Labour migration, business and human rights

Migrant workers are pivotal to enriching societies and sustaining resilient economies. They contribute significantly to such sectors as services, agriculture, construction, healthcare and domestic work, filling critical skill and labour shortages in the labour market.¹ They add to economic activity and recovery through remittances, while also making a sociocultural contribution to communities.² Yet migrant workers are at constant risk of numerous human rights violations and abuses, including forced labour, precarious employment, wage theft, debt, diminished freedoms of peaceful assembly and association, discrimination, xenophobia, social exclusion and criminalization.³ This is especially true of those experiencing the intersectional realities of being, for instance, a pregnant woman migrant worker living with hidden disabilities. Undocumented or irregular migrant workers are also at heightened risk of violations and abuses, and are often those “left furthest behind” in society, as seen during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic.⁴ Compounding these risks are structural barriers to accessing justice and effective remedies.

1. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-un-enti-ilo.pdf. ↩
2. See www.weforum.org/stories/2023/02/remittances-money-world-bank/ and www.weforum.org/ stories/2021/01/remittances-key-post-covid-recovery/. ↩
3. See A/HRC/53/24/Add.3 and A/HRC/59/53/Add.1. ↩
4. See https://malta.iom.int/sites/g/files/tmzbdl1101/files/documents/Qarantined-%2520IOM%2520rearch%2520on%2520xenophobia%2520and%2520the%2520pandemic_0.pdf. ↩

The Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights offer important guidance on how States and businesses should uphold their respective duty and responsibility to protect and respect the human rights and dignity of all migrant workers. Doing so – including by ensuring safe and regular migration channels alongside access to decent work – is a legal and ethical imperative; and it is also essential to building sustainable businesses. At a time when workers’ rights are in “free fall across every continent”,⁵ the present report is a call to action for States and businesses to scale up efforts to safeguard the rights of migrant workers everywhere, and thereby build stronger, safer and more vibrant societies.

5. See www.ituc-csi.org/ituc-global-rights-index-2025-EN. ↩

The report focuses on labour migration in a cross-border context. To this end, it assesses the salient and understudied business and human rights challenges faced by transnational migrant workers.⁶ With practical examples and recommendations, it distils insights on how States and businesses can implement the Guiding Principles in Business and Human Rights through a migrant worker-centred lens, particularly in the context of global value chains.

6. “Transnational migrant workers” refers to land-based and sea-based migrants of working age who migrate from the State of their usual residence with a view to joining the labour force of another State, and who continue to retain sociocultural ties to their country of origin. Unless otherwise indicated, references to “migrant workers” in the present report are references to transnational migrant workers. ↩

Although the report acknowledges that internal labour migration raises a plethora of business-related human rights challenges, word limitations prevent exploration of that issue. Moreover, while the specific legal statuses and protections afforded to migrant workers and refugees are recognized, certain parallels are drawn between the experiences of migrant workers, particularly those affected by conflict, and refugees seeking employment. Lastly, the Working Group notes the considerable existing research on topics such as fair and ethical recruitment, reforms to immigration sponsorship system, forced labour, child labour and trafficking in persons. While those issues remain salient, the present report identifies emerging and less-studied issue areas, including intersectional challenges.

The report builds on the substantial body of work and databases published by bodies including the United Nations, in particular the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, and the special procedures of the Human Rights Council, the International Labour Organization (ILO), the International Organization for Migration (IOM), the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).⁷ It also draws on key observations from 36 multi-stakeholder and bilateral consultations with States, private sector actors, migrant workers, human rights defenders, civil society organizations, workers’ organizations, national human rights institutions, international organizations and experts in various regions. The analysis is also informed by over 90 public and confidential stakeholder submissions,⁸ information derived from allegations submitted to the special procedures communications mechanism, and desk research involving primary and secondary source materials.

7. See the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration, www.ilo.org/sites/default/ files/wcmsp5/groups/public/@ed_protect/@protrav/@migrant/documents/publication/wcms_208594.pdf, https://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/pub2024-023-r-access-to-justice-for-migrant-workers-and-victims.pdf and www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/overview-data-on-migration-flows-and-migrant-populations.html. ↩
8. See www.ohchr.org/en/calls-for-input/2025/call-inputs-report-labour-migration-business-and-human-rights-80th-session-un. ↩

Observations based on stakeholder consultations centre on how States and businesses need to address not just the drivers of migrant labour abuse, but also the structural and systemic conditions enabling them. Given that many legal instruments related to business and human rights are largely focused on combating forced labour, modern slavery and child labour, the extent to which those instruments are applied to tackle the root causes of such abuses as experienced by migrant workers remains relatively limited. Although not treated exhaustively, the issues covered in the present report exemplify the significant barriers and intersectional challenges that frustrate efforts to uphold migrant workers’ rights, particularly in cross-border contexts.

Each stage of the migration continuum presents varied, yet overlapping, human rights risks. These can include trafficking in persons for purposes of forced labour and criminality,⁹ fraudulent job offers via online employment, social media and messaging platforms, and occupational health and safety hazards. Indeed, many submissions highlight how migrant workers disproportionately experience a range of serious and chronic health conditions linked to occupational hazards, including respiratory issues and dehydration when working outdoors in extreme heat.¹⁰

9. See https://bangkok.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/wp_files/2023/08/ONLINE-SCAM-OPERATIONS-2582023.pdf. ↩
10. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-un-enti-who.pdf. ↩

Across a range of sectors, migrant workers face actual and potential adverse human rights impacts linked to their insecure migration status, language and cultural barriers, and lack of access to legal services, among other factors. Drawing on submissions and consultations, the following sectors are identified as high risk for migrant workers: services, manufacturing and fast-moving consumer goods, 7 See the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration, www.ilo.org/sites/default/ files/wcmsp5/groups/public/@ed_protect/@protrav/@migrant/documents/publication/wcms_208 594.pdf, https://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/pub2024-023-r-access-to-justice-formigrant-workers-and-victims.pdf and www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/overview-data-onmigration-flows-and-migrant-populations.html. 8 See www.ohchr.org/en/calls-for-input/2025/call-inputs-report-labour-migration-business-andhuman-rights-80th-session-un. 9 See https://bangkok.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/wp_files/2023/08/ONLINE-SCAMOPERATIONS-2582023.pdf. 10 See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-un-enti-who.pdf. construction, agriculture, domestic work and the care economy, maritime industries (including fishing and shipbuilding), extractive industries, hospitality and tourism, logistics and transportation, and the “gig” economy.¹¹ 11

11. On the gig economy, see www.ilo.org/sites/default/files/wcmsp5/groups/public/%40ed_norm/ %40ipec/documents/publication/wcms_854733.pdf. ↩

Migrant workers in the informal economy, in particular, face increased human rights risks. Value-chain strategies have largely failed to address the intersections between economic and labour-market informality and labour migration. Because regulatory frameworks to govern platform work remain fragmented at the global level, migrant workers in that sector are also not currently entitled to adequate labour rights and social protection (e.g. insurance and overtime pay), and face barriers in negotiating proper employment conditions with platform providers. Aside from environmental hazards such as heat stress, which are worsened by climate change, concerns relating to the just transition and green jobs were also raised in consultations and submissions. Those concerns pertain for example, to human rights abuses and labour-related abuses experienced by migrant workers in the construction and renewable energy industry, including but not limited to workers in the States members of the Gulf Cooperation Council.¹²

12. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-cso-hr-watch.pdf. ↩

Temporary labour migration programmes remain pervasive among destination countries. That situation can create a permanent state of limbo for migrant workers by preventing pathways to permanent residency or citizenship and restricting their entitlements to social welfare benefits and family reunification.¹³ Employer-tied permits further restrict their freedom of movement; loss of employment also results in immediate loss of legal residency. The Working Group notes longstanding criticisms about the kafalah system¹⁴ and, despite the improvements made,¹⁵ concerns that are now being raised about aspects of Japan’s new Employment for Skill Development programme.¹⁶

13. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-cso-migration-youth-children-platform.pdf. ↩
14. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-cso-hr-watch.pdf. ↩
15. See A/HRC/56/55/Add.1. ↩
16. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-sta-japan.pdf and www.ohchr.org/sites/ default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-cso-solidarity-ne2rk-with-migrants-japan.pdf. ↩

Underlying those risks are the widening governance gaps among origin, transit and destination countries that seek to protect migrant workers, and those where migrant labour exploitation is facilitated or tolerated.¹⁷ This lack of policy coherence at the transnational level often reflects coordination issues at the national and local levels with regard to migration governance, rights protection and law enforcement, especially among government agencies. In confidential submissions, businesses also shared difficulties in respecting migrant workers’ rights in the United States of America and Malaysia, where local laws do not always align with international human rights standards.

17. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-cso-migrant-forum-asia-stakeholders-input.pdf. ↩

Realizing a “whole-of-Government” or “whole-of-society” approach requires recognizing corruption as an overarching challenge. In relation to recruitment and sponsorship schemes, corruption involving government officials and agencies can enable the charging of illegal fees and deceptive practices, trapping migrant workers 11 On the gig economy, see www.ilo.org/sites/default/files/wcmsp5/groups/public/%40ed_norm/ %40ipec/documents/publication/wcms_854733.pdf. 12 See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-cso-hr-watch.pdf. 13 See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-cso-migration-youth-children-platform.pdf. 14 See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-cso-hr-watch.pdf. 15 See A/HRC/56/55/Add.1. 16 See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-sta-japan.pdf and www.ohchr.org/sites/ default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/labour-migration/submlabour-migration-business-cso-solidarity-ne2rk-with-migrants-japan.pdf. 17 See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-cso-migrant-forum-asia-stakeholders-input.pdf. 6/26 in debt bondage and exploitation.¹⁸ Absent effective enforcement and oversight, this situation undermines the rule of law and denies workers justice.

18. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-cso-asia-pacific-mission-migrants.pdf and A/HRC/44/43. ↩

Migrant workers face pervasive and structural barriers due to various forms of discrimination, xenophobia and criminalization that exacerbate political narratives of migrants as “disposable”.¹⁹ Those dynamics are also pronounced for migrant human rights defenders, who face intimidation, surveillance and deportation.²⁰ Moreover, stigma can force migrants, even those who are overqualified, into low-waged informal work in which they are treated worse than other highly skilled migrants, who also experience challenges in seeking professional integration.²¹

19. See https://mfasia.org/recruitmentreform/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Policy-Brief-Support-for-Ethical-Recruitment.pdf, www.iom.int/sites/g/files/tmzbdl486/files/2019-01/S-19-5%20-%20Promoting%20the%20ethical%20recruitment%20of%20migrant%20workers_1.pdf, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10860016/ and www.hrw.org/news/2023/12/18/gulf-states-treat-migrant-workforce-disposable. ↩
20. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-othe-stak-asean-act.pdf and www.unwomen.org/ sites/default/files/2023-06/Policy-brief-Protecting-women-human-rights-defenders-in-migration-contexts-en.pdf. ↩
21. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-sta-lithuania.pdf. ↩

An important strategy to combat discrimination, secure fair pay and prevent irresponsible business conduct is to ensure that migrant workers can engage in collective bargaining and exercise their freedom of association.²² That right is, however, unavailable to many migrant workers, particularly women, LGBTI+ and Indigenous workers, and workers in special economic zones, as they frequently lack collective representation due to being legally prohibited from unionizing or are being actively discouraged by employers from doing so.²³ It is clear from stakeholder submissions and consultations that other major obstacles contribute to migrant workers’ exclusion from union membership and leadership positions, and create difficulties in reaching and organizing them.²⁴

22. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-trad-unio-ituc.pdf. ↩
23. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-othe-stak-asean-act.pdf. ↩
24. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-trad-unio-cgil.pdf and www.ohchr.org/sites/ default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-trad-unio-confederation-autonomous-trade-union-erbia.pdf and www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-cso-migrant-wg.pdf. ↩

Similarly, there are significant obstacles to the right to remedy for migrant workers in cross-border contexts. Challenges include: migrant workers’ lack of awareness of their rights and of existing justice and grievance mechanisms; logistical, linguistic and cultural barriers that prevent them from raising grievances; fears of retaliation, including in the form of deportation, unfair dismissal and being made irregular, that deter the reporting of abuses; and the temporary nature of employment contracts and related visas, that can in some cases require migrant workers to return to their countries of origin before grievances have been resolved. Seeking remedy can pose additional challenges for migrant workers: aside from long court and bureaucratic processes, workers usually require direct support to lodge complaints 18 See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-cso-asia-pacific-mission-migrants.pdf and A/HRC/44/43. 19 See https://mfasia.org/recruitmentreform/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Policy-Brief-Support-forEthical-Recruitment.pdf, www.iom.int/sites/g/files/tmzbdl486/files/2019-01/S-19-5%20%20Promoting%20the%20ethical%20recruitment%20of%20migrant%20workers_1.pdf, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10860016/ and www.hrw.org/news/2023/12/18/gulfstates-treat-migrant-workforce-disposable. 20 See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-othe-stak-asean-act.pdf and www.unwomen.org/ sites/default/files/2023-06/Policy-brief-Protecting-women-human-rights-defenders-in-migrationcontexts-en.pdf. 21 See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-sta-lithuania.pdf. 22 See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-trad-unio-ituc.pdf. 23 See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-othe-stak-asean-act.pdf. 24 See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-trad-unio-cgil.pdf and www.ohchr.org/sites/ default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/labour-migration/submlabour-migration-business-trad-unio-confederation-autonomous-trade-union-erbia.pdf and www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/labourmigration/subm-labour-migration-business-cso-migrant-wg.pdf. and monitor progress. Without such support, for instance from a civil society organization, remedy can remain elusive.

The commentary to Guiding Principle 3 provides that guidance to business should recognize the specific challenges faced by migrant workers and their families, among other groups. The adverse human rights impacts experienced by migrant workers are not, however, uniform. The overlapping identities of migrant workers, derived from such factors as their gender, disability, race, age, nationality or migration status, whether they are Indigenous and/or stateless, and whether they identify as LGBTI+,²⁵ can lead to increased incidences of discrimination and other abuses,²⁶ as well as barriers to accessing protection and remedy. An intersectional lens is thus required to address those challenges.

25. See A/79/178. ↩
26. See www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2025/05/saudi-arabia-migrant-domestic-workers-face-severe-exploitation-racism-and-exclusion-from-labour-protections/, www.scielo.org.mx/ scielo.php?pid=S1405-14352025000100002&script=sci_arttext&tlng=en and www.ohchr.org/ sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-sta-ecuador.pdf. ↩

Women migrant workers, particularly those in domestic and care work, are consistently identified by stakeholders as facing heightened risks of severe abuse.²⁷ Their labour is regularly excluded from standard labour laws and social protections and may, in many contexts, not be recognized as work. That situation leaves them without labour rights or social protection. Women migrants are particularly at risk of gender-based and sexual violence and exploitation, including harassment and physical abuse.²⁸ They often earn significantly less than their male counterparts for similar tasks and are relegated to informal and precarious work,²⁹ including work in the agricultural, hospitality and manufacturing sectors. Women migrants can also face pregnancy-based discrimination and even job loss or deportation if they become pregnant. Restrictive policies in countries of origin, such as age requirements or the need for the consent of a male family member, can push them into irregular migration pathways. Upon return, these women may face social stigmatization and lack access to reintegration services.

27. See A/HRC/59/56 and https://roasiapacific.iom.int/sites/g/files/tmzbdl671/files/documents/ addressing-women-migrant-worker-vulnerabilities.pdf. ↩
28. See A/RES/78/180. ↩
29. See www.ilo.org/sites/default/files/wcmsp5/groups/public/@dgreports/@dcomm/@publ/ documents/publication/wcms_534326.pdf. ↩

Especially in States where LGBTI+ persons have limited legal protections and face marginalization, LGBTI+ migrant workers encounter serious barriers to employment, healthcare and housing. Transgender and non-binary persons report higher rates of violence and abuse, and may be forced into low-paying or irregular jobs due to discrimination. For instance, they are reportedly coerced into sex work or domestic servitude, in which they remain unprotected due to stigma and fear of institutional mistreatment.³⁰ Within value chains, LGBTI+ migrants are often invisible to standard compliance assessments, and are thus left without tailored protections. Victims can face further discrimination when attempting to gain support or report abuse to authorities, something that contributes to underreporting and impunity. Outside the workplace, they can face risks to their physical and mental health.

30. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-aca-glasgow-caledonian-university.pdf. ↩

Despite contributing considerably to the migrant workforce in some regions, Indigenous Peoples remain invisible in national migration data due to a lack of disaggregation by ethnicity, something that hinders tailored policy responses.³¹ Indigenous migrant workers also experience increased human rights harms due to structural discrimination and socioeconomic marginalization – a situation similarly faced by minority groups such as the Roma/Traveller communities.³² Crucially, in the case of Indigenous migrant workers, the loss of ancestral lands and traditional livelihoods, owing for instance to imposed development projects and conflicts, can push them into precarious migration pathways, exposing them to exploitative working conditions in such sectors as agriculture, domestic work and construction. Factors such as climate change, environmental degradation and natural disasters can exacerbate their displacement. Indigenous women migrant workers face compounded risks, including the risk of gender-based exploitation, which is underpinned by colonial legacies and racism. Similarly, a lack of legal identity renders Indigenous Peoples invisible to many protection systems. Indigenous Peoples in coastal areas of such countries as India, Malaysia and Thailand whose main source of livelihood is fishing reportedly face criminalization, wrongful arrest and statelessness for practising their traditional livelihoods across State boundaries, including in disputed maritime regions.³³ In consultations with Indigenous migrant workers, additional emphasis was placed on the need for culturally appropriate and gender-responsive outreach and support services, together with accessible grievance mechanisms.

31. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-cso-indigenous-peoples-major-group.pdf. ↩
32. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-regi-mech-council-europe.pdf. ↩
33. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-cso-indigenous-peoples-major-group.pdf. ↩

Because conflict constitutes a major driver of forced displacement and migration, improvements are needed to protect rights holders affected by civil or international conflict. Those groups face increased human rights and security risks when seeking employment opportunities elsewhere. Policy commitments and engagement among businesses have typically neglected refugees, many of whom face the same challenges as migrant workers while contending with a heightened risk of human rights abuses owing to their status. The Working Group acknowledges some exceptions; for instance, the Ingka Group has provided skills support to thousands of refugees since 2019 and developed a Skills for Employment toolkit with support from UNHCR.³⁴ As States promote new policy levers, such as complementary pathways to enhance employment outcomes for refugees in particular,³⁵ it is important that related policies and programming embed a requirement for businesses to conduct heightened human rights due diligence and address adverse human rights impacts.³⁶

34. See www.unhcr.org/europe/news/announcements/we-re-better-together-private-sector-stepping-refugee-inclusion and www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/ workinggroupbusiness/cfis/labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-cso-maat-peace-development-human-r-ights.pdf. ↩
35. See www.unhcr.org/what-we-do/build-better-futures/solutions/complementary-pathways/ employment-pathways. ↩
36. See A/75/212. ↩

Human rights violations and abuses faced by migrant workers and refugees seeking employment have cascading impacts on their families and children. A major issue is family separation, often prolonged by restrictive visa systems, which undermines the right to family life and can lead to mental health issues for migrant workers, refugees, and family members.³⁷ Policies denying family unity rights, or requiring migrant workers and refugees to meet certain conditions in order to bring over family members or regularize their status, create significant hardship.³⁸ Children left behind in countries of origin may also experience psychosocial stress and neglect due to parental separation. Those who accompany or are born to migrant workers abroad are frequently denied access to education, health and social protection services due to their legal status. They may face language and cultural barriers in schools, and may also be excluded from national child protection and justice systems. Undocumented children and adolescents, and their families, are especially at risk of statelessness, detention, trafficking in persons, being neglected by systems responsible for child protection and “adult” labour. Despite initiatives conducted by States and businesses to support families (e.g. through localized education) and integrate child-sensitive indicators and family impacts into human rights due diligence frameworks, systemic challenges remain that risk perpetuating a cycle of deprivation and social exclusion.³⁹

37. See www.unicef.org/media/58341/file/Family%20unity%20issue%20brief.pdf and www.unhcr.org/ sites/default/files/legacy-pdf/3bd3d4a14.pdf. ↩
38. See https://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/iml_15_en.pdf. ↩
39. See www.unicef.org/eap/reports/regional-situation-analysis-children-affected-migration-asean-member-states and www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/ workinggroupbusiness/cfis/labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-un-enti-unicef.pdf. ↩

This report cannot detail the challenges faced by all at-risk groups, such as migrant workers with disabilities, workers of colour including those of African descent, older workers, and other minority groups. However, the analysis underlines the need to connect corporate commitments to diversity, equity and inclusion with the protection of migrant workers. As commitments to diversity, equity and inclusion are regressing, these exigent circumstances require States and businesses to apply a human rights-based approach, consistent with the Guiding Principles in Business and Human Rights, to safeguard migrant workers’ rights.

States are critical to enforcing expectations for businesses to respect human rights in their activities, including along cross-border migration pathways that workers use to enter foreign employment and labour markets. Many States have implemented various regulations at the national and subnational levels, including in relation to employment standards, labour relations, immigration, justice and counter-trafficking, to protect migrant workers’ rights. Policy measures have also been implemented, such as stronger inspection and enforcement regimes and direct engagement with migrant workers. The effectiveness of many of these actions is predicated on effective bilateral and multilateral cooperation to regulate cross-border migration.

Policy, legal and regulatory measures

Given the importance of a smart mix of voluntary and mandatory measures to implement the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, strengthening migrant labour protection likewise requires a coherent mix of policies, including national action plans,⁴⁰ laws and regulations across the interrelated areas of business and human rights, immigration, counter-trafficking, modern slavery and social protection, to create a conducive environment for rights-respecting businesses. Some States have taken important steps to enhance human rights due diligence by businesses and value-chain transparency among them by enacting legislation that requires businesses to report on how they address adverse human rights impacts. Examples include laws enacted in France, Germany and Norway.⁴¹ Laws focusing specifically on forced labour, modern slavery and child labour, such as those enacted in Australia and Canada, are also noteworthy and relevant to migrant workers.⁴²

40. See https://globalnaps.org/issue/migrant-workers/. ↩
41. See www.legifrance.gouv.fr/jorf/id/JORFTEXT000034290626, www.bmas.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Internationales/act-corporate-due-diligence-obligations-supply-chains.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=3 and https://lovdata.no/dokument/NLE/lov/2021-06-18-99. ↩
42. See www.legislation.gov.au/C2018A00153/latest/text and https://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/F-10.6/. ↩

Another area receiving attention is the regulation of cross-border recruitment practices, which are linked to well-documented risks of forced labour and trafficking in persons.⁴³ Here, States are focusing not only on the employment conditions of migrant workers but also on their conditions of recruitment, which can include misinformation, deception, fraud, corruption, discrimination, restrictions on freedom of movement and confiscation of passports, as well as debt bondage associated with recruitment fees and related costs. Further efforts are required to regulate labour recruiters, including by reforming licensing systems and addressing corruption to enhance transparency and accountability.

43. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-cso-remedy-project.pdf and www.ohchr.org/ sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-cso-1-swedwatch.pdf. ↩

From consultations held, the Working Group observes an appetite among business and civil society stakeholders for businesses involved in recruitment to be registered through a licensing or registration scheme supported by inspections and appropriate penalties to punish illegal practices. For the operation of such schemes, States would need to consider transparency measures, including the publication of the names and details of licensed recruiters and lists of those under investigation or whose licences have been suspended or revoked. They would also need to consider requiring licence holders to report annually on the steps they are taking to combat exploitation. One such scheme has been introduced in the Canadian Province of British Columbia, where the Temporary Foreign Worker Protection Act sets out licensing requirements for recruiters, registration requirements for employers, and a complaints mechanism and powers of investigation for the relevant authority.⁴⁴ Similarly, in Mauritius, the Private Recruitment Agencies Act establishes licensing conditions, criteria for their suspension or revocation and powers of inspection, as well as explicitly prohibiting the charging of fees to migrants.⁴⁵

44. See www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/18045. ↩
45. See https://mauritiusassembly.govmu.org/mauritiusassembly/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/ act1323.pdf. ↩

The Working Group reiterates the need to ensure that States apply policy, legal and regulatory measures fairly to migrant workers and that those measures are regularly evaluated and updated to address evolving human rights risks. Any smart mix of measures must be aligned with relevant international instruments,⁴⁶ including the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families; conventions and protocols related to forced labour and trafficking in persons; international standards related to labour migration and migrant workers, including the ILO Convention concerning Migration for Employment (revised 1949); and non-binding instruments such as the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration⁴⁷ and Human Rights Council resolution 56/18, entitled “Promoting and protecting the enjoyment of human rights by seafarers”. The Working Group further emphasizes the importance for States of ensuring migrant workers’ right to freedom of association and collective bargaining, so that States’ legal frameworks and law enforcement mechanisms facilitate and do not impede that right. For example, the right to trade union membership and collective bargaining for migrant workers is embedded in the European Social Charter,⁴⁸ while, in Australia, the Pacific Australia Labour Mobility scheme offers a structural safeguard that requires employers to invite unions to meet migrant workers.⁴⁹

46. See www.ilo.org/sites/default/files/wcmsp5/groups/public/@ed_protect/@protrav/@migrant/ documents/publication/wcms_223057.pdf. ↩
47. General Assembly resolution 73/195. See also https://refugeesmigrants.un.org/migration-compact. ↩
48. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-regi-mech-council-europe.pdf. ↩
49. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-cso-synod-victoria-tasmania-uniting-ralia.pdf. ↩

Law enforcement and inspections

According to the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, States are required to give effect to policies, laws and regulations through law enforcement, strengthened access to justice and other safeguards. Regarding migrant worker protection, this brings to mind longstanding recommendations for States to establish standards and procedures, known as firewalls, to separate immigration enforcement from criminal justice, health services and public education.⁵⁰ Efforts have more recently focused on strengthening inspection services and, specifically, the role of labour inspectors who oversee working conditions in industries with migrant workers. In many jurisdictions, labour inspectors also assess cross-border recruitment practices, with responsibility for investigating human rights abuses, including discrimination, sexual harassment and exploitation, in the workplace.

