Yes, they should. But given the current very desperate circumstances of garment workers who are not even paid the poverty wages they were counting on, the rst and foremost priority is to get workers their current regular wages and bene ts, even though we know that these cover only about one third of what is needed to meet basic needs of themselves and their families. Currently many workers are getting reduced wages or nothing at all. Providing their legally owed wages and bene ts to their workers immediately is the minimum rst step brands should take to ensure workers can survive. What is meant by a “Guarantee Fund” ? In addition to providing immediate income support for workers, the wage assurance also includes a commitment to negotiate an enforceable agreement to support stronger social protections for workers related to unemployment and severance bene ts, in line with the relevant ILO conventions, through the establishment of a Severance Guarantee fund. The purpose of the Severance Guarantee Fund is to pay severance and outstanding wages in cases where employers have gone insolvent, or otherwise have terminated workers and can’t be compelled to pay. The Severance Guarantee Fund will also mitigate the devastating consequences of unemployment for workers in the future by nancially supplementing or strengthening government social protection programmes for unemployment or severance bene ts. Brands and retailers would contribute to both funding streams through a fee based on on volume sourced from each country, and employer fees would be a percentage of their wage bill in each country. This should be part of a larger effort to establish more sustainable and resilient industries in the near future, consisting of supply-chains with better planning and pricing models, which includes a costing model that covers fair payment schedules, and nancial space for living wages, safe factories, and social bene ts. Brands will be asked to pay a premium of 1.5% of annual FOB, with a special additional 1.5% fee assessed in the rst year to account for the administrative set up and the devastating impacts of the pandemic and climate disruption. "The rst year" is de ned as the rst year after the brand signs on to the Fund. Thus, even if a brand signs on after the initial year of the program, the additional 1.5% fee will still be assessed in the rst year of the brand's participation in the Fund. The 1.5% fee can be reduced if a brand sources from countries that establish credible and effective social protection programs covering unemployment and/or severance bene ts, or if its suppliers sign on and contribute to the Fund. If all of a brand's suppliers sign on, or if the brand is exclusively sourcing from countries that have fully functioning social protection programmes, its fee will go to zero. The agreement will include a trigger mechanism for implementation, which will be de ned either by the number of brands that have signed on or by total amount of purchasing volume.