: ● Do you think the type of work performed by the SC/WEP partners is relevant to the needs of your factory? Why/why not? ● How has it affected relationships between managers and workers? Provide examples. Were there any changes in working conditions at your factory since August 2019 that could be attributed to the WEP Activity? If so, what are some examples? Probes: ● Did you start to have more dialogues with workers? If yes, provide examples. If no, please explain why. ● Did you establish any grievance procedures at your factory? ● What is the benefit of having a union in your factory? ● Did CODs and CBAs begin to include provisions to promote gender equality and inclusion in the workplace? ● Please provide other examples. Questions related to EQ4 In your view, what WEP strategies have been the most effective in engaging employers and other key stakeholders in constructive labor relations dialogue with workers and the organizations that represent them? What else could be done? Closing Is there anything else you would like to share that we did not discuss? Thank you very much for taking the time to talk with us today. We appreciate your time. 45 INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR OTHER KEY STAKEHOLDERS Name and Designation of Interviewee Name of Institution Date of Interview Mode of Interview (in-person/virtual) Name of Interviewer Name of Note Taker (if relevant) Interview Start Time Interview End Time Interview Questions Responses Anticipated Duration of the Interview: 60-90 Minutes Introduction Please describe the role/mission of your organization and your main activities in the areas of improving working conditions in RMG/SFP factories and/or living conditions in worker communities. Questions related to EQ 1, EQ2, and EQ3 Block of Questions for the GOB: What are the key issues that positively/negatively impact a constructive tripartite (workers, employers, and government) relationship in the RMG and SFP sectors? Probes: ● Do you believe that all parties (workers, employers, and government) are heard equally (e.g., have an equal voice)? ● Do problems exist in the formation and registration of TUs? ● What are the reasons behind labor unrest in the RMG sector? ● Are there marked differences between the RMG and SFP sectors? What are the most important issues enabling/constraining workers’ ability to achieve improvements in their living conditions in factory communities? Probes: ● Are there any differences between male and female workers? ● Are there any differences in the RMG or SFP factories? ● What kind of impact has the COVID-19 pandemic had on workers’ ability to improve their living conditions in factory communities? ● What kind of initiatives has the GOB implemented to ensure a win-win solution for both sides (employers and workers)? Block of Questions for employers’ associations, the ILO, and other development partners: ● What role do organizations such as BGMEA, BKMEA, BFFEA, BSFF, etc., have in promoting changes to employee relations? What contributions are they making to change the workplace environment? ● What role do labor unions have in promoting changes to employee relations? What contributions are they making to change the workplace environment? ● What role does the adherence to labor laws play with union membership in the RMG/SFP sectors? ● What are the main challenges experienced by labor unions in the RMG/SFP sectors? (Probes: Have these challenges changed after the COVID19 pandemic? [This question is to be asked only of ILO and other development partners.]) ● How do these challenges affect labor unions in their day-to-day work with the RMG/SFP sectors (Probes: Before/after COVID19?) Are labor unions able to successfully address these challenges? Please elaborate. ● In your opinion, what should labor unions do to overcome the challenges they experience in the RMG/SFP sectors? 46 Questions for all: Please describe your involvement (if any) with the SC/WEP Activity. How informed you are about the work of the SC/WEP Activity? Probes: ● Have you participated in any of the activities—i.e., training, meetings, workshops, or events—organized by the SC? ● Do you interact with the SC or its main partners (TUFs, factory-level TUs, WCCs, or WCAs) in the course of your duties? If so, how often? In your opinion, has the SC/WEP Activity contributed to increased worker representation in the factories? Probes: ● Do you think the type of work performed by the SC is relevant to the needs of factory workers (male/female)? ● Do you think it has changed workers’ ability to have their rights and concerns addressed by factory management? ● How has it affected relationships between managers and workers? In your opinion, has the SC/WEP Activity contributed to improving the living conditions in worker communities? Probes: ● Are there differences between the improvements in the living conditions of male, female, and third-gender workers? ● Do you think the type of work performed by the SC/WEP Activity and its technical partners is relevant to the needs of community members? ● What is your opinion of the quality and effectiveness of services provided? ● Are you aware of ways in which the SC/WEP Activity interventions may have addressed the specific concerns of women/men in the community? Questions related to EQ4 To what extent does the work of the SC coordinate with or complement the work of your administration/organizations to improve the living and working conditions for women, men, and third genders in the RMG/SFP sector(s)? Are there any areas you would identify that need improvement? Are the SC/WEP activities visible and recognizable? How so? Please provide examples. Questions related to EQ5 In your opinion, are the WEP interventions relevant to the needs of target beneficiaries (TUFs/unions/WCCs/workers/community members)? Please explain. Probe: Should the program strategy be adjusted vis-à-vis any new developments or changing situations? How? Questions related to EQ6 From your point of view, what are the external and internal obstacles that make institutional sustainability for RMG TUFs in Bangladesh a challenge? What strategies can be enhanced or adjusted to tackle these challenges? Closing Is there anything else you would like to share that we did not discuss? Thank you very much for taking the time to talk with us today. We appreciate your time. 47 FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION (FGD) GUIDES Consent Script Thank you for taking the time to meet with us today. My name is [NAME]. I am a researcher from an organization called ME&A, Inc., a company that is based in the United States. Our team is in Bangladesh to conduct a study about the work of the Solidarity Center (SC) delivered through an activity known as the Workers Empowerment and Participation Program—or WEP for short. The SC helps and provides training to independent workers’ organizations and Worker Community Associations with the aim of helping workers to defend their rights and interests both in factories and in the communities where workers live. You have been asked to participate today so that we can learn more about the support you received from [SC, or sub-grantee/partner XX]. We would like your honest impressions, opinions, and thoughts about various issues related to this activity’s implementation. We are independent consultants, and we are not affiliated with the SC. In addition, we are not affiliated with any trade unions—nor do we represent the government, employers, or employers’ organizations. If you agree to participate, we ask you to discuss your experience and opinion of the activities and services implemented under the WEP program. The FGD will take about 1.5 hours of your time. Although we will publish our findings in a public report, all your answers will be kept confidential. We are aware that there may be risks associated with trade union activities in Bangladesh, including retaliation at work or in the community. We have organized this meeting at a time and in a safe place to minimize such risks, so that strangers are not likely to be able to identify you as a WEP Activity participant. You will not receive any direct benefit or compensation for participating in this study. Although this study will not benefit you personally, we hope that our results will help to improve support provided to workers and their organizations to further improve working and living conditions in and around factories in Bangladesh. Participation in this interview is completely voluntary. You are free to leave the FGD at any time or decline to answer any question which you are not comfortable answering. If you decline to participate, no one will be informed of this. It will in no way affect your access to services provided by the project or its partners. Do you have any questions at this time? If no, do you agree to participate in the interview? ◻Yes ◻No 48 FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION (FGD) GUIDE FOR ORGANIZERS (TUF/WCC) FGD # Total # of Participants Male: Female: Ice Breaker Participants will be asked to think of a word or short phrase responding to: “How would I describe the current situation of workers’ rights in RMG/SFP factories in my area?” (If necessary, prompt with “improving,” “disrespected,” “good,” “terrible.”) We will ask each participant to introduce herself/himself and share his/her word or short phrase. Any organizer that does not feel comfortable participating in this exercise will not be required to do so. Questions for Discussion During FGD Questions related to EQ1, EQ2, EQ3, EQ4, EQ5, and EQ6 In your role as a worker organizer, what are your main objectives and activities? (EQ2) Probes: ● Do you have a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) or Job Description? How do you relate your job description to your work as organizer? How frequently do you visit the factories or meet with factory workers for organizing purposes? ● On days when you do not visit a factory or provide training to workers, how do you support the federations? ● How frequently do you report back to the federations and/or the SC? What are some examples of reports you provide to them? What types of support have you received from the SC/WEP Activity? (EQ2) Probes: ● Have you received training? Mentoring? Other types of support? ● How often do you meet with the SC program staff? ● What types of issues are discussed? In what ways, if any, has the SC/WEP Activity support changed how you work? (EQ2) Probes: ● In which ways have you been able to apply the skills you learned from the SC in your day-to-day work with factory workers? ● What are some examples? What, if anything, has changed since August 2019 because of your attempts to improve worker representation in the RMG/SFP factories? (EQ2) Probes: ● To what extent have you been successful in educating workers about their labor rights? ● Has the number of workers who participate in union activities changed? ● Have you been able to assist workers to address their grievances with factory management? ● Has the relationship between workers and factory management changed? What are some examples? To what extent have you been able to help female workers to have their concerns in RMG/SFP factories addressed by factory management? What are some examples? Were there any challenges? Are there examples where you did not succeed? (EQ3) What have been the most significant obstacles you have faced in carrying out your duties? (EQ1, EQ 2, EQ3) Probes: What types of resistance have you encountered? From whom? Has the work of your organization been disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic? If so, how? Will these disruptions influence your ability to achieve key targets? To what extent has support from the SC/WEP Activity enabled you to overcome some of these challenges? Please provide examples. (EQ 2, EQ3) 49 How confident are you that you will be able to continue your work when the support provided by the SC/WEP Activity ends? (EQ6) Probes: ● Do you think your trade union federation will be able to provide you with adequate support to continue with your duties? (If respondents are not confident, please