About SAI | Find us on Facebook View our profile on LinkedIn Follow us on Twitter View our videos on YouTube|Subscribe| Donate | Training Schedule | Social Fingerprint� | Archive 
March 2014
1. Sharing Best Practices: Gap Inc.'s P.A.C.E. Program
2. SA8000 Advanced Auditor Training: Meet the Students
3. SA8000: 2014 Standard Revision
4. "Putting the Pillars into Practice"
4. Tea Plantations Report
5. SA8000 Auditor Calibrations
6. SA8000 Auditor Trainings: Courses in Turkey and India
7. Highlights & Announcements
Jobs & Internships 
Coming Events
 
Ethical Sourcing Forum

New York City

March 27-28 

 

SAI to Present on
Worker - Manager Collaboration to Achieve Rapid Results and Drive Sustainable Change
     

 

Pillars in Practice Program
 

 

Like us on Facebook'Like' & view photos of the program on Facebook

Top 3 News Stories 
Training Courses 

-Getting Started in Your Company

-Building Your Internal Social Performance Team  

 

  SA8000 Fire Safety Webinar  

Auditing for Fire Safety in the SA8000 & BSCI System
[Mandatory for SA8000/BSCI Auditors]
 

 SA8000 Basic Auditor Training

Santiago, Chili
April 21-25
(Spanish)
Sao Paulo, Brazil
May 5-9
(Portuguese)

 SA8000 Advanced Auditor Training  

Bologna, Italy
April 7-9
(English/Italian) 
Athens, Greece 
May 5-7
 

SA8000 Online Training 

SA8000 Online Revision Course
  
NGOs & Trade Unions
Complimentary seats available for NGO & trade union representatives. For more information, email SAI Training Coordinator Stephanie Wilson at [email protected].

  

 
Like us on Facebook
View Photos from SAI's Training Courses

Social Accountability International (SAI) is a non-profit, multi-stakeholder organization established to advance the human rights of workers by promoting decent work conditions, labor rights, and corporate social responsibility through voluntary standards and capacity building. 

 

SAI is headquartered in the United States with field representation in Brazil, China, Costa Rica, India, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, Philippines, Switzerland, and UAE.


SAI- Human Rights at Work

For newsletter inquiries contact: SAI Director of Operations Michelle Bhattacharyya, [email protected] 
Empowerment of Women Workers Worldwide

 

Sharing best practices is vital to any organization's success. As part of a new series, SAI's newsletter will showcase best practices and lessons learned from programs developed and delivered by corporate members and other partners.  To launch this series, SAI highlights corporate member Gap Inc.'s P.A.C.E. (Personal Advancement & Career Enhancement) program, launched in 2007 to advance women both in the workplace and in their personal lives. To date, more than 25,000 women have been impacted by Gap Inc.'s program.

 

 

The P.A.C.E. Program Background

 

Despite the garment industry being one of the largest employers of low-skilled female workers, few women in the industry advance beyond low-level positions. This is in part due to limited opportunity to enhance professional and personal skills through education. In response to this problem, Gap Inc.'s P.A.C.E. program was developed in partnership with the International Center for Research on Women (ICRW) and India's Swasti Health Resource Centre.  Implemented with the support of NGO CARE P.A.C.E. provides women with 65 to 80 hours of life skills education on topics such as communication, problem solving and decision making, time and stress management, general and reproductive health, as well as legal and financial literacy.  In addition, women are also given the opportunity to participate in enhanced technical training upon completion of the life skills component.  

 

The launch of the P.A.C.E. program was directed by Gap Inc.'s belief that a strategic social investment is a sustainable investment that creates value for both business and communities. "As women make up approximately 80% of garment workers worldwide and 70% of Gap Inc.'s employees, investing in women ties back to Gap Inc. in a very tangible way," said Lucien Chan, Director of Community Expansion & Evaluation for P.A.C.E. Global Initiatives at Gap Inc.


