Aller à l’essentiel de l’information

Bibliothèque des disclosuresGuide pratique pour chaque information à publier

ESRS S1: Own Workforce·Disclosure Requirement S1-2

Engagement & Grievance Mechanisms

Guide pratique pour préparer cette information. Utilisez cette fiche pour identifier les données à préparer, vérifier les affirmations et organiser les preuves. Pour les exigences exactes, reportez-vous toujours à la source officielle European Commission.

Ouvrir la source officielle European Commission Comparer des rapports réels → ↗ Partager

Passeport publié

Révision en attente
··· En cours de révision Révision éditoriale en cours Élaboré à partir des sources officielles et de preuves issues de rapports publiés. Aucun approbateur n’est encore enregistré : cette page ne porte donc pas de signature. Utilisez-la avec la source officielle European Commission tant que cette révision est en cours.

Norme

ESRS S1: Own Workforce

Disclosure Requirement S1-2 · 2026-5010-final

En vigueur

2027-01-01

Source officielle : Ouvrir ↗

Dernière révision

—

Support pédagogique LRA · Non publié ni approuvé par European Commission

Pour préparer cette information
14champs à préparer 6affirmations à vérifier 5domaines de preuve 3exemples de rapports

Objet de l’information

This disclosure asks an organisation to explain how it engages with its own workforce and how people can raise concerns or complaints. In practice, the report should show whether workers have ways to speak up, whether those channels are available in a way that people can actually use, and how the organisation responds when issues are raised.

The practical focus is on coverage and accessibility across the organisation, not just on a few well-known sites or headquarters. A useful response should make clear whether the arrangements apply across operations, locations and worker groups, and whether there are differences in how they work in practice for different parts of the workforce.

Ce support pédagogique LRA aide à préparer l’information. Pour les exigences exactes, reportez-vous toujours à la source officielle European Commission.

Avant de commencer

Avant de commencer

Une courte liste de contrôle avant de préparer cette information — cochez chaque point une fois réglé.

Préparation

Informations clés à préparer

Champ à préparer Ce qu’il faut recueillir Indice de preuve Responsable
Engagement approach Describe the main ways the organisation consults or involves affected people and other relevant parties. Stakeholder engagement plan, consultation logs, meeting notes, survey records, community liaison records. Sustainability / stakeholder engagement
Priority groups engaged List the specific groups the organisation has identified for engagement, including women, migrant groups and people with disabilities where relevant. Stakeholder mapping, inclusion lists, consultation participant records, community or worker group registers. Sustainability / stakeholder engagement
Engagement methods used Set out the practical methods used to engage those groups, such as meetings, surveys, forums or other channels. Engagement calendar, consultation minutes, survey tools, workshop attendance lists, channel records. Sustainability / stakeholder engagement
Formal agreements in place State whether there are formal arrangements with worker or community representatives covering engagement with those groups. Signed agreements, memoranda of understanding, collective arrangements, representative body records. Legal / HR / stakeholder engagement
Agreement subject matter If such arrangements exist, describe what they cover in practical terms. Agreement text, annexes, scope notes, representative consultation terms. Legal / HR / stakeholder engagement
Agreement coverage Explain which people, sites, operations or activities are covered by those arrangements. Agreement schedules, site lists, workforce coverage notes, entity or location registers. Legal / HR / stakeholder engagement
Reporting channels Describe the channels available for people to raise concerns or complaints, including internal and external routes where applicable. Policy documents, hotline portal screenshots, intranet pages, supplier or worker handbooks, posters. Compliance / ethics / HR
Grievance route exists State whether a formal route exists for people to raise concerns and seek response. Grievance policy, complaints procedure, hotline setup records, case management system configuration. Compliance / ethics / HR
Issues raised Capture the number and nature of cases or complaints raised through the available channels during the reporting period. Case management system, hotline logs, complaints register, investigation tracker. Compliance / ethics / HR
Case closure rate Report the share of raised cases that were closed or otherwise resolved in the period, using the organisation's chosen basis consistently. Case tracker, closure status report, complaints dashboard, resolution log. Compliance / ethics / HR
Channel effectiveness Explain how the organisation judges whether the available channels work well in practice. Effectiveness review, user feedback, usage statistics, audit findings, management review notes. Compliance / ethics / HR
Remedy process Describe the process used to provide remedy when a case requires it, including how decisions are made and followed through. Remediation procedure, investigation workflow, corrective action process, case handling guidance. Compliance / ethics / legal
Remedied cases Capture the cases that were remedied during the period and the basis used to count them. Remediation log, case closure records, corrective action tracker, settlement or repair records. Compliance / ethics / legal
Remedial actions taken List the concrete actions taken to put things right for the cases that were remedied. Corrective action tracker, case notes, settlement records, repair or compensation records, follow-up evidence. Compliance / ethics / legal
＋ Afficher les sous-éléments de S1-2 (liste de travail LRA)

