Disclosure LibraryPractitioner guidance for every reporting disclosure

Home→ Disclosure Library→ GRI→ GRI 401→ GRI 401-2

GRI 401: Employment · 2016

Disclosure GRI 401-2

Benefits provided to full-time employees that are not provided to temporary or parttime employees

Practical guidance for preparing this disclosure. Use this card to identify datapoints, verify claims and organise supporting evidence. For exact requirements, always refer to the official GRI source.

◍ Open official GRI source ↗ Share

Reviewed by Dr Ross Kurinko · GRI Certified Trainer LRA educational guidance · Not issued or endorsed by GRI

To prepare this disclosure

4datapoints↓ 4claims to verify↓ 5evidence areas↓ 3report examples↓

Disclosure focus

This disclosure asks an organisation to explain which benefits it gives to full-time employees that it does not extend to temporary or part-time employees. The focus is on the difference in treatment between these groups, so the report should make clear what benefits are available, which employee categories are excluded, and whether the approach is consistent across the organisation.

In practice, the useful question is not just whether a benefit exists, but how broadly it is applied across the workforce. Organisations should be clear about whether the arrangement covers all operations or only certain sites, business units or countries, and describe any material exceptions. The aim is to show the real pattern of access to benefits, rather than a headline statement that may only reflect a flagship location.

This LRA educational guidance supports disclosure preparation. For the exact requirements, always refer to the official GRI source.

Before you start

A quick mental checklist before you prepare this disclosure — tick each as you settle it.

Have you fixed which sites count as significant for this comparison, and is that definition written down? Are you comparing the benefits that are standard for permanent staff against those not given to casual or part-time staff? Have you decided whether any extra benefit outside the usual list needs to be included in your answer? Is the basis for the figures clear — for the same reporting period and the same set of locations? Can each point be traced back to a source you can show if asked, rather than relying on memory or estimates?

Preparation

Key datapoints to prepare

Datapoint What to capture Evidence hint Owner

Key operating sites List the sites that matter most to the organisation’s operations, using the organisation’s own threshold for what counts as a major site and keeping the list aligned to the reporting period. Group structure or site register, operational footprint summary, management reporting on locations, and any internal rule used to decide which sites are included. Operations

Full-time only benefits Capture the benefits that full-time staff receive as standard but temporary or part-time staff do not, and state the benefit set in a way that matches the organisation’s employee categories. Employee benefits policy, HR handbook, contract templates, and HRIS or payroll records showing which groups receive each benefit. Human Resources

Additional employee benefits Record any other benefit the organisation provides to employees, beyond the standard package, and describe it clearly enough to distinguish it from core pay or mandatory entitlements. Benefits register, HR policy documents, payroll notes, and approvals for discretionary staff benefits. Human Resources

Location significance rule Set out the rule the organisation uses to decide whether a location is significant, including the basis for the threshold and how it is applied in practice. Internal reporting methodology, location ranking or materiality rule, and any governance paper that defines the inclusion test for sites. Finance

＋ Show GRI 401-2 sub-elements (LRA working checklist)

How to prepare it

1Set the reporting boundary first: list the sites, branches, plants, offices, or other places you will treat as relevant for this disclosure, and make sure the same boundary is used consistently across the response.

2Write down your working definition of a relevant operating site in plain business language, so a reviewer can see exactly how you decided which locations were included and why.

3Identify the employee benefits that are normally available to permanent staff but not to temporary or part-time workers, and separate those from any other benefits you may need to mention.

4Gather supporting records for each point you plan to report, such as HR policies, benefit schedules, location lists, or internal approvals, so the final answer is backed by evidence.

5Prepare the disclosure content in the form required by your reporting approach: either a clear narrative or a structured set of figures and descriptions, with each item tied back to the evidence you collected.

6Check the draft against the official source before sign-off, and note any exclusions, scope changes, or wording choices so the final submission is transparent and internally consistent.

Request the data

Request the employee benefits comparison and site definition

Translate the disclosure into an internal business question — then adapt it to your organisation's own language.

Which employee benefits are given as standard to permanent staff, but not to agency, fixed-term, or other non-standard workers, and how do we define the sites in scope?

Use your organisation’s own labels first (for example, staff groups, worker types, sites, depots, branches, plants, offices, or locations), then map them to the disclosure wording for reporting. Please adapt this to your internal terminology and check the source guidance before sign-off.

Weak request

Please provide the GRI 401-2 benefits disclosure data, including the benefits provided to full-time employees that are not provided to temporary or part-time employees, plus the definition of significant locations of operation.