P.A.C.E. participants in Vietnam

 

Best Practice: Measurement and Evaluation for P.A.C.E. Proves Impact

 

The first Best Practice we highlight seems obvious, but is often overlooked in the design of social programs: measurement and evaluation. Although many programs purport to measure progress in their work, the inclusion of measurement and evaluation as a fundamental part of the program beginning pre-launch and providing continual data for analysis over a period of years is still rare. For Gap Inc., this was a fundamental part of the program design. Gap Inc. understood that measurement is a vital element to programs to establish the program's credibility. As a result there is evidence of impact that guides  efforts to scale and advance the program.  

 

Gap Inc. contracted with the International Center for Research on Women (ICRW) to conduct evaluations of the program from 2009 - 2013. The compiled findings can be found in the following report: http://www.icrw.org/files/publications/PACE_Report_PRINT_singles_lo.pdf. According to the ICRW report:

 

"The results show that P.A.C.E is changing many women's lives. They now have a more optimistic outlook on life and are better able to deal with challenges. They have a greater sense of self-worth, are able to express themselves with ease, can better manage their work and their personal lives, and have plans for the future that seemed out of reach before their participation in the program."  

 

The report highlights many impressive impacts of the program including: a reported 49% increase in self-esteem and a 150% increase in self efficacy in the countries and factories evaluated. Both quantitative and qualitative metrics are considered.

 

 

Best Practice: Stakeholder Engagement

 

When SAI asked Dotti Hatcher, Executive Director of P.A.C.E. Global Initiatives for Gap Inc., what she believed was P.A.C.E.'s most important best practice, she pointed to the engagement with multiple stakeholders to gain buy-in and inform the project from the outset. Gap Inc. looked to stakeholders for their expertise and guidance in creating a highly effective program at the supplier/producer level and as such, gathered input from both NGOs anda key manufacturing partner. Stakeholders with varying approaches and work focuses were able to identify shared goals to create what became the P.A.C.E. program.

 

 

Best Practice: Geographic Customization

 

 The P.A.C.E. program was first launched in two facilities in India where most of the female workers had 8-10 years of formal education.  When the program expanded to Cambodia, the team was confronted by significantly lower literacy rates than in the facilities in India. This required the team to create a literacy module for P.A.C.E. before the core modules could begin. This type of adaptation and planning for differences across geographies is instrumental in the long term success and scalability of the program.

 

The program has expanded beyond garment factories;  P.A.C.E. community programs - a version of the program delivered outside of the factory setting in local communities where women can benefit from the curriculum - have launched in India and Cambodia.  Further community expansion is planned in Bangladesh and Haiti during the first quarter of 2014.  In addition, Gap Inc. has partnered with a cosmetic company in Indonesia,  where the program will be launched in a training school for women from marginalized areas around the country. The ability to adapt and evolve the program for different settings is essential for the program to succeed, thrive, and expand.

P.A.C.E. participant in Sri Lanka

 

Lessons Learned: Achieving Scale and Overcoming Challenges

 

A problem that often arises with voluntary programs is getting participation and involvement from factories. Gap Inc. had a clear and strategic approach on how to select partners. The company selected potential vendor partners by approaching those factories already investing in social programs for their workers beyond what is required by law.  The program is voluntary for both the women and vendors, and Gap Inc. ensures that there  is no change in a factory's relationship with the company, regardless of the decision to implement the program or not. This avoided a false image of success driven by buyer incentives and facilitated scalable design.

 

Because achieving scale in the long run was an important goal for P.A.C.E., Gap Inc. began measuring the program's impact from the very beginning,   to build the business case.  Gap Inc. designed a theoretical model of how the program would positively impact not only the lives of workers, but also the factories in which they work. This theoretical model is carried through the M&E plan. As a result, the impact evaluation conducted by the ICRW builds both the business and social case. Some of the outcomes and indicators measured for each case are listed below, followed by examples of survey items from the ICRW impact report.