Comment le préparer

Set the reporting boundary first. Decide which parts of the business, workforce and value chain you will cover for this disclosure, then keep that boundary consistent across the rest of the response.
List the worker groups and participation routes you actually use. Identify the relevant groups, such as women, migrant workers and people with disabilities where applicable, and record the ways they can engage with the organisation.
Check whether formal worker agreements exist and define their reach. Note if there are any such arrangements, then state the scope they apply to and the coverage they provide in practice.
Map the complaint and issue-handling routes. Capture the channels people can use, whether a grievance route is in place, the cases raised through it, the share resolved, and your view on how well it works.
Describe how problems are put right. Set out the process used to remediate issues, note which cases were remediated, and summarise the actions taken to address them.
Document any exclusions, scope changes or judgement calls, then reconcile the draft against the official source. Make sure the final wording matches the underlying datapoints and that every required item is covered before sign-off.

Demander les données

Request employee engagement and grievance records

Traduisez l’information en une question métier interne, puis adaptez-la au vocabulaire de votre organisation.

How do we show the ways people can raise issues, how those issues are handled, and what follow-up or remedy has been put in place during the reporting period?

Use your organisation’s own terms first, then map them to the reporting disclosure. For example, if you call these routes, speak-up lines, case logs, employee forums, union consultations, or resolution actions, use those labels in the request and only translate them afterwards for reporting.

Demande faible

Please provide the ESRS S1-2 engagement and grievance mechanism data, including stakeholder engagement methods, grievance channels, remediation, and effectiveness evidence.

Pourquoi elle échoue : It uses framework language that may not match how the business actually records the information, so the owner may not know which systems, teams, or case types to pull. It also does not specify the period, boundary, counting basis, or the exact internal records needed to support the figures and narrative.

Meilleure demande

Please send the people issue-handling and speak-up records for [reporting period] for [site/business unit]. We need the routes people use to raise concerns, any groups you tailor them for, any agreements that set out how they work, the channels available, whether a formal case route exists, the number of cases raised and resolved, how you assess whether the process works, and the remedy or follow-up actions taken. Please use your own team labels and include the source extract, date pulled, and any counting notes.

Modèle d’e-mail formel
Subject: Request for people issue-handling and engagement records for [reporting period]

Hi [name/team],

We are preparing the sustainability reporting pack and need your help with the records that show how people can raise concerns, how those concerns are handled, and what follow-up actions were taken during [reporting period] for [entity / site / business unit].

Please share, in your team’s own terms first and with a short mapping note where helpful:
- the main routes people use to raise issues or ask for help
- any groups you specifically tailor these routes for, such as women, migrant workers, or people with disabilities, if applicable
- any agreements or arrangements that set out how these routes work, plus their scope and who they cover
- the channels available for raising concerns
- whether a formal case-handling route exists
- the number of cases raised in the period, the number resolved, and how you assess whether the process is working
- the process used to provide remedy or follow-up, the number of cases remediated, and the actions taken

Please include the source file or system extract, the date pulled, and any notes on definitions or counting rules. A possible LRA training template is attached for adaptation to your organisation. Please check the official source before sign-off.

