Bangladesh has taken important steps regarding sexual harassment in the workplace, including addressing aspects of the issue through the Labour Act and ratifying ILO Convention No. 190 (C190) on Violence and Harassment. As the country's labour rules are currently under review, the primary challenge remains transforming these legal commitments into a coherent system that can be trusted by workers, implemented by organizations, and enforced by regulators.

This is first a matter of rights, as no one should have to trade dignity or safety for work. Convention C190 recognizes the right to a world of work free from violence and harassment while calling for prevention, protection, enforcement, and remedies.

This is also a productivity issue. The International Labour Organization reports that workplace sexual harassment cost the world $2.6 billion in lost productivity in 2018, alongside $0.9 billion in other financial costs.

Unsafe workplaces contribute to absenteeism, turnover, and disengagement, while poorly handled complaints can escalate into disputes and reputational damage. Prevention and effective response are not simply compliance costs, but rather part of good governance and risk management. Furthermore, the business case reinforces the rights-based case rather than replacing it.

The development sector has an equal stake in the issue. Donors expect credible protection from sexual exploitation, abuse and harassment (PSEAH) systems, which include safe reporting, competent investigations, non-retaliation, and support.

For the government, this entails giving effect to Bangladesh’s international commitments. Bangladesh ratified C190 on 20 November 2025, and the convention enters into force for the country on 20 November 2026. Its gender-responsive approach spans prevention, enforcement, remedies, investigation, training, and social dialogue. The rules reform represents an opportunity to make these principles workable.

The aim should be a coherent system, not more requirements for their own sake.

First, clarify the relationship between Sections 23, 24, 332, and 332A. Sections 23 and 24 provide the misconduct and disciplinary framework, while Sections 332 and 332A address prevention and the complaints committee.

The law should clarify how complaints and investigations connect with disciplinary proceedings by specifying who investigates, who decides, what safeguards apply, and how remedies follow.

Investigators should establish findings on the evidence, while the appropriate authority should decide on action in accordance with law and due process. The committee need not replace disciplinary authority, but the pathway from complaint to decision and remedy must be clear, and if the Act does not support it, amendment may be needed.

Second, Section 332 must be operationalized. The rules should translate the preventive duties of employers into practical expectations regarding policies, risk assessments, training, reporting channels, and protection from retaliation.

Third, clear procedures must be established for Section 332A. The Act provides for a five-member complaints committee comprising a majority of women, a female chair, and two members representing organizations that work on gender and sexual violence. The rules should clarify the committee's mandate, independence, timelines, confidentiality, reporting lines, and safeguards against interference.

Fourth, the framework must establish an end-to-end process for receiving concerns, assessing safety, selecting an investigator, managing conflicts of interest, assessing evidence, deciding on action, informing parties, and providing remedies.

Additionally, the process should address harassment involving supervisors, contractors, clients, and service providers.

Fifth, complainants, witnesses, and committee members must be protected against retaliation while balancing confidentiality with the respondent’s right to know and respond. An allegation that cannot be established is not, for that reason alone, considered malicious.

Finally, the rules must be made workable for multinationals, factories, NGOs, and small enterprises. Although systems may differ in scale, all should meet core principles including prevention, safe reporting, fair investigation, accountability, and remedy. The Act should establish rights and duties, while rules provide the machinery but cannot fill substantive gaps.

Workers should be able to speak up without risking their livelihood, dignity, or safety. For organizations, a fair process can address concerns before they escalate.

Trade unions are confident that workers can raise concerns without retaliation, while employer organisations now have a more consistent playing field. The government can demonstrate that its commitments go beyond words, and development organizations continue to sustain donor confidence.

For businesses, the issue extends across supply chains. Buyers want evidence that worker voice, grievance mechanisms, and remedies function in practice, not simply that a policy exists.

There is also a market-access dimension, with the EU remaining Bangladesh’s largest trading partner and textiles accounting for a major share of its imports from the country.

After LDC graduation, Bangladesh is due to retain Everything But Arms preferences for at least three years under the revised EU GSP framework and may seek GSP+. The framework emphasizes human rights, labour rights, and good governance.

From December 14, 2027, the EU Forced Labour Regulation will prohibit products made with forced labour from being placed on or made available in the EU market. Harassment is not itself forced labour, but violence, intimidation, and abuse of vulnerability can be relevant to wider forced-labour risks. Market access depends on price, quality, and delivery, but also on evidence that labour rights are respected.

This is not simply about compliance; it is about good governance and good business. A credible system protects rights, reduces productivity losses, supports responsible supply chains, gives effect to international commitments, and helps safeguard market access.

“Zero tolerance” should not mean zero complaints. A workplace with no complaints may be safe, or it may be one where people do not feel safe enough to speak. Zero tolerance should mean zero tolerance for harassment, retaliation, and inaction.

Bangladesh has moved towards legal reform. The next step is to make the law and rules work together. That is where the real test of reform will lie.

Jenefa Jabbar is a Barrister-at-Law and the Principal of JJC. This article was developed through the Bangladesh Institute of Labour Studies (BILS) and GoodWeave International. The work was conducted under a project titled “Promoting Living Wage, Labour Rights, and Human Rights Due Diligence in Bangladesh.”

Why it matters

Implementing ILO Convention 190 strengthens worker protections and supports Bangladesh’s efforts to maintain access to key export markets like the EU.