ask.) How much time would it take for your trade union federation to reach sustainability to continue your good work? ● What are your most important areas of concern? Coaching and technical assistance? Personal safety? ● Do you anticipate having any personal safety challenges when the WEP Activity ends? What additional efforts are needed to ensure that you continue your work after the SC/WEP Activity support ends? (EQ6) Probes: ● Have you received financial or other forms of support from any other international organizations, international trade union federations, or international non-governmental organizations? Which organizations? What kind of support? ● What is the percentage of USAID support in comparison to other support that your trade union federation receives for continuing your activities for freedom of association, collective bargaining, different training, and legal assistance? How can support offered by the SC/WEP be improved or adapted to be more effective in building your capacity as organizers? (EQ5) Closing Thank you very much for taking the time to talk with us today. We appreciate your time. 50 FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION (FGD) GUIDE FOR TUF MEMBERS FGD # Total # of Participants Male: Female: Ice Breaker After introducing the members of the ET, we will ask each participant to introduce herself/himself. Questions for Discussion during FGD Questions related to EQ2, EQ3, EQ4, EQ5, and EQ 6 Please describe your partnership with the SC/TUF for the WEP Activity. Please describe the types of support you received from the SC/TUF as part of this partnership. To what extent has assistance provided by the SC/TUF to your union contributed to your capacity to increase the knowledge and skills of workers to represent their rights and interests in the workplace? What factors have enabled/constrained progress in this area? To what extent has your partnership with the SC/TUF changed or influenced the relationship between workers and employers? What factors have enabled/constrained progress in this area? To what extent has your partnership with the SC/TUF contributed to building your capacity to address the concerns of women and third-gender workers? What are some examples of concerns specific to women or third-gender workers? In what ways could these concerns be addressed? What factors have enabled/constrained progress in this area? Do you think that the WEP Activity has been effectively managed? Do you have any suggestions on how the activity management could be improved? Are the WEP interventions relevant to your current needs/needs of beneficiaries? Explain. Probe: Should the program strategy be adjusted vis-à-vis any new developments or changing situations? How? How confident are you that you will be able to continue your work when the support provided by the SC/WEP ends? Have you received financial or other forms of support from any other international organizations, international trade union federations, or international non-governmental organizations? Which organizations? What kind of support? Closing Thank you very much for taking the time to talk with us today. We appreciate your time. 51 FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION (FGD) GUIDE FOR WEP PARTICIPANTS (TUF/RMG PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS [WORKERS]) FGD # Total # of Participants Male: Female: Ice Breaker We will ask each participant to introduce herself/himself and list some of the TUF-sponsored activities in which they have participated. Start the discussion by asking the participants to share with workers’ priority concerns. Probes: ● Building and fire safety in factories ● Better wages and benefits ● Right to form independent trade unions ● Right to negotiate collective agreements ● Other improvements in working conditions (to be identified with participants, e.g., shorter working hours, on￾time payment of salaries, better treatment from supervisors, gender equality and inclusion in the workplace) Then proceed with asking the participants to define what is meant by worker representation. Questions for Discussion during FGD Questions related to EQ2, EQ3, EQ5, and EQ6 In your view, what are the main factors facilitating and/or limiting worker representation in your factories? Probes: ● Weaknesses in laws and regulations? ● Lack of worker knowledge of their rights? ● Work-life balance/gender roles? ● Resistance from employers? ● Resistance from government? To what extent has participation in (name of TUF/TU) training and other capacity-building activities been useful to address the areas of concern we listed in the beginning of our discussion? What are some examples? Probes: ● Did it help you to: improve your understanding of workers’ rights? Communicate the importance of trade union organization to other workers? discuss grievances with factory management? solve any problems you had with factory management? ● Where has it been less effective? Has anything changed in worker representation since August 2019 due to the efforts of (name of TUF/TU)? If so, what are some examples? Probe: ● Have new factory-level trade unions been created? How many since the WEP Activity began in August 2019? Has there been an increase in the number of workers who participate in union activities? ● Have any Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBAs) been negotiated and approved? How many CBAs were approved and negotiated during the life of the project? Has anything gotten worse? To what extent has the efforts of (name of TUF/TU) enabled women and third-gender workers to represent and/or find solutions to their concerns in RMG/SFP factories? What are some examples? What are the main challenges? Have you received training and other kind of support from any other international organizations, international trade union federations, or international non-governmental organizations? Which organizations? What kind of support? Do you have any suggestions for how (name of TUF/TU) meetings, training, and other capacity-building activities could be more helpful in enabling you to address the areas of concern we listed in the opening exercise? Closing Thank you very much for taking the time to talk with us today. We appreciate your time. 52 FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION (FGD) GUIDE FOR WEP PARTICIPANTS (WCC) FGD # Total # of Participants Male: Female: Ice Breaker After introducing the members of the ET, we will ask each participant to introduce herself/himself and list some of the WCC-sponsored activities in which they have participated. Start the discussion by asking participants to suggest key needs in worker communities. Probes: ● Access to health services ● Access to affordable, decent housing ● Access to basic municipal services (water and sanitation) ● Access to legal services ● Ability to advocate to local government for improvements in social services ● Other improvements in living conditions (to be identified with participants, e.g., community childcare facilities, public transportation) Questions for Discussion During FGD Questions related to EQ2, EQ3, EQ5, and EQ6 To what extent has participation in (name of WEP NGO technical partner) meetings, trainings, and other capacity￾building activities been useful to address the concerns we listed in the opening exercise? Have there been any changes in the living conditions since August 2019 that are due to the efforts of (name of WEP NGO technical partner)? If so, what are some examples? To what extent has (name of WEP NGO technical partner)’s work enabled female members of the community to find solutions to their particular concerns? Have there been any challenges? For those of you who are workers in garment factories, to what extent has participation in (name of WEP NGO technical partner) meetings, trainings, and other capacity-building activities been useful to address concerns in the factory? Have you received training and other kinds of support from any other international organizations, international trade union federations, or international non-governmental organizations? Which organizations? What kind of support? Do you have any suggestions for how (name of WEP NGO Technical Partner) meetings, trainings, and other capacity-building activities could be more useful in helping you to address the concerns we listed at the beginning of our discussion? Closing Thank you very much for taking the time to talk with us today. We appreciate your time. 53 FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION (FGD) GUIDE FOR WCAs (EXECUTIVE BOARD AND LEADERS) FGD # Total # of Participants Male: Female: Ice Breaker After introducing the members of the ET, we will ask each participant to introduce herself/himself. Then proceed with the discussion. Questions for Discussion during FGD Questions related to EQ1, EQ2, EQ3, EQ4, EQ5, and EQ6 What (if any) were the main factors facilitating or constraining the creation of WCAs? How would you assess the effectiveness of the WEP Activity support in strengthening the organizational capacities of WCAs? What is the relationship between your activities in the centers and WCCs in terms of increasing worker representation in factories? Please provide examples. Do you think there have been any changes in the living conditions of workers since August 2019 that are due to the efforts of your WCA? If so, what are some examples? To what extent has your work enabled female members of the community to address their concerns? Have there been any challenges? Has the work of your organization been disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic? If so, how? Will these disruptions influence your ability to achieve key targets? How confident are you that you will be able to continue your work when the support provided by the SC/WEP Activity ends? Probes: ● Are you able to support yourself financially? Do you receive membership fees from community members to support the services and advocacy work of your WCA? Why or why not? ● Have you received other kinds of support from international organizations, international trade union federations, or international non-governmental organizations? Which organizations? What kind of support? ● How much time would it take for the WCAs to reach sustainability to continue the work that you started under WEP? Do you have any suggestions for how the SC/WEP activities could be more useful in helping you to promote the sustainability of WCAs? Closing Thank you very much for taking the time to talk with us today. We appreciate your time. 54 MINI-SURVEY FORMS SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE FOR TUF LEADERS Screening: S1 Date - S2 Start time - S3 End time - S4 Name of the respondent - S5 Age (in years) - S6 Gender/sex Male 1 Female 2 S7. Name of affiliated federation Akota Garment Workers Federation (AGWF) (Dhaka) 1 Bangladesh Garment and Industrial Workers Federation (BGIWF) (Dhaka) 2 BGIWF (Chittagong) 3 Bangladesh Independent Garment Workers Union Federation (BIGUF) (Dhaka) 4 BIGUF (Chittagong) 5 Bangladesh Revolutionary Garments Workers Federation (BRGWF) (Dhaka) 6 Informed Consent: Good morning/afternoon! My name is (name) and I am working as an enumerator for the mid-term evaluation of the Bangladesh/Workers’ Empowerment and Participation (WEP) Activity. We would like to talk to you regarding the WEP Program intervention and learning. Your opinion is very important to us. Participation in this mini -is completely voluntary. You are free to stop at any time or decline to answer any question which you are not comfortable answering. If you decline to participate, no one will be informed of this. It will in no way affect your access to services provided by the project or its partners. The data you provide to us will be aggregated to protect your privacy and will only be used for report writing purposes. We will always maintain maximum levels of data confidentiality. S8. Do you want to proceed with the mini-survey? Yes 1 Continue to 1 No 2 Terminate 1. How long have you been in a leadership role? (In months) - 2. How many training sessions/workshops have you attended up to today? 1. None 0 2. 