Thanks,
[preparer name]
[team]
[contact details]
Version courte pour Teams / Slack
Hi [name] — could you send the people issue-handling / speak-up records for [reporting period] for [site/business unit]? We need: the channels people use, any groups you tailor them for, any agreements and their scope/coverage, case counts, resolution rate, how you judge effectiveness, and the remedy/follow-up actions. Please use your team’s own labels and add a short mapping note. Include the source extract and date pulled. Thanks.

Exemples sectoriels

Manufacturing

Contexte. A multi-site employer with local worker forums, a hotline, and site-level case logs.

Demande adaptée. Please share the site forum notes, hotline summary, and case log extract for [reporting period] across [sites]. We need the routes workers use to raise issues, any groups you tailor them for, any site agreements, the channels available, whether a formal case route exists, case counts, resolution rate, effectiveness notes, and remedy actions.

Exemple de réponse. Attached: hotline dashboard, site committee minutes, case log export. Labels used: worker forum, supervisor escalation, ethics line. Cases raised: 42; resolved: 39; remediated: 18. Notes include definitions, site coverage, and date pulled.

Retail

Contexte. A store-based workforce with a central employee relations team and a third-party speak-up provider.

Demande adaptée. Please send the store and head-office speak-up records for [reporting period]. We need the channels available to colleagues, any groups we specifically support, the case-handling route, the number of cases raised and closed, how you judge whether the process is effective, and the follow-up actions taken.

Exemple de réponse. Attached: provider summary, ER tracker, policy note. Labels used: colleague helpline, manager escalation, HR case portal. Cases raised: 87; resolved: 81; remediated: 26. Coverage and counting rules are noted in the cover sheet.

Rédigez votre information

Des notes qui transforment les données en information publiée

Modèles pédagogiques LRA — adaptez-les à votre organisation et vérifiez la source officielle avant validation.

Note méthodologique

Explain which groups were included in the engagement review, what counted as an engagement method, how agreements were identified, and how scope and coverage were defined for the reported arrangements.

Note de contexte

Set out what the figures show about how the organisation engages with people, what channels are available for raising concerns, how many cases were received and resolved, and what remediation steps were taken where issues were found.

Déclaration sur les variations

If the numbers changed from one period to the next, link the movement to changes in engagement activity, channel use, case volumes, resolution performance, or the extent of remediation work carried out.

Entrée de l’index de contenu

S1-2 Engagement & Grievance Mechanisms — [location / page] / [notes]

Centre de téléchargement

Outils et formulaires de préparation

Outils de préparation professionnels pour S1-2 — gratuits avec l’adhésion à LRA Community. Inscrivez-vous une fois (c’est gratuit) et tous les téléchargements se débloquent, avec la Bibliothèque des informations, les modèles et l’assistant IA LRA.

Gratuit · Membres de la Community
01XLSClasseur préparation et assurancePoints de données, risques, preuves à vérifier, responsable et dossier de preuves.Obtenir gratuitement ↧ 02XLSPack de demande de donnéesE-mail de demande, modèle de message, champs de réponse et structure de validation.Obtenir gratuitement ↧ 03PDFFiche de bibliothèqueRésumé imprimable d’une page de cette fiche d’information.Obtenir gratuitement ↧

