The undertaking says how it talks directly with its workforce or their representatives and how workforce perspectives inform its decisions and actions on actual and potential impacts during the year, including how it learns the views of people who may be vulnerable or marginalised (women, migrants, persons with disabilities) where it does so, and any global framework agreements or similar outcomes reached with workers' representatives on human rights. It sets out the routes by which the workforce can bring concerns or needs to it and get them dealt with, states whether it has a grievance mechanism, explains how it assesses the effectiveness of those channels (the UNGP Principle 31 criteria may be used, with anti-retaliation protections cross-referable to G1-1), and explains how it goes about providing or joining in remedy when it caused or contributed to a material negative impact on its workforce.
This control maps to 1 controls across 1 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.
Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.
The graph holds this control, the 1 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.