Kern van de disclosure
The practical focus is on coverage across the whole workforce and all relevant operations, not just a few well-controlled sites or headline cases. An organisation should be able to show whether its reporting and response processes apply consistently across locations, business units and worker groups, and whether there are any gaps in coverage. The aim is to help readers understand how complete and reliable the organisation’s incident reporting is in practice.
Dit educatieve materiaal van LRA ondersteunt het opstellen van de disclosure. Raadpleeg voor de exacte vereisten altijd de officiële European Commission-bron.
Voorbereiden
Wat te verzamelen vóór het opstellen
Vink elk veld af zodra het bewijs binnen is. Eigenaren zijn de teams die de bronbestanden doorgaans beheren.
-
Incident count
Risk / ComplianceRecord the number of incidents covered by this disclosure for the reporting period, using one consistent counting basis and the same cut-off date across the source records.
Bewijs Incident log, case register, or incident tracker; reconcile the final count to the period-end extract used for reporting.
Let op The count is taken from a different period or source extract than the incident register, so the reported total does not reconcile to the underlying case log.
-
HR case count
Human ResourcesCapture the number of people-related incidents included in the period, keeping the definition of an HR case consistent with the source system and the reporting cut-off.
Bewijs HR case management system, employee relations log, or grievance/disciplinary tracker; tie the reported figure back to the period extract.
Let op A definition mismatch between HR cases and the wider incident log means employee-related matters are counted differently from the source system.
-
Penalty amount
Finance / LegalCapture the total monetary penalties linked to the relevant incidents for the period, in euros, using the same scope and period as the incident count.
Bewijs Finance ledger, legal case file, or compliance penalty schedule; reconcile the amount to the booked or approved penalty records.
Let op The euro amount is pulled from a different period or excludes part of the penalty set, so it does not reconcile to the finance or legal records.
-
Compensation amount
Finance / LegalCapture the total compensation paid or recognised for the relevant incidents in the period, in euros, using the same incident set and reporting cut-off as the other figures.
Bewijs Claims file, finance ledger, or settlement schedule; check the total against the compensation records used for reporting.
Let op Compensation is reported on a different basis from the incident total, so the amount misses part of the relevant claims or settlements.
Voordat u begint
- Have you fixed the scope: are you counting only human-rights-related incidents, or every incident in the period, and do you need both figures kept separate?
- Have you agreed the time basis for the numbers: which reporting period they come from, and whether you are using incident date, case closure date, or another internal cut-off?
- Can each figure be traced back to a source record, so the incident totals, any penalties, and any compensation amounts all reconcile to underlying files or registers?
- Have you settled the definitions your team will use for a human-rights incident, so the same rule is applied consistently across the count?
- Have you checked whether any amounts are to be shown in euros and whether they cover only sums linked to these incidents, with no double counting across categories?
Hoe u dit voorbereidt
De gegevens opvragen
Request the incident log and case outcomes
Vertaal de disclosure naar een interne bedrijfsvraag — en pas die daarna aan op het taalgebruik van uw organisatie.
What human-rights-related incidents were recorded in the period, and what amounts were paid or imposed as a result?
Use your organisation’s own case, grievance, conduct, complaints, or incident terms first, then map them to the disclosure wording when you prepare the reporting pack. Keep the request in the language the owner already uses internally, and check the source material before sign-off.
Zwak verzoek
Please provide all human rights incidents and related fines and compensation for the period.
Waarom dit misgaat: It uses framework language that many teams do not use day to day, so the owner may not know which register, case type, or payment fields to pull. It also leaves out the boundary, counting approach, and source system, which makes the extract hard to verify.
Beter verzoek
Please pull the [reporting period] extract from your [case log / grievance register / conduct tracker] for the records you would normally treat as [your internal case categories]. For each record, include the case reference, dates, status, internal label, and any amounts paid or imposed, split between [your terms for sanctions] and [your terms for compensation]. Please also note the source system, the counting rule used, and any exclusions.
Sjabloon voor een formele e-mail
Subject: Request for incident and case data for [reporting period] Dear [name/team], Please could you provide the incident and case data for [reporting period] for the entities in [reporting boundary]. We need the records from your [system/register name] covering the cases you would normally classify as [your internal category terms]. For each record, please include the case reference, date recorded, date closed if applicable, current status, internal category, brief description, and any amounts paid or imposed, split between [your organisation’s terms for fines/sanctions] and [your organisation’s terms for compensation/settlement]. If you use a different counting approach for linked records or multiple affected people, please note that clearly. Please also include the source system name, the person who prepared the extract, and any assumptions or exclusions. Could you send this by [date]? Please adapt this to your organisation’s own terms and check the source material before sign-off. Many thanks, [Name] [Role]
Korte versie voor Teams / Slack
Hi [name/team] — could you send the [reporting period] extract from your [system/register] for the cases you’d normally tag as [internal category terms]? Please include case ref, dates, status, category, and any amounts paid or imposed, split between [your terms for fines/sanctions] and [your terms for compensation/settlement]. Also note the counting approach, source system, and any exclusions. Thanks — [name]
Sectorvoorbeelden
Retail and consumer services
Context. The business tracks customer-facing and worker complaints in a central case tool, with separate fields for conduct issues and settlement payments.