Préparation à l’assurance

Pour chaque affirmation, vérifiez les preuves

Affirmation Risque Preuves à vérifier
We based the coverage figure on the workforce population we could evidence for the reporting period, and we documented any exclusions, cut-off dates, and duplicate records removed before the number was finalised.An assurer may test whether the reported coverage is complete, whether exclusions were applied consistently, and whether the figure could be overstated or understated by missing sites, entities, or worker groups.['Workforce population extract used for the calculation', 'Rules for inclusions and exclusions, including period cut-off', 'Reconciliation showing removals of duplicates or inactive records', 'Sign-off or review note confirming the final figure']
For the narrative on how we understand views from more exposed or less visible worker groups, we relied on documented engagement records, meeting notes, survey outputs, and any targeted listening sessions, and we kept the source material that supports the summary we published.An assurer may probe whether the statement is supported by real engagement rather than general intent, whether the groups described were actually reached, and whether the summary overstates the depth or breadth of insight obtained.['Engagement logs and attendance records', 'Survey results or interview notes for the relevant worker groups', 'Internal summary showing how inputs were turned into the disclosure', 'Evidence of management review of the final wording']
Where we refer to agreements or outcomes with worker representatives, we checked the signed documents, mapped which parts of the workforce they cover, and recorded the business units, locations, or worker categories included before publishing the statement.An assurer may test whether the agreement or outcome really exists, whether the stated coverage is accurate, and whether the disclosure implies wider reach than the underlying document supports.['Signed agreement or formal outcome record', 'Coverage mapping by site, entity, function, or worker group', 'Legal or HR review confirming the scope description', 'Version-controlled draft showing how the final wording was approved']
When we said the concern channel review was judged against recognised good-practice features, we kept the assessment matrix, the scoring notes, and the evidence showing how each feature was tested before the report went out.An assurer may challenge whether the assessment was actually performed, whether the criteria were applied consistently, and whether the channel was assessed on the basis claimed rather than by informal judgement.['Assessment matrix or checklist used for the review', 'Supporting evidence for each scored feature', 'Reviewer notes explaining any judgement calls', 'Approval record for the published assessment']
Our description of workforce engagement was built from direct meetings, representative discussions, and documented feedback, and we retained the records showing how those views influenced the actions or decisions we reported for the year.An assurer may probe whether the engagement was direct and current, whether representative views were fairly reflected, and whether the reported decisions can really be traced back to workforce input.['Meeting minutes, consultation notes, or feedback summaries', 'Records from worker representatives where relevant', 'Traceability note linking input to decisions or actions', 'Management approval of the final disclosure']
Where we pointed readers to the policy covering retaliation protection for people using the channel, we checked that the cross-reference matched the current policy version and that the policy was in force at the reporting date.An assurer may test whether the cross-reference is current, whether the linked policy actually covers anti-retaliation protections, and whether the disclosure points to the right document version.['Current policy document and version history', 'Cross-reference check between the report and the policy', 'Approval or publication date showing the policy was active', 'Document control log']

Dossier de preuves à préparer

Lacunes fréquentes dans les rapports

The information is presented without a date or as-at point.
The scope or boundary of the statement is left undefined.
Key terms are used inconsistently across the report.
Material changes since the previous period are not disclosed.
Assertions are made without supporting detail or a source record.
Boilerplate is used that does not actually answer what is asked.

Lacunes fréquentes

Erreurs à éviter lors de la collecte des données

Wrong ownerThe request goes to the wrong team, so the data comes from people who do not run the staff channels, case handling, or follow-up actions in practice.
Framework language onlyThe data call uses disclosure terms instead of the organisation’s own labels, and the source team cannot map them cleanly to its internal records.
No scope setThe collector never defines which workforce groups, sites, or entities are in scope, so the figures mix together records that should have been kept separate.
＋ Afficher 6 de plus

Là où un jugement professionnel est souvent nécessaire

Acquisitions and disposals during the yearDecide whether to include only the people and channels in the business at the reporting date or to also reflect parts added or removed during the year, and explain the cut-off used.
Different local labels for the same worker groupsWhere countries use different labels or legal categories, map them to a single internal grouping approach and state the mapping rule so readers can see how like-for-like groups were combined.
People just outside the formal workforceSet out whether contractors, agency staff, interns, or other near-scope groups are counted in the engagement and complaint channels, and explain the boundary if they are partly included or excluded.
＋ Afficher 7 de plus

Exemples

Exemples illustratifs

Synthétiques, rédigés par LRA — ils ne proviennent ni d’un rapport d’entreprise ni du texte d’une norme.