1 to 5 1 3. 6 to 8 2 4. 9 to 11 3 5. 12 to 14 4 6. 15 & above 5 3. What have you learned from these trainings? a. Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) 1 b. Labor Law and/or Paralegal Issues 2 c. CBA and Industrial Relations 3 d. Financial and Administrative Sides of Trade Unions 4 e. Other (please specify) 5 55 4. In your opinion how effective were those trainings? Very ineffective Somewhat ineffective Neither effective nor ineffective Somewhat effective Very effective 1 2 3 4 5 5. Please rate your level of agreement or disagreement with the outcomes of the capacity-building activities mentioned below. Would you say that the capacity-building activities helped? (Select only one response for each line.) - - Strongly Disagree Somewhat disagree Neither agree nor disagree Somewhat agree Strongly agree a. You have a better understanding of labor rights 1 2 3 4 5 b. You have a better understanding of labor law 1 2 3 4 5 c. Improve your capacity to address different labor issues 1 2 3 4 5 d. Improve your negotiation skills 1 2 3 4 5 e. Improve your collective bargaining skills 1 2 3 4 5 f. Increase community-level engagement 1 2 3 4 5 g. How/where to seek legal assistance (RMG) 1 2 3 4 5 h. You know how/where to seek legal counseling (SFP sector) 1 2 3 4 5 i. Improve your confidence to interact with high-level officials (e.g., government officials, RMG/FSP sector leaders, international community, and international buyers and companies) 1 2 3 4 5 6. To what degree has workers’ awareness of workplace safety improved? Would you say that worker’s awareness about workplace safety has … (select only one response). Not improved at all Improved a little Slightly improved Fairly improved Greatly improved 1 2 3 4 5 7. What is your level of agreement or disagreement with the following statement? “Workers are able to address their issues through the proper channels.” Strongly disagree Somewhat disagree Neither agree nor disagree Somewhat agree Strongly agree 1 2 3 4 5 8. What is your level of agreement or disagreement with the following statement: “Workers are able to file complaints on time.” Strongly disagree Somewhat disagree Neither agree nor disagree Somewhat agree Strongly agree 1 2 3 4 5 56 9. How satisfied are you with the union members’ level of awareness on the following issues? (Select only one response for each line.) - Very dissatisfied Somewhat dissatisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Somewhat satisfied Very satisfied No opinion/don’t know a. Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) 1 2 3 4 5 - b. Labor law and TU formation 1 2 3 4 5 - c. Paralegal 1 2 3 4 5 - d. CBA 1 2 3 4 5 - e. Industrial relations 1 2 3 4 5 - f. Financial and administrative sides of trade unions 1 2 3 4 5 - 10. How many complaints have you received during the project period? Number: ___________ 11. How many were resolved successfully, were unsuccessful (didn’t resolved), or are still in the pipeline? - In numbers a. Resolved successfully - b. Unsuccessful (didn’t resolved) - c. Still in the pipeline - 12. What was the minimum and maximum length of time needed to resolve complaints? Min (in months) - Max (in months) - 13. How many complaints were solved through Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)? Number: ___________ 14. What was the minimum and maximum length of time needed to resolve complaints? Min (in months) - Max (in months) - 15. In your opinion, how sustainable are the WEP program activities for unions? Would you say that the WEP Program’s activities for unions are (select only one response) … Very unsustainable Somewhat unsustainable Neither sustainable nor unsustainable Somewhat sustainable Very sustainable 1 2 3 4 5 16. What are the major challenges experienced by union leaders? - - 17. Recommendation/suggestions - - 57 SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE FOR TUF ORGANIZERS/OUTREACH WORKERS Screening: S1 Date - S2 Start time - S3 End time - S4 Name of the respondent - S5 Age - S6 Gender/sex Male 1 - - Female 2 S7 Name of TUF/organization Bangladesh Garment and Industrial Workers Federation (BGIWF) 1 Bangladesh Revolutionary Garments Workers Federation (BRGWF) 2 Sommilito Garments Sramik Federation (SGSF) 3 Akota Garments Workers Federation (AGWF) 4 Bangladesh Independent Garment Workers Union Federation (BIGUF) 5 Garments Workers Solidarity Federation (GWSF) 6 Informed Consent: Good morning/afternoon! My name is (name), and I am working as an enumerator for the mid-term evaluation of the Bangladesh/Workers’ Empowerment and Participation (WEP) Activity. I would like to talk to you regarding the WEP program intervention and learning. Your opinion is very important to us. Participation in this mini-survey is completely voluntary. You are free to stop at any time or decline to answer any question which you are not comfortable answering. If you decline to participate, no one will be informed of this. It will in no way affect your access to services provided by the project or its partners. The data you provide will be aggregated to protect your privacy and will only be used for report writing purposes. We will always maintain maximum levels of data confidentiality. S7. Do you want to proceed with the mini-survey? Yes 1 Continue No 2 Terminate 1. Have you participated in any sustainability planning workshops in the past? Yes 1 Continue No 2 Go to Q8 2. How would you rate the effectiveness of the sustainability workshops for planning of the TU activities? Would you say they have been … (select only one response)? Very ineffective Somewhat ineffective Neither effective nor ineffective Somewhat effective Very effective 1 2 3 4 5 3. Have the workshops been useful in helping you to develop a leadership structure within your organization? Yes 1 Continue No 2 Go to Q8 58 4. How would you rate your satisfaction with the workshops in terms of helping you to develop a leadership structure within your organization? Would you say that you have been … (select only one response) with the workshops? Very dissatisfied Somewhat dissatisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Somewhat satisfied Very satisfied 1 2 3 4 5 5. Have the workshops been useful in helping you to advance your professional development skills? Yes 1 Continue No 2 Go to Q6 6. How would you rate your satisfaction with the workshops in advancing your professional development skills, such as organizing? Would you say that you have been … (select only one response) with the workshops? Very dissatisfied Somewhat dissatisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Somewhat satisfied Very satisfied 1 2 3 4 5 7. Please rate your level of satisfaction with the WEP workshops. Would you say that you have been … (select only one response) with the workshops? Very dissatisfied Somewhat dissatisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Somewhat satisfied Very satisfied 1 2 3 4 5 8. Have you participated in any gender equality and inclusion trainings? Yes 1 If yes, please provide your answer below: No 2 Go to Q13 9. Did the training helped you to better understand the GBVH issues? Yes 1 No 2 10. Please rate your satisfaction with the training. [select only one response] Very dissatisfied Somewhat dissatisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Somewhat satisfied Very satisfied 1 2 3 4 5 11. Did you participate in any gender equality and inclusion training/s or something similar in the past? Yes 1 No 2 12. If yes, in what is your level of satisfaction with the WEP training? Would you say that you have been … (select only one response) with the training? Very dissatisfied Somewhat dissatisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Somewhat satisfied Very satisfied 1 2 3 4 5 13. How satisfied are you with the collective bargaining skill of TUF organizers? Would you say that you are … (select only one response) with the collective bargaining skills of TUF organizers? Very dissatisfied Somewhat dissatisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Somewhat satisfied Very satisfied 1 2 3 4 5 59 14. What are the major challenges that need to be addressed? - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 15. Recommendations/suggestions - 1 - 2 - 3 60 SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE FOR TUF RMG PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS (WORKERS) Screening: S1 Date - S2.1 Start time - S2.2 End time - S3 Factory Location a. Dhaka 1 - - b. Gazipur 2 - - c. Narayanganj 3 - - d. Chittagong 4 - - e. Khulna 5 S4 Name of the respondent - S5 Age - S6 Gender/sex Male 1 Female 2 S7. Name of affiliated union - S8. Name of affiliated factory - S9. Engagement with union Yes 1 No 2 S10. Duration - Informed Consent: Good morning/afternoon! My name is (name) and I am working as an enumerator for the mid-term evaluation of the Bangladesh/Workers’ Empowerment and Participation (WEP) Activity. I would like to talk to you regarding the WEP program intervention and learning. Your opinion is very important to us. Participation in this mini-survey is completely voluntary. You are free to stop at any time or decline to answer any question which you are not comfortable answering. If you decline to participate, no one will be informed of this. It will in no way affect your access to services provided by the project or its partners. The data you provide will be aggregated to protect your privacy and will only be used for report writing purposes. We will always maintain maximum levels of data confidentiality. S11. Do you want to proceed with the mini-survey? Yes 1 Continue to 1 No 2 Terminate 1. How many training sessions have you attended up to today? 1. None 0 2. 1 to 5 1 3. 6 to 8 2 4. 9 to 11 3 5. 12 to 14 4 6. 15 & above 5 61 2. How did you find out about the training (source)? Self 1 Peers 2 WCA 3 Union leader 4 Others (specify) - 3. What have you learned from the training? a. Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) from training 1. PPE 2. Caution signs 3. Fire extinguishers 4. Electric lines and cables 5. Exist doors and stairs 6. Rapid and proper decision making 7. Other (please specify) b. Labor rights please specify c. Labor law please specify d. Complaints placement please specify e. Health and hygiene 1. Personal hygiene 2. Safe drinking water 3. Balanced diet 4. Appropriate food for pregnant women, lactating mothers, and adolescent children 5. Early marriage and its disadvantages on health 6. Other important health topics 7. Please specify f. GBVH 1. Harassment traveling between home and factory. 