What questions do you have about the Responsible Business Initiative?
On November 29, the Swiss will vote on a people’s initiative that demands companies based in Switzerland ensure respect for human rights and the environment abroad.
Under the initiative, large companies as well as smaller ones in high-risk sectors would be required to assess the impacts of activities in their operations and supply chains. Switzerland-based companies could be held liable for abuses if they failed to exercise appropriate due diligence.
Many confusing or misleading statements on the initiative are swirling as the vote comes closer. How can we help you navigate the debate? What questions do you have about the initiative?
We’ll work to answer questions and comments in the conversation below, and take them on board for our future reporting.
From the article Game on for Swiss corporate responsibility vote
From the article How easy is it to hold Swiss companies to account abroad?
The company has an obvious responsibility to train and set an example!
L'entreprise a une responsabilité évidente dans la formation et l'exemple !
Just preventively tax all companies with a one time 30 percent profit tax, a responsibility and solidarity tax and use the money to help all those who lost their jobs due to the virus. Surely all companies who stay here do it because of the tax incentives, so they will not mind losing 30 percent as a one off.
Okay!
Ok!
Doesn't it introduce an unequal playing field? Swiss-based companies can be charged but their foreign-based competitors cannot. I guess some foreign companies would have a bright idea to sponsor activists to sue Swiss competitors.
“Apple’s managers at every level... have been expected to possess three key leadership characteristics: deep expertise ...immersion in the details...and a willingness to collaboratively debate” — Joel M Podolny & Morten Hansen
On the contrary, PASSERBY2, does it introduce an equal playing field? From colonialism, the century old multilateralism changed to neocolonialism. Since then, as the Cybernetic Age has been replacing the Contemporary Age, global issues has been replacing international issues.
The story "Game on for Swiss corporate responsibility vote" says "How can multinational companies ensure that their subsidiaries respect human rights and the environment in the various areas of the world where they operate? This issue has long been discussed at a global level."
Might global (no longer mutinational) companies be able to respect human rights and the environment by being innovative as Apple? Please take a look at my contribution to the SWI story "The palace at the centre of world peace."
What means were taken to ensure that troll lawyers cannot make up charges just to take money for settlement? Proponents don't understand the very high cost of simply being sued for fake.
If it is so important to hold companies accountable for their behavior abroad, why are the majority of companies (small & medium sized businesses) exempt from accountability?
Wenn es so wichtig ist, dass man Firmen für ihr Verhalten im Ausland zur Verantwortung ziehen kann, weshalb ist die Mehrheit der Firmen (kleine & mittelständische Betriebe) von der Verantwortung entbunden?
I like it. Tax the rich poluters and give the money to people so they can buy the things needed to work from home, like an extra desk, PC / laptop, printer, etc. Help the new economy.
What if your prices will soar? Your laptop might contain a mineral mined in poor conditions in Africa. Your desk could be from unsustainably cut forest in East Europe. Company making your printer could pollute rivers in South Asia. Ultimately, probably you would ditch Swiss products and order the cheaper laptop, desk and printer from abroad.
What if we all win the lotery. Fake news and fear mongering.
Just like people who said the economy will die in every country which introduced a minimum age. They all said what if every business leaves and it never happened.
Personally I think it is important that these companies take their responsibilities towards the Swiss standards and laws. Otherwise it's too easy in a Pontius Pilate way, I wash my hands of what happens elsewhere.
I agree that it is not easy to put in place, but it is up to the politicians to put in place, enforce and control ... especially.
I have a small reflection however on the subject of the votes in general, all these polls concerning the intentions of votes, in my opinion, are often very directed and often influence people and it is regrettable. But that's just me.
Perso je pense que c'est important que ces entreprises prennent leurs responsabilités vis-à-vis des normes et des lois suisses. sinon trop facile façon Ponce Pilate, ce qu'il se passe ailleurs je m'en lave les mains.
