Leia o relatório completo aqui
Responses to questions from Repórter Brasil about coffee farms and worker conditions in Colombia
Please note: Cooperativa Departamental de Cafeicultores de Huíla (Cadefihuila) and the Cooperative de Caficultores de Salgar are Fairtrade certified producer organisations and therefore must adhere to the Fairtrade Standard for Small-scale Producer Organisations not the Fairtrade Standard for Hired Labour Organisations that Repórter Brasil referred to.
The small scale producer organisation certification does not recognise individual farms but the members who own the farms and therefore further investigation is needed to confirm that the farms named “Finca La Siberia” and “Los Naranjos” are owned by members of a Fairtrade certified cooperative.
1) In the case of certified producers who hire workers, Fairtrade includes the obligation to formalize written employment contracts for temporary workers who work for three months or more on the estate (Criterion 3.5.7.). A copy of this employment contract is provided to the workers (Criterion 3.5.8.). Has this criterion been breached in the cases presented?
The Cooperativa Departamental de Cafeicultores de Huíla (Cadefihuila) is a Fairtrade certified small producer organisation and therefore must adhere to the Fairtrade Standard for Small-scale Producer Organisations. Section 3.3.24 of the Standard requires that all permanent workers have a legally binding contract and that they understand the terms of the contract. These contracts may be verbal as per Colombian national law. Furthermore, Section 3.3.23 states that migrant or seasonal workers who are employed must also meet the requirement of the Standard.
This applies to farmers who employ more than 10 workers, who work more than 30 hours per week, and who work for at least one month during the year.
Any violations of the Fairtrade Standard must be reported to FLOCERT, Fairtrade’s independent certifier, who checks for these breaches in their thorough investigations. FLOCERT will have to investigate to determine any breach of the Fairtrade Standard.
2) Fairtrade also requires that temporary workers’ accommodation “guarantees structural security” and “reasonable levels of decency, privacy, safety and hygiene, and includes regular maintenance” (Criterion 3.5.27.). Sanitary facilities must have toilets and showers with clean water. Has this criterion been breached in the cases presented?
The Fairtrade Standard for Small-scale Producer Organisations Section 3.3.32 requires clean toilets/latrines with hand washing facilities close by for workers. These facilities must be separate for women and men and the number of facilities is in proportion to the number of workers.
This applies to farmers who employ more than 10 workers, who work more than 30 hours per week and who work for at least one month during the year.
Again, any violations of the Fairtrade Standard must be reported to FLOCERT, Fairtrade’s independent certifier, who checks for these breaches in their investigations. FLOCERT will have to investigate to determine any breach of the Fairtrade Standard.
3) Fairtrade also points out that the maximum weekly working hours allowed by certification is 48 hours a week (Criterion 3.5.9.). However, workers on certified farms interviewed by the report claim to work from sun up to sun down, exceeding the maximum limit of 8 hours a day. How does Fairtrade monitor compliance with this criterion?
The 48 hours refer to the Fairtrade Standard for Hired Labour Section 3.5.9 that states that companies must comply with applicable national and local legislation and industry standards regarding working hours and overtime regulations.
While we have identified the two organisations you mentioned as being certified as small producer organisations, which means the Hired Labour Standard does not apply. Fairtrade only certifies SPOs in coffee, no estates/plantations, as 95 percent of Latin American coffee farms are smaller than five hectares.
For small producer organisations, section 1.1.0.21 of FLOCERT’s Compliance Criteria is applicable. It states that “there are no indications that you or your members violate national legislation on the topics covered by this standard.”
Only in case that one of the small producer organisations members or the small producer organisation itself has more than 10 workers that are present for one month or more during a year working more than 30 hours per week or equivalent, must the SPO also adhere to additional Compliance Criteria from the Small-scale Producer Organisation Standard.
Regarding the way FLOCERT conducts its checks – FLOCERT checks during any audit/investigation if working hours are in compliance with the applicable legal requirements in Colombia. We do this by checking contracts and records of overtime and potentially conduct worker interviews. Under Colombian law the weekly working hours are 46 hours, allowing for up to two extra hours per day/12 extra hours per week.
4) Does Fairtrade believe that the cases presented in the report are in line with Fairtrade’s mission to “make trade fairer for the people who grow our food”?
Fairtrade International does not all believe that these allegations are in line with our mission and values. We believe that farmers and workers should be paid a fair price and that they have decent working conditions and can help build sustainable livelihoods. We have chosen to work in areas where producers struggle with poverty and lack of stability so that we can make a difference. We take all allegations of workers’ rights violations very seriously, and we view any form of exploitation and abuse as unacceptable.