2. Harassment on public transport g. COVID-19 (if you attend the training after March 2020) 1. Social distancing 2. Wearing mask 3. Workstation hygiene 4. Safe way to use public transport 5. Dos and don’ts when you are home from work 6. Other (please specify) 3.1 How relevant do you think the training content and materials were for workers like you and others? Would you say that the training content and materials were … (select only one response) for workers like you and others? Very irrelevant Somewhat irrelevant Neither relevant nor irrelevant Somewhat relevant Very relevant 1 2 3 4 5 4. In your opinion, how effective were those trainings? Would you say that those trainings were … (select only one response)? Very ineffective Somewhat ineffective Neither effective nor ineffective Somewhat effective Very effective 1 2 3 4 5 5. Have you participated in any awareness-raising sessions conducted by the WCC? Yes 1 No 2 62 6. Please rate your level of agreement or disagreement with the outcomes of the capacity-building activities mentioned below. Would you say that the capacity-building activities helped (select only one response for each line)? - - Strongly disagree Somewhat disagree Neither agree nor disagree Somewhat agree Strongly agree a You better understand labor rights (wages, benefits, due benefits, festival bonus, compensation, etc.) 1 2 3 4 5 b Improve your awareness of labor laws 1 2 3 4 5 c Enhance your capacity to address different labor issues 1 2 3 4 5 d Enhance your capacity to take action in accordance with the law 1 2 3 4 5 e Improve your knowledge on complaints placement (how, when, where) 1 2 3 4 5 f Increase community-level engagement - - - - - g You to seek basic legal assistance (RMG sector) 1 2 3 4 5 h You to seek legal counseling (SFP sector) 1 2 3 4 5 I You to differentiate between real scenarios and rumors/fake news about management 1 2 3 4 5 7. To what degree has workers’ awareness of workplace safety improved? Would you say that workers’ awareness about workplace safety has … (select only one response)? Not improved at all Improved a little Slightly improved Fairly improved Greatly improved 1 2 3 4 5 8. Have you ever heard of gender-based violence cases occurring in the workplace? Yes 1 No 2 9. To what degree has workers’ awareness of workplace safety improved? Would you say that workers’ awareness about workplace safety has … (select only one response)? Not improved at all Improved a little Slightly improved Fairly improved Greatly improved 1 2 3 4 5 10. Have you ever heard of gender-based violence cases occurring in the workplace? Yes 1 No 2 11. If yes, have you ever personally experienced gender-based violence in the workplace? Yes 1 No 2 63 12. What actions need to be taken if you or any of your colleagues experience GBVH in the workplace? - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 13. Have you ever shared the knowledge you have learned during trainings with workers in your factory or other factories? Yes 1 If yes, go to next question. No 2 - 14. If yes, please specify: - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 15. Have you ever placed a complaint with your trade union? Yes 1 If yes, go to next question. No 2 - 16. If yes, please specify: - 1 - 2 - 3 17. How long did it take your TU to resolve the problem? - 1 - 2 - 3 64 18. Through which modality was the problem solved? Modality - - - - 1 - - 2 - - 3 19. How long (on average) did it take for your problem to be solved? Duration - 20. Do you have a bank account or a digital financial service account (e.g., Nagad, bKash, etc.)? Yes 1 If yes, go to next question. No 2 - 21. If yes, for what purpose are you using the account? Salary 1 Cash into mobile phone 2 Cash transfer to family members and others 3 Savings 4 Payment of utility bill 5 Pay school fees for children 6 Payment of credit card bill/insurance premium 7 Others - 20. How satisfied are you with your financial literacy skills? Would you say that you are … (select only one response) with your financial literacy skills? Very dissatisfied Somewhat dissatisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Somewhat satisfied Very satisfied 1 2 3 4 5 21. Please rate your level of satisfaction with the WEP program activities for unions. Would you say that you are … (select only one response) with the WEP program activities for unions? Very dissatisfied Somewhat dissatisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Somewhat satisfied Very satisfied 1 2 3 4 5 22. Please rate your level of satisfaction with the overall impact of the WEP program activities. Would you say that you are [select only one response] with the WEP program activities? Very dissatisfied Somewhat dissatisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Somewhat satisfied Very satisfied 1 2 3 4 5 23. In your opinion, how sustainable are the WEP program activities for unions? Would you say that the WEP program activities for unions are … (select only one response)? Not sustainable (no activities are sustainable) Partially sustainable (some activities are sustainable and others aren’t) Very sustainable (all activities are sustainable) 1 2 3 65 24. In your opinion, how sustainable are the WEP program activities for workers? Would you say that the WEP program activities for workers are … (select only one response)? Not sustainable (no activities are sustainable) Partially sustainable (some activities are sustainable and others aren’t) Very sustainable (all activities are sustainable) 1 2 3 25. In your opinion, how sustainable are the WEP program activities for federations? Would you say that the WEP program activities for federations are … (select only one response)? Not sustainable (no activities are sustainable) Partially sustainable (some activities are sustainable and others aren’t) Very sustainable (all activities are sustainable) 1 2 3 26. Do you have any recommendation/suggestions on how the WEP program can be improved? - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 66 SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE FOR TUFS MEMBERS (FACTORY-LEVEL UNION LEADERS) Screening: S1 Date - S2 Start time - S3 End time - S4 Name of the respondent - S5 Age - S6 Gender/sex Male 1 Female 2 S7. Name of affiliated union - S8. Name of affiliated factory - S9. Duration of engagement with union - S10. Sector RMG 1 SFP 2 Informed Consent: Good morning/afternoon! My name is (name) and I am working as an enumerator for the mid-term evaluation of the Bangladesh/Workers’ Empowerment and Participation (WEP) Activity. I would like to talk to you regarding the WEP program intervention and learning. Your opinion is very important to us. Participation in this mini-survey is completely voluntary. You are free to stop at any time or decline to answer any question which you are not comfortable answering. If you decline to participate, no one will be informed of this. It will in no way affect your access to services provided by the project or its partners. The data you provide will be aggregated to protect your privacy and will only be used for report writing purposes. We will always maintain maximum levels of data confidentiality. S11. Do you want to proceed with the mini-survey? Yes 1 Continue to 1 No 2 Terminate 1. How long have you been in a leadership role? In months - 2. How many training sessions/workshops have you attended up to today? 1. None 0 2. 1 to 5 1 3. 6 to 8 2 4. 9 to 11 3 5. 12 to 14 4 6. 15 & above 5 67 3. Would you please share the most important things you have learned during the trainings or workshops? - Code - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 4. In your opinion, how effective were those trainings? Very ineffective Somewhat ineffective Neither effective nor ineffective Somewhat effective Very effective 1 2 3 4 5 5. Please rate your level of agreement or disagreement with the outcomes of the capacity-building activities mentioned below. Would you say that the capacity-building activities helped … (select only one response for each line? - - Strongly Disagree Somewhat disagree Neither agree nor disagree Somewhat agree Strongly agree a. You to have a better understanding of labor rights 1 2 3 4 5 b. You to have a better understanding of labor law 1 2 3 4 5 c. Improve your capacity to address different labor issues 1 2 3 4 5 d. Improve your negotiation skills 1 2 3 4 5 e. Improve your collective bargaining skills 1 2 3 4 5 f. Increase community-level engagement 1 2 3 4 5 g. You know how/where to seek legal assistance (RMG) 1 2 3 4 5 h. You know how/where to seek legal counseling (SFP sector) 1 2 3 4 5 i. Improve your confidence to interact with high-level officials (e.g., government officials, RMG/FSP sector leaders, the international community, and international buyers and companies) 1 2 3 4 5 68 6. How confident are you with the workers’ ability to place complaints (select only one response for each line)? - Very unconfident Somewhat unconfident Neither confident nor unconfident Somewhat confident Very confident a. To management 1 2 3 4 5 b. To unions 1 2 3 4 5 7. How satisfied are you with the union members’ level of awareness on the following issues? (Select only one response for each line.) - Very dissatisfied Somewhat dissatisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Somewhat satisfied Very satisfied a. Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) 1 2 3 4 5 b. Gender equality and inclusion 1 2 3 4 5 c. Gender-based violence and harassment 1 2 3 4 5 8. How many complains did you receive from the members of your union or general workers during this project period? Number: ___________ 9. How many were resolved successfully, unsuccessfully (didn’t get resolved), or are still in the pipeline? - In numbers a. Resolved successfully - b. Unsuccessful (didn’t resolved) - c. Still in the pipeline - 10. On average, what is the minimum and maximum length of time needed to resolve complaints? Min (in months) - Max (in months) - 11. How many complaints were solved through Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)? Number: ___________ 12. How satisfied are you with the financial literacy skill of union leaders? Very dissatisfied Somewhat dissatisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Somewhat satisfied Very satisfied 1 2 3 4 5 13. How satisfied are you with the collective bargaining skill of union leaders? Very dissatisfied Somewhat dissatisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Somewhat satisfied Very satisfied 1 2 3 4 5 69 14. In your opinion, how sustainable are the WEP program activities for unions? Would you say that the WEP program activities for unions are … (select only one response)? Very unsustainable Somewhat unsustainable Neither sustainable nor unsustainable Somewhat sustainable Very sustainable 1 2 3 4 5 15. What are some of the major challenges experienced by union leaders? 1 2 3 4 16. Recommendation/suggestions 1 2 3 4 5 70 SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE FOR IBC LEADERS Screening: S1 Date S2 Start time S3 End time S4 Name of the respondent S5 Age S6 Gender/sex Male 1 Female 2 S7. Sector RMG 1 SFP 2 Informed Consent: Good morning/afternoon! My name is (name) and I am working as an enumerator for the mid-term evaluation of the Bangladesh/Workers’ Empowerment and Participation (WEP) Activity. I would like to talk to you regarding the WEP program intervention and learning. Your opinion is very important to us. Participation in this mini-survey is completely voluntary. You are free to stop at any time or decline to answer any question which you are not comfortable answering. If you decline to participate, no one will be informed of this. It will in no way affect your access to services provided by the project or its partners. The data you provide will be aggregated to protect your privacy and will only be used for report writing purposes. We will always maintain maximum levels of data confidentiality. S8. Do you want to proceed with the mini-survey? Yes 1 Continue to 1 No 2 Terminate 1. How much did the SC’s initiatives help TUs to organize? a. Not at all b. Only a little c. To some extent d. Rather much e. Very much 2. Have the capacity-building activities provided workers with knowledge of the registration of TUs? a. Yes b. No 3. Will these interventions enable IBC-affiliate TUs/TUFs to promote workers’ rights in Bangladesh? a. Yes b. No 4. Were the SC’s interventions useful to help workers overcome the challenges experienced during the COVID￾19 pandemic? a. Yes b. No 4a. If yes, please identify which activity or activities were most effective in helping workers overcome the challenges experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic? 1 2 3 4 5 71 5. Have the staff management and professional development consultation workshops helped WCAs and TUs to promote greater transparency of their activities? a. Yes b. No 6. Have the activities helped to promote democratic values and practices among the TUs and within the WCA leadership? a. Yes b. No 7. Have the mentoring meetings helped the WCA and TUs to conduct union activities more effectively? a. Yes b. No 8. Have factory-level union leadership and the WCA been more aware of GBVH issues as a result of the SC’s sensitization activities? a. Yes b. No 9. Are TUs and WCA working to include more women in leadership roles? a. Yes b. No 10. Which three WEP activities implemented by the SC were the most effective? Please start with the most effective. a. _______________________________________________________________________ b. _______________________________________________________________________ c. _______________________________________________________________________ 11. Which three WEP activities implemented by the SC were the least effective? Please start with the least effective. a. _______________________________________________________________________ b. _______________________________________________________________________ c. _______________________________________________________________________ 12. What WEP activity were you most involved with?