Certainement pas facile à mettre en place j'en conviens mais çà c'est du ressort des politiques de mettre en place, de faire respecter et de contrôler ... surtout.
J'ai une petite réflexion toutefois au sujet des votations en général, tous ces sondages concernant les intentions de votes, à mon avis, sont souvent très orientés et influencent souvent les gens et c'est regrettable. Mais cela n'engage que moi.
How about a responsible tax?
As a person I would not mind a resonable tax system where if I donate 10'000 CHF a year to plant trees to get back 20'000 as a tax deduction, while if a company invests in polluting industries and weapons they should pay 2x the tax and distribute that money to people who are responsible with their choices.
When they say Swiss companies are responsible for due diligence and ensuring respect for human rights and the environment abroad, which companies exactly? Are we talking about only companies who are based in Switzerland? What about companies from abroad who do business IN Switzerland? For example, as a Swiss firm, ON RUNNING would likely be liable under this new directive. Would a foreign company like NIKE who chooses to do business IN Switzerland also be held to the same standards? In short, who exactly does this affect and not affect?
Thanks for your questions. This has been the subject of some debate because some of the details would still need to be worked out in parliament if the initiative were approved. According to the initiative text, it is intended to affect large companies with headquarters in Switzerland. Small and medium enterprises, except for those in high-risk sectors such as gold, are not supposed to be affected.
We should be talking here about the initiative for an unaccountable Parliament'.
How can we submit to the people an information brochure indicating the stakes of the vote with the pros and cons, while indicating that if the vote fails, the counter-project will come into force very quickly (sic, because we want to go quickly).
But this counter-project is nowhere to be found in the brochure, which distorts things by giving the side of the CF Parliament, even on the back cover.
This is what we call a democratic power grab.
On devrait ici parler de l'initiative "pour un Parlement irresponsable".
Comment peut-on soumettre au peuple une brochure d'information indiquant les enjeux de la votation avec les pour et les contres, en indiquant que si la votation échoue, le contre-projet entrera en vigueur très rapidement (sic, car on veut aller vite).
Mais ce contre-projet n'apparait nulle part sur la dite brochure, qui biaise les choses en donnant le camp du Parlement CF, jusque sur la dernière de couverture.
C'est ce qu'on appelle un passage en force démocratique.
The example of Ikea shows that it sounds easier than it is. Why should it work on a large scale?
Thanks for writing. Agree, the question of scale is a good one. Some of the companies have more than 100,000 direct suppliers and thousands more deeper in the supply chain. Should they be responsible for all of them? And what does that mean? Good question, thanks!
If there are 100,000 direct suppliers, than there must be 1,000,000s or 10,000,000s down the supply chain. I doubt that any company can keep an eye on it. There should be some limits. Otherwise a corner shop selling mobile phone cards could be fined for a mine in Africa, or whatever.
Isn't "Responsible Business" an oxymoron? Businesses will always put short term profit ahead of anything else. Good luck finding a Government that has the guts to change this. Especially parties whose politicians are funded by the same businesses.
The initiative does raise some tricky questions. Companies are used to trying to cut costs and this has sometimes come at the expense of people and the environment. Thanks for your contribution.
It is interesting that the initiative needs companies to uphold measures even when doing business abroad. As much as it seems to be a bold move, but I think it's not quite easy-to-follow. Swiss people always had the reputation of taking the biggest steps and I hope this could be one of those.
HI! Thanks so much for sharing your perspective. How the initiative would be implemented and company actions would be monitored are indeed important questions.
Having companies being deeply committed to such this programmes requires stringent regulations while fair trade relations is being the most controversial issue at the international relations and unfortunately there are enormous companies have to run their business in a way that does not support human rights and even if they wanted to make any changes and act towards human flourishing increasing production cost would not let them
You can find an overview of ongoing debates with our journalists here . Please join us!
If you want to start a conversation about a topic raised in this article or want to report factual errors, email us at english@swissinfo.ch.