Incidents of non-compliance concerning the health and safety impacts of products and services

Zydus Lifesciences’ current card relies on the wrong disclosure.

Report page 134 states that there were no incidents concerning product and service information and labelling and marketing communications. This information relates to GRI 417-2 and GRI 417-3, not GRI 416-2.

The substantive product-quality information is on report page 50. The report discloses:

zero Class I recalls;

54 Class II recalls;

12 Form 483 observations or equivalent; and

one FDA warning letter or equivalent.

The GRI index maps Product Recalls to GRI 416-1 and GRI 416-2.

The card should:

replace page 135 with report page 50 as the principal substantive source;

remove the product-information and labelling zero result from GRI 416-2;

recognize the one FDA warning letter as potentially relevant to the regulatory-warning category;

avoid treating every recall or Form 483 observation automatically as a GRI 416-2 incident;

determine whether any incidents resulted in a fine or penalty;

determine whether any incidents involved non-compliance with voluntary codes;

confirm how the 54 recalls were classified against the GRI requirement; and

classify the disclosure as partial or requiring category-level reassessment.

Materiality and general risk-management information on page 148 is not required to complete Disclosure 416-2.

The official report contains separate product-recall, regulatory-observation and warning-letter information, while the cited labelling statement belongs to a different GRI disclosure.

Owens Corning’s 2024 Sustainability Report states on report page 184 that the company had no material incidents of non-compliance concerning the health and safety of its products.

Its GRI index maps GRI 416-2(a) to None and GRI 416-2(b) to page 184.

The wording does not provide a fully aligned zero response because GRI 416-2 requires all incidents of non-compliance, not only incidents classified as material.

The card should:

remove the parental-leave return-to-work figure;

remove the SCS Global Services independence and competence statement;

use report page 184 as the substantive reference;

quote or paraphrase the company’s no material incidents wording accurately;

explain that no material incidents does not necessarily mean zero incidents;

assess whether the company can confirm zero incidents across the three GRI categories; and

classify the response as partial or imprecise rather than a complete zero disclosure.

No additional governance or assurance narrative is required solely for GRI 416-2.

Owens Corning’s report uses a materiality qualifier, while its GRI index indicates that the detailed incident-count requirement is not separately reported.

Thai Beverage provides an adequate zero-incidents response on report page 92.

The report states that:

there were zero incidents of non-compliance with regulations or voluntary codes concerning the health and safety impacts of products and services; and

no regulatory incidents resulted in a fine, penalty or warning.

The broad zero statement is sufficient under GRI 416-2(b). Separate category details are not required when no incidents occurred.

The card should:

use report page 92 as the substantive reference;

retain the zero-incidents conclusion;

remove all child-labor references;

remove all forced-labor references;

remove supply-chain-management gaps;

state that no prior-period incident identification is applicable unless an incident exists; and

classify the disclosure as an adequate zero response.

ThaiBev explicitly reports zero incidents of non-compliance concerning the health and safety impacts of products and services.