Why it fails: This uses framework language that many internal owners will not recognise, and it does not tell them which internal systems, worker groups, sites, or source documents to pull from. It also does not ask for the organisation’s own terminology first, so the response may be hard to map and verify.

Better request

Please send the employee benefits schedule for permanent staff and the comparison against other worker groups, using your own labels for staff types and sites, plus the wording you use for a significant site/location and the list of sites in scope. Include the source policy or system for each item and any local exceptions.

Formal email template

Subject: Request for employee benefits and site definition data for reporting pack

Hi [name/team],

I’m preparing the [reporting period] sustainability reporting pack and need your help with the employee benefits and site definition information.

Please send:
- the list of benefits that are part of the standard package for permanent staff, but not offered to temporary, agency, fixed-term, or part-time staff;
- any benefit that sits outside the main categories and should still be noted;
- the wording your team uses to define a significant site/location for this pack;
- the locations covered by that definition;
- the source system or policy document for each item;
- any notes on local exceptions or variations.

Please use your internal terms in the response, and I will map them into the reporting pack wording. A possible LRA training template is attached for reference only; please adapt this to your organisation and check the source guidance before sign-off.

If easier, you can return the information in a table with the fields below.

Thanks,
[preparer name]

Short Teams / Slack version

Hi [name/team] — could you share the benefits list for permanent staff vs other worker groups, plus how you define a significant site/location and which sites are in scope for [period]? Please use your internal terms and I’ll map them for the pack. A possible LRA training template is attached; adapt to your organisation and check the source guidance before sign-off. धन्यवाद/Thanks, [preparer name]

Industry examples

Manufacturing

Context. A business with plants, warehouses, and office sites, where benefits may vary by site and worker type.

Adapted request. Please share the benefits package for permanent employees versus agency, fixed-term, and part-time workers across each plant, warehouse, and office in scope, plus the site definition your team uses and the list of locations covered.

Example response. Returned as a table showing each site, worker group label, benefit name, whether it is included for permanent staff, whether it is included for other worker groups, the policy source, and any site-specific variation.

Retail

Context. A multi-store business with head office and regional stores, where benefits may differ between store staff and office staff.

Adapted request. Please provide the standard benefits for head office and store colleagues on permanent contracts, identify which of those are not available to temporary or part-time colleagues, and confirm how you define a significant store or location for this pack.

Example response. Returned with a list of benefits by colleague group, a note on the internal definition of a significant location, the store list in scope, and references to the handbook and benefits portal.

Draft your disclosure

Notes that turn data into a disclosure

LRA training templates — adapt them to your organisation, and check the official source before sign-off.

Method note

Explain which sites were treated as significant by setting out the organisation’s own definition, and state how benefit data were grouped so readers can see which benefits apply to full-time staff and which are not extended to temporary or part-time staff.

Context note

Use the figures to show how the organisation’s benefit package differs by worker group and how broad the disclosure is across the locations that meet the organisation’s significance test.

Fluctuation statement

If the pattern changed from the prior period, note whether that was driven by a change in the sites counted as significant, a change in benefit coverage, or both.

Content index entry

GRI 401-2 Benefits provided to full-time employees that are not provided to temporary or parttime employees — [location / page] / [notes]

Download Centre

Preparation tools & forms

Professional preparation tools for GRI 401-2 — free with an LRA Community membership. Register once (it's free) and every download unlocks, together with the Disclosure Library, templates and the LRA AI-assistant.

Free · Community members

01XLSPrep & Assurance workbookDatapoints, risks, evidence to check, owner and evidence pack.Get it free ↧ 02XLSData-request packRequest email, message template, response fields and sign-off structure.Get it free ↧ 03PDFLibrary CardPrintable one-page summary of this disclosure card.Get it free ↧

Assurance readiness

For each claim, check the evidence

ClaimRiskEvidence to check

I used the organisation’s own cut-off for which sites counted in the coverage figure, and I applied it consistently when compiling the disclosed operations.An assurer may test whether the site selection rule was applied consistently, whether any material locations were left out, and whether the basis for inclusion was changed without explanation.Documented inclusion rule for the coverage figure; list of sites reviewed; working papers showing which locations were included or excluded; management sign-off on the final scope; any notes explaining exceptions or changes from prior periods.