 

Social Case: How is P.A.C.E. changing women's personal and professional lives?

  • Self-Esteem: Perception of one's own self-worth in professional and personal life
    • o    Family's respect of a woman's opinion
    • o    Accomplishing something positive at work
    • o    Confidence to make plans to meet future aspirations
  • Self-Efficacy: Belief in One's ability to take action to get the results desired
    • o    Ability to give feedback to others
    • o    Capacity to lead a group or committee
    • o    Ability to guide siblings/children in education

Business Case: How is P.A.C.E. benefitting business?

  • Work Efficacy: Belief in one's ability to produce quality work in a timely manner and perform new tasks
    • o    Meeting production targets on time
    • o    Assuming greater responsibilities at work
    • o    Confidence to resolve a problem at work
  • Workplace Influence: Perception of one's workplace behaviors and influence on work environment
    • o    Timeliness of arrival for work
    • o    Ability to communicate with supervisors about work conflicts
    • o    Guiding peers when they make a mistake

 

Building the business case is fundamental to expanding the program to factories and encourages their participation. Currently Gap Inc. is working to extend the program to new vendor partners, as well as expanding it with existing vendor partners that implement P.A.C.E. to reach even more women.

 

 

Lessons Learned: Middle Management Buy-in

 

A prime lesson learned, according to Mr. Chan, involved the way the program initially appealed to factories. When Gap Inc. met with factories to gauge their interest in participation, it sought  approval from the most senior executives, and did not initially engage or inform the direct supervisors of women in the workplace. Gap Inc. soon realized that it was important to have the supervisors on board with the program, as they are the ones directly impacted by women leaving their workplaces for training and can influence the women to attend or not attend. Once Gap Inc. assured that supervisors understood the benefits of training, it noticed a marked difference in support for P.A.C.E..

 

 

Challenges Remaining: The Next Lesson to be Learned

 

Moving forward, Gap Inc. is exploring how to make the program more widely available.  However, the common concern of losing  quality control is a big hurdle. If the program is not implemented the way it was initially designed, it may not result in some of the same impacts. At SAI, we hope to provide an update in a future installment of this series on how Gap Inc. grappled with and overcame this next challenge in their highly successful P.A.C.E. program.    

 

The P.A.C.E. program proves to be highly effective with far reaching positive impacts in the communities where Gap Inc. does business. The program itself is also immensely valuable for Gap Inc. beyond measured impacts as it strengthens relationships with strategic vendors through the creation of a sustainable and measurable program model that benefits all participants and contributors. Vendors involved in the program not only share P.A.C.E. best practices with one another, but come together to share their business best practices outside of P.A.C.E. training. P.A.C.E. is the common ground that brings competitors together and offers a framework for further social and business improvement. 

 

 

For more information about the Gap Inc. P.A.C.E. program contact Lucien Chan at Gap Foundation  - [email protected]. 

 


SA8000 Advanced Auditor Training
Meet the Students
 

On March 5-7, SAI conducted the SA8000 Advanced Auditor Training Course in New York City. This 3-day classroom course reinforces and develops advanced knowledge, skills and attitudes for experienced social auditors and offers insight into fundamental issues that arise on a regular basis in field assessments. The course is designed to simulate an audit and includes document review, worker interviews, writing corrective action  requests and conducting opening and closing meetings.

At the end of this course, SAI sat down with two participants to learn more about their jobs and their personal takeaways from the course.

Meet Cara Wasserstrom from Gap Inc. and Stacey Hernandez from VF Sportswear Inc. 

Cara Wasserstrom, Gap Inc.
Cara Wasserstrom
 
Gap Inc.
 
SAI:  Can you tell us a little about your position?

 

Cara Wasserstrom: I am an Associate Production Manager. I work on the development of GapBody Sleep & Lounge wear and manage the production process from initial concept to the final product. I work closely with our design and merchandising departments and oversee a cross-functional international team. 

