Vai al focus dell’informativa
Gratis · Membri della Community
＋ Mostra 6 in più− Mostra meno
＋ Mostra 7 in più− Mostra meno
Report reali pubblicati
Apri il report →
Apri il report →
Apri il report →
✓ Assistente IA di LRA · Con supervisione umana
Apri la fonte ufficiale →
Explore the ESRS / CSRD course →
ESRS S1: Own Workforce·Disclosure Requirement S1-2
Engagement & Grievance Mechanisms
Guida pratica per preparare questa informativa. Usa questa scheda per individuare le informazioni da predisporre, verificare le affermazioni e organizzare le evidenze a supporto. Per i requisiti esatti, fai sempre riferimento alla fonte ufficiale European Commission.
Passaporto pubblicato
Revisione in attesa
···
In revisione
Revisione editoriale in corso
Predisposto a partire da fonti ufficiali e da evidenze di report pubblicati. Non è ancora registrato un approvatore, quindi la pagina non riporta una firma.
Usala insieme alla fonte ufficiale European Commission finché la revisione è in corso.
Standard
ESRS S1: Own Workforce
Disclosure Requirement S1-2 · 2026-5010-final
Ultima revisione
—
Materiale didattico LRA · Non emesso né approvato da European Commission
Per preparare questa informativa
Focus dell’informativa
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.
Questo materiale didattico LRA supporta la preparazione dell’informativa. Per i requisiti esatti, fai sempre riferimento alla fonte ufficiale European Commission.
Prima di iniziare
Prima di iniziare
Una breve checklist prima di preparare questa informativa: spunta ogni voce man mano che la definisci.
Preparazione
Informazioni chiave da preparare
| Campo da preparare | Cosa rilevare | Suggerimento sull’evidenza | Responsabile |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
＋ Mostra i sotto-elementi di S1-2 (checklist di lavoro LRA)
Describe how people or groups can be engaged.
Name the groups singled out for attention, such as women, migrants, and people with disabilities.
State whether any agreements are in place.
Explain how far those agreements reach.
Set out the areas or topics they cover.
List the ways engagement is carried out.
Record the issues or complaints that were brought forward.
Show which reporting or complaint routes are available.
Explain how you judge whether those routes work well.
State whether a grievance route exists.
Report the share of cases that were closed out.
Summarise the steps taken in response.
State how many cases were fixed through remediation.
Describe the process used to put things right.
Come prepararla
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.
Richiedi i dati
Request employee engagement and grievance records
Traduci l’informativa in una domanda di business interna, poi adattala al linguaggio della tua organizzazione.
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.
Richiesta debole
Please provide the ESRS S1-2 engagement and grievance mechanism data, including stakeholder engagement methods, grievance channels, remediation, and effectiveness evidence.
Perché non funziona: 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.
Richiesta migliore
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.
Modello di e-mail formale
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]
Versione breve per 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.
Esempi di settore
Manufacturing
Contesto. A multi-site employer with local worker forums, a hotline, and site-level case logs.
Richiesta adattata. 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.
Esempio di risposta. 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
Contesto. A store-based workforce with a central employee relations team and a third-party speak-up provider.
Richiesta adattata. 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.
Esempio di risposta. 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.
Redigi la tua informativa
Note che trasformano i dati in un’informativa
Modelli formativi LRA: adattali alla tua organizzazione e verifica la fonte ufficiale prima dell’approvazione.
Nota metodologica
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.
Nota di contesto
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.
Dichiarazione sulle variazioni
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.
Voce dell’indice dei contenuti
S1-2 Engagement & Grievance Mechanisms — [location / page] / [notes]Centro download
Strumenti e moduli per la preparazione
Strumenti professionali di preparazione per S1-2 — gratuiti con l’iscrizione a LRA Community. Registrati una volta (è gratis) e sblocchi tutti i download, insieme alla Biblioteca delle informative, ai modelli e all’assistente IA di LRA.
01XLSCartella di lavoro per preparazione e assurancePunti dato, rischi, evidenze da verificare, responsabile e pacchetto di evidenze.Ottienilo gratis ↧
02XLSPacchetto per la richiesta datiE-mail di richiesta, modello di messaggio, campi di risposta e struttura di approvazione.Ottienilo gratis ↧
03PDFScheda della bibliotecaSintesi stampabile di una pagina di questa scheda informativa.Ottienilo gratis ↧
Preparazione all’assurance
Per ogni affermazione, verifica le evidenze
| Affermazione | Rischio | Evidenze da verificare |
|---|---|---|
| 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'] |
Pacchetto di evidenze da preparare
Lacune ricorrenti nella rendicontazione
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.