50. See https://bangkok.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/2024-06/Report-on-temporary-labour-migration-programme-final-250123.pdf. ↩

Inspection mechanisms can be strengthened by incorporating proactive models that are risk-based, intelligence-led and focused on value chains, in effect linking employers that hire migrant workers with entities responsible for recruiting them. In the United Kingdom, the Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority⁵¹ investigates labour exploitation and protects at-risk workers, including migrants in agriculture where value chains are complex and extensive.

51. See www.gla.gov.uk/who-we-are. ↩

To perform their functions effectively, inspectorates require an appropriate mandate and adequate resourcing, including the authority to investigate the risks that face migrant workers (such as abuses that occur during recruitment), institutional mechanisms to liaise with other enforcement agencies and the means to engage international counterparts to support cross-border investigations (e.g. information-sharing protocols). The Norwegian Labour Inspection Authority has pioneered both intra- and inter-State collaboration to assist migrant workers. Inspectors engage police, tax authorities and the Directorate of Immigration to provide support through a Service Centre for Foreign Workers, and the Authority has also signed bilateral agreements with countries of origin to enable joint inspections and provide targeted information to workers and businesses in Norway.⁵² In Italy, cultural mediators have been deployed to support the National Labour Inspectorate during inspections and outreach sessions by reducing language and cultural barriers.⁵³

52. See www.arbeidstilsynet.no/en/working-hours-and-organisation-of-work/knowyourrights/. ↩
53. See https://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/IRIS-Handbook-Ch-3-Inspections.pdf, p. 18. ↩

Migrant workers must be allowed to play a greater role in the inspection process, including, where necessary, by extending residency and work permits to enable their participation in proceedings resulting from an enforcement action. Likewise, the effectiveness of existing criminal, civil and administrative penalties warrants evaluation to determine whether additional sanctions are required to support inspectors’ preventative and remedial functions. New penalties can include revoking licences, imposing administrative fines for recruitment fees charged to migrant workers, forcing the suspension or closure of operations and requiring financial restitution for victims.

In addition to vertical and horizontal coherence across the national and subnational levels in line with the commentary to Guiding Principle 8, cross-border policy coherence is crucial to global migration governance and can be achieved through inter-State cooperation. For migrant worker protection, cooperation has been based largely on bilateral labour migration agreements, for which guidance is provided by the United Nations Network on Migration.⁵⁴ Corresponding agreements related to social security and memorandums of understanding are also key features of such cooperation. These instruments establish the principles of cooperation between participating entities, regulate workers’ movement and establish protections at all migration stages.

54. See https://migrationnetwork.un.org/sites/g/files/tmzbdl416/files/resources_files/blma_guidance _final.pdf. ↩

Improvements to bilateral labour migration agreements are required, however, to ensure full protection for the workers whose mobility they regulate. Human rights, including labour rights, need to be integrated into such agreements, so as to provide for protection at all stages of migration, including recruitment, employment and return. Specific protections are similarly necessary for migrant workers facing unique and heightened risks, such as Indigenous Peoples, domestic workers, workers with disabilities and those employed in conflict-affected areas or remote workplaces (e.g. in agriculture, forestry, extractive industries or fishing). Moreover, when negotiating agreements, States should incorporate a mechanism to support periodic review and monitoring of implementation.⁵⁵ Examples include the inter-agency understandings signed by New Zealand with Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Samoa and Vanuatu under the Recognized Seasonal Employer Scheme,⁵⁶ which requires employers to provide migrant workers with suitable accommodation, medical insurance, health services and access to religious and cultural activities,⁵⁷ and the cooperation agreement signed between Brazil and the Plurinational State of Bolivia to strengthen institutional cooperation between police, immigration agencies and the judiciary.⁵⁸

55. See https://publications.iom.int/books/iris-handbook-governments-ethical-recruitment-and-migrant-worker-protection-chapter-4. ↩
56. See www.mfat.govt.nz/en/aid-and-development/labour-mobility#bookmark0. ↩
57. See wwwex.ilo.org/dyn/migpractice/migmain.showPractice?p_lang=en&p_practice_id=48. ↩
58. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/trafficking/cfis/dom-workers/subm-migrant-domestic-workers-sta-8-brazil.pdf and www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/ issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-aca-clinic-international-law-fae.pdf. ↩

Multilateral cooperation is likewise necessary. Regional bodies such as the Council of Europe and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) have contributed, inter alia, to elucidating the right of migrant workers and their families to protection and assistance; reaffirming States’ commitment to protecting victims of trafficking in persons; and setting out expectations of business responsibility.⁵⁹ Inter-State consultation mechanisms have also become a key feature of migration governance, enabling information-sharing, policy dialogue and cooperation among States or blocs of States. Despite being non-binding, such mechanisms help States to establish common ground on shared challenges in order to develop more effective policies and practices to address gaps in the protection of migrant workers. They can also serve to strengthen partnerships, introduce new initiatives and areas of engagement (e.g. climate-induced human mobility) in participating jurisdictions and encourage the harmonization of protection strategies. Examples include the Global Forum on Migration and Development, the Regional Ministerial Forum on Migration for East and Horn of Africa and platforms dedicated to irregular migration, trafficking in persons and ethical recruitment.⁶⁰

59. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-regi-mech-council-europe.pdf. See also, for example, the ASEAN Guidelines for Corporate Social Responsibility on Labour, which require updating for greater alignment with the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Available at: https://asean.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/ASEAN-Guidelines-for-CSR-on-Labour.pdf. ↩
60. See www.gfmd.org, www.iom.int/regional-ministerial-forum-migration-east-and-horn-africa-rmfm, www.baliprocess.net, http://abudhabidialogue.org.ae and https://policynetwork.iom.int. ↩

Outreach and awareness-raising initiatives

Community outreach and public awareness initiatives can support States’ fulfilment of their obligations. State engagement through public campaigns designed to combat xenophobia and misinformation and to provide support services and assistance, for instance, would benefit migrant workers and the public.⁶¹ Such engagement exists, for example, in Bahrain, where the Labour Market Regulatory Authority has established a website including a multilingual guide for migrant workers regarding their rights and responsibilities at work,⁶² and Brazil, where the labour inspectorate maintains the Protect Work information campaign for migrants and refugees, using web-based resources, brochures, live-streaming events and videos with testimonies from migrants and migration experts.⁶³

61. https://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/pub2023-034-l-iris-handbook-for-govt-ch5.pdf. ↩
62. See www.lmra.gov.bh/en/page/show/210. ↩
63. See www.gov.br/trabalho-e-emprego/pt-br/acesso-a-informacao/acoes-e-programas/programas-projetos-acoes-obras-e-atividades/proteja/estrangeiro/english. ↩

Orientation programmes tailored to the situation and information needs of migrant workers at the pre-departure and post-arrival stages of migration were identified during consultations with businesses and civil society organizations as beneficial. In Ethiopia, the Ministry of Labour and Skills provides pre-employment and pre-departure orientation over two days at centres across the State.⁶⁴ 64 In Mexico and Canada, training is provided to Mexican migrants on health, safety and labour rights through a partnership with a leading trade union,⁶⁵ while in Vanuatu, the Family Ready Programme trains migrant workers and their families on human rights, communication with children, and the prevention of gender-based violence, among other topics.⁶⁶ 66 Furthermore, the Comprehensive Information and Orientation Programme, developed under the Abu Dhabi Dialogue, promotes harmonization of information across countries of origin, transit and destination. It provides migrants 59 See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-regi-mech-council-europe.pdf. See also, for example, the ASEAN Guidelines for Corporate Social Responsibility on Labour, which require updating for greater alignment with the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Available at: https://asean.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/ASEAN-Guidelines-for-CSR-onLabour.pdf. 60 See www.gfmd.org, www.iom.int/regional-ministerial-forum-migration-east-and-horn-africarmfm, www.baliprocess.net, http://abudhabidialogue.org.ae and https://policynetwork.iom.int. 61 https://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/pub2023-034-l-iris-handbook-for-govt-ch5.pdf. 62 See www.lmra.gov.bh/en/page/show/210. 63 See www.gov.br/trabalho-e-emprego/pt-br/acesso-a-informacao/acoes-e-programas/programasprojetos-acoes-obras-e-atividades/proteja/estrangeiro/english. 64 See https://publications.iom.int/books/iris-handbook-governments-ethical-recruitment-andmigrant-worker-protection-chapter-5-migrant. 65 See www.ufcw.ca/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33272:canada-s-foodworkers-union-partners-with-governments-in-mexico-to-launch-pilot-project-in-support-ofmigrant-farm-workers&catid=10319&Itemid=6&lang=en. 66 See https://roasiapacific.iom.int/sites/g/files/tmzbdl671/files/documents/2023-10/famili-i-redirapid-review-report-digital.pdf. 14/26 with information and support that are mutually reinforcing across all stages of migration: pre-employment, pre-departure, post-arrival and pre-return.⁶⁷