Aangepast verzoek. Please send the [reporting period] extract from the case tool for records tagged as [conduct issue / grievance / rights complaint]. Include case ref, date opened, date closed, status, internal label, and any amounts paid or imposed, split between [penalties] and [settlements].
Voorbeeldantwoord. Prepared by: Case Management Lead; Source system: Central case tool; Period: 1 Jan 2025 to 31 Dec 2025; Boundary: Group entities A, B and C; Records: 14 cases; Amount imposed as fine or sanction: €12,000; Amount paid as compensation or settlement: €48,500; Notes: 3 linked records counted as 1 matter under the team’s normal practice.
Manufacturing
Context. The business logs site-level complaints and legal matters separately, with payments tracked by Finance but linked back to the case register.
Aangepast verzoek. Please provide the [reporting period] list from the site complaint register and legal matter log for cases you would classify as [worker complaint / site grievance / rights allegation]. Include the case ID, site, status, internal category, and any fine, settlement, or compensation amounts linked to the matter.
Voorbeeldantwoord. Prepared by: Legal Operations; Source system: Site grievance log and legal matter register; Period: FY2025; Boundary: All owned sites in scope; Records: 9 matters; Amount imposed as fine or sanction: €0; Amount paid as compensation or settlement: €31,200; Notes: One matter had two payments, both linked to the same case ID.
Stel uw disclosure op
Notities die gegevens tot een disclosure maken
LRA-trainingssjablonen — pas ze aan op uw organisatie en controleer de officiële bron vóór goedkeuring.
Methodenotitie
State how the organisation defined each incident measure, how it identified the work-related subset, and the basis used to total any penalties and compensation amounts.
Contextnotitie
Explain what the counts and amounts indicate about the scale of incidents and their financial consequences during the reporting period.
Toelichting op schommelingen
If any figure moved materially, note the main operational, legal, or reporting reasons that drove the change and whether it reflects a one-off event or a broader shift.
Vermelding in de inhoudsindex
S1-16 Human Rights Incidents — [location / page] / [notes]Downloadcentrum
Hulpmiddelen en formulieren voor de voorbereiding
Download voorbereidingstools voor S1-16 gedurende 24 uur met gratis toegang na e-mailverificatie. Links naar bronrapporten blijven openbaar.
Controleren
Controleer bij elke bewering het bewijs
I have linked the incident figures to the related follow-up actions or remedies, so a reviewer can trace each case from the disclosed numbers to the response recorded elsewhere in the report.
Risico An assurer will check that the cross-reference is real, complete and points to the right follow-up information. They may test whether the incidents counted here are the same ones discussed in the separate actions/remedies section, and whether anything material has been left out or linked to the wrong place.
Te controleren bewijs Cross-reference map or disclosure index; incident log with case IDs; the separate actions/remedies disclosure; internal review notes showing how the link was made; sign-off pack confirming the referenced information matches the incident set.
I have pointed readers from the incident discussion to the section on concern-raising routes, so the report shows where people could raise issues connected with those cases.
Risico An assurer will probe whether the link to the concern-raising information is accurate and whether the report actually connects the relevant incidents to the right channel information. They may also check that the route described is the one used for the disclosed cases, not a generic or outdated process.
Te controleren bewijs Published report cross-reference; whistleblowing/grievance or speak-up channel description; case files showing how concerns were raised; internal mapping note linking the incidents to the channel information; approval evidence for the final wording.
I have included the monetary amounts recognised in the accounts for penalties, fines and compensation tied to those incidents during the period, using the figures that were booked in the financial records.
Risico An assurer will test whether the amounts are actually recognised in the financial statements, whether they relate to the right incident set, and whether the totals are complete and correctly classified. They may also check that the period cut-off and currency treatment are consistent with the accounts.
Te controleren bewijs General ledger extracts; journal entries; supporting legal/accounting papers; financial statement note or trial balance tie-out; reconciliation showing the disclosed amount agrees to the recognised accounting figure; evidence of review by finance and legal teams.
I have set out the method used to build the incident dataset, including how cases were gathered, screened and counted before publication.