  

SAI: How does social auditing or social compliance relate to your job?

 

Cara Wasserstrom: 

Social compliance is core to Gap's business values and mission and we have a Social Responsibility department that oversees our human rights strategy.  

  

As an Associate Production Manager, social auditing and compliance, relates quite minimally to my job and responsibilities. That being said, having taken this course, I have a better understanding of how my actions and decisions do actually have a direct impact on factories and factory workers. For example, making late changes to orders can result in factories having to stay open late, which leads to overtime, which in turn can lead to violations of working hours.

  

I now have a better understanding of the importance of making decisions upfront in the development process and prioritizing last minute changes and will be able to guide my team in making smarter decisions early on.
 
SAI: Typically, it is members of CSR departments that take this course - not production staff. Would you recommend social compliance training to your production & design colleagues 

  

Cara Wasserstrom: Yes - I think it would be really beneficial for my colleagues in global production merchandising and design to have a crash-course on how their work and their decision making can affect the factories we work with. It's only when a designer travels to a factory that they truly realize and appreciate how their work affects the operations of the factory. For those people not heading into the field, a course like this would be beneficial in providing a snapshot of the challenges factories face when it comes to social compliance.  

  

SAI: What was your biggest takeaway from the course?

  

Cara Wasserstrom: I was surprised to learn that in some cases workers forego measures that are actually put in place to protect them. For example, when dealing with chemicals, workers are typically instructed to wear Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), like masks or gloves. Masks however, tend to be uncomfortable and irritating, especially in warm workplaces, and workers will forego wearing them. Unfortunately, I think part of the reason they choose not to wear them is a result of lack of education. For this reason, I think it's important that workers are not merely given instruction to do something or to not do something - but instead are provided with the context as to why. Workers should understand that wearing a mask protects them from potential health problems like respiratory issues and even cancer - this information should motivate workers to take preventive measures.   

 

  

Stacey Hernandez VF Sportswear Inc.
Stacey Hernandez

  

VF Sportswear Inc.

  

SAI: Can you tell us a little about your position?

  

Stacey Hernandez: I am a Senior Analyst of Process and Compliance. I am responsible for monitoring all 300 factories in the Nautica supply chain worldwide, along with all licensed products.    

 

SAI: How does social auditing or social compliance relate to your job?

 

Stacey Hernandez: Social auditing and monitoring is a big part of my job. VF Inc has its own Code of Conduct and I am responsible for ensuring factories in our supply chain meet the requirements set out in the code. When I'm not auditing, I am communicating with brands, conducting trainings, implementing remediation plans, visiting suppliers and vendors and building their capacity.

  

SAI: What was your biggest takeaway from the course?

  

Stacey Hernandez: First, social auditing is not black and white. There are many shades of gray that affect the auditors perception and decision making and ultimately the outcome of the audit. Second, you need to do your homework before entering the factory to conduct the audit. You need to know what to look for, what documents to review and which ones are of high priority. Also, the importance of connecting with employees during worker interviews was a big take away for me.

  

  
For more information about SA8000 frequently asked questions, visit www.sa-intl.org/SA8000FAQ or contact Senior Manager of Research and Stakeholder Relations Alex Katz - [email protected].

SA8000:2014 Standard Revision
SA8000 revision process includes many stakeholders and colleagues

By Dorianne Beyer, Esq., Chair, SAI Advisory Board Standards Revision Committee

 

SAI revises its Standard SA 8000 only every 5 years, so each time we take up that task it is a momentous and challenging experience.  Revising SA 8000 is the job of our Advisory Board (the "AB"), which delegates the design of its Draft Revisions to its Standards Revision Committee. When this process is completed, the newly revised 2014 SA 8000 will be issued, to serve as SAI's beacon and landmark for the next 5 years. Our goal throughout has been to retain SA 8000's leadership and cutting edge in establishing and expanding human rights in the workplace now.