It is important to remember that no certification scheme can guarantee that there are no worker rights violations. However, compliance with our rigorous Standards is checked through regular audits by our independent certifier FLOCERT. The audits involve physical inspections of fields, plants and offices as well as document and finance reviews and confidential interviews with staff members.
5) What actions will Fairtrade take after becoming aware of the cases presented by Repórter Brasil?
Fairtrade Standards contain clear language prohibiting these violations based on the International Labour Organization (ILO) conventions and recommendations. Fairtrade takes immediate steps to follow-up to act to protect the people involved when an allegation is made.
To address these allegations, here’s what we have done:
- We have referred the allegations to the Fairtrade International Protection Committee, as per our Act to Protect policy. This committee reviews and refers allegations to one or more of our producer networks, whose trained staff undertake a safe follow-up assessment. In this case, the Latin American and Caribbean Network of Fair Trade Small Producers and Workers (CLAC) was notified.
- We have also referred the allegations to our independent certifier, FLOCERT, for follow up on the certification side. Still, we strongly encourage anyone with information about suspected violations of Fairtrade Standards to report them confidentially to FLOCERT, whether via their multilingual WhatsApp channel, website, email, or telephone. This enables more targeted and effective follow-up. Each allegation is reviewed on a case-by-case basis to determine the best course of action to enable safe outcomes for impacted persons.
6) Information on Fairtrade-certified producer associations is published on the FLOCERT platform. Why isn’t Fairtrade transparent about certified properties? Does the organization plan to move forward with transparency mechanisms for certificates at farm level?
FLOCERT issues certificates for small producer organisations – cooperatives that are the legal entity with who FLOCERT has contractually binding relations. The members of such cooperatives in coffee are individual smallholder farmers. In each small producer organisation audit, we check the current member list of any cooperative and sample production conditions with members.
Whether “Finca La Siberia” and “Finca Los Naranjos” are farms owned by cooperative members will be investigated. In general, the prevalence of very similar farm names, the need for verification of field/farm ownership, plus additional exact location checks require careful investigation.
Follow-up questions sent by Repórter Brasil (31/03/2025)
1) Even in the case of hiring a considerable number of seasonal workers, does Fairtrade consider this producer to be a “small-scale producer” just because he is linked to a producers’ cooperative? What is the criteria adopted?
2) Why are there no criterias regarding the accommodation of seasonal workers in the “Fairtrade Standard for Small-scale Producer Organizations”, given that, even under these terms, the hiring of migrant and seasonal workers is common?
3) In view of the information presented above, can Fairtrade confirm whether “Finca La Siberia” and “Finca Los Naranjos” are Fairtrade certified farms owned by Fairtrade certified cooperative members and whether the certification status will change after the information provided by Repórter Brasil about the work conditions on these two farms?
Fairtrade
1) The Fairtrade Standard for Small-scale Producer Organisations (SPO) defines an SPO not by the number of workers, but by the size by hectares of the farms: “The maximum size of the cultivated land where a member grows a Fairtrade crop is equal to or below 30 hectares.” The standard also defines for the farms: “Small–scale producers are farmers who are not structurally dependent on permanent hired labour and who manage their production activity mainly with family workforce.”
2) The Small-scale Producer Organisation Standard does not have a requirement on workers housing like the Hired Labour Standard (Section 3.5.27). Fairtrade recognises that it needs to do more to ensure the benefits of Fairtrade reach workers on smallholder farms, including temporary, seasonal, and migrant workers. The SPO Standard reviews in the recent years have sought to strengthen workers’ rights (such as accommodations) through improved labour conditions. It is, however, important to note that many farmers earn very little and some sell only a fraction of their products on Fairtrade terms and therefore requiring them to provide accommodation for workers is a tall order. Fairtrade seeks multi-stakeholder commitment to improve the livelihoods of farmers and subsequently, workers in this context, through pathways such as living income strategy and human rights commitment.
In reference to the “common use” of seasonal workers: Smallholders hire workers during the coffee harvest, however many farmers (some 66%) just hire them for some days a year, and it’s usually less than a week.
3) We would not immediately decertify based on these allegations. We will, however, as mentioned in our earlier communication investigate further. Each allegation is reviewed on a case-by-case basis. If violations of our Standards are found, then we would act accordingly.
The Rainforest Alliance recognizes the human rights challenges affecting coffee supply chains in Latin America, and we take allegations of violations within our certification program very seriously. Whenever we are presented with credible, concrete evidence of human rights violations on any certified operations, we conduct our own investigation. If that investigation confirms violations of our certification program’s rules, the certificate holder is given the opportunity to take corrective action within a designated time-period. If the issue is not resolved, the farm stands to have its certification suspended or canceled, which is stated clearly in the rules of our program.
Regarding the points raised in your reporting, the Rainforest Alliance states that:
- Finca San Fernando has not yet been Rainforest Alliance-Certified. While the farm has applied for certification, it still needs to undergo an auditing process by an independent third-party Certification Body in accordance with our standard.
- Certificate Holder Finca La Arboleda took immediate actions to address non-conformities related to work contracts and housing conditions following a regular audit by an independent third-party Certification Body in 2024, and these non-conformities were closed later in the same year after a follow-up audit. However, after receiving the information provided by Repórter Brasil, the Rainforest Alliance will conduct further investigations to verify that these non-conformities have been effectively resolved in accordance with our certification program’s requirements and local regulations.
- At the Rainforest Alliance, we believe that addressing human rights challenges in agricultural supply chains requires a systemic and multi-stakeholder approach to collaboration. That’s why, as part of our assurance activities, we have involved the International Labour Organization in training sessions for certification bodies over the past few years. With these activities, we aim to strengthen the capacity of certification bodies to assess our standard’s requirements within the context of local regulations.
- It is important to emphasize that our mission is to contribute to making agricultural production more sustainable and to promote the continuous improvement of production and working conditions in production chains. In this way, we also believe it is important to give individuals and organizations the opportunity to remain in our program after correcting their conduct and demonstrating a commitment to keeping them in line with the law and certification rules in order to contribute to the improvement of production chains as a whole.
- We are committed to protecting certificate holders’ data, including farmer and farm group locations, according to our privacy policy and standard. We only share this information with select third parties, such as auditors and certification bodies, in order to support the certification program. For example, we may share information with auditors to confirm certification audit data. We may also share anonymized and aggregated certification-related information with third-party researchers.
- The Rainforest Alliance Certification program is based on a model of continuous improvement and should not be viewed as a panacea. The system is designed to consider the various realities and complexities of different countries and sectors while providing flexible assurance systems. While certification serves as a valuable mechanism for mitigating risks and promoting responsible practices, no single organization can address these deeply complex challenges on its own. Human rights issues in agriculture require a broader and more holistic approach to systemic change, including legislation and regulatory reforms, education, and a commitment to addressing root causes. The key to success lies in partnerships, where every stakeholder along the supply chain— from governments and NGOs to retailers and brands— plays a key role in shared responsibility.
- Certification is one of the most successful and proven tools available for driving progress towards sustainability practices. Research has shown that credible certification programs lead to tangible benefits such as improved worker well-being and livelihoods, increased yields and prices for farmers, and improvements in ecosystem quality. Certification is an important part of the solution but should not be seen as a silver bullet. While it can help mitigate risks and promote responsible practices, it cannot by itself solve any country’s entrenched socioeconomic problems.
4C Responds to Questions about Finca La Arboleda, Colombia
4C Services acknowledges the recent allegations of labour rights violations at Finca La Arboleda, as reported by Repórter Brasil. We are treating these allegations with the utmost seriousness and appreciate Repórter Brasil’s reporting, which is vital for our compliance efforts. Using the reporter’s GPS coordinates, we have confirmed Finca La Arboleda’s identity and its corresponding records in our system. However, we must clarify that this farm was part of a 4C certified unit only between June 2, 2023, and August 6, 2024. The farm is currently not part of any 4C certified unit.
However, despite the farm’s status outside of our system, we would like to address the specific concerns raised by Repórter Brasil to demonstrate our commitment to transparency and provide insight into our standards and processes.
Addressing Specific Concerns:
• Verbal Labour Contracts (Criterion 2.1.10): 4C standards require written labour contracts, aligning with local laws and regulations. While oral contracts may be permissible under specific national legislation (as in Colombia) and in exceptional cases, they must adhere to 4C guidance and verification protocols.
• Excessive Working Hours (Criterion 2.1.13): The 4C Code of Conduct addresses working hours and overtime, acknowledging the demands of harvest season activities. It mandates a maximum of 48 working hours per week, or fewer if required by national law. Overtime must be voluntary, fully compensated, and limited to 12 hours per week. Exceptions are permissible only during peak harvest season, and for a maximum of two months. 4C provides verification guidance for auditors, which includes reviewing timesheets, working time records, and payment slips, conducting worker interviews, and engaging with community stakeholders as needed to confirm compliance.
• Adequate Housing (Criterion 2.2.1): The described housing conditions at Finca La Arboleda are inconsistent with 4C’s definition of “adequate housing,” which includes basic amenities like separate beds, proper sanitation, and safe construction.
• Alignment with 4C’s Mission: Even though this farm is not currently part of the 4C system, this situation highlights the value of stakeholder input in driving continuous improvement and effective implementation of our standards.
• Transparency at Farm Level: We recognize the importance of transparency and are exploring options to enhance public access to information about farm-level certifications, while considering crucial requirements on data protection regulations.
• Minimum Wage: We acknowledge the complexity of ensuring fair compensation for farmers within the diverse economic landscapes of coffee-producing regions. Instead of setting fixed minimum prices, 4C focuses on strengthening farmers’ economic resilience through sustainable practices, improved productivity, and access to premium markets. This approach aims to empower farmers to navigate market fluctuations effectively.
4C’s Role and Responsibilities
As an independent third-party certification scheme, 4C establishes sustainability standards for green coffee production.While system users, including companies and their cooperating groups of producers and farmers, are primarily responsible for implementing and complying with these standards, 4C ensures compliance through rigorous audits conducted by independent Certification Bodies (CBs) and its integrity program. These independent CBs, working in collaboration with 4C, conduct regular and additional audits to verify compliance with 4C requirements, thereby ensuring neutrality and credibility. We emphasize that 4C operates independently and maintains a clear separation between standard-setting and implementation.
Strengthening Trust and Ensuring Compliance
To further uphold the integrity of our system, we have established the 4C Integrity Program. This program includes rigorous integrity audits and a grievance and complaint channel, enabling us to effectively monitor compliance and address any reported issues. We are committed to thoroughly investigating any allegations brought to our attention and taking appropriate action.
To maintain the integrity of the 4C system concerning La Arboleda farm, we have placed an alert in our database. If Finca La Arboleda seeks 4C certification again, it will undergo a rigorous extra compliance audit under our Integrity Program, in addition to the standard certification audit. This will ensure all past non-conformities are resolved and current standards are met before reincorporation. We will also require the farm to remove the unauthorized, outdated 4C logo shown in the reporters’ photos.
Our Commitment to Continuous Improvement
4C remains steadfast in its commitment to assessing and addressing reported risks through targeted interventions. We continuously evaluate real-world conditions to ensure compliance with our requirements and drive positive change within the coffee sector.
Recognizing the inherent challenges in auditing sensitive social risks, 4C is leading a joint project, made possible by a grant from the ISEAL Innovations Fund, with support from the Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO) and the UK International Development, to enhance the detection of human rights violations in audits. This project will introduce more responsive and context-specific approaches, improving human rights due diligence. As part of this initiative, 4C will conduct free training sessions on human rights, labour, and social topics in Colombia, open to all 4C system users. Additionally, 4C will develop online training materials tailored to the local context for farmer accessibility.
Certification is a proven tool for progress, but it cannot always provide a 100% guarantee that all farmers and certified units are following the requirements. Certification supports also risk assessments and mitigation measures. Its effectiveness is maximized when combined with stakeholder engagement, robust grievance mechanisms, civil society oversight, and supply chain transparency.
4C is dedicated to collaborative improvement and invites comments from all stakeholders. We urge ongoing collaboration with companies, producers, and civil society organizations to address the systemic challenges highlighted in the industry, working together towards a more sustainable and equitable coffee sector.
Cologne, 28th March 2025
At the time of the investigation neither of these farms (Finca La Arboleda, Finca San Fernando) were C.A.F.E. Practices verified, and Starbucks was not buying coffee from them.
We take allegations like these extremely seriously and require suppliers to comply with our Supplier Code of Conduct. We are actively engaged with farms to ensure they adhere to our standards and each supply chain is required to undergo reverification regularly. We remain committed to working with our business partners to meet our expectations. This is how we work with supply partners like Federación Nacional de Cafeteros de Colombia (FNC).
The cornerstone of our approach to buying coffee is Coffee and Farmer Equity (C.A.F.E.) Practices, which was one of the coffee industry’s first set of ethical sourcing standards when it launched in 2004 and we continuously work to improve these standards. As you may know, C.A.F.E. Practices was developed in collaboration with Conservation International. C.A.F.E. Practices is a verification program that measures farms against economic, social, and environmental criteria, all designed to promote transparent, profitable, and sustainable coffee growing practices while also protecting the well-being of coffee farmers and workers, their families, and their communities. To maintain an active status in the program, each supply chain is required to undergo reverification regularly.
Follow-up question sent by Repórter Brasil (27/03/2025): Is it possible to know when these (month/year) two properties lost their status of “verified” on C.A.F.E. Practices?
Starbucks: reverification occurs every one to two years. These farms (Finca La Arboleda, Finca San Fernando) had been verified previously, but those verifications lapsed, and we were no longer purchasing from them at the time of the investigation.
Nestlé is committed to promoting decent working conditions and upholding human rights throughout its supply chain, actively working to prevent human rights abuses and labor violations. We take all allegations of non-compliance very seriously. Where there are claims that our standards have not been met, we work with our suppliers to investigate immediately and take action as necessary.
Moreover, our supplier list is updated on a yearly basis once information is available after the reporting period. It should be available shortly.
NKG
Statement by Neumann Kaffee Gruppe
Regarding reports about labor rights violation within the Colombian coffee sector
We have read with great dismay the report on labor rights violations in the Colombian coffee sector. Neumann Kaffee Gruppe (NKG) does not tolerate any form of human rights violations such as forced labor, including human trafficking and slavery-like practices. NKG is committed to eliminating forced labor and any other form of labor rights violations within our sphere of influence. We have immediately launched an internal investigation into the matter and have reviewed our business relationships with the farms mentioned in the report:
• Finca La Arboleda, located in Andes, in the state of Antioquia
• Finca La Siberia, located in Palermo, in the state of Huíla
• Finca Los Naranjos, located in Salgar, in the state of Antioquia.
Regarding our Colombian export company SKN Caribecafé, we can confirm that we did not and do not have a farm called La Arboleda in the Andes, Antioquia, or a farm called La Siberia in Palermo, Huila as part of our supply chains. We had a farm called Los Naranjos in Salgar, Antioquia, as part of a supply chain in the past. To be able to verify if it is the farm mentioned in the report with certainty, we would need to know the name of the farm owner or the exact location. In any case, the business relationship ended in 2023 and SKN Caribecafé did not purchase any coffee from this farm in 2024.
Our US-based importer, Rothfos Corporation, has sent a request to its suppliers asking whether they have purchased coffee from these farms and sold it to Rothfos Corporation. These requests are still open, so we will not be able to provide more detailed information before the deadline.
Update, March 27, 2025: The supplier of Rothfos Corporation, FNC, confirmed that no coffee from these farms was allocated to Rothfos Corporation or will be shipped in the future.
We can confirm that our German import company, Bernhard Rothfos, had and has no direct business relations with any of these farms.
Update, March 27, 2025: This means that we are currently seeing no business relationships with these farm.
However, due to the complexity of the supply chain, we can never completely rule out the possibility that coffee from these farms may have entered our supply chain through third party sales.
Once we have fully identified potential business relationships with the farms, we can take appropriate action. This could be that we agree with the producers on improvements to working conditions on the ground and monitor these steps closely. However, it may also be that we suspend or permanently terminate the business relationship. We will continue to investigate that matter and of course keep you informed about any new findings.
NKG is well aware of our responsibilities in the countries we operate in. We always act with respect for and in compliance with fundamental rights and national legislation. We have written down our values and beliefs as the basis of our business in our NKG Code of Conduct; this is an integral part of our value-oriented corporate culture. In order to fulfill our responsibility for a growing, sustainable coffee industry in the future, we have, among other things, launched the NKG Responsible Business Program. The program sets specific goals that define responsible and sustainable business practices at NKG. In this context, please refer to the NKG Sustainability Report 2024, published on September 2, 2024, which provides insights into the Responsible Business Program and where NKG stands and where we want to go in the future. Two of our key objectives are to “strengthen sustainability performance within our supply chains” and “improve transparency and ethical behavior in collaboration with our direct suppliers.”
NKG is committed to creating transparency and sustainability in our coffee supply chains. Our program NKG Verified includes traceability and compliance with critical criteria such as no worst forms of child labor, no child labor, no forced labor, school attendance, no use of prohibited pesticides, protection of forests and ecosystems, and continuous improvement. To meet our human rights due diligence obligations, we established our Supplier Code of Conduct (SCoC) in 2022, in which we set our values and expectations towards our suppliers. The SCoC has been actively communicated to our key suppliers. Suppliers are encouraged to communicate the SCoC to sub-suppliers as well.
Despite our efforts, we are still in the process of addressing labor issues in the coffee industry. Due to the complex structure of the coffee supply chain, it remains a challenge to cover the entire supply chain. In addition, we cannot guarantee that suppliers who are part of this supply chain are always fully compliant. However, we work closely with our suppliers and are constantly striving to improve working conditions. As NKG, we are committed to critically reviewing our own actions, improving or adapting them as necessary, and to being and remaining in constant communication with our suppliers and customers.
For further questions please do not hesitate to contact us!
Further Links and information:
• Responsibility – Neumann Kaffee Gruppe (NKG)
• NKG Code of Conduct
• NKG Responsible Business Program
• NKG Sustainability Report 2024
• Supplier Code of Conduct
All companies within the Volcafe Ltd group and the ED&F Man Commodities group have a policy to operate in full compliance with national and international laws. We take allegations of human rights violations seriously and are committed to eradicating forced labour and all forms of abuse in the coffee supply chain. Volcafe has a zero-tolerance policy for human rights violations in its operations.
Through rigorous due diligence, we assess and mitigate risks in our supply chains, ensuring that we work with suppliers who uphold ethical business standards. With operations in eleven coffee producing countries, Volcafe works closely with coffee producers to provide a holistic response to the challenges they face. Through the implementation of responsibly sourced and certified supply chains, Volcafe undertakes a range of activities aimed at improving the conditions for farmers, workers, and communities in the coffee supply chain.
As a company committed to human rights in accordance with international standards as laid out in our “human rights and environmental policy in agricultural supply chains” we handle grievances and allegations with due care.
Por medio del presente, damos respuesta a sus inquietudes enviadas por correo electrónico el día 24 de marzo del presente año.
A continuación las preguntas formuladas por usted y sus respectivas respuestas:
1) ¿Qué medidas tomará FNC tras conocer los casos presentados por Repórter Brasil?
La problemática de la protección social para la mano de obra dedicada a la actividad de la caficultura, incluida la de los mismos productores de café en Colombia, ha sido de atención y estudio permanente por parte de la Federación.
La Federación, ni desconoce ni minimiza la situación de informalidad que rodea toda esta actividad, la cual no es ni diferente ni especial frente a la situación de la ruralidad y del campo colombiano. De manera reiterada hemos sido voceros de iniciativas para generar políticas públicas que conduzcan a mejoras y avances en esta materia.
No puede olvidarse que durante más de 9 décadas el mayor órgano de gobierno para la conducción de la política cafetera colombiana, ha sido conformado por los Ministros más importantes del ejecutivo de nuestro país. En la actualidad los Ministros de Hacienda, Agricultura, Comercio Exterior y el Director del DNP comparten con los representantes de los 15 Comités departamentales de cafeteros el Comité Nacional de Cafeteros. Como se ha indicado y es reconocido, en términos generales, en el campo colombiano existe un alto nivel de informalidad por falta de una normativa aplicable en pensiones y riesgos laborales que en conjunto con el régimen subsidiado de salud (el 95% de los caficultores está cubierto por éste) permita la inserción en la formalidad a la población que labora en el campo y en la zona rural dispersa.
Fruto de ese trabajo conjunto, en materia de Seguridad y Salud en el trabajo se expidió por parte del Ministerio del Trabajo una normatividad diferencial para las Unidades de Producción Agropecuaria (UPAs) con menos de 10 trabajadores permanentes. (Decreto 1072 de 2015, Decreto 171 de 2016, y Resolución 312 de 2019).
De otro lado, es necesario tener en cuenta que para cualquier consideración de orden legislativo o regulatorio se deberá recordar que la gran mayoría de la caficultura colombiana cabe dentro de la definición de “Agricultura campesina, familiar y comunitaria” como el sistema de producción y organización gestionado y operado por mujeres, hombres, familias y comunidades campesinas, indígenas, negras, afrodescendientes, raizales y palenqueras que conviven en los territorios rurales del país (UPRA, 2024).
A partir de la definición anterior, y teniendo en cuenta que el 96,9% de los caficultores en Colombia, son pequeños caficultores con menos de 5 has. sembradas en café (SICA, FNC, 2024), se clasifican dentro de la agricultura campesina, familiar y comunitaria. Con datos de la Encuesta Nacional Agropecuaria (DANE, 2019), alrededor del 80% caben en la definición de agricultura familiar donde la fuerza de trabajo como su nombre lo indica es esencialmente familiar. Cualquier regulación en materia de protección social deberá entonces ajustarse a esta realidad.
Además, un estudio sobre los recolectores de café encontró que alrededor del 45% de ellos son productores en unidades de producción agrícola familiar de tamaño pequeño (menos de 1 ha). De otra parte alrededor del 20% de los recolectores son itinerantes interdepartamentales, es decir que migran a lo largo de la zona cafetera siguiendo el comportamiento de la cosecha con el fin de maximizar sus ingresos provenientes de esta actividad. El remanente, o sea el 35%, son itinerantes intradepartamentales (Ensayos de Economía Cafetera, No.32 (2016/17), Federación Nacional de Cafeteros “La recolección de café en Colombia. Una caracterización del mercado laboral”).
La legislación laboral colombiana hoy vigente presenta vacíos respecto de cómo aplicar conceptos propios de los contratos laborales para actividades urbanas a las actividades rurales y sobre todo en la caficultura en donde la itinerancia y la temporalidad son el denominador común.
De conformidad con lo expuesto y teniendo en cuenta sus afirmaciones, se puede decir, que la mayoría de la población laboral cafetera puede estar en la informalidad, más no en la ilegalidad – conceptos distintos -, por falta de una regulación adecuada y aplicable.
Igualmente se recuerda que las relaciones laborales no requieren un documento escrito, se pueden formalizar de manera verbal. Adicionalmente la mayoría de las labores del campo son labores ocasionales, accidentales o transitorias, de corta duración, y en épocas de cosecha, además de ser desarrolladas en zonas en donde no existe conectividad ni servicios bancarios, presupuestos necesarios, mas no suficientes para la inclusión y formalización del campo.
2) ¿La misión de la FNC de “procurar el bienestar del caficultor colombiano” también incluye los recolectores de café? ¿La FNC cree que ha logrado su objetivo de garantizar condiciones laborales más justas para todos los involucrados en la cadena productiva del café colombiano?
La misión de la FNC, tal como lo establece el artículo 2 de sus Estatutos, es “procurar y promover prioritariamente la prosperidad y el interés general de los productores de café”. Igualmente, y de conformidad con el artículo 3, la FNC “tiene por objeto orientar, organizar y fomentar la caficultura colombiana y propender porque sea rentable, sostenible y mundialmente competitiva, procurando el bienestar del productor de café a través de mecanismos de colaboración, participación y fomento ya fuere de carácter social, económico, científico, tecnológico, ambiental, industrial o comercial, buscando mantener el carácter de capital social estratégico de la caficultura colombiana.”
La FNC trabaja a diario para lograr el objetivo del mayor bienestar de los caficultores de Colombia, incluyendo las condiciones laborales más justas para todos los involucrados en la cadena productiva. Por supuesto, siempre hay oportunidades de mejora y en ellas enfoca sus mayores esfuerzos la FNC.
3) ¿La FNC cree ser posible garantizar condiciones decentes de trabajo para los recolectores de café que trabajan en las fincas colombianas? ¿Cómo?
Como se indicó en la respuesta anterior, la FNC hace esfuerzos constantes para mejorar las condiciones de vida de los caficultores del país, llevando a cabo distintos proyectos, programas y actividades. Se recuerda que la FNC es una entidad sin ánimo de lucro, de carácter gremial, integrada por los productores de café federados en el país.
4) La reforma laboral, propuesta en marzo de 2023 por el Ejecutivo colombiano, incluyó dos artículos sobre el trabajo rural: la creación de un contrato agropecuario (artículo 29), incentivando la formalización de relaciones laborales permanentes y estacionales, y el establecimiento de un jornal agropecuario (artículo 29), que flexibilizaba la duración de los contratos, permitiendo el cobro de beneficios por día. Estos puntos fueron excluidos durante la aprobación del texto en la Cámara de Representantes. ¿La FNC estaba a favor de mantener estos dos puntos? ¿Cuál es la valoración de la FNC sobre la reforma laboral?
La FNC considera que los artículos mencionados eran susceptibles de ser mejorados en el sentido de recoger de una mejor manera la realidad del campo y de la caficultura.
Por otra parte, una lectura cuidadosa de los artículos relacionados con el campo, no permitían lo que se indica en su pregunta y en particular las cotizaciones por días y con la flexibilidad para tener en cuenta actividades estacionales, y actividades en distintas fincas a lo largo del día y la población itinerante, requerían para lograr una oportuna y adecuada inclusión en la población laboral.
5) ¿La FNC evalúa que la informalidad en las relaciones laborales durante la cosecha de café es un problema a enfrentar? ¿Existe alguna estrategia o propuesta por parte de la Federación para reducir este problema?
La Federación de manera permanente y en su interacción con el gobierno nacional sigue generando iniciativas que mejoren la calidad de vida de quienes participan en la caficultura. No puede olvidarse que este gremio ha contribuido con bienes públicos apreciados por la población tales como vías terciarias para conectar el territorio y permitir sacar la cosecha y entregarla en los más de 500 puntos de compra organizados, servicios médicos, escuelas rurales, vinculación a la salud contributiva y subsidiada, vinculación a los BEPS y demás proyectos productivos y actividades que hacen de la FNC una de las organizaciones que más progreso y desarrollo han llevado al campo.
En los últimos 10 años, la FNC ha invertido y ejecutado proyectos de inversión social para beneficiar las familias caficultoras colombianas por un valor aproximado de COP $2,213 billones (USD 539 Millones a la tasa de hoy), de los cuales casi el 70% son el resultado de la gestión de aliados privados, públicos, nacionales e internacionales y el 30% a inversiones directas del Fondo Nacional del Café.
Del total de esta inversión, el 54% se ejecutó en proyectos relacionados con el eje económico, impactando directamente en la rentabilidad de las fincas, mejorando la productividad y mejoramiento del precio. El 39% se invirtieron en proyectos de tipo social relacionados con el mejoramiento de infraestructura vial, educación, saneamiento básico, mejoramiento de vivienda rural entre otros y un 7% en proyectos de tipo ambiental orientados a la gestión del agua y recursos naturales.
También hay que recordar que años atrás esta entidad acompañó una importante iniciativa que se convirtió en el “el piso de protección social” (PPS) como mecanismo de protección social, dirigido especialmente a trabajadores que ganaban menos de un salario mínimo mensual legal vigente (SMMLV) y que obligaba a los contratantes de esa mano de obra a contribuir con el 15% del ingreso para lograr un beneficio periódico que en conjunto con un seguro inclusivo, se convirtieran en ese primer paso hacia la formalización y la protección social de dicha población. Dicho mecanismo, consagrado en el artículo 193 de la ley 1955 de 2019, infortunadamente fue declarado inexequible por la Corte Constitucional por vicio de forma (por estar contenido en una ley del plan) en su sentencia No. 276 del 19 de agosto de 2021.
Por último, se señala que tal y como exigen diversos estándares voluntarios de sostenibilidad, las auditorías y verificaciones anuales deben ser realizadas por terceras partes independientes y acreditadas por los mismos sellos – organismos de certificación y/o verificación. El cumplimiento de este proceso permite contar con cadenas de suministro de café certificado como 4C, Rainforest, Fairtrade y C.A.F.E Practices, entre otros.
Los organismos de certificación se adhieren a los protocolos de certificación de los distintos estándares de sostenibilidad y realizan las auditorías en medio de la cosecha a una muestra representativa de los productores que participan en cada programa. Estas auditorías abordan temas relacionados con condiciones laborales, protección de los derechos humanos, entre otros aspectos sociales y ambientales, de acuerdo con la legislación nacional aplicable y como requieren los acuerdos internacionales.
En conclusión, la FNC no tiene ninguna injerencia sobre los organismos de certificación, terceros imparciales, ajenos a la FNC los cuales realizan las auditorías correspondientes para evaluar si otorgan o no el certificado en mención a un grupo de caficultores específico.
Cordialmente,
REYNALDO ANDRÉS DÍAZ MEDINA
Representante Legal Suplente
Ante su invitación a responder en la discusión, le informo que la finca San Fernando de Ciudad Bolívar mencionada en su correo no hace parte de nuestros programas de sostenibilidad ni de nuestra cadena de suministro.
As empresas colombianas Carcafé e Expocafe e as cooperativas de cafeicultores de Salgar e Huíla não responderam aos questionamentos enviados pela Repórter Brasil. A compradora Sucafina também não enviou respostas.
Os donos das fazendas Los Naranjos e San Fernando não foram localizados pela reportagem. Entrevistado pessoalmente pela Repórter Brasil durante a viagem de campo, o proprietário da fazenda La Siberia não foi localizado pela reportagem novamente para responder perguntas adicionais. Já a Fazenda Arboleda não respondeu aos questionamentos enviados até o fechamento deste relatório.
Deixe o Seu Comentário