Illustrative (synthetic) example — Food manufacturing

We used a mix of staff forums, one-to-one interviews, site walkabouts and worker-representative meetings to hear from people most likely to face barriers, including women, migrant workers and colleagues with disabilities. We had written arrangements with 3 of our 5 main labour suppliers, covering 420 of 500 workers in scope; our reporting channels were open to all staff and contractors, 18 concerns were logged, 15 were closed out, and we judged the process effective because most cases were handled within target times and users said the routes were easy to access.
- Where harm had already occurred, we used case-by-case fixes such as pay corrections, schedule changes, equipment adjustments and manager retraining; 11 matters were fully put right during the period.
- The figures above are internally consistent and illustrative only.

Synthetic, practitioner-facing example showing how a company might describe worker engagement, reporting routes, case handling and remedy in plain language.

Illustrative (synthetic) example — Logistics and warehousing

We gathered views through toolbox talks, shift huddles, anonymous surveys and meetings with elected worker representatives, with extra outreach to women, migrant colleagues and employees with disabilities. We had formal agreements with 2 of our 4 key service partners, covering 260 of 320 people in the relevant workforce; our speaking-up routes included phone, web and in-person options, 9 matters were raised, 8 were closed, and we assessed the system as working well because access was broad and most issues were settled without delay.
- When something needed fixing, we used tailored remedy steps such as reinstating hours, replacing damaged equipment, adjusting duties and giving refresher training; 6 cases were remedied in full.
- This is a made-up example for training and review.

Synthetic, practitioner-facing example showing a different sector and a different mix of engagement, reporting and remedy practices while keeping the figures internally consistent.

Rapports d’entreprises

Comment les entreprises publient S1-2 en pratique

Exemples de pratiques de publication complètes et partielles. Ce sont des analyses fondées sur des preuves, non des modèles à recopier.

Rapports réels publiés
Aena S.M.E., S.A.
Air Transportation — Airport Services · Spain · 2025
Ouvrir le rapport →
Aena S.M.E., S.A.'s 2025 Sustainability report includes information on channels for its own workers to raise concerns and actions taken on material impacts affecting its workforce (p.70). It also addresses processes to remediate negative impacts and channels for value chain workers to raise concerns (p.183). However, the report provides unclear context on the effectiveness of these actions (p.70, p.233), and no clear disclosure was found on other related narrative items.
Enagás, S.A.
Gas Utilities · Spain · 2025
Ouvrir le rapport →
Enagás, S.A.'s 2025 Annual Report provides partial context on its human rights due diligence system as established in its Human Rights Policy, though it does not present clear headline values or detailed disclosures (p.200). The report includes some related context on engagement with affected communities, noting that negative impacts can be raised through such engagement, but this is not a clear or comprehensive disclosure of the required datapoint (p.209). Several expected narrative items are not found in the report, indicating a lack of full coverage or clarity on specific social information related to affected communities.
Hugo Boss AG
Textiles, Apparel, Footwear and Luxury Goods · Germany · 2024
Ouvrir le rapport →
Hugo Boss AG’s 2024 Annual Report partially covers employee engagement, noting the use of the annual Great Place to Work survey conducted Group-wide by an external service (p.92). The report also references engagement in the context of the Combined Non-Financial Statement and assurance processes (p.338) and mentions grievance mechanisms and remediation processes related to workforce engagement, though it states some related standards are only partially applied or not material (p.315). However, the report lacks clear headline values or comprehensive disclosures specifically on employee engagement, with several expected narrative items not found or unclear.

Comparer côte à côte →

✓ Assistant IA LRA · Supervision humaine
Dr Ross Kurinko

Interrogez l’assistant IA de Study Studio sur cette information

Obtenez des réponses concrètes pour votre contexte de reporting. Les deux premières réponses sont gratuites — rejoignez gratuitement LRA Community pour continuer sans limite.