Lacune ricorrenti
Errori da evitare nella raccolta dei dati
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.
Wrong period basisThe team pulls numbers from a different reporting window or cut-off date, so the dataset does not match the period being reported.
Mixed counting basisSome fields are counted by people, others by cases or actions, but the source files do not state the basis used, so the totals cannot be compared reliably.
Source labels lostOriginal system names, case IDs, or channel tags are stripped out during collection, making it impossible to trace each figure back to the underlying record.
Populations mergedRecords for different groups, such as women, migrant workers, or people with disabilities, are combined into one pool even though they should be tracked separately.
Missing evidence trailThe pack is saved without the supporting file names, dates, or approver trail, so no one can show where the data came from or who checked it.
No sign-off recordThe final dataset is used before the owner has confirmed it, leaving no clear trail that the numbers were reviewed and accepted before drafting.
Dove serve spesso un giudizio professionale
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.
Which channels count as a complaint routeChoose whether to list only dedicated issue-reporting routes or also broader speaking-up, HR, union, or hotline channels, and describe the basis for that choice.
Agreements with worker representativesIf there are arrangements with employee representatives, clarify which parts of the workforce they cover and whether coverage is full, partial, or limited to certain sites or countries.
Counting cases and measuring resolutionState whether case numbers and closure rates are based on opened cases, closed cases, or another internal measure, and keep the same basis across the period or explain any change.
Effectiveness judged by numbers or by reviewExplain whether the assessment of how well the channels work is based on operational metrics, management review, user feedback, or a mix of these, and disclose the method used.
Privacy-driven grouping of sensitive dataWhere small numbers could identify individuals, combine categories or locations before reporting and say that the figures were aggregated to protect privacy.
Estimated figures versus system extractsIf some data come from manual estimates rather than a system report, identify the estimated items, the source used, and any known limits on accuracy.
Rounding and presentation of percentagesApply one rounding rule consistently to counts and percentages, and note it if rounding means subtotals do not add exactly to the total.
Esempi
Esempi illustrativi
Sintetici, scritti da LRA: non provengono dal report di un’azienda né dal testo di uno standard.
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.
Report aziendali
Come le aziende rendicontano S1-2 nella pratica
Esempi di prassi di rendicontazione completa e parziale. Sono analisi basate sulle evidenze, non modelli da copiare.
Aena S.M.E., S.A.
Air Transportation — Airport Services · Spain · 2025
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
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
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.
Chiedi all’assistente IA di Study Studio di questa informativa
Ottieni risposte pratiche per il tuo contesto di rendicontazione. Le prime due risposte sono gratuite: iscriviti gratis a LRA Community per continuare senza limiti.
Prova
Come preparo S1-2?
Quali dati devo raccogliere?
Dove posso vedere un esempio da un report reale?
Quali errori devo evitare?
2 risposte gratuite
Verifica la tua comprensione
Scenari da affrontare
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.
DHow should the team decide what to include about who was consulted and how the consultation was done?
Mostra la risposta modello →Nascondi la risposta ↑
They should describe the groups that were identified for engagement, including the relevant worker groups that were actually considered, and explain the methods used to engage them. If different approaches were used for different groups, the description should make that clear rather than collapsing everything into one generic statement.
Perché è importante · Report both the groups reached and the practical ways they were engaged, using wording that matches the organisation’s own process.
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.
DWhat should the preparer do when describing the complaint route and the cases raised through it?
Mostra la risposta modello →Nascondi la risposta ↑
They should explain the channels available for raising concerns in plain business terms, then state whether the organisation has a dedicated complaint-handling route. They should also disclose the number of cases raised through that route, using the same basis consistently so the figures are understandable and comparable within the report.
Perché è importante · Describe the available routes and the volume of cases in a consistent way, without mixing different reporting bases.
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.
DHow should the team judge whether to say the process is effective?
Mostra la risposta modello →Nascondi la risposta ↑
They should not rely only on the existence of a process or on closure numbers. The disclosure should explain how the organisation assessed whether the route works in practice, using evidence such as how people can access it, whether issues are handled in a timely way, and whether the process is trusted by the people it is meant to serve.
Perché è importante · Effectiveness is a judgement about how well the process works in practice, not just whether it exists or how many cases were closed.
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”.
DWhat should the preparer include about remedy and follow-up actions?
