McDonalds failed to spot human trafficking and slavery
Discussion
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2kdg84zj4wo
How does a company not spot its staff are being human trafficked and exploited. A hint is all their wages were paid into the same bank account and had the same address.
How does a company not spot its staff are being human trafficked and exploited. A hint is all their wages were paid into the same bank account and had the same address.
BikeBikeBIke said:
And I'm pretty certain my employer can't legally do analysis of my bank details to compare them with other employees. Surely there are data privacy laws.
Nope, preventing and detecting fraud would be a legitimate purpose. It's a standard internal audit test to check employee bank account details for duplicates and also against vendors set up in the accounts payable ledger. Ideally there should be segregation of duties between those who have can crest or amend bank details and those who process the payments. McDonald's HQ probably should be checking this as part of internal audits of franchises but it depends how often they cycle through branches. Less likely that it would be detected in supply chain audits of suppliers.
Edited by Hill92 on Monday 30th September 14:41
Yep, all these fancy laws that basically hurt/annoy/p
s off normal people and SMEs while 100mill person data breaches go on, and McDonalds involved in this kinda bullst.
Same with KYC and AML, despite scammers being rife and using the same “banking system’”, and banks now reducing fraud coverage limits… and money laundering still existing.
Legitimate interest or data processing for any employer to catch slavery is very obviously legitimate, and probably directly covered under their anti slavery statement.
Never mind their ESG scoring for investors, which likely waffles at length about how they use data to prevent all sorts of nasty things like slavery in their product chain, climate change, etc.
The great bureaucracy… that ultimately gives rise to the great apathy of “someone else’s job/responsibility/should have spotted it”
Just like Grenfell, so many rules/regs you’d think no one could do anything wrong without being spotted… but everywhere you look, no one is actually looking!
s off normal people and SMEs while 100mill person data breaches go on, and McDonalds involved in this kinda bullst.Same with KYC and AML, despite scammers being rife and using the same “banking system’”, and banks now reducing fraud coverage limits… and money laundering still existing.
Legitimate interest or data processing for any employer to catch slavery is very obviously legitimate, and probably directly covered under their anti slavery statement.
Never mind their ESG scoring for investors, which likely waffles at length about how they use data to prevent all sorts of nasty things like slavery in their product chain, climate change, etc.
The great bureaucracy… that ultimately gives rise to the great apathy of “someone else’s job/responsibility/should have spotted it”
Just like Grenfell, so many rules/regs you’d think no one could do anything wrong without being spotted… but everywhere you look, no one is actually looking!
I'm responsible for supplier audit at an international manufacturing company and this is the stuff of my nightmares.
It's horrible for the victims, goes on more than you think, and you have to invest so much in training and diligence of your staff to root it out.
Then, it takes courage of your staff to raise issues. When it hits you in the face, companies go into paralysis trying to accept it and figure out what to do.
The worst part is that if you then do the wrong thing and you can make it worse for the victims. So you need processes for remediation lined up and the balls to invoke them.
The board and your legal team will be out of their depth, they probably think it doesn't really happen, certainly not on their watch... their instinct is to distance themselves by severing ties, which does nothing to help the victims. It's really difficult. You kind of have to get comfortable with it (in a weird way) to deal with it more effectively.
While there is poverty, and vulnerable people this sort of st will happen. Unfortunately you don't have to dig that deep to find red flags... my interesting cases have been in less developed economies, but it can clearly can happen in western societies.
I've probably said enough
It's horrible for the victims, goes on more than you think, and you have to invest so much in training and diligence of your staff to root it out.
Then, it takes courage of your staff to raise issues. When it hits you in the face, companies go into paralysis trying to accept it and figure out what to do.
The worst part is that if you then do the wrong thing and you can make it worse for the victims. So you need processes for remediation lined up and the balls to invoke them.
The board and your legal team will be out of their depth, they probably think it doesn't really happen, certainly not on their watch... their instinct is to distance themselves by severing ties, which does nothing to help the victims. It's really difficult. You kind of have to get comfortable with it (in a weird way) to deal with it more effectively.
While there is poverty, and vulnerable people this sort of s
t will happen. Unfortunately you don't have to dig that deep to find red flags... my interesting cases have been in less developed economies, but it can clearly can happen in western societies.I've probably said enough
I was also surprised by the chap who had worked a 30 hour shift!
I mean, surely his manager or colleagues would have noticed when signing it off.
I would have hoped established businesses would have had controls for this, but I imagine modern slavery is still a massive problem in less regulated sectors.
In fact I recall reading how some clothing manufacturers in Leicester scammed loads of workers by paying them min wage on the books, but then demanding cash back from them, or paying them at 16 hours but making them work 32 etc.
The workers were too scared to complain else they'd lose their job/visa etc.
There's a saying "you can't cheat an honest person" but when the practice is widespread it must be hard for individuals to tackle it. However I would have thought HMRC would always offer a friendly ear to employees complaining about tax fraud?
I mean, surely his manager or colleagues would have noticed when signing it off.
I would have hoped established businesses would have had controls for this, but I imagine modern slavery is still a massive problem in less regulated sectors.
In fact I recall reading how some clothing manufacturers in Leicester scammed loads of workers by paying them min wage on the books, but then demanding cash back from them, or paying them at 16 hours but making them work 32 etc.
The workers were too scared to complain else they'd lose their job/visa etc.
There's a saying "you can't cheat an honest person" but when the practice is widespread it must be hard for individuals to tackle it. However I would have thought HMRC would always offer a friendly ear to employees complaining about tax fraud?
Ah I wrote a really long reply then accidentally hit back on my phone browser.
It is more surprising internally than in supply chain because you have direct control and opportunities to see it.