Risico An assurer will look for a clear, repeatable method and may challenge whether the approach was applied consistently across the full population. They will test whether the method explains the source systems, inclusion/exclusion choices, verification steps and any judgement used in compiling the figures.
Te controleren bewijs Written methodology or reporting protocol; data flow diagram; source-system extracts; counting rules; exception log; version-controlled working papers; evidence of management review and approval of the method used.
I have reported the number of confirmed discrimination cases at work that were identified in the period, based on the cases that met our verification threshold.
Risico An assurer will check whether the count is complete, whether only confirmed cases were included, and whether the verification threshold was applied consistently. They may also test whether the period boundary, duplicate handling and classification of cases were correct.
Te controleren bewijs Case register; investigation outcomes; verification criteria; count reconciliation to source records; duplicate check; period-end cut-off review; evidence that the final number was reviewed and approved.
I have reported the number of confirmed human-rights-related cases involving our own workforce, excluding the discrimination cases already counted separately, using the same reporting period and validation process.
Risico An assurer will test whether the non-discrimination cases are genuinely separate from the discrimination count, whether the workforce link is correct, and whether the count is complete and verified. They may also check for double counting, misclassification or overlap between categories.
Te controleren bewijs Incident log with category tags; workforce linkage evidence; exclusion list showing discrimination cases removed from this count; investigation files; reconciliation between category totals; review notes confirming no overlap and consistent validation.
Voor te bereiden bewijsdossier
Veelvoorkomende hiaten in de rapportage
- 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.
Waar concepten misgaan
Fouten om te vermijden en waar een oordeel nodig is
De linkerkolom toont wat opstellers fout doen bij het verzamelen; de rechter waar u een oordeel moet vellen en toelichten.
Fouten om te vermijden
- Wrong ownerAsking the policy team or legal team for the figures, instead of the case-handling owner who tracks incidents in day-to-day operations, leads to incomplete or delayed data.
- Framework language onlyRequesting the numbers using disclosure labels rather than the organisation’s own case, complaint, or incident terms means the right records may never be pulled together.
- No clear scopeFailing to state which parts of the business, sites, or worker groups are in scope causes teams to mix in records that should have been left out.
- Wrong time basisPulling cases by report date, close date, or payment date without fixing one consistent period can shift incidents into the wrong reporting year.
- Mixed counting methodCombining raw incident counts with separate human-rights case counts, or mixing case totals with euro amounts, produces figures that cannot be reconciled.
- Source labels lostCopying data into a summary sheet without keeping the original case reference, category, or outcome label makes later checks against the source file difficult.
- Separate groups mergedPutting employee cases, contractor cases, and other affected groups into one undivided total hides which population each number came from.
- Missing evidence trailCollecting the totals without the underlying file name, date extracted, and preparer note leaves no audit trail for review and sign-off.
- No sign-off recordSending the draft numbers forward without a named reviewer and approval date means nobody can show who checked the figures before they were used.
Oordeel vereist
- Set the cut-off for counting events that span a reporting dateChoose one clear rule for whether an incident is counted when it starts, when it is confirmed, or when it is closed, then use that same timing consistently and explain it in your note.
- Decide how to treat a business bought or sold during the yearState whether you include events and amounts from the acquired or disposed operation for the part of the year it was under your control, and describe any boundary change so readers can see why the year-on-year figure moved.
- Handle local legal labels and internal case types with one mapping ruleIf different countries or sites use different labels for the same kind of event, map them to one internal category set, explain the mapping, and note any cases that could not be aligned cleanly.
- Define the edge of the workforce and other people linked to your operationsMake a documented call on whether to include people just outside your direct payroll but still tied to your activities, then disclose the scope rule and any exclusions that materially affect the count.
- Separate confirmed cases from allegations or open investigationsUse one basis for the count and say whether it covers only substantiated cases or also unclosed matters, then explain how you avoid double counting when a case moves from allegation to confirmed outcome.
- Choose between exact records and reasoned estimates for money amountsWhere case-level amounts are incomplete, use a consistent estimation method, label the figure as estimated, and explain the source data and assumptions behind the amount reported.
- Decide whether to report gross amounts or netted figuresPick one approach for fines and compensation, state whether offsets, recoveries, or reversals are included or excluded, and keep the same basis across the period unless you explain a change.
- Set a rounding rule that does not distort small totalsApply one rounding convention to counts and euro amounts, and if rounding changes a small total in a noticeable way, say so and show the unrounded basis in working papers.
- Protect personal data by grouping low-volume cases before disclosureIf naming or splitting cases would expose individuals, combine the data into a broader group, explain the aggregation rule, and make clear that the published total still covers the full set of relevant incidents.