Mostra la risposta modello →Nascondi la risposta ↑
They should explain the process used to put things right, identify which matters were actually remedied, and describe the actions taken in response. Where the response was a process outcome rather than a fix, that should be made clear so readers can see the difference between closing a case and addressing the underlying issue.
Perché è importante · Separate case closure from real remedy, and describe the concrete actions taken to address the issue.
Riferimenti al framework
Requisiti ESRS pertinenti e informative correlate
Riferimenti disponibili al framework e informative vicine utili alla preparazione di questo requisito.
ESRS
S1-2
all’interno di ESRS S1: Own Workforce
Correlati ed esplora
Policies (Own Workforce) → SchedaSocial Protection → SchedaDisabilities → SchedaTraining → SchedaHealth & Safety → Scheda
Sfoglia tutte le informative →
Altro in ESRS S1 → Sfoglia il catalogo completo → Home della Biblioteca delle informative → Cerca in tutte le informative →
FAQ
Domande a cui risponde questa pagina
How do I prepare disclosure S1-2 on own workforce engagement using this page?+−
Use the plain-language explainer, then work through the step-by-step preparation section and the listed datapoints. The page is designed to help you turn those inputs into a draft disclosure, not to replace your own judgement or internal process.
What data do I need to collect for S1-2 own workforce engagement?+−
The page lists the core datapoints to gather, including engagement approach, priority groups, methods, agreements, reporting channels, grievance route, issues raised, closure rate, channel effectiveness, remedy process, remedied cases and remedial actions. Treat that list as the starting point for your data request and evidence check.
How should I define the scope and methodology for S1-2 own workforce engagement?+−
The page gives a step-by-step preparation section and a set of datapoints that help you frame scope and method, such as who was engaged, how they were engaged, and what channels or grievance routes were used. It does not set a formal methodology, so you need to align the page to your organisation’s own approach.
Who should own the S1-2 own workforce engagement disclosure in practice?+−
The page is aimed at sustainability and ESG managers, HR teams, data owners and assurance reviewers, so ownership usually needs to sit with whoever can coordinate those inputs and evidence. Use the page to split responsibilities across content, data, and assurance readiness rather than leaving it with one person alone.
What evidence pack do I need for assurance on S1-2 own workforce engagement?+−
The page includes an evidence pack with five items for assurance readiness, plus six assurance claims to verify with claim, risk and evidence. Use those materials to build a traceable pack that supports the numbers and narrative you plan to disclose.
What are the common mistakes or reporting gaps for S1-2 own workforce engagement?+−
The page has a section on common reporting gaps and mistakes, which is useful for checking whether your draft is complete and internally consistent. Use it as a final review step before sign-off and assurance.
How do I use the Prep & Assurance workbook for S1-2 own workforce engagement?+−
The Download Centre includes a Prep & Assurance workbook in .xlsx format, which is intended to help you organise preparation and assurance work. Use it alongside the page’s datapoints, evidence pack and assurance claims to build a working draft.
How do I turn the S1-2 own workforce engagement data into a draft disclosure?+−
The page has a draft-output section with visualisation ideas, narrative starters and a content-index line. That gives you a practical way to convert your collected data into a first draft and structure the supporting narrative.
Can I use the synthetic example disclosure on S1-2 own workforce engagement as a template?+−
Yes, but only as an illustrative starting point. The example is explicitly synthetic, so you should adapt it to your own data and make sure any quantitative table remains internally consistent.
Where can I find real company report examples for S1-2 own workforce engagement?+−
The page includes a 'From company reports' table that links to real published reports where the topic is disclosed. Use it to see how others present similar information, but do not treat it as a substitute for your own disclosure approach.
Altre domande in cui questa pagina può aiutare
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
Approfondisci · S1-2
Impara a preparare questa informativa dall’inizio alla fine
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.
Come è costruita questa biblioteca
312 report pubblicati indicizzati
63.171 pagine con citazioni a livello di pagina
272 schede disclosure realizzate da professionisti
/it/knowledge-hub/disclosure-cards/esrs-s1-2/
Gratis · LRA Community
Ottieni i tuoi strumenti per S1-2 — gratis
I tuoi strumenti di preparazione sono gratuiti per i membri di LRA Community e per gli studenti. Registrati una volta (è gratis) e il tuo download parte subito — insieme alla Biblioteca delle informative, ai modelli e all’assistente IA di LRA.
✓
Ci sei — il download sta per iniziare
Il file è in download. Anche il tuo Cabinet Community — con la Biblioteca delle informative, i modelli e l’assistente IA di LRA — è pronto.
Apri il tuo Cabinet →