______________ ______________________ 13. Please rate the (a-f) of (name of WEP initiative stated in 12). You can rate it as low, moderate, or high. Low Moderate High a. Relevance 1 2 3 b. Effectiveness 1 2 3 c. Efficiency 1 2 3 d. Impact 1 2 3 e. Sustainability 1 2 3 f. Gender/equality 1 2 3 72 SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE FOR WCC ORGANIZERS AND COORDINATORS 1. Group a. WCC Organizer b. WCC Coordinator 2. Place of Interviews a. Dhaka b. Gazipur c. Narayanganj d. Chittagong e. Khulna 3. Sex: a. Male b. Female 4. Age: ________ - - - 5. Which of the following trainings you have attended? a. Organization planning, management, coordination, monitoring, and implementation. b. Strategies and techniques of organizing programs and awareness campaigns. c. Labor laws and standards. d. Occupational Safety and Health (OSH). e. Civic education. f. Health and hygiene. g. Family and Community Engagement and Development programs. h. Gender-based violence and harassment. i. COVID-19 risk and prevention measures. 6. How many programs and awareness campaigns have you organized? a. Less than 5 b. 5-9 c. 10-14 d. 15-19 e. 20+ 7. Do you have enough resources to organize programs and awareness campaigns? a. Yes b. No 7a. If No, please provide examples of the obstacles that prevent you from organizing awareness campaigns. 8. What strategy do you employ when mitigating obstacles? - 1 - 2 - 3 9. Have you participated in any monitoring activities, studies, and/or evaluations requiring data collection efforts (e.g., situations, needs, or problems of RMG or SEP workers and communities)? a. Yes b. No 73 9a. If yes, please mention the names of the monitoring activities, studies, and/or evaluations. - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 9b. If yes, please describe how data collection was done. - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 10. Are you required to develop/write a short/summary about the situation, output, and outcomes related to your work? a. Yes b. No 11. Do you receive enough support from local government authorities to implement awareness campaigns? a. Yes b. No 11a. If no, why not? - 1 - 2 - 3 12. Did you provide any advocacy training to: Yes No a. Local government officials 1 2 b. Community leaders 1 2 c. Employers of RMG and SEP 1 2 d. Other stakeholders 1 2 13. Did you organize any national or international day celebrations? a. Yes b. No 74 13a. If yes, which day/s? - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 14. What percentage of local level issues or labor-related disputes were you able to prevent? a. Less than 25 b. 25-49 c. 50-74 d. 75-99 e. 100 14a. Please provide a few examples of local disputes that you were able to prevent: - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 15. Will you be able to continue your work after the SC activity ends? a. Yes b. No 15a. If no, why not? - 1 - 2 - 3 75 SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE FOR WCA EXECUTIVE BOARD AND LEADERS 1. Group: a. WCA Executive Board Member b. WCA Leader 2. Place of Interviews: a. Dhakab. Gazipur c. Narayanganj d. Chittagong e. Khulna 3. Sex: a. Male b. Female 4. Age: ________ 5. Which of the following trainings you have attended? a. Organization planning, management, coordination, monitoring, and implementation b. Strategies and techniques of organizing programs and awareness campaigns c. Labor laws and standards d. Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) e. Civic education f. Health and hygiene g. Family and Community Engagement and Development programs h. Gender-based violence and harassment i. COVID-19 risk and prevention measures 6. Do you regularly organize WCA elections? a. Yes b. No 6a. If yes, please mention how often (month, year, etc.) a. Annually b. Biannually c. Quarterly d. Monthly e. Other _______________ 7. Do you ensure that females participate in the election process? a. Yes b. No 7a. Please give examples. - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 8. Are all decisions of the board conclusive? Democratic? Transparent? Yes No 8a. Conclusive 1 2 8b. Democratic 1 2 8c. Transparent 1 2 76 9. Does your board have a work plan? a. Yes b. No 9a. If Yes, please give examples of some work plan. - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 10. Do your members pay member fees on regular basis? a. Yes b. No 10a. If no, why not? - 1 - 2 - 3 11. Did you face any challenges with the registration process? a. Yes b. No 11a. If yes, please provide specific challenges: - 1 - 2 - 3 12. Have you participated in any monitoring activities, studies, and/or evaluations requiring data collection effort (e.g., situations, needs, or problems of RMG or SEP workers and communities)? a. Yes b. No 12a. If yes, please mention the names of the monitoring activities, studies and/or evaluations. - 1 - 2 - 3 12b. If Yes, please describe how data collection was done. - 1 - 2 - 3 77 13. Are you required to develop/write a short/summary about the situation, output and outcomes related to your work? a. Yes b. No 14. Do you receive enough support from government authorities to implement awareness campaigns? a. Yes b. No 14a. If no, why not? - 1 - 2 - 3 15. Did you organize any national or international day celebrations? a. Yes b. No 15a. If yes, which day/s? 16. What percentage of local issues or labor-related disputes were you able to prevent? a. Less than 25 b. 25-49 c. 50-74 d. 75-99 e. 100 16a. Please provide a few examples of local disputes that you were able to prevent. - 1 - 2 - 3 78 SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE FOR WCC RMG AND SFP PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS 1. Respondent Information: 1.1 Sector: a. RMG b. SFP 1.2 Place of Interviews: a. Dhaka b. Gazipur c. Narayanganj d. Chittagong e. Khulna 1.3 Sex: a. Male b. Female c. Other 1.4 Age: _____ 1.5 Household Members: a. Male ____ b. Female ____ c. Other ____ d. Total _____ 1.6 Education Level: a. Primary/equivalent b. Secondary/equivalent c. College/equivalent d. University equivalent e. Graduate education f. Other (please specify) 2. Training 2.1 Which one of the following trainings have you attended? a. Labor law and standards b. Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) c. Civic education d. Health and hygiene e. Family and Community Engagement f. Other _______________________ 2.2 How important was the training to your professional life? Would you say that the training was … (select only one response) to your professional life? Not important Somewhat important Very important 1 2 3 2.3 If you answered that the training was not important or somewhat important to your professional life, why did you give that answer? (Select all that apply.) a. Topics were not relevant for my job b. Topics were very difficult to understand c. The training material was repetitious d. The trainings did not provide new knowledge e. The trainers were not engaging f. Training sessions were too long g. The venues were unsuitable h. Other (please specify): _________________________________________________________ 79 2.4 Please tell us how the training impacted your everyday work? (Select all that apply.) a. Enhanced my level of knowledge about national labor law and standards b. Improved my ability to negotiate and bargain c. Built my confidence to solve work-related disputes d. Raised my awareness of GBV issues in the workplace (e.g., preventing sexual harassment and promoting gender equality and knowledge of laws, rights, and responsibilities) e. Enhanced my knowledge about freedom of association f. Participated in TU’s and WCA’s election and leadership g. Built organizational capacity h. Empowered my colleagues 2.5 Please provide a specific example of the way you solved a work-related problem by applying the knowledge learned during the training. 2.6 How could trainings be further improved? - 1 - 2 - 3 3. Occupational and Health-Related Awareness 3.1 Please rate the importance of gaining knowledge for each topic listed under the Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) area. S.N Topic Issues Rating - Not important at all Somewhat important Very important Don’t know 1 Workplace hazard and risks Using machinery safely Electrical safety Electrical hazards and precautions Fire safety Fire safety precautions Workplace stress and managing workplace stress Slips, trips, and falls on ground levels Working on high floors Manual handling and regulations Reducing manual handling Controlling hazardous substances 80 2. Workplace conditions Cleanings and housekeeping Hygiene and welfare Lighting, ventilation, and heating Safety signs, mandatory signs, prohibition signs Emergency escape and first aid signs Firefighting signs Earthquake safety 3. Workplace procedure Reporting accidents and incidents First aid arrangements Use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) 4. Capacity Building and Awareness 4.1 What are some of the root causes of domestic violence, gender-based violence and harassment, child marriage, etc.? 1 2 3 4 5 4.2 Have you ever joined a TU, WCA, and WCC? a. Yes b. No 4.3 If yes, have you ever participated in any TU, WCA, and WCC elections? a. Yes b. No 4.4 Were you engaged in any community-related development programs (e.g., waste and drainage management and social awareness)? a. Yes b. No 81 4.4.1 If yes, please provide a few examples. - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 4.5 Do you know how to place an emergency call (999)? a. Yes b. No 4.6 Do you know how to access financial services (e.g., how to open a bank account, manage income)? a. Yes b. No 4.7 Do you know how to access public health-related services? (e.g., COVID-19 treatment, doctors’ visits) a. Yes b. No 5. Advocacy-Related Issues 5.1 Have you participated in organizing any celebrations (International Labor Day, Women’s Day, Migration Day, etc.)? a. Yes b. No 5.2 If yes, would you briefly tell me your role? - 1 - 2 - 3 5.3 Have you ever provided advice to co-workers on how to negotiate, bargain, file a claim, and gain access to legal support? a. Yes b. No 5.4 If yes, would you please provide specific examples? - 1 - 2 5.5 Have you ever assisted your co-workers in mediating incidents related to gender-based violence? a. Yes b. No 5.6 If yes, would you please provide specific examples? - 1 - 2 82 5.7 Have you ever assisted co-workers with placing emergency calls? a. Yes b. No 5.8 If yes, would you please provide specific examples? - 1 - 2 5.9 Have you ever assisted your co-workers with accessing public health-related services? a. Yes b. No 5.10 If yes, would you please provide specific examples? - 1 - 2 5.11 Have you contributed to raising awareness about environmental management and/or social awareness programs in your community? a. Yes b. No 5.12 If yes, would you please provide specific examples? - 1 - 2 - 3 83 ANNEX 3: LIST OF STAKEHOLDERS INTERVIEWED Key Informant Interviews # Organization Category of Stakeholder Mode of KII 1 USAID Bangladesh USAID virtual 2 USAID Bangladesh USAID virtual 3 USAID Bangladesh USAID virtual 4 USAID Bangladesh USAID virtual 5 SC Washington IP virtual 6 SC Dhaka IP virtual 7 SC Dhaka IP virtual 8 ILO Other development partners virtual 9 Embassy of Netherlands Other development partners virtual 10 GIZ Other development virtual 11 JICA Other development partners virtual 12 Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES) in Bangladesch Other development partners virtual 13 Canadian High Commission Other development virtual 14 Laudes Foundation Other development partners virtual 15 BRAC WCC service providers virtual 16 CARE Bangladesh WCC service providers virtual 17 SGSF WEP partners TUFs virtual 18 BGIWF WEP partners TUFs virtual 19 BRGWF WEP partners TUFs virtual 20 BIGUF WEP partners TUFs virtual 21 AGWF/IBC General Secretary WEP partners TUFs in-person 22 GWSF WEP partners TUFs in-person 23 Awaj