64. See https://publications.iom.int/books/iris-handbook-governments-ethical-recruitment-and-migrant-worker-protection-chapter-5-migrant. ↩
65. See www.ufcw.ca/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33272:canada-s-food-workers-union-partners-with-governments-in-mexico-to-launch-pilot-project-in-support-of-migrant-farm-workers&catid=10319&Itemid=6&lang=en. ↩
66. See https://roasiapacific.iom.int/sites/g/files/tmzbdl671/files/documents/2023-10/famili-i-redi-rapid-review-report-digital.pdf. ↩
67. See www.iom.int/ciop. ↩

Migrant worker-centred engagement

Migrant resource centres are useful for States in engaging with and supporting migrant workers. They are often administered by a public authority, though, in some cases, the service is contracted out to a third party, such as a civil society organization. Often regarded as a “one-stop shop”, migrant resource centres enable migrants – and, in some cases, employers – to seek information, advice and services, including direct assistance in reporting abuse, or referral to legal aid, shelter, health support and psychosocial counselling. In Kyrgyzstan, the Ministry of Labour, Social Security and Migration operates the Centre for Employment of Citizens Abroad, providing information on employment services, job vacancies and licensed recruitment agencies, and pre-departure orientation to promote safe migration.⁶⁸ In the Philippines, Migrant Worker Offices serve to protect the welfare of such workers, providing social assistance, education, cultural services, financial management, reintegration services and assistance with contractual disputes with employers.⁶⁹

68. See https://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/pub2023-034-l-iris-handbook-for-govt-ch5.pdf and https://migrant.kg/ru/. ↩
69. See https://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/pub2023-034-l-iris-handbook-for-govt-ch5.pdf. ↩

In establishing a migrant resource centre or a network of them, States, through meaningful consultation, will need to identify the services that are most useful to migrant workers and their families at each stage of migration, while also linking these services to existing referral mechanisms, law enforcement agencies, social services and civil society partners. Investment in communications technologies and remote service provision is also necessary to allow migrants who live far from a migrant resource centre to receive information and support.

Businesses are crucial to ensuring that labour migration is “safe, fair and beneficial for all”.⁷⁰ Complementing State action, business efforts to enhance migrant worker protection, especially with regard to the prevention of forced labour and trafficking in persons, have been noteworthy over the past decade. Even so, in their engagement for this report, stakeholders have emphasized the importance of businesses integrating a broader consideration of migrant workers’ rights into human rights due diligence, avoiding “box-ticking” approaches and improving access to remedy.

70. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-un-enti-ilo.pdf. ↩

Businesses and industry associations have been embedding their respect for human rights in policy commitments, such as those explicitly prohibiting forced labour, modern slavery and trafficking in persons, in line with the ILO indicators of forced labour and other international human rights standards. One global commitment to migrant workers, developed by the American Apparel and Footwear Association and the Fair Labor Association and signed by over 100 businesses and organizations, requires the signatories to translate the commitment into policy and report on actions taken.⁷¹ Another example is the commitment by businesses to the “employer pays principle”, aimed at preventing migrant workers from paying fees and costs associated with their recruitment and migration.⁷²

71. See www.aafaglobal.org/AAFA/Solutions_Pages/Commitment_to_Responsible_Recruitment. ↩
72. See www.ihrb.org/projects/leadership-group-for-responsible-recruitment and www.ioe-emp.org/ index.php?eID=dumpFile&t=f&f=156233&token=c8033ba3a6f02383ba1f7b7e1df69a2cd63806c3. ↩

Businesses should ensure the horizontal and vertical coherence of their corporate human rights policies, along with the inclusion of specific commitments to the rights of all migrant workers, as part of efforts to address and prohibit practices such as debt bondage, contract substitution, unexplained or illegal wage deductions and restrictions on freedom of movement. Such policy commitments also need to be designed and implemented through standard operating procedures that address human resource and procurement practices, and by third-party service providers such as recruiters.

Stakeholder consultations underscored the importance of ensuring that occupational health and safety policies account for the situation of migrant workers and their families, and that corporate human rights commitments contain concrete measures to prevent the discrimination, xenophobia, racism and social exclusion that affect migrant workers. These commitments should be anchored in international human rights standards, with stakeholders, such as migrants’ rights groups, trade unions, diaspora groups, public authorities, international organizations and academia, being consulted in the design of new or updated policies.

Capacity-building and training can highlight the actual and potential adverse human rights impacts faced by migrant workers in business operations and value chains. They are also key to demonstrating a business’s human rights commitment and serve as steps to prevent human rights abuses in the future. Further, they help improve understanding and practices among business partners, including suppliers and subcontractors that are small- and medium-sized enterprises.⁷³ Unilever, Ipieca and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development have all spearheaded e-learning and hybrid training courses on the topics of forced labour and unethical recruitment.⁷⁴ It is important for training to be connected to issues affecting migrant workers, for example, fair wages, working hours, living conditions and diversity, equity and inclusion, with attention also directed to the protection of at-risk groups.

73. See A/HRC/35/32. ↩
74. See www.unilever.com/files/2326fa58-7615-4d9e-97db-60e77ff63730/unilever-modern-slavery-statement-2024.pdf, www.ipieca.org/resources/online-labour-rights-training and www.wbcsd.org/ education/fair-recruitment-in-practice/. ↩

Human rights due diligence and labour migration (a) Identifying and assessing human rights impacts

Ongoing human rights due diligence enables businesses to identify and address actual and potential adverse human rights impacts proactively, fulfilling their human rights responsibilities while reducing legal, reputational and operational risks. One business representative observed that preventing human rights harms cost less than remediation. While conducting human rights due diligence to prevent and address forced labour has been a focus in recent years, a migrant worker-centred lens with regard to human rights due diligence also entails looking beyond forced labour to understand the root causes of the abuse and exploitation of migrant labour. For example, as part of an integrated approach to human rights due diligence,⁷⁵ value-chain mapping can be adapted to include consideration of migrants in the workplaces of business partners, including service providers. Where migrant workers are identified, mapping should also trace cross-border mobility and examine all the entities involved in countries of origin, transit and destination, reflecting a corridor approach aligned with the migration process.⁷⁶ This includes entities that may otherwise escape a business’s attention, such as entities facilitating health assessments, skills certification and visa facilitation that may charge migrant workers for their services, and border governance services. In conducting value-chain mapping, businesses should also collect disaggregated data related to migrant workers (e.g. gender, age, ethnicity, nationality and legal status) to render their human rights due diligence more targeted.

75. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-priv-sect-amfori.pdf. ↩
76. See, for example, Apple and IKEA: https://s203.q4cdn.com/367071867/files/doc_downloads/ 2025/04/23/Apple-Supply-Chain-2025-Progress-Report.pdf and www.ikea.com/global/en/ stories/sustainability/protecting-migrant-workers-230101/#:~:text=Supporting%20suppliers%20 in%20responsible%20recruitment,of%20recruitment%20of%20all%20workers. ↩

Similarly, human rights impact assessments need to identify and account for the whole migration continuum, including countries of origin and transit as well as countries of destination or employment. This means that existing models of assessment, which focus more narrowly on a workplace, business or product value-chain, must be adapted in line with a broader understanding of adverse human rights impacts that encompasses the pathways that migrants take in order to reach a workplace or employment. Otherwise, impact assessments will only tell part of the story, missing important “locations” where migrants may experience significant impacts related to unethical recruitment, forced labour and debt bondage.