Essayez Comment préparer S1-2 ? Quelles données dois-je collecter ? Où voir un exemple issu d’un rapport réel ? Quelles erreurs éviter ?
2 réponses gratuites

Vérifiez votre compréhension

Scénarios à travailler

A preparer is drafting the people section and has one consultation log for the year, but it only covers office staff. The business also has migrant workers and employees with disabilities, and there were separate listening sessions for each group.

QHow should the team decide what to include about who was consulted and how the consultation was done?
Afficher la réponse type →

A grievance hotline exists for all staff, but the team is unsure whether to present it as a formal complaint route because some issues are also handled through line managers and HR. During the year, 18 cases were logged and 15 were closed.

QWhat should the preparer do when describing the complaint route and the cases raised through it?
Afficher la réponse type →

The company has a worker feedback process in place, but the team has not checked whether it actually works well. They know that 12 matters were closed during the year, while 3 remain open, and they have no documented review of whether users trust the process.

QHow should the team judge whether to say the process is effective?
Afficher la réponse type →

A worker complaint about unsafe conditions was resolved by changing the shift pattern and providing new protective equipment. Another complaint about pay was closed after a discussion, but no follow-up action was taken. The draft report currently says only that matters were “handled”.

QWhat should the preparer include about remedy and follow-up actions?
Afficher la réponse type →

Références au référentiel

Exigences ESRS applicables et informations connexes

Références disponibles du référentiel et informations voisines utiles à la préparation de cette exigence.

ESRS

S1-2

au sein de ESRS S1 : Own Workforce

Ouvrir la source officielle →

Connexes et exploration

Policies (Own Workforce) → FicheSocial Protection → FicheDisabilities → FicheTraining → FicheHealth & Safety → Fiche Parcourir toutes les informations →

Plus dans ESRS S1 → Parcourir le catalogue complet → Accueil de la Bibliothèque des informations → Rechercher dans toutes les informations →

FAQ

Questions auxquelles cette page répond

How do I prepare disclosure S1-2 on own workforce engagement using this page?+
What data do I need to collect for S1-2 own workforce engagement?+
How should I define the scope and methodology for S1-2 own workforce engagement?+
Who should own the S1-2 own workforce engagement disclosure in practice?+
What evidence pack do I need for assurance on S1-2 own workforce engagement?+
What are the common mistakes or reporting gaps for S1-2 own workforce engagement?+
How do I use the Prep & Assurance workbook for S1-2 own workforce engagement?+
How do I turn the S1-2 own workforce engagement data into a draft disclosure?+
Can I use the synthetic example disclosure on S1-2 own workforce engagement as a template?+
Where can I find real company report examples for S1-2 own workforce engagement?+

Autres questions auxquelles cette page peut aider

S1-2 own workforce engagement checklist for ESG managerS1-2 own workforce engagement data points listS1-2 own workforce engagement evidence pack itemsS1-2 own workforce engagement assurance claimsS1-2 own workforce engagement common mistakesS1-2 own workforce engagement workbook downloadS1-2 own workforce engagement draft narrative startersS1-2 own workforce engagement reporting channels and grievance routeS1-2 own workforce engagement remedial actions and case closure rateS1-2 own workforce engagement synthetic example disclosureS1-2 own workforce engagement company report examplesS1-2 own workforce engagement plain-language explainer

Aller plus loin · S1-2

Apprenez à préparer cette information de bout en bout

This guide covers one Disclosure Requirement. The ESRS / CSRD Reporting course walks the full European workflow — double materiality, datapoints, evidence and assurance — with exercises on your own data.

Available as Guided Flex, Live Cohort, 1:1 Expert Mentorship or Corporate Programme.

Explore the ESRS / CSRD course →
Comment cette bibliothèque est construite 312 rapports publiés indexés 63 171 pages avec citations au niveau de la page 272 fiches disclosure conçues par des praticiens
/fr/knowledge-hub/disclosure-cards/esrs-s1-2/