© 2006. Business Ethics Quarterly, Volume 16, Issue 2. ISSN 1052-150X. p. 167–184 ARE CODES OF CONDUCT IN GLOBAL SUPPLY CHAINS REALLY VOLUNTARY? FROM SOFT LAW REGULATION OF LABOUR RELATIONS TO CONSUMER LAW André Sobczak Abstract: Labour and employment law no longer has a monopoly on regulating labour relations and is facing a crisis as its effectiveness is questioned. Codes of conduct adopted by companies to recognise their social responsibility for the global supply chain are instruments that can usefully complement labour and employment law. The aim of this paper is to analyse in depth the legal nature of codes of conduct and their impact on labour and employment law. Will the use of codes of conduct reinforce the crisis of labour and employment law in the era of globalisation or will these codes be part of a solution to this crisis? Do we have to consider codes of conduct as competitors to labour and employment law or as an opportunity for rethinking the way that labour and employment law norms should be produced and applied? P revalent in the era of industrial manufacturing within companies organised like hierarchies, continuous, site-attached employment with an identifiable employer currently is challenged in the context of the network society (Castells 1996; Klare 2002). Concentrating on their core business, companies prefer other forms of mobilising work than to conclude continuous employment contracts. The latter are being replaced in an increasing number of situations with contracts based on contract or commercial law, such as subcontracting or franchising. Although the work performed may in fact remain identical, the legal norms governing these relationships are completely different. Labour and employment law was created to compensate for the economic imbalance between the worker and the employer by a set of norms either defined by public authorities or negotiated by the social partners (Supiot 2001a). In contrast, contract and commercial law considers the two parties to a contract on an equal footing, and thus are able to determine its content, without any third party having to protect one of them by a precise legal framework. Of course, national labour and employment law still formally protects the employ- ees of subcontractors or franchisees. However, these norms become completely ineffective in this context because the only person liable for respecting them is the subcontractor and not the multinational company that defines the economic strategy for the whole supply chain. In other words, by shifting its organisational structure