1. Inya Lake Hotel, Yangon 7 October 2016

2. Current core funders:
UK DFID
DANIDA
Norway
Switzerland
Netherlands
Ireland
Founders:
MCRB Objective
To provide an effective and legitimate platform for
the creation of knowledge, capacity and dialogue
concerning responsible business in Myanmar,
based on local needs and international
standards, that results in more responsible
business and thereby contributes to sustained,
inclusive and sustainable economic growth.
MCRB defines ‘responsible business’ as
‘business activities that work for the long-
term interests of Myanmar and all its
people’.
www.myanmar-responsiblebusiness.org
15 Shan Yeiktha Street, Sanchaung, Yangon
Tel/Fax: 01 510069

3. MCRB publications
and translations
www.mcrb.org.mm
myanmar.responsible.business

4. Sector-Wide Impact Assessments
(SWIA)
The mining SWIA is the fourth sector-wide impact assessment project
undertaken by MCRB, following the publication of previous SWIAs

5. Myanmar ICT
Sector Wide Impact Assessment (SWIA)
http://www.myanmar-
responsiblebusiness.org/swia/ict.
html

6. Fieldwork
period:
November 2014 –
February 2015

7.  General lack of worker-management engagement in most companies across the
ICT value chain
 A few companies provided grievance mechanisms (fibre companies had letter
boxes but few complaints addressed)
 Unskilled workers relieved to secure a job at all → afraid of raising complaints
 At fibre factories, workers unaware of basic association and collective
bargaining rights; some aware of the right but assume company does not allow
them to form union
 No women (justified as unsafe) or only as manual workers on construction sites
 Racial and religious tensions were observed in some areas, mainly where
communities identified the company or its workers as Muslim
 Several cases where workers were brought on to dig fibre cable trenches due to a
debt owed to the group leader (debt bondage)
 General lack of basic measures to prevent underage workers in fibre cable
digging in particular
 Workers travel long distance so children regularly left with someone connected to
the works in the worker camps during the 10 hour shift periods.

8.  Employment contracts generally not used; limited exception of direct,
permanent employees of a tower company (no wage slips provided)
 When jobs of manual labourers and construction workers secured through
relatives/connections, wages were negotiated with no contracts
 Daily wage workers typically worked every day possible to maximise income
while work available, exceeding legal working time limits (?)
 Awareness of rights to wages and benefits varied considerably; very low level
of understanding of their rights vis-à-vis employers or the Government.
 Tower construction companies: reported cases of no rest, no payment of
overtime, wages varied (direct/indirectly employed)
 Fibre line digging: cases of pressure to work till target is reached, not given set
rest if not reached, wages not covering basic needs and do not reflect level of
difficulty (type of soil), sick pay not provided
 Working conditions for fibre cable digging particularly harsh: long distances of
trenches dug manually, 12 hour work days, injured workers have to repay any
medical expenses, Language barriers, Little to no facilities or equipment were
provided to fibre cable diggers etc...
 Some fibre factory workers were provided with accommodation

9.  Workers of subcontractors commonly not informed
about which tower construction company or telecoms
operator the tower was being built for: health and
safety and other operational standards may not have
been transmitted to the site level?
 Workplace attention to health and safety varied greatly
amongst the tower and fibre sites visited
 Often no personal protective equipment (PPE) used
(even where workers had PPE to hand)
 Failure to ensure that emergency first aid kits available
at tower sites
 For fibre factories: PPE +some training provided

10.  Dealing with local non-state armed groups: access fee, delays due
to blocked access to sites, lack of consultation with local groups
(NSAG) etc; fire-arms being carried by NSAGs;
 Workers aware of landmines around infrastructure in conflict areas
 Tower company acknowledgement and action concerning their
responsibility for the safety of workers was uneven:
◦ Some assume that this is responsibility of subcontractors, - some
provided safety and skills trainings
◦ Some labour subcontractors fear reporting incidents for fear of reprisal or
lost business even with incident reporting system in place
 Choosing to operate without contracts between tower companies
and their subcontractors was a common occurrence

11. Workshop objective
Establish a forum for Telecoms companies and their tier 1 subcontractors to
identify lessons learned and best practices in tower construction and fibre laying
operations in Myanmar through experience sharing in the following areas:
Health and safety
• To discuss problems, challenges or concers Telecoms companies in Myanmar
have in implementing health and safety standards at workpace, fibre factories
and during fibre cable diging;
• Ways of improving future work on safety in network construction in different
locations with possible focus on location-specific safety requrements, groups at
risk, hst community safety;
Labour
• Challenges for telecoms operations: human rights risks, ways of monitoring,
ways of mitigating, positive case studies;
• Sharing of recent experiences;
• Challenges of applying international standards in Myanmar in the absence of
developed national legal frameworks;
Company/community engagement and grievance mechanisms
• Current practice and recent challenges;
• Ways to improve work with civil society on monitoring adverse impacts
Identification of follow up actions; ongoing initiatives which can support action.

12. Please add our RSS feed to stay up-to-date on our activities
http://www.myanmar-responsiblebusiness.org/rss.xml
www.mcrb.org.mm
myanmar.responsible.business