Foundation WEP sub-grantee virtual 24 DIFE GOB virtual 25 DOL GOB in-person 26 DOL, Previously Dhaka Division, Now Rajshahi Division GOB virtual 27 BGMEA Employer organizations virtual 28 Bangladesh Frozen Fish Exporters Association (BFFEA) Employer organizations virtual 29 American Chamber of Commerce in Bangladesh Employer organizations virtual 84 # Organization Category of Stakeholder Mode of KII 30 Bangladesh Women Chamber of Commerce and Industry (BWCCI) Employer organizations virtual 31 IBC IndustriALL Bangladesh Council Labor rights organizations virtual 32 Bangladesh Institute of Labor Studies (BILS) Labor rights organizations virtual 33 3F Labor rights organizations virtual 34 Center for Policy Dialogue Labor rights organizations virtual 35 BNWLA Labor rights organizations in-person 36 Union to Union Labor rights organizations virtual 37 United Federation of Garments Workers (UFGW) Labor rights organizations in-person 38 National Garments Workers Federation (NGWF) Labor rights organizations in-person 39 Bangladesh Textile and Garments Workers League (BTGWL) Labor rights organizations virtual 40 Bangladesh Apparels Workers Federation (BAWF) Labor rights organizations virtual 41 Bangladesh Garments, Textile & Leather Workers’ Federation (BGTLWF) Labor rights organizations virtual 42 GTWL Garments Tailors Workers League (GTWL) Labor rights organizations in-person 43 Shadhin Bangla Garments Sramik Karmachari Federation (SBGSKF) Labor rights organizations virtual 44 SC Khulna IP in-person SC Khulna 45 Bangladesh Center for Workers Solidarity (BCWS) WEP NGO technical partners virtual 46 WARBE Development Foundation WEP NGO technical partners virtual 47 Rural & Urban Poor’s Partner for Social Advancement (RUPSA) WEP NGO technical partners virtual 48 Rupsha WCC (Khulna) WCC virtual 49 Rupsha Upazila Office WCC service providers in-person 50 Christian Service Society (CSS), Rupsha, Khulna WCC service providers in-person 51 Bagmara Dakkhinpara Govt. Primary School, Rupsha, Khulna WCC service providers virtual 52 Department of Labor (DOL), Khulna Division GOB in-person 53 Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishment (DIFE), Khulna Division GOB in-person 54 Sobi Fish Processing Ind. Ltd. Factories (SFP) in-person 55 Fresh Foods Ltd. Factories (SFP) in-person 56 Rupali Sea Foods Ltd. Factories (SFP) in-person 85 # Organization Category of Stakeholder Mode of KII 57 Southern Foods Ltd. Workers Representatives (SFP) in-person 58 National Sea Food Ind. Ltd. Workers Representatives (SFP) in-person 59 Dutch Bangla Bank Ltd., Konabari, Gazipur WCC service providers virtual 60 Social Services Directorate, Hemayetpur, Dhaka WCC service providers virtual 61 Konabari Popular Hospital WCC service providers virtual 62 Golden Heights Ltd., Kalurghat, Chattogram Factories (RMG) virtual 63 Denitax Ltd., Gazipur Factories (RMG) virtual 64 Masco Industries Ltd., Gazipur Factories (RMG) in-person 65 Fashion Skirt & Trousers Ltd., Gazipur Factories (RMG) virtual 66 Shyms Fashions Ltd., Kalurghat, Chattogram Factories (RMG) virtual 67 Cotton Textile and Apparels Ltd., Mirpur, Dhaka Factories (RMG) virtual 68 Farsing Knit Composite Ltd., Gazipur Factories (RMG) in-person 69 The Dress and the Ideas TU Leaders (RMG) in-person 70 Reedisha Knitex Ltd. TU Leaders (RMG) in-person 71 Shyms Fashions Ltd., Chittagong TU Leaders (RMG) in-person 72 Sang-Kung Appareals Ltd., Gazipur TU Leaders (RMG) in-person 73 Masco Industries Ltd., Gazipur TU Leaders (RMG) in-person 74 Cotton Textile and Apparels Ltd, Mirpur, Dhaka TU Leaders (RMG) in-person 75 Sharmin Fashion Ltd., Savar, Dhaka TU Leaders (RMG) in-person 76 Glory Industries Workers Ltd., Chittagong TU Leaders (RMG) in-person 86 Focus Group Discussion (FGD) Participants # of FGD Category of Respondents Division/ District Date # of FGD Participant s # of Mini￾Survey Respondents 1 WCA Executive Board and Leaders (3 WCCs from sub- grantee AWAJ Foundation) Dhaka 03-Sep-21 7 2 2 WCC RMG Program Participants (Participants of sub-grantee AWAJ Foundation) Dhaka 06-Sep-21 5 5 3 TUF RMG Program Participants (workers) Dhaka 07-Sep-21 6 5 4 TUFs Members (factory-level unions) (for 6 members of BGIWF TUF) Dhaka 07-Sep-21 6 6 5 TUFs Members (factory-level unions) (for 6 members of AGWF TUF) Dhaka 08-Sep-21 6 6 6 WCA Executive Board and Leaders (2 WCCs – BCWS and WARBE-DF) Dhaka 08-Sep-21 7 7 7 TUFs Members (factory -unions) (for 6 members of SGSF TUF) Dhaka 10-Sep-21 6 6 8 TUFs Members (factory-level unions) (for 6 members of BRGWF TUF) Dhaka 10-Sep-21 4 4 9 TUFs Members (factory-level unions) (for 6 members of GWSF TUF) Dhaka 10-Sep-21 6 6 10 WCC SFP Program Participants (factory) (permanent workers) Khulna 10-Sep-21 6 6 11 WCC SFP Program Participants (WPC & Safety Committee Workers Representatives) Khulna 12-Sep-21 4 4 12 WCC SFP Program Participants (factory) (contractual workers) Khulna 13-Sep-21 6 6 13 WCA Executive Board and Leaders (WCC RUPSA) Khulna 13-Sep-21 6 6 14 TUF RMG Program Participants (workers) Chittagong 14-Sep-21 6 6 15 TUF RMG Program Participants (workers) Chittagong 15-Sep-21 6 6 16 TUFs Members (factory-level unions) (for 6 members of BIGUF TUF) Chittagong 15-Sep-21 6 6 17 TUF RMG Program Participants (workers) Dhaka 17-Sep-21 4 4 18 WCC RMG Program Participants (participants of technical partner NGOs) Dhaka 17-Sep-21 7 7 19 WCC Coordinators Dhaka 20-Sept-21 7 7 20 TUR Organizers/Coordinators Dhaka 22-Sept-21 6 6 20 FGDs: 117 111 87 ANNEX 4: RESULTS OF MINI-SURVEYS TUF Members (factory unions) (N=31) Gender Age Engagement with union Duration of engagement with union Length in a leadership role (in months) Number of training sessions attended 61% 39% Male Female 68% 29% 3% 20-29 30-39 40-49 100% 0% Yes No 3% 26% 10% 29% 26% 6% less 6 month 7-12 months 13-18 months 19-24 months 25-36 months more than 36 months 10% 42% 3% 19% 19% 7% less 6 month 7-12 months 13-18 months 19-24 months 25-36 months more than 36 months 3% 39% 20% 16% 3% 19% None 1 to 5 6 to 8 9 to 11 12 to 14 15 & above 88 Most important things learned by participants during WEP trainings or workshops (N=31). Multiple response categories selected. Assessment of training effectiveness (N=31) Sustainability of WEP activities for unions (N=31) 10% 28% 10% 28% 3% 3% 3% 17% 17% 66% 21% 28% 14% 24% 10% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% All the benefits and behavior rule Leaves and benefits/Annual leave/ Medical leave/Proper salary structure/Legal aid Benefits and rights of labor CBA Benefits/Skills Chartered of Demand Daycare center Financial literacy Fire safety Hygiene and safety/Occupational security Laboe law Labor rights Violence and harrasment law/policy Pregnancy benefits Trade union forming Relationship forming with owner 27% 73% Somewhat effective Very effective 27% 73% Somewhat sustainable Very sustainable 89 Level of agreement or disagreement with the outcomes of the capacity-building activities (N=30) Level of satisfaction with union leaders Level of workers’ ability to file complaints 3% 7% 3% 3% 3% 10% 10% 3% 13% 21% 21% 23% 13% 7% 17% 10% 97% 87% 76% 76% 77% 60% 90% 83% 87% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% have a better understanding of labor rights have a better understanding of labor law enhanced capacity to address different labor issues improved negotiation skills improved CB skills increased community level engagement seek basic legal assistance (RMG sector) seek basic legal counseling (SFP sector) improved confidence to interact with high level officials Neither agree nor disagree Somewhat disagree Strongly Disagree Somewhat agree Strongly agree 11% 18% 71% 3% 4% 7% 86% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Very dissatisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Somewhat satisfied Very satisfied collective bargaining skills (N=29) financial literacy skills (N=28) 21% 3% 14% 62% 20% 80% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Very unconfident Neither confident nor unconfident Somewhat confident Very confident To unions (N=30) To management (N=29) 90 Level of satisfaction with union members’ awareness on … (N=30) Minimum and maximum length of time needed to resolve complaints (N=28) Number of complaints solved through Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) (N=25) 3% 3% 4% 3% 4% 10% 13% 17% 21% 83% 83% 77% 79% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% OSH Health and Hygiene Gender equality and inclusion Gender based violence and harassment Very dissatisfied Somewhat dissatisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Somewhat satisfied Very satisfied 32% 21% 11% 25% 7% 4% 4% 14% 14% 10% 10% 7% 17% 24% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 1 day 2-7 days 8-14 days 15-30 days 46-60 days 61-90 days 91-180 days more than 180 days Min (in months) Max (in months) 36% 4% 8%8% 4% 4% 16% 4% 4% 8% 4% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 91 TUF RMG Participants (workers) Gender (N=22) Age (N=22) Engagement with union (N=22) Duration of engagement with union (N=11) Number of training sessions attended (N=22) Source of information about the training (N=22) 50% 50% Male Female 50% 32% 18% 20-29 30-39 40-49 55% 45% Yes No 33% 50% 9% 8% 1-3 years 6-9 years 12 years 20 years 32% 27% 9% 32% 1 to 5 6 to 8 9 to 11 15 & above 18% 36% 46% Self Peers Union leader 92 Relevance of the training content and materials (N=22) Perception of the effectiveness of trainings (N=22) Participation in awareness-raising sessions conducted by the WCCs (N=22) Level of improvement of workers’ awareness of workplace safety (N=22) Extent to which the capacity-building activities helped to … (N=22) 5% 95% Somewhat relevant Very relevant 4%5% 5% 86% Somewhat ineffective Neither effective nor ineffective Somewhat effective Very effective 36% 64% Yes No 23% 27% 50% Slightly improved Fairly improved Greatly improved 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 9% 5% 13% 5% 5% 14% 27% 18% 36% 13% 23% 5% 22% 86% 63% 73% 59% 77% 64% 90% 68% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% better understand labor rights (wages, benefits, due benefits, festival bonus, compensation, etc.) improve your awareness of Labor Laws enhance your capacity to address different labor issues enhance your capacity to take action in accordance with the law improve your knowledge on complaints placement (how, when, where) increase community level engagement seek basic legal assistance (RMG sector) differentiate between real scenarios and rumor/fake news about management Somewhat disagree Neither agree nor disagree Somewhat agree Strongly agree 93 Extent to which the workers heard about GBV cases occurring in the workplace (N=22) Personal experience with GBV in the workplace (N=22) Level of sharing the learned knowledge during trainings with workers in factories (N=22) Placing of complaints with trade unions (N=22) Existence of bank/digital financial service accounts by surveyed workers (N=22) Purpose of using the account (N=19) 50% 50% Yes No 27% 73% Yes No 91% 9% Yes No 27% 73% Yes No 91% 9% Yes No 47% 11% 37% 5% Salary Cash into Mobile phone Cash transfer to family members and others Savings 94 Level of satisfaction with own financial skills (N=22) Level of satisfaction with the WEP program activities for unions (N=15) Sustainability of WEP program activities for unions (N=17) Sustainability of WEP program activities for workers (N=21) 9% 5% 9% 32% 45% Very dissatisfied Somewhat dissatisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Somewhat satisfied Very satisfied 7% 27% 66% Somewhat dissatisfied Somewhat satisfied Very satisfied 6% 12% 82% Not sustainable Partially sustainable Very sustainable 5% 14% 81% Not sustainable Partially sustainable Very sustainable 95 WCC RMG and SFP participants Gender (N=24) Age (N=24) Sector of employment (N=24) Location (N=24) Level of education (N=24) 50% 50% Male Female 25% 46% 25% 4% 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 50% 50% SFP RMG 21% 29% 50% Dhaka Gazipur Khulna 25% 34% 33% 8% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Primary/equivalent Secondary/equivalent College/equivalent Other (please specify) 96 