I separated the workforce groups before preparing the figure, so the comparison between permanent staff and non-permanent staff was based on the same internal classification used in payroll or HR records.An assurer may probe whether worker categories were defined consistently, whether the comparison was made on a like-for-like basis, and whether the underlying HR data supports the split used in the disclosure.HR or payroll extracts used for the calculation; internal worker classification policy; reconciliation between source records and the reported split; evidence of review for misclassified workers or duplicate records; sign-off from the data owner.

Where I referred to an additional benefit, I checked that it was treated as a separate item in the source records and that the wording in the report matched the underlying evidence.An assurer may question whether the extra benefit was genuinely distinct, whether it was recorded in the source system, and whether the report description overstates or mislabels what was actually provided.Source records showing the benefit type; policy or plan documents; payroll, benefits or HR system extracts; internal mapping from source terminology to report wording; review notes confirming the item was not double-counted or misclassified.

Before publishing, I documented the rule I used to decide which locations were treated as significant, and I kept that rule available so the reported coverage can be traced back to the same basis used in the calculation.An assurer may test whether the definition was set before reporting, whether it was applied consistently, and whether the reported figure can be traced back to a clear and supportable basis.Written definition or methodology note for the location threshold; version history showing when the rule was approved; calculation file linking the definition to the final figure; evidence of review by the preparer and approver; any prior-period comparison showing whether the basis changed.

Evidence pack to prepare

The governing policy or written commitment behind this disclosureA methodology / definition note setting out how the disclosure was scoped and preparedSource-system exports the figures or facts were drawn fromThe internal approval / sign-off record for the disclosure before publicationMinutes or records evidencing the relevant engagement or consultation

Common reporting gaps

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.

Common gaps

Mistakes to avoid when collecting the data

Wrong owner

The request goes to a people team contact who knows the policy, but not the payroll or benefits source that can confirm what is actually in place.

Framework language only

The data request is written in reporting jargon, so the business cannot map it to its own benefit names, plan codes, or local HR terms.

No boundary set

The team never agrees which sites, countries, or legal entities are in scope, so the dataset mixes locations that should have been assessed separately.

Wrong time basis

The collector uses a different period from the one used for the report, so the benefit list reflects a mismatched snapshot rather than the same reporting window.

Mixed counting basis

Headcount, contract status, and benefit eligibility are combined in one extract, which makes it impossible to tell which staff group each benefit applies to.

Source labels lost

The original payroll or HR field names are stripped out during consolidation, so no one can trace a reported benefit back to the system record that created it.

Populations merged

Permanent staff and agency or part-time workers are rolled into one file, which hides the differences the disclosure needs to show.

Missing evidence trail

The pack is sent without file dates, version notes, or sign-off names, so reviewers cannot see who checked the figures or when.

No local definition for sites

The team uses a vague idea of a major site instead of recording the organisation’s own definition of which operating locations count for the exercise.

Where judgement is often needed

Set the site list before you start counting

Agree which operating sites count as significant, explain the basis you used, and keep that approach consistent unless a business change means the list needs updating.

Use one local rulebook for each country, then map it back

Where employment practice differs by country, apply the local employment terms in each place and disclose how you translated those differences into one group-wide summary.

Decide how to treat workers near the boundary

State whether people on fixed-term, agency, probationary, apprentice, intern, or similar arrangements sit inside or outside the comparison, and explain the rule you applied.

Be clear on the reference date or period

Choose the point in time or reporting period used to test who had access to each benefit, then describe that timing so readers can see how the figures were built.

Explain any use of estimates or proxies

If direct records are incomplete, use a documented estimate or proxy, say where it was needed, and note the main assumptions behind it.

Show how acquisitions and disposals affected the scope

If a bought or sold business changed the workforce or benefit set during the year, explain whether it was included for the full period, part of the period, or excluded, and why.

Keep benefit labels aligned with internal HR language

Translate internal plan names into plain descriptions of the benefit provided, and make clear when one local scheme covers several employee groups differently.

State the privacy threshold for small teams

If headcount is so small that naming a site or benefit would expose individuals, aggregate the data and explain the privacy-based grouping you used.

Round in a way that does not distort the comparison

If you round counts or percentages, apply the same rule across the table and note it so readers can understand any small differences between totals and components.

Separate standard benefits from optional extras

Only include benefits that are part of the normal package for the full-time group, and explain whether discretionary, one-off, or location-specific extras were left out or shown separately.

Examples

Illustrative examples

Synthetic, written by LRA — not from a company report, not text from any standard.