Voorbeelden
Hoe het op de pagina leest
Synthetisch, geschreven door LRA — niet afkomstig uit een bedrijfsrapport en geen tekst uit een standaard.
we report four workplace incidents in the year, of which two involved our own staff. We also show the related financial outcomes: €18,000 paid in penalties and €42,000 paid in compensation.
Synthetic illustration of workplace incidents and related amounts (count / €)
| Category | Count |
|---|---|
| All recorded incidents | 4 |
| Incidents involving our own workers | 2 |
| Penalties paid (€) | 18000 |
| Compensation paid (€) | 42000 |
Illustrative only; figures are invented for training purposes and are internally consistent.
during the reporting period we recorded six workplace incidents, including three affecting our employees. The associated financial impact was €9,500 in penalties and €27,500 in compensation.
Synthetic illustration of workplace incidents and related amounts (count / €)
| Category | Count |
|---|---|
| All recorded incidents | 6 |
| Incidents involving our own workers | 3 |
| Penalties paid (€) | 9500 |
| Compensation paid (€) | 27500 |
Illustrative only; figures are invented for training purposes and are internally consistent.
Kwaliteitsladder
- Basis
We recorded 3 human rights incidents and €0 in fines or compensation.
- Beter
We recorded 3 human rights incidents, of which 2 were substantiated, and we paid €0 in fines and €0 in compensation.
- Best
Across our own operations and value chain this year, we recorded 3 human rights incidents, 2 of them substantiated, with €0 in fines and €0 in compensation; the total was unchanged from last year because our case review and escalation process did not identify any new material matters.
Toets uw begrip
Scenario’s om door te werken
During the year, the group logged 7 incidents in its grievance and case-tracking system. After review, 3 of those were confirmed as human-rights related, and the rest were health-and-safety, conduct, or payroll matters.
A supplier complaint led to a settlement payment of €120,000 and a regulator later imposed a €30,000 penalty. Internal records show both amounts relate to the same human-rights matter.
The legal team says one case involved a labour-rights breach, but the operations team argues it was only a contract dispute because the worker was later rehired. The incident file contains witness notes, a settlement agreement, and an internal investigation summary.
At year-end, the company has 5 open cases and 2 closed cases that were confirmed as human-rights related. Finance has already booked €18,000 of compensation for one closed case, while a regulator has not yet decided whether any penalty will be issued.
Vraag de AI-assistent van de Knowledge Hub naar deze disclosure
Ontvang praktische antwoorden die passen bij uw rapportagecontext.
Controleer je tekst
Plak één of twee alinea’s. Het fragment wordt alleen voor deze controle gebruikt en niet in uw gesprek opgeslagen.
De vergelijking gebruikt voorbeelden op deze kaart, niet hun prevalentie in het rapportcorpus.
Advies, geen assurance
Verwijzingen naar het raamwerk
Relevante ESRS-vereisten en verwante disclosures
ESRS
S1-16
binnen ESRS S1: Own Workforce
Guides that settle this question
Gerelateerd & verkennen
Meer in ESRS S1 →Volledige catalogus bekijken →Zoeken in alle disclosures →
FAQ
Vragen die deze pagina beantwoordt
The page says to prepare four datapoints: incident count, HR case count, penalty amount and compensation amount. Use those as the starting checklist before you draft anything.
Use it as a working sequence for getting the disclosure ready, rather than as a final answer. It is there to help you organise scope, data collection, evidence and drafting in a practical order.
The page includes an evidence pack with five items to support assurance readiness. Use it alongside the assurance claims so you can show where the numbers came from and how they were checked.
The page provides six claims with related risks and evidence prompts. Treat them as a checklist for testing whether the disclosure is supported, rather than as a substitute for your own controls and records.
The page lists common gaps and mistakes to help you spot weak points before submission. Use that section to check whether your scope, data and evidence are consistent and complete.
The page has a draft-output section with visualisation ideas, narrative starters and a content-index line. Use those to turn the prepared data into a first draft that is easier to review and assurance-test.
The example is there to show what a worked-up disclosure can look like, including a quantitative table. It is synthetic, so use it for structure and presentation only, not as a real reporting benchmark.
The Download Centre includes a Prep & Assurance workbook in .xlsx format. Use it to organise the preparation work, track the assurance checks and keep the disclosure build in one place.
The Download Centre also includes a printable Library Card in .pdf format. The page presents it as a companion resource, so it is useful for quick reference while the workbook is better for active preparation.
Yes. The page includes a 'From company reports' table that links to real published reports at the pages where the topic is disclosed, which can help you see how others present similar information.
Yes. The page is built around assurance readiness, with claims to verify, evidence-pack items and common mistakes to check. It is designed to help you spot gaps before a reviewer does.
Meer vragen waarbij deze pagina helpt