Type of WEP trainings attended (N=24) Impact of the trainings on everyday work (N=24) 100% 75% 46% 79% 58% 100% 25% 54% 21% 42% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Labour law and standards Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Civic Education Health and Hygiene Family and Community Engagement Others Yes No 96% 83% 79% 63% 42% 29% 29% 42% 4% 17% 21% 37% 58% 71% 71% 58% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Enhanced my level of knowledge about national labour law and standards Improved my ability to negotiate and bargain Built my confidence to solve work related disputes Raised my awareness of GBV issues in the workplace (e.g., preventing sexual harassment, promoting gender equality, knowledge of laws, rights, and responsibilities) Enhanced my knowledge about freedom of association Participated in TU’s and WCA’s election and leadership Built organizational capacity Empowered my colleagues Yes No 97 Assessment of importance of gaining knowledge on different OSH topics (N=24). Workplace hazard and risks Workplace conditions Workplace procedure 92% 88% 92% 96% 100% 88% 83% 71% 42% 34% 100% 4% 8% 17% 4% 4% 8% 8% 8% 8% 8% 4% 4% 25% 54% 50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Using machinery safely Electrical safety Electrical hazards and precautions Fire safety Fire safety precautions Workplace stress and managing workplace stress Slips, trips, and falls on ground levels Working on high floors Manual handling and regulations Reducing manual handling Controlling hazardous substances Very important Somewhat Important Not Important at all Don’t Know 100% 100% 92% 96% 100% 100% 46% 8% 4% 54% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Cleanings and housekeeping Hygiene and Welfare Lighting, Ventilation, and heating Safety signs, mandatory signs, prohibition signs Emergency escape and first aid signs Firefighting signs Earthquake safety Very important Somewhat Important Don’t Know 96% 100% 100% 79% 4% 21% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Reporting accidents and incidents First aid arrangements Use of Personal protective equipment (PPE) Maintaining traffics rules, signals, crossing roads Very important Don’t Know 98 Have you ever joined a TU, WCA, or WCC? (N=24) Participation in any TU, WCA, or WCC elections (N=24) Engagement in any community-related development programs (N=24) Knowledge of how to place an emergency call (999) (N=24) Knowledge of how to access financial services (N=24) Knowledge of how to access public health￾related services (N=24) 54% 46% Yes No 86% 14% Yes No 67% 33% Yes No 54% 46% Yes No 96% 4% Yes No 100% 0% Yes No 99 Participation in organizing any celebrations (International Labor Day, Women’s Day, Migration Days, etc.) (N=22) Provision of advice to co-workers on how to negotiate, bargain, claim, and gain access to legal support (N=24) Provision of assistance to co-workers in mediating incidents related to gender-based violence (N=24) Provision of assistance to co-workers with placing emergency calls (N=24) Provision of assistance to co-workers with accessing public health-related services (N=24) Contribution to raising awareness about environmental management and/or social awareness programs in the community (N=24) 82% 18% Yes No 67% 33% Yes No 67% 33% Yes No 25% 75% Yes No 79% 21% Yes No 50% 50% Yes No 100 WCA Executive Board Members and Community Leaders Gender (N=20) Age (N=20) Role (N=20) Location (N=20) Type of training sessions attended (N=20) 50% 50% Male Female 15% 45% 20% 20% 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 75% 25% WCA Executive Board Member WCA Leader 35% 35% 30% Dhaka Gazipur Khulna 70% 70% 100% 100% 85% 85% 75% 90% 90% 30% 30% 15% 15% 25% 10% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Organisation planning, management, coordination, monitoring and implementation Strategies and technique of organising programmes and awareness campaign Labour laws and standards Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Civic Education Health and Hygiene Family and Community Engagement and Development programmes Gender-based violence and harassment COVID-19 risk and prevention measures Yes No 101 Regular organization of WCA elections (N=20) Female participation in the election process (N=20) All decisions of the board are … (N=20) Existence of work plans by WCA Board (N=20) Regular payment of members’ fees (N=20) Challenges with the registration process (N=20) Participation in any monitoring activities, studies, and/or evaluations requiring data collection effort (N=20) 95% 5% Yes No 95% 5% Yes No 100% 100% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Conclusive Democratic Transparent Yes No 100% 0% Yes No 95% 5% Yes No 95% 5% Yes No 30% 70% Yes No 102 Requirement to develop/write a short summary of the situation, output, and outcomes related to WCA work (N=20) Receiving sufficient support from government authorities to implement awareness campaigns (N=20) Organization of national or international day celebrations (N=17) Percentage of local issues or labor-related disputes that WCAs were able to prevent (N=20) Percentage of local issues or labor related disputes prevented by WCAs % of respondents Less than 25% 80% 50%-74% 15% 100% 5% 50% 50% Yes No 90% 10% Yes No 85% 15% Yes No 103 WCC Organizers/Coordinators Role (N=7) Gender (N=7) Age (N=7) Number of programs and awareness campaigns organized (N=7) Types of training attended (N=7) 57% 43% WCC Organizer WCC Coordinator 57% 43% Male Female 29% 71% 20-29 30-39 43% 57% 15-19 20+ 57% 14% 71% 14% 14% 100% 43% 86% 29% 100% 100% 86% 100% 86% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Organisation planning, management, coordination, monitoring and implementation Strategies and technique of organising programs and awareness campaign Labour laws and standards Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Civic Education Health and Hygiene Family and Community Engagement and Development programs Gender-based violence and harassment COVID-19 risk and prevention measures Yes No 104 Adequacy of resources to organize programs and awareness campaigns (N=7) Participation in any monitoring activities, studies, and/or evaluations requiring data collection effort (N=7) Requirement to develop/write a short summary of the situation, output, and outcomes related to the work (N=7) Receiving suffcient support from government authorities to implement awareness campaigns (N=7) Provision of advocacy training to … (N=7) 57% 43% Yes No 14% 86% Yes No 100% 0% Yes No 57% 43% Yes No 43% 71% 29% 71% 57% 29% 71% 29% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Local government officials Community leaders Employers of RMG and SEP Other stakeholders Yes No 105 Organization of any national or international day celebrations (N=7) Percentage of local issues or labor-related disputes that WCC organizers and coordinators were able to prevent (N=7) Percentage of local issues or labor-related disputes prevented % of respondents Less than 25% 80% 50%-74% 15% Ability to continue the work after the SC activity ends (N=7) 86% 14% Yes No 100% Yes 106 TUF Organizers/Outreach Workers Gender Age (N=6) Participation in sustainability planning workshops (N=6) Satisfaction with the workshops in helping to develop a leadership structure within organization (N=6) Usefulness of workshops in advancing professional development skills (N=6) Satisfaction with the workshops in advancing professional development skills such as organizing (N=6) 50% 50% Male Female 83% 17% 30-39 50 and more 100% Yes 50% 17% 33% Somewhat ineffective Somewhat effective Very effective 100% Yes 16% 17% 67% Somewhat dissatisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Somewhat satisfied 107 Participation in gender equality and inclusion trainings (N=6) Training helped to better understand GBVH issues (N=6) Satisfaction with the training on GBVH issues (N=6) Participation in gender equality and inclusion training/s or something similar in the past (N=6) Satisfaction with the collective bargaining skill of TUF organizers (N=6) Level of satisfaction with the WEP workshops (N=6) 100% Yes 100% Yes 33% 17% 33% 17% Somewhat dissatisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Somewhat satisfied Very satisfied 100% Yes 16% 17% 67% Somewhat dissatisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Somewhat satisfied 17% 83% Somewhat dissatisfied Somewhat satisfied 108 ANNEX 5: ANALYSIS OF WEP TRAININGS Training Name Duration in Hours (exc. Breaks/lunch) Total # of Main Topics Total # of Sub￾Topics Main Topics ET Reflections on Quality of Training Topics and Missing Topics TUF/TU component Financial and Administrative Management Training 7 hours 4 18 ● Concept of management ● Administrative management ● Account management ● Group work and presentation on work plan formulation Topics/sub-topics include important issues. However, the question is whether it is possible to discuss all these in five hours and 30 minutes. Q&A needed at the end of each session. At least two days’ training needed to cover all the issues provided to the participants. Industrial Dispute Resolution Training 6.5 hours 4 12 ● Dispute Resolution ● Peaceful worker-employer relationship ● Group work ● Acting – meeting between workers’ representatives and employers/management for dispute resolution Insufficient time (90 minutes) for dispute resolution and employer-worker relations. More time needs to be allocated, in particular, to trade unions and ADR. Brief discussion of labor law would add extra value. Q&A needed at the end of each session. Participation Committee Training 6 hours 4 7 ● ILO Convention (87 & 98) ● Workers’ rights to organize, TU and PC ● PC and the way it works ● Decision making and ADR in PC Important issues are covered. Q&A needed at the end of each session. 109 Training Name Duration in Hours (exc. Breaks/lunch) Total # of Main Topics Total # of Sub￾Topics Main Topics ET Reflections on Quality of Training Topics and Missing Topics Safety Committee Training 6 hours 4 6 ● PC and TU ● Safety measures ● Safety Committee – representation ● Safety Committee – activities, responsibilities, and Jurisdiction This training is for the SFP sector. However, a brief discussion of the Rana Plaza (2013) accident and its aftermath would help the participants to understand the importance of workplace safety. Q&A needed at the end of each session. Labor Law Training 7.5 hours 4 7 ● Importance of understanding the Labor law ● International labor standards ● BD Labor law, 2006 and Rules, 2015 ● Initiative against the violation of legal rights One-day training is not sufficient for labor law. Include brief discussion of BD Labor (Amendment) Act, 2018. Emphasize Act 2006 – Basic rules of recruitment, retrenchment, benefits, TU, and related issues. Q&A needed at the end of each session. 110 Training Name Duration in Hours (exc. Breaks/lunch) Total # of Main Topics Total # of Sub￾Topics Main Topics ET Reflections on Quality of Training Topics and Missing Topics Paralegal Training 12 days plenty of topics plenty of sub￾topics ● BD Labor Rules, 2015 ● Worker: Definition, classification ● Terms and conditions of work, work hour, breaks ● Retirement and benefits ● Wages ● Leave ● Maternity ● Complain ● Gratuity, TU, TU registration and TU management checklist ● CBA and COD, dishonest labor activities ● Anti-TU discrimination, Labor Court ● Safety measures ● Safety Committee ● Injury and compensation ● First aid, labor law schedules Topic/sub-topics cover important issues. First day: Discussion of the BD Labor Act 2006 needed before the discussion of Labor Rules 2015. Instead of the second session of Day 1, paralegals and their activities can be discussed in the first session. 