Such considerations also apply to other assessments such as social audits. For example, VF Corporation monitors its supply-chain facilities through a mix of compliance audits (initial, follow-up and annual assessments) supported by technology (the Mekong Club Apprise Audit) that enables the company to engage with workers individually and collectively to uncover risks of forced labour. This monitoring is reinforced by a traceability programme that extends to the company’s tier 2 suppliers of key materials, providing greater visibility into value chain risks.⁷⁷ In addition to implementing targeted or specialized assessments focused on forced labour, businesses can tailor audit protocols to identify abuse more effectively, broadening the auditing scope to examine conditions during migration, adapting worker interview techniques to ensure that migrants can share their experiences and adopting new assessment protocols to reach less visible or hard-to-access parts of the value chain. Innovation is also required to identify complex issues such as irregular migration and unfair dismissals, and their intersection with the informal economy, particularly in lower tiers of the value chain. In all cases, the safety and protection of migrant workers is paramount, including guarantees of non-retaliation (e.g. threats of reporting to the authorities, detention, deportation and the loss of wages, livelihoods and accommodation, where the latter is provided by the employer or recruiter). Support for these and related human rights due diligence activities is found in several tools and resources developed by industry, multi-stakeholder and intergovernmental organizations, including in the IOM and ILO toolkits on fair and ethical recruitment.⁷⁸

77. See https://d1io3yog0oux5.cloudfront.net/vfc/files/pages/vfc/db/436/description/Responsible+ Recruitment+and+Anti+Forced+Labor+Committment+.pdf. ↩
78. See www.iom.int/fair-and-ethical-recruitment-due-diligence-toolkit and www.fairrecruitmenthub.org/resources/due-diligence-toolkit-fair-recruitment. ↩

Given that there is no “‘one-size-fits-all” approach to human rights due diligence, it is important for businesses to broaden the focus of those processes to consider not only the specific experiences of at-risk groups (e.g. refugees and LGBTI+ or disabled migrant workers and their families), but also the full set of risks and hazards that these rights holders face, including those resulting from conflict, climate change, inequality and poverty, age, gender and disability, and the loss of cultural identity in the case of Indigenous migrant workers. Stakeholder submissions also spotlighted how occupational health and safety risks, despite being covered by the ILO fundamental principles and rights at work, are not given sufficient consideration in corporate human rights due diligence processes. In addition, submissions and consultations revealed gaps in understanding of the application of heightened human rights due diligence to migrant workers and refugees affected by or working in conflict-affected areas, as well as to undocumented workers and those in detention.⁷⁹ Moreover, businesses will need to consider how to address these adverse human rights impacts along value chains, factoring in restrictions on freedom of movement, poor work conditions, discrimination and exposure to occupational health and safety hazards.

79. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-aca-cornell-university.pdf. ↩

How businesses respond to and act upon human rights due diligence findings determines how effective their processes are. Examples of effective processes include engagement by businesses with migrant workers throughout value chains, including in partnership with civil society organizations or under the guidance of third-party experts. Ajinomoto, for instance, consults external experts during its assessments and, for high-risk parts of its supply chain, also conducts on-site visits to engage in dialogue directly with rights holders,⁸⁰ while Hitachi reports that it conducts migrant worker surveys as part of human rights due diligence processes for its own operations and those of its business partners.⁸¹

80. See www.ajinomoto.com/sustainability/keyword/human_rights.php. ↩
81. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-cso-bhrrc.pdf. ↩

In consultations, businesses observed that uneven levels of awareness among migrant workers of their rights can hinder businesses’ ability to ascertain whether policies are being implemented and adverse impacts addressed. Development of guidance and other resources to explain new or updated policies on migrant worker protection can prove useful in this regard. These resources should be comprehensive, accessible and widely distributed among the relevant teams (e.g., in human rights, sustainability, human resources, procurement and legal areas). They should also be made available to business partners along value chains, including service providers such as recruiters, social auditing firms and others involved in security, cleaning, logistics, warehousing and transport, which are often overlooked.

Outreach to migrant workers should involve a mix of awareness-raising, capacity-building and other forms of engagement, including pre-departure orientation, “know your rights” brochures, and other print and digital resources. CIERTO, for example, provides a comprehensive training programme for new and returning migrants, which is supported by employer clients and implemented before workers leave their home communities.⁸² Such initiatives should be tailored to the situation and information needs of migrant workers and refugees, available in relevant languages, accessible through multiple means and, where possible, complemented by digital engagement through smartphone and messaging applications.

82. See https://ciertoglobal.org/comprehensive-training/. ↩

Where a business finds itself directly linked to adverse impacts that have occurred, it should exercise leverage within its business relationships before deciding to disengage. Examples of measures that can be taken include commissioning independent audits, requiring the supplier or subcontractor to provide a corrective action plan that is implemented within an agreed timeframe, offering training and resources to develop capacity and strengthening supplier systems to prevent recurrence. A business can go from being directly linked to an adverse human rights impact (e.g. through a supplier) to contributing to that impact, should the business fail to take appropriate action to prevent or mitigate the adverse human rights impact through its business relationship.

While leverage can be exercised by a business on its own, business consultations highlighted certain sectors where a business may find itself lacking leverage. In such circumstances, according to the commentary to Principle 19 of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, businesses may seek to exert increased leverage by collaborating with industry peers and other stakeholders to address adverse impacts on migrant workers’ rights within a sector. For example, businesses alerted the Working Group to the lack of awareness of the Guiding Principles and relevant international standards, such as the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, in the shipbuilding and shipping sectors, rendering it necessary for business clients to collaborate with other actors to increase leverage and effect change at the sector level.

When sustained efforts to exercise leverage fail and harm cannot be satisfactorily addressed, disengagement may be appropriate. In its guidance on responsible exit,⁸³ OHCHR advises how businesses planning disengagement can act with transparency and prioritize the well-being of affected rights holders. Regarding migrant labour, this can include actions by States and businesses to ensure that wages are paid, workers are provided with alternative employment or livelihood sources, support is provided for them to return home upon request, and operational-level grievance mechanisms are in place.

83. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/bhr-in-challenging-contexts.pdf. ↩

Adopting new forms of worker-centred engagement – such as “worker voice” programmes tailored to migrant constituencies – can be highly useful for businesses, providing channels to gather insights from migrant workers about their experiences in relation to employment, living conditions and migration. To enhance understanding of migrant workers’ needs, improve risk management and support responsible business practices, the intersectional realities of migrant workers should also be incorporated into such programmes, with steps taken to ensure that those who “raise their voices” do not face retaliation. The Responsible Business Alliance, for instance, has established a mechanism of this type, which includes worker surveys, mobile learning and a grievance procedure allowing workers, including migrants, to complain directly to participating businesses.⁸⁴ ASOS has partnered with Anti-Slavery International and the IndustriALL Global Union in Mauritius to support safe migration through the establishment of a migrant resource centre in the State’s capital and the launch of a smartphone application that provides information to migrants, as well as serving as a means through which to give feedback and raise grievances.⁸⁵

84. See www.responsiblebusiness.org/tools/voices/. ↩
85. See www.asosplc.com/news/asos-announces-continued-support-mauritius-migrant-resource-centre-antislavery-day/ and www.industriall-union.org/app-promotes-migrant-workers-rights-in-mauritius. ↩

Business engagement should be anchored in industrial relations mechanisms where workplaces are unionized or an international framework agreement has been negotiated with a global union federation. Technology-driven, “worker voice” platforms can be significantly enhanced by the longstanding experience of labour movements, not least in relation to grievance and dispute resolution. For example, by signing a global agreement with Building and Wood Workers’ International, QDVC and VINCI committed to establishing worker welfare committees, supporting worker education and implementing a conflict resolution mechanism for their largely migrant workforce in Qatar.⁸⁶

86. See www.ihrb.org/latest/commentary-bwi-vinci-qdvc-framework-agreement. ↩

Likewise, social partners, workers’ organizations and trade unions can advance the migrant worker protection agenda in value chains by supporting dispute resolution mechanisms and social dialogue at the operational, national and sector levels, as well as through education campaigns and direct assistance programmes.⁸⁷ At the global level, the International Trade Union Confederation has spearheaded initiatives such as the Recruitment Advisor platform to help workers access their rights.⁸⁸

87. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-trad-unio-centrales-syndicales-du-quebec.pdf and www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-trad-unio-cgil.pdf. ↩
88. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-trad-unio-ituc.pdf. ↩

Steps are being taken in relation to how businesses communicate their responses to human rights impacts, especially in light of recent modern slavery laws that include reporting requirements. In consultations, stakeholders observed the expectation for businesses to use annual sustainability and human rights reports, alongside disclosure to benchmarks such as “KnowTheChain”, to inform stakeholders about policies and practices relevant to migrant labour.⁸⁹ Reporting should be comprehensive, addressing well-documented and lesser-known risks, and should cover all tiers of the value chain, including vertical and horizontal business partners where transparency has been limited (e.g. labour recruiters and security, transport, cleaning and other service providers). Fortescue, for example, has disclosed where migrants are at risk, including for outsourced and subcontracted services.⁹⁰ Performance and impact data related to migrant workers’ grievances, dispute resolution results, and preventive, corrective and remedial actions taken, should also be prioritized over policy description in reporting. That would reinforce trends in data-sharing regarding the repayment of recruitment fees and related costs, and initiatives such as the public database on worker-paid fees developed by the labour rights consultancy Impactt, with the aim of furnishing businesses with information to support targeted human rights due diligence and remediation.⁹¹

89. See www.business-humanrights.org/en/from-us/knowthechain/. ↩
90. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-cso-bhrrc.pdf. ↩
91. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-priv-sect-impactt.pdf. ↩

Where remedy and migration intersect,⁹² efforts taken by States and businesses to enhance access to justice and effective remedies for migrant workers are resulting in progress. Even so, there are enduring obstacles, with submissions received stressing the fear and lack of trust – specifically, the threat of employer or recruiter retaliation, the loss of wages and employment, the risk of detention and deportation, the distrust of law enforcement agencies, and the lack of confidence in the effectiveness of support systems – that combine to prevent migrant workers from accessing justice and remedy.⁹³ Dedicated strategies by States and businesses are needed to build migrant workers’ confidence, as well as improve bureaucratic efficiency and cross-border accessibility.