Illustrative (synthetic) example — Food manufacturing

*Synthetic example only.* We describe the sites we treat as material for this disclosure as our two largest production plants and the main distribution hub, because together they account for 82% of our workforce and 79% of payroll costs. At those locations, full-time staff receive private medical cover, life assurance, and an annual wellbeing allowance; temporary and part-time staff receive only the wellbeing allowance, so the first two items are not extended to them. - For this illustration, the sites counted as material are the three locations above. - The extra item available to full-time staff, but not to temporary or part-time staff, is private medical cover and life assurance. - We use a simple internal test: any site with at least 15% of our total headcount or 15% of total payroll is treated as material.

Synthetic illustration for practitioner review only; figures and locations are invented and internally consistent.

Illustrative (synthetic) example — Business services

*Synthetic example only.* We treat our three largest office campuses as the relevant sites for this disclosure, since each has at least 12% of our total staff or 12% of our total employment cost, and together they make up 68% of staff and 71% of employment cost. Full-time colleagues at those campuses receive private health cover, an enhanced pension contribution, and an extra paid day off; temporary and part-time colleagues receive the pension top-up only, so the other two items are reserved for full-time staff. - The sites included in this illustration are the three campuses meeting our internal size test. - The benefit available to full-time staff only is private health cover and an extra paid day off. - Our internal test for a material site is a campus with at least 12% of total staff or 12% of total employment cost.

Synthetic illustration for practitioner review only; figures and locations are invented and internally consistent.

Company reports

How companies report GRI 401-2

Real reports where this topic is disclosed. These are report practice, not exact disclosure templates to copy.

Grupo Cibest S.A.

Banks / Diverse Financials / Insurance · Colombia · 2025

Open report →

Grupo Cibest S.A.'s 2025 Management Report provides a definition for "significant locations of operation" on page 313 and reports the number of employees within governance bodies by age group on page 326. Additionally, it details other employment benefit plans as part of other liabilities on page 459. However, there is no clear information or methodology found regarding narrative item (b), as no quotable evidence is provided.

CAE Inc.

Aerospace and Defense · Canada · 2024

Open report →

CAE Inc.’s FY24 Global Annual Activity and Sustainability Report provides a definition for ‘significant locations of operation’ as sites with more than 700 employees, with reporting on GRI 401-2 starting in FY23 (p.174). The report includes specific employee numbers, noting 734 full-time and 10 part-time employees in the U.S. (p.159). However, there is no clear narrative or methodology found for item (b), and some financial measure definitions are partially addressed without headline values (p.205), indicating gaps in comprehensive disclosure for certain aspects.

Bangchak Corporation Public Company Limited

Oil and Gas · Thailand · 2025

Open report →

Bangchak Corporation Public Company Limited’s Integrated Sustainability Report 2025 includes a specific disclosure on significant locations with potential biodiversity impacts, noting 11 stations not classified as significant locations (p.108). The report also references omissions related to GRI 409 on forced or compulsory labour, indicating some disclosure gaps (p.218). However, there is no clear narrative or methodology provided for certain aspects of the disclosure, leaving some elements unclear or unaddressed.

✓ LRA AI Assistant · Human-in-the-loop

Ask Study Studio AI assistant about this disclosure

Get a practical answer for your reporting context. Your first answer is free — create a free account to continue the conversation.

TryHow do I prepare GRI 401-2?What data do I need to collect?Where can I see a real-report example?What mistakes should I avoid?

1 free answer

Check your understanding

Scenarios to work through

A group has offices in three cities and a warehouse in a fourth. The HR team can list the sites it treats as material for this disclosure, but the list was built for a different report and no one has checked whether it still matches the current workforce footprint.

QHow should the preparer decide which sites to include when describing where the benefit comparison applies?

Reveal model answer →

A company gives permanent staff private medical cover and an annual wellbeing allowance, but agency workers and part-time staff do not receive either. The benefits team is unsure whether to mention only the medical cover because it is the larger cost item.

QWhat should the preparer do when identifying the benefits that are available to the permanent workforce but not to other worker groups?

Reveal model answer →

At one site, full-time staff get subsidised meals, extra paid leave and a pension contribution, while temporary staff get only meals. The draft note says ‘other benefit: pension’ but does not explain whether the same treatment applies across all locations.

QHow should the preparer handle an additional benefit that is not part of the main list, especially where practice varies by site?

Reveal model answer →

The reporting team has a draft note saying that ‘major sites’ are the places included in the disclosure, but no one can explain what counts as major. The same draft also lists the benefits gap, yet the basis for choosing the sites is missing.

QWhat needs to be added before the disclosure can be finalised?

Reveal model answer →

Framework references