111 Training Name Duration in Hours (exc. Breaks/lunch) Total # of Main Topics Total # of Sub￾Topics Main Topics ET Reflections on Quality of Training Topics and Missing Topics Two-Day RMG Training of Trainers (ToT) on Organization and Leadership 14 hours 12 plenty of sub￾topics ● Organization, Organizing and organization management. ● Right to organize – State and international Laws ● TU, TU formation ● Organizing skill development ● Leadership skills ● Successful communication technique ● Training skills development ● Organizing campaign Q&A session needed at the end of each session. Need to check whether all these sub-topics can be discussed effectively in 2 days. Trade Union Consolidation Training 7 hours 5 10 ● TU and reason to join TU ● Leadership quality ● TU executive committee ● TU and TUF background, history, etc. ● TU and TUF relationship ● Organizing workers: Success story from Cambodia ● Roles and responsibilities of Executive Committee Q&A session needed at the end of each session. Success stories from Bangladesh should be included. 112 Training Name Duration in Hours (exc. Breaks/lunch) Total # of Main Topics Total # of Sub￾Topics Main Topics ET Reflections on Quality of Training Topics and Missing Topics Two-Day CBA Workshop for Union Leaders 15 hours 1 plenty of sub￾topics ● TU and CBA representatives in the Labor law; ● Stages of CBA, preparation; Strong sides and weak points; Priorities; COD ● Strategies to reach CBA; communication skills; rules of discussion ● CBA and COD drafts review Q&A needed at the end of each session. Two-Day Conflict Resolution Workshop for Union Leaders 14.5 hours 5 plenty of sub￾topics ● Understanding dispute ● Dispute resolution ● Identifying the disputes in RMG factories ● Dispute resolution through CBA and PC ● Mediation Balanced sub-topics. Time is a factor so far. Q&A needed at the end of each session. 113 Training Name Duration in Hours (exc. Breaks/lunch) Total # of Main Topics Total # of Sub￾Topics Main Topics ET Reflections on Quality of Training Topics and Missing Topics Women’s Leadership Training 7 hours 7 12 ● Defining “women”; women leaders, qualities of a women leader ● Roles and contributions of women in family and society ● Concerns of women workers ● Obstacles that women leaders experience ● Networking, coalition, negotiation, and bargaining ● Gender ● Constitution and law on equality rights Q&A needed at the end of each session. More time can be allocated on gender/women issue-related networking, coalition, negotiation, and bargaining. Taking into account the immense importance of the gender/women issue, this training can continue for 2 days. Community component Civic Education Training 7 hours 2 9 ● Civic education and BD Constitution ● National and international law, policy, rules and state, government and citizen Sub-topics are good. One new issue can be included in the civic education section: Responsible use of social media—which means creating and sharing positive contents and avoiding the sharing of disinformation (hate speech, propaganda, abusive audiovideo, etc.) Q&A needed at the end of each session. 114 Training Name Duration in Hours (exc. Breaks/lunch) Total # of Main Topics Total # of Sub￾Topics Main Topics ET Reflections on Quality of Training Topics and Missing Topics Health and Hygiene Training 7.5 hours 6 plenty of sub￾topics ● Basic ideas on health ● Human body ● Health and safety ● Mental health ● Regular diseases ● Hygiene, COVID-19, cleanliness, etc. Only 45 minutes are allocated for 17 sub-topics under Health and Safety. No topic/sub-topic on factory -evel health and hygiene issues (e.g.,, use of public toilet, etc.). Need detailed discussion on this issue, although there is a training on OSH. This training can be 2 days long with prior attention to factory-level health safety measures. Q&A needed at the end of each session. OSH Training 6 hours 4 plenty of sub￾topics ● OSH – concept and content ● Diseases due to profession and protection ● OSH – Institutional measures ● OSH and BD Labor Act Well-organized sub-themes. Time is an issue – less than 5 hours of discussion including the opening, closing, etc. Q&A needed at the end of each session. 115 ANNEX 6: LIST OF SOURCES CONSULTED Cooperative Agreement No. 72038818CA00003 USAID’s Workers’ Empowerment and Participation (WEP) Activity Communications Strategy for USAID’s Workers’ Empowerment and Participation (WEP) Activity Data Quality Assessment of USAID’S Workers’ Empowerment and Participation (WEP) Activity (August 5, 2021) Factory Mapping Database Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan Solidarity Center – Bangladesh (October 7, 2019) USAID Final Report. Bangladesh/Workers’ Empowerment Program – Component 1 (WEP-C1) USAID Final Report. Bangladesh/Workers’ Empowerment Program – Component 2 (WEP-C2) WEP C1 Cooperative Agreement – Program Description WEP C2 Cooperative Agreement – Program Description Year 1 and Year 2 Annual Work Plan Bangladesh/Workers’ Empowerment and Participation (WEP) Activity Consolidated Logframe of USAID’s Workers’ Empowerment and Participation (WEP) Activity Narrative Report. Quarterly Progress Report Year 1 (Quarters 1-4) and Year 2 (Quarters 1-3) USAID WEP PMP Year 1 (Quarters 1-4) and Year 2 (Quarters 1-3) Baseline Study Report/Worker Community Centers Supported by the Workers’ Empowerment and Participation (WEP) Program (March 2020) CBA Factory A dd 06.02.20, Factory B dd 16.02.2021 and Factory C dd 13.01.2020 Report on Program/Activity. TUF Sustainability Consultation, BGIWF (July 14, 2021) Report on Program/Activity. Advanced Paralegal Training, RMG (June 15-16, 2021) Report on Program/Activity. Labor Law and Workers’ Rights Training, RMG (June 11, 2021) Report on Program/Activity. TUF Sustainability Planning Consultation, RMG ( June 08, 2021) Report on Program/Activity. Women’s Leadership Training, RMG (February 28, 2020) Report on Program/Activity. Consultation on Staff Management and Professional Development, RMG (February 04, 2021) Report on Program/Activity. Trade Union Consolidation Training, RMG (December 20, 2019) Report on Program/Activity. Labor Law and Workers’ Rights Training, RMG (December 06, 2019) Report on Program/Activity. Two-Day Collective Bargaining Workshop for Union Leaders, RMG (June 11-18, 2021) Rupsha. WCA Membership Townhall Meeting, Family and Community Support Workshop, Advocacy Strategy Development Meetings Konabari. WCA Membership Townhall Meeting and WCA Board Meeting WCA Public-Private Stakeholders’ Meeting (March 23, 2021) Training Module. Occupational Safety and Health (OSH), Health Hygiene, Civic Education 116 Manual and Agenda: Women’s Leadership training; TUF WCA Financial and Administrative Management; Paralegal raining; Labor Law training; Participation Committee training; Trade Union Consolidation training; Financial and Administrative Management training; Industrial Dispute Resolution; Safety Committee training; Organizational Governance and Democracy Mentoring Session; Two-Day CBA Workshop for Union Leaders; Two-Day Conflict Resolution Workshop for Union Leaders; ToT on Organization and Leadership USAID’s Workers’ Empowerment and Participation (WEP) Activity First Year. Success and Support in COVID-19 and Beyond. 117 ANNEX 7. EXAMPLE OF THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE OF THE QUARTERLY REPORT TABLE OF CONTENT ACRONYMS ACTIVITY SUMMARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY POLITICAL BACKGROUND ACTIVITY IMPLEMENTATION PROGRESS IR 1: Workers are better represented, both inside and outside the workplace, within sustainable, democratically organized, well-managed, and independent worker organizations Analysis of Outcomes and Progress for IR1 Sub-IR 1.1. Improved organizational capacity, sustainability, and resilience of trade union federations, their affiliated unions, and Worker Community Associations (WCAs) Summary of Activities per theme/area Theme 1: Staff Management and Professional Development Theme 2: Gender Equality and Inclusion Theme 3: Financial and Administrative Management Theme 4: Organizational Governance and Democracy Sub-IR 1.2 Increased skills of factory workers, and their unions and affiliated federations, to collectively represent their rights and interests in the workplace Summary of Activities per theme/area Gender Equality and Gender-Based Violence Awareness Raising Advanced Paralegal Training, Legal Support, and Labor Law Education Collective Bargaining Capacity Building 118 Sub-IR 1.3 Increased skills of worker community members and their associations to collectively advocate for improved living and working conditions in their communities Summary of Activities per theme/area Thematic Training Advocacy Capacity Building Family and Community Support Workshops IR 2: Enabling atmosphere for constructive industrial relations and protection of labor standards enhanced Analysis of Outcomes and Progress for IR2 Sub-IR 2.1 Improved understanding of constructive labor relations by workers and the organizations that represent them, their employers, and other stakeholders Summary of Activities per theme/area Industrial Relations Stakeholder Meetings and Interest-based Negotiation Engagement Conflict Resolution Workshops Sub-IR 2.2. Effective complaint and dispute resolution mechanisms are developed and utilized by worker organizations Summary of Activities per theme/area Explore Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in the RMG Sector Develop Grievance Systems 119 SUSTAINABILITY PLANS WEP partner TUFs Sustainability elements AGWF BGIWF BIGUF BRGWF GWSF SGSF Gender Integration - - - - - - Collective bargaining and dispute resolution - - - - - - Financial management - - - - - - Organizing and recruitment - - - - - - Democracy and sound governance - - - - - - Next steps (if any) for further strengthening of sustainability - - - - - - WCAs Parameters/ WCA Hemayetpur Mirpur Fatullah Unique Konabari Board Bazaar Khulna Status of registration - - - - - - - Total # of members in the WCA - - - - - - - Proportion (%) of workers among the WCA members - - - - - - - Proportion (%) of women among the WCA members - - - - - - - Total # of EC members of the WCA - - - - - - - Proportion (%) of workers among the EC members - - - - - - - Proportion (%) of women among the EC members - - - - - - - Proportion (%) of the EC members who are inactive - - - - - - - Monthly membership fees (in BDT) - - - - - - - Proportion (%) of the WCA members who paid membership fees regularly - - - - - - - Next steps (if any) for further strengthening of sustainability - - - - - - - 120 CHALLENEGES FACED PLANS FOR NEXT QUARTER ANNEXES Annex 1. USAID WEP PMP Annex 2. Calendar of Events Annex 3. Success Stories Annex 4. Miscellaneous Annex 6. Statistics TUFs’ performance on organizing for Quarter x, Year x - AGWF BGIWF BIGUF BRGWF GWSF SGSF Total # of organizers receiving SC mentoring and support - - - - - - - # of submissions - - - - - - - # of new submissions - - - - - - - # of registered unions - - - - - - - # of rejected unions - - - - - - - # of pending applications - - - - - - - # of withdrawal - - - - - - - # of workers (new) - - - - - - - # of women (new) - - - - - - - # of workers - - - - - - - # of women - - - - - - - 121 Training conducted by WEP in Quarter x, Year x Sub-IR Training Title Conducted by Planned # Actual # Total # of participants Total # of men Total # of women - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Training Assessment in Quarter x, Year x Sub-IR Training Title Conducted by Total # of participants Pre-test Post-test Average - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 122 Data on Legal Counselling in Quarter x, Year x - Type of activity Sector Actual # of workers who received legal counseling Legal Assistance Through Paralegals RMG - from them # of men - from them # of women - # of factories - # of complaint letters prepared Legal Assistance Through Paralegals RMG - # of grievance letters to management - # of cases filled in the labor courts - type of those cases - # of legal counseling sessions conducted Legal Counseling RMG - total # of workers covered - from them # of men - from them # of women - # of factories - # of labor court cases resolved Legal Counseling RMG - results of the labor court cases - # of workers who received legal counseling Legal Counseling SFP - from them # of men - from them # of women - # of factories - # of complaint letters prepared Legal Counseling SFP - # of grievance letters to management - # of cases filled in the labor courts/coordinated with DIFE - type of those cases -