92. See https://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/PUB2023-072-R-Accelerating-Access-to-Remedy.pdf. ↩
93. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-priv-sect-pillar-2.pdf and www.ohchr.org/ sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-cso-migrant-forum-asia-stakeholders-input.pdf. ↩

States have developed multiple mechanisms to provide access to justice and effective remedy, ranging from nationwide hotlines to quasi-judicial labour and human rights tribunals. Hotlines have proliferated recently and are usually designed to ensure that migrant workers can obtain timely and relevant information about their rights, while also constituting a means to raise grievances. However, they need to be responsive to migrant workers’ needs, for example, by ensuring accessibility in multiple languages, offering support outside normal working hours and providing internationally accessible services, including after migrants return to their countries of origin. At the subnational level, the Temporary Foreign Worker Advisory Office of the Canadian Province of Alberta administers a free and confidential helpline that responds to complaints, questions and requests for information, and makes referrals to assistance provided by law enforcement and civil society organizations to migrant workers worldwide.⁹⁴ The New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment operates a call centre where complaints about migrant labour exploitation can be lodged, with support available in more than 180 languages. The centre is complemented by an online reporting mechanism, which allows users to receive a response via email, text message or phone.⁹⁵ Similar initiatives exist in Japan, reinforced by in-person consultation services,⁹⁶ and in the Republic of Korea, where a guide has been developed in 16 languages to assist migrant workers seeking remedy for rights violations and abuses.⁹⁷

94. See www.alberta.ca/temporary-foreign-workers. ↩
95. See www.employment.govt.nz/employment-new-zealand/contact-us and www.employment.govt.nz/ resolving-problems/migrant-exploitation. ↩
96. See www.startup-roudou.mhlw.go.jp/foreigner_eng.html. ↩
97. See www.moel.go.kr/info/etc/dataroom/view.do?bbs_seq=20200100084 and https://www.moel.go.kr/english/. ↩

Tribunal or court systems that administer labour justice for workers, including migrants, are also positive examples of mechanisms providing access to justice and effective remedy. They often exist at subnational or municipal levels and are mandated to address all aspects of employment law and working conditions. In some cases, they also deal with labour relations and occupational health and safety; if not, then other bodies may be established for this purpose. In either case, individuals employed in the court’s jurisdiction, including migrant workers, are entitled to access these systems in cases of abuse. Such mechanisms can exist alongside human rights tribunals, with the latter serving to address complaints outside the employment sphere (e.g. in relation to discrimination in access to housing, education or healthcare). In some jurisdictions with temporary labour migration programmes, dedicated reporting or grievance mechanisms are established in parallel with such programmes. These mechanisms are designed to protect migrant workers participating in temporary labour migration programmes and to strengthen the accountability of participating employers, by enabling workers – and, in some instances, members of the public and civil society – to confidentially report labour abuses.⁹⁸

98. See, for example, www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/services/foreign-workers/report-abuse.html. ↩

Some States have adapted existing visa systems to enhance migrant protection and access to remedy. In Australia, a workplace justice visa allows temporary migrants who experience exploitation at work to remain in the country and take legal action.⁹⁹ Likewise, the federal Government of Canada adopted an open work permit that enables vulnerable workers who experience exploitation to leave the abusive situation, find a new job and work for another employer with limited exceptions.¹⁰⁰ The Republic of Ireland has established a Reactivation Employment Permit scheme for non-European Union citizens who become undocumented through “no fault of their own”.¹⁰¹ In Lithuania, victims of trafficking or illegal employment who cooperate with law enforcement authorities are eligible for temporary residence permits.¹⁰²

99. See https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/visas/getting-a-visa/visa-listing/temporary-activity-408/australian-government-endorsed-events-workplace-justice-pilot. ↩
100. See www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/work-canada/permit/ temporary/vulnerable-workers.html. ↩
101. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-cso-focus-labour-exploitation.pdf and https://enterprise.gov.ie/en/what-we-do/workplace-and-skills/employment-permits/permit-types/reactivation-employment-permit/. ↩
102. See https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/internal-security/organised-crime-and-human-trafficking/together-against-trafficking-human-beings/eu-countries/lithuania_en. ↩

National human rights institutions are central to protecting migrant workers’ rights, despite the challenges they face in addressing and coordinating complaints about abuses occurring in cross-border contexts.¹⁰³ National human rights institutions can accept complaints from migrant workers, investigate abuses such as wage theft or exploitation by recruitment agencies and facilitate legal assistance, mediation or conciliation, and redress. Their contributions also include research to understand labour migration risks and recommendations of legal and policy reforms. For example, the Philippine Commission on Human Rights maintains a migrant rights observatory and collaborates with other government agencies to document abuses against Filipino migrant workers, facilitating migrant workers’ involvement in policymaking.¹⁰⁴ Furthermore, national contact points under the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct can be another useful channel for migrant workers to raise complaints.¹⁰⁵

103. See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-nhri-1-suhakam-malaysia.pdf. ↩
104. See https://chr-observatories.uwazi.io/page/hxgjtdg5c3j and https://chr.gov.ph/2025/statements/ press-release/chr-dmw-ink-agreement-to-enhance-human-rights-protection-of-filipino-migrant-workers-and-their-families/?utm_source=chatgpt.com. ↩
105. See, for example, www.oecd.org/en/networks/national-contact-points-for-responsible-business-conduct/database/ch0013.html. ↩

The Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights clarify how businesses should provide for or cooperate in the remediation of any adverse human rights impacts they cause or to which they contribute. Businesses should ensure that migrant workers are not only aware of their right to remedy, but that they and their families can access operational-level grievance mechanisms without obstacles and with 98 See, for example, www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/services/foreignworkers/report-abuse.html. 99 See https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/visas/getting-a-visa/visa-listing/temporary-activity408/australian-government-endorsed-events-workplace-justice-pilot. 100 See www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/work-canada/permit/ temporary/vulnerable-workers.html. 101 See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-cso-focus-labour-exploitation.pdf and https://enterprise.gov.ie/en/what-we-do/workplace-and-skills/employment-permits/permittypes/reactivation-employment-permit/. 102 See https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/internal-security/organised-crime-and-humantrafficking/together-against-trafficking-human-beings/eu-countries/lithuania_en. 103 See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/workinggroupbusiness/cfis/ labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-nhri-1-suhakam-malaysia.pdf. 104 See https://chr-observatories.uwazi.io/page/hxgjtdg5c3j and https://chr.gov.ph/2025/statements/ press-release/chr-dmw-ink-agreement-to-enhance-human-rights-protection-of-filipino-migrantworkers-and-their-families/?utm_source=chatgpt.com. 105 See, for example, www.oecd.org/en/networks/national-contact-points-for-responsible-businessconduct/database/ch0013.html. 22/26 guarantees of non-retaliation. In designing migrant worker-centred remedies, they should ensure that operational-level grievance mechanisms and the resulting corrective action plans are sensitive to the languages used by migrant workers, given the importance of worker testimony and consultation for evidence-gathering and proceedings. The Working Group recommends corrective action plans that provide a structured – as opposed to an ad hoc – response to human rights harms and that include clear targets and timelines to address identified instances of non-compliance in relation to human rights.

Remediation for migrant workers has thus far addressed cases of passport retention, restrictions on freedom of movement, wage theft, and abuses associated with poor working and living conditions. However, a complex issue raised in consultations with businesses is that of remedying the impacts of debt bondage resulting from unethical recruitment practices and the charging of fees to migrant workers. To determine effective remedies, the Working Group recalls the effectiveness criteria mentioned in Principle 31 of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, specifically noting the importance of remedies being arrived at through engagement and dialogue with victims. The repayment of fees charged to migrant workers is now an integral component of many corporate policy commitments and the focus of many remediation efforts. Apple has reportedly returned US$ 34.5 million linked to unethical recruitment practices to over 37,700 workers in its supply chain.¹⁰⁶

106. See https://s203.q4cdn.com/367071867/files/doc_downloads/PeopleandEnvironment/2024/ Apple-Supply-Chain-2024-Progress-Report.pdf. ↩

Grievance mechanisms currently exist at business and industry levels; they are implemented in partnership with civil society organizations in some cases and through multi-stakeholder initiatives to enhance business members’ accountability in others. The Working Group strongly encourages businesses to develop partnerships that allow migrant workers to access support from trusted advocates while grievances are processed. For example, the global business association amfori has a mechanism enabling rights holders, including migrant workers and their advocates in Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Türkiye and Vietnam, to submit and resolve complaints in multiple languages by connecting via a hotline, QR code or messaging apps.¹⁰⁷ In another example, the Japan Platform for Migrant Workers towards Responsible and Inclusive Society (JP-MIRAI) provides migrant workers with an online portal where they can receive consultation services, referrals to helpdesks and assistance with lodging formal complaints.¹⁰⁸

107. See www.amfori.org/amfori-speak-for-change/. ↩
108. See https://jp-mirai.org/jp/ and www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/ workinggroupbusiness/cfis/labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-sta-japan.pdf. ↩

Equally critical for migrant workers’ access to remedy is social dialogue. In unionized workplaces, dispute resolution mechanisms and labour-management committees, such as those related to health and safety, production and workplace training, are key to preventing and resolving grievances. Such mechanisms can be further replicated and formalized through international framework agreements signed by businesses with trade union counterparts.

It should, however, be noted that the multiplicity of mechanisms does risk fragmentation and duplication of efforts. Closer coordination among businesses, industry associations and multi-stakeholder initiatives, as well as with existing Statebased judicial mechanisms is needed to avoid such risks. 106 See https://s203.q4cdn.com/367071867/files/doc_downloads/PeopleandEnvironment/2024/ Apple-Supply-Chain-2024-Progress-Report.pdf. 107 See www.amfori.org/amfori-speak-for-change/. 108 See https://jp-mirai.org/jp/ and www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/business/ workinggroupbusiness/cfis/labour-migration/subm-labour-migration-business-sta-japan.pdf.

Transnational migrant workers face profound adverse human rights impacts, including exploitation and unsafe working and living conditions, as well as various forms of discrimination based on gender, nationality, migration status and other intersectional factors. Although progress has been achieved globally and nationally to uphold migrant workers’ rights, major implementation gaps persist. Significant barriers preventing victims from accessing justice and remedy also remain, and are not limited to low awareness, distrust and fear of reprisals.

Leadership by States, as duty bearers, is paramount to creating a conducive environment for businesses to respect their human rights responsibilities. The Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights delineate how, in order to move beyond a compliance-based approach, businesses can adopt policy commitments and execute them through ongoing human rights due diligence. To bridge the gap between established standards and migrant workers’ lived realities, it is imperative that States and businesses work together and in concert with other stakeholders, including migrant workers themselves, to embed migrant workers’ rights in policy and legal frameworks as well as centre their voices in human rights due diligence processes.

In the words of an Indigenous woman migrant working in Hong Kong, “as a migrant worker, we are worth more than the remittances we send or the economic contributions we make”. All human rights of all migrant workers must be protected and respected because all people, regardless of where they come from or where they work, deserve dignity, justice, and the opportunity to build a life free from fear and exploitation. Migrant workers’ rights are human rights.

Strengthen inspection systems, labour inspectorates and recruitment regulation to improve oversight of businesses, employers and labour recruiters, monitor employment and working conditions, and enhance migrant worker protection during recruitment and migration.

Develop and enforce mandatory human rights due diligence measures that incorporate a migrant worker-centred lens, including attention to adverse impacts on migrant workers’ families and children.

Consider new regulatory and enforcement measures to combat fraud and deception in recruitment, hiring and employment, including effective oversight of online employment platforms, social media and messaging platforms used to advertise fraudulent job offers.

Support efforts to develop a United Nations legally binding instrument on business and human rights that regulates global value chains and promotes business respect for human rights, including those of migrant workers.

Strengthen bilateral dialogue and cooperation with counterparts in countries of origin, transit and destination, including data-sharing agreements and joint investigations, inspections and training.

Ensure that migrant workers enjoy equal protection of all their rights without discrimination, irrespective of gender, race, migration status, contractual status and contract length in temporary labour migration programmes.

Develop regulatory measures to address protection gaps in the informal, gig and platform economies, in particular those faced by migrant workers, to promote decent work and promote regularization of irregular workers.

Invest in comprehensive information and orientation programmes for migrant workers, including at the pre-employment, pre-departure, post-arrival and pre-return stages.

Develop gender-responsive public services and initiatives tailored to the needs and experiences of women and LGBTI+ migrant workers, including effective protection for migrant domestic workers who face greater risks of isolation and abuse.

Address the unique protection needs of Indigenous migrant workers in policy measures by identifying the root causes of Indigenous Peoples’ migration and disaggregating labour migration data by ethnicity.

Enhance business respect for collective bargaining and freedom of association of migrant workers, including by removing legal barriers to joining or establishing workers’ organizations, participating in elections and holding union leadership positions.

Strengthen access to justice and effective remedies for migrant workers within value chains. This involves ensuring that:
(a) Remedies are delivered in a timely manner;
(b) The status of migrant workers, including undocumented workers and those under temporary labour migration programmes, does not impede such access in law or practice;
(c) Migrant workers who experience abuse are issued with forms of status that allow them to remain in the country of employment until judicial proceedings or grievance procedures are complete, independently of their cooperation;
(d) Justice and remedy mechanisms facilitate accessibility by workers even after they have returned home;
(e) Workers have access to competent, free and independent legal aid as well as interpretation services.

Ensure that children affected by migration, along with their representatives, have equal access to justice and remedy for business-related abuses, including legal standing and access to legal aid.

Establish protections against employer or recruiter retaliation and provide migrant workers with forms of protection status, at least until judicial proceedings or grievance procedures are complete, to address workers’ fears of losing their immigration status.

Establish explicit and binding procedures and standards separating immigration enforcement from, inter alia, criminal justice, health services and education service providers that engage with migrant workers. This includes removing requirements for public officials and health and school administrators, among others, to report or share data on individuals’ migration status.

Address adverse human rights impacts associated with immigration sponsorship systems by removing restrictions on labour market mobility and allowing migrant workers to terminate their employment and change employers without the prior approval of their sponsor.

Strengthen safety, protection and legal services along migration routes, including support for voluntary returns to country of origin.

Support national human rights institutions in the development of cross-border cooperation frameworks that can ensure migrant worker protection and remedy across the migration continuum.

Ensure timely and continuous financial contributions and support for civil society and international organizations, such as OHCHR, UNHCR, UNICEF, IOM and ILO, to continue their important work on the safeguarding of the rights of migrant workers, refugees seeking employment and their families.

Ensure that all corporate policies and processes are aligned with international standards for the protection of migrant workers. This may include integrating into policy statements respect for the rights of all migrant workers across all stages of migration, and an acknowledgment of risks related to, inter alia, discrimination, xenophobia, recruitment, employment and access to adequate housing.

Embed respect for migrant workers’ rights throughout their operations and value chains, including among horizontal and vertical business partners (e.g. service providers in logistics, cleaning and security), by supporting the industry-wide and cross-sector setting of standards through membership organizations, industry associations and chambers of commerce.

Conduct human rights due diligence to enhance respect for migrant workers’ rights. This may include human rights impact assessments based on migration corridor-based models; workplace audits that include occupational health and safety risks; oversight of recruitment and migration processes; worker and stakeholder interviews; partnerships with workers’ organizations, migrants’ rights organizations and diaspora groups; and adoption of preventive and remedial measures.

Consult migrant workers and their advocates, workers’ organizations, civil society and other external experts in the development and implementation of business policies and activities, including capacity-building along value chains.

Develop outreach and engagement models that encompass multilingual awareness-raising and orientation programmes for migrant workers, as well as the development of “worker voice” mechanisms through consultations with worker representatives, migrant advocates and migrant workers themselves.

Prevent and address restrictions that migrant workers face in relation to freedom of association and collective bargaining, including barriers to union membership and leadership positions, by conducting social dialogue at all levels.

Establish and maintain operational-level grievance mechanisms that are accessible to all migrant workers in operations and value chains, including by ensuring that such mechanisms can be used confidentially by migrant workers without fear of reprisals, arbitrary dismissal, detention or deportation, as well as by developing transparent corrective action plans in response.

Collaborate with peers to exercise increased leverage, especially in sectors that pose high risks to migrant workers, including through active participation in multi-stakeholder initiatives focused on migrant worker protection.