The undertaking says how it talks directly with value chain workers, their legitimate representatives or credible proxies and how what it hears from them shapes its decisions and actions on actual and potential impacts during the year, including how it learns the views of vulnerable or marginalised workers (women, migrants, workers with disabilities) where it does so, and any global framework agreements or similar outcomes with their representatives on human rights; sets out the routes by which value chain workers can bring concerns or needs to it and get them dealt with, says whether a grievance mechanism exists and how it judges whether those routes work (UNGP Principle 31 criteria, 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 value chain workers.
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.