"INTERVIEW Reality Check: Why Omnibus fails workers like Kalpona Akter", 25 February 2025.

Tomorrow, President Ursula von der Leyen will introduce the Omnibus proposal, framed as a “simplification” of key EU laws. But let’s call it what it is: a corporate-driven deregulation effort that chops down sustainability laws like the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) before they even take effect.

Instead of an open consultation with workers, civil society, and those affected by corporate abuse, the European Commission has given big business a front-row seat to decide what rules they want to weaken. These closed-door corporate roundtables are being marketed as “reality checks.” But the real reality check is what happens when corporate impunity goes unchecked. Today, we hear from Kalpona Akter, human right defender and trade union leader who has been on the frontlines of this fight against corporate abuse for decades. She knows firsthand what corporate abuse means—and why the EU must uphold, not weaken, due diligence laws...

Q: The EU says the Omnibus proposal will "simplify" due diligence laws to help businesses. What does deregulation really mean for workers in supply chains? Can mandatory due diligence be “too costly” for big companies?

A: I don’t buy this argument that due diligence is ‘too costly.’  We are talking about the very same companies or brands who make huge profit off our labour for years. Mandatory due diligence is not new, companies have been aware of this policy development for years now, since before the CSDDDD discussion started...

I find this simplification wave a worrying development where irresponsible businesses and right-wing governments are promising deregulation for power. If the EU simplifies the CSDDD law, then there is no point to have it because you are accepting new prestige or deforestation cases will happen again. We have hope for the CSDDD because it talks about living wages, about freedom of association, climate, forced labour, and gender a little bit. But the CSDDD can only make a difference throughout the entire supply chain if there are clear responsibilities. But now with all these simplifications, the EU will lose the beauty of the due diligence law. Backtracking and mixing it up with some voluntary mechanism will destroy the aim of the CSDDD. I would say, if the EU really wanted to make a voluntary mechanism, then there is no point in having this due diligence law.

If you limit responsibilities to just direct suppliers, then they will hire middlemen based in EU countries like the Netherlands and that would be their direct suppliers.

With this decision, we as workers understand that Europe does not care who they are sourcing products from, if it’s from Bangladesh or India, it does not matter because it is not the responsibility of big EU corporations. This is nonsense, I do not buy the argument that it is too complicated. Brands like C&A must know from where they buy their yarn and fabrics, and they must be held responsible for their entire supply chains...

If the CSDDD is limited to the direct supplier, this will mean empty words for workers, we would be left out. It is unacceptable...

Corporate justice means having a job with dignity, with access to justice. Without it, promises are empty. For me, it means access to remedy: if my rights are violated, I can take my employer to court and hold them accountable.

This is why I fight for corporate justice. It ensures workers have a safe workplace, fair wages, social protection, and freedom from gender-based violence. It means corporations take responsibility for their impact on people and the planet...