I have been audited by one of the big 4 in a review of modern slavery controls. They used the UN guiding principles for business and human rights to write their audit checklist.
https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Document...
Section 2 and 3 are like a to do list for businesses.
Internally the key thing is the risk assessment on the types of peoplemin your org, the types of harm that can happen and what you do for each. This is how you get controls like checking for duplicate bank accounts etc.
Ideally need to exert leverage over 3rd parties to improve the situation to the extent you can before terminating the relationship. (My understanding - IANAL - we are not responsible for the actions of a 3rd party so long as we don't encourage or facilitate the behaviour).
If it is an internal case and your organisation caused the harm or was complicit then you should remediate the victims.
Sadly if you raise audit findings directly to a 3rd party it can be worse for the victims. So a good process would involve one of the NGOs who work to help victims. They have links to the correct government task forces that can actually help the people.
It's pretty high stakes, high stress stuff, especially when you don't have strong evidence. The instinct for the average executive is to distance the organisation from it. Probably we are all too scared of offending people of you raise a false alarm.
It's why I say there is a weird acceptance that needs to happen so you can deal with it without panicking.
This case is a great case study to remind the boards what can happen if they assume this isn't going on, and don't have resources to think about it and maintain the controls.
Imagine the ripples through those high street names when the news broke!
It is more surprising internally than in supply chain because you have direct control and opportunities to see it.
I have been audited by one of the big 4 in a review of modern slavery controls. They used the UN guiding principles for business and human rights to write their audit checklist.
https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Document...
Section 2 and 3 are like a to do list for businesses.
Internally the key thing is the risk assessment on the types of peoplemin your org, the types of harm that can happen and what you do for each. This is how you get controls like checking for duplicate bank accounts etc.
Ideally need to exert leverage over 3rd parties to improve the situation to the extent you can before terminating the relationship. (My understanding - IANAL - we are not responsible for the actions of a 3rd party so long as we don't encourage or facilitate the behaviour).
If it is an internal case and your organisation caused the harm or was complicit then you should remediate the victims.
Sadly if you raise audit findings directly to a 3rd party it can be worse for the victims. So a good process would involve one of the NGOs who work to help victims. They have links to the correct government task forces that can actually help the people.
It's pretty high stakes, high stress stuff, especially when you don't have strong evidence. The instinct for the average executive is to distance the organisation from it. Probably we are all too scared of offending people of you raise a false alarm.
It's why I say there is a weird acceptance that needs to happen so you can deal with it without panicking.
This case is a great case study to remind the boards what can happen if they assume this isn't going on, and don't have resources to think about it and maintain the controls.
Imagine the ripples through those high street names when the news broke!
Edited by Glade on Tuesday 1st October 08:08
These fast food businesses have become joke cowboy outfits when it comes to illegal labour. Even the big ones are guilty of it mainly through the use of delivery companies.
How these delivery companies get away with it without severe fines and punishments is a joke. Any other industry that allowed their employees to set up fake employe accounts so illegal immigrants could work. Then ride around on essentially illegal motorbikes with no insurance would be ripped to bits and rightly so. But for some reason these large companies are getting away with it. Mainly because they use the excuse all their workers are self-employed.
How these delivery companies get away with it without severe fines and punishments is a joke. Any other industry that allowed their employees to set up fake employe accounts so illegal immigrants could work. Then ride around on essentially illegal motorbikes with no insurance would be ripped to bits and rightly so. But for some reason these large companies are getting away with it. Mainly because they use the excuse all their workers are self-employed.
There are loads of these encampments round Bristol too.
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/17...
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/17...
Edited by Red9zero on Thursday 10th October 14:08
Traditionally, the slaves were owned by an 'employment agent' who would supply them to a food franchise. The slaves are stored in the granny flats at the end of all the gardens in the cheap parts of the suburbs and their rent and other enormous costs such as toilet paper are taken at source from their salary.
Alongside fast food kitchens you now have the whole gamut of 'disrupter' industries such as the ride hire services and delivery services which disrupt by ignoring local laws and turning a blind eye to the rampant slavery.
Alongside fast food kitchens you now have the whole gamut of 'disrupter' industries such as the ride hire services and delivery services which disrupt by ignoring local laws and turning a blind eye to the rampant slavery.
Red9zero said:
There are loads of these encampments round Bristol too.
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/17...
And the article helps shine a light on one of the key issues:https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/17...
“ Of those arrested 13 were subsequently detained, pending potential removal from the UK. The four individuals not detained were placed on immigration bail and will be required to report regularly to the Home Office. “
So, despite already being in breach of various conditions, and living in a caravan at the roadside - about as “no fixed abode” and untraceable as you could get - four of these individuals have been left to it. Is there a maximum quota I wonder for how many bodies the immigration service can cope with detaining in one go, and anyone over that number just gets a nod and a wink?
The specific individuals dealt with here may well be victims and entirely not to blame, but that action hardly discourages anyone from future offending.
Southerner said:
The specific individuals dealt with here may well be victims and entirely not to blame, but that action hardly discourages anyone from future offending.
Yup, in simple terms, they are the victims. In order to discourage future victims the simplest path is to follow the money trail to the victimisers and sweep them up and invariably offer them prison or 50% of the first year's cost of prison and a free flight out of the U.K. They can then have the remaining 50% if they agree terms immediately and can claim it 12 months after being happily ensconced abroad. I think the key is to make the punishment for owning slave extreme and the definition loose (receipt of funds from the employer etc) and then go gunning for those people as they're the ones responsible and they also have a money trail making them easier to find. Trying to find and manage the undocumented or barely traceable victims is just an endless high spend and no deterrent.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff