The simple solution to permit the workers in each of the EPZs to vote on whether to form a trade union or not is a fine one. Now the decision on whether to unionise or not is in the hands of the workers, where it should be. If the workers in any sector vote against forming a union, then the workers' welfare association currently in place will continue to protect their interests.

It has been argued by the investors that the working conditions in the EPZs are much better than in the country at large and that there was thus no need for trade unions. This may be correct. But now the workers will themselves have the opportunity to be heard on the matter.

But we would suggest to the investors that they please reconcile themselves to the reality that workers in Bangladesh can no longer be denied the rights that workers all over the world are entitled to. Indeed, one cannot help but notice that the investors' home countries have some of the strongest trade unions in the world, with no discernible negative impact on productivity, so there is no reason to believe that permitting trade unions in the EPZs will harm their investment.

At the same time, we thought the US insistence on the principle of trade unionism needed to be consistent with the ground realities in the EPZs. From this point of view, leaving the choice to the workers has struck a compromise between being a stickler for it and responding to the special needs of the EPZs.

The agreement reached is the one that is most in the interest of Bangladesh, both as regards the EPZ workers and for the economy as a whole. The investors will also gain from it. That's why it has our support.