 

This revision cycle began almost two years ago, when the AB named its Revision Committee and laid out some pressing issues that had arisen in the past years of SA 8000 use.  Since that time, many different activities, outreaches, reviews and drafts have been designed and implemented.  First,  AB members wereasked for comments on what needed revision and how that revision should be designed.  Later, 33 subject matter experts were similarly consulted and asked to  recommend subject and language changes.  The views of SAI's internal staff and external colleagues were also requested and collected.  Compiling and analyzing all of the results from these sources resulted in a rough outline of those SA 8000 chapters and provisions deemed to need the most scrutiny and what changes to those identified SA 8000 portions might be the most beneficial. 

 

There were many Committee conference calls, AB meeting discussions and agreements, conversations with auditors and with some of our harshest critics.  The list of all of the many stages of this revision and the inputs we sought and developed is extremely lengthy and cannot be cataloged here.

 

In brief, however, all of these preparations and participants led to December 18, 2013, when the AB's Draft of the 2014 Standard was released for public comment through an announcement in the SAI Newsletter of that date.  It should be noted that lessons learned from the 2008 Standard Revision were used in a serious effort to gain an increased quantity and quality of responses to our Draft.  Our communications plan aimed to reach beyond the announcement in our Newsletter through various means, including the responsibility of named staff members for garnering the participation of each of their most relevant portion of stakeholder segments.  There were mass and targeted emails, phone calls and the use of AB members in personally reaching out to their own relevant contacts. 

 

In addition to issuing the Draft and our many request for comments, critiques, suggested improvements and the like in our Newsletter and though our more targeted outreaches, we knew we would have to ensure that the breadth and depth of comment from all of our stakeholder groups was represented by those who responded.  As the date of the end of the 60-day Public Comment Period loomed, we analyzed the responses received thus far and then phoned, emailed or otherwise contacted several classes of respondents whose views were either wholly missing or far too infrequently received.

 

That Comment Period ended on February 14, 2014 with great gratitude for both the number of respondents who dedicated the time to answer our call and to the diversity of stakeholder segments they came from.  We are also proud to point to the full variety of geographical regions and industries represented by our commentators.   

 

When all tallied, we received over 800 comments from 215 commentators, from all parts of the globe and many industrial sectors and stakeholder categories.  These views were structured through a special tool we created on Survey Monkey that was designed to gain reviewers' general and specific critiques, as well as their more detailed suggestions on the policy and language they would like to see included in the final revision.

 

Over 95% of all respondents were, in general, satisfied with the direction of the SA 8000 revisions Draft they had reviewed.  They were hardly as solidly joined on what chapters and provisions drew their support or critique and on what policy or language suggestion they advised.  

 

The most comments on any SA 8000 provision were received on recruitment agency involvement and fees in our Forced or Compulsory Labor chapter.  That was not surprising as it echoed our own serious debates on this issue within the Advisory Board and its Standards Revision Committee.  Other subject areas that gained much attention from our public consultation respondents were the draft definitions of "supplier/subcontractor", "organisation", "SA 8000 worker representative(s)" and "worker".  A significant number of comments were also received on our new language on the Intent and Scope of the Standard, the roles of Social Performance Teams and Worker Safety Committees. 

 

You can make your own conclusions about the Public Comments received when they are posted on our website.  Along with that raw data, we will also post a paper on our Analysis and Discussion of those comments, indicating those that were included in the 2014 SA 8000 Standard and those which will be retained for another review when this process begins anew in 2019.   Both of those can be expected to be on SAI's website after our issuance of the 2014 Standard, shortly after the AB's anticipated acceptance of it at its upcoming meetings in late May.   
For more information about the SA8000 Standard, visit www.sa-intl.org/sa8000 or contact Sr. Manager of Stakeholder Relations & Research Alex Katz - [email protected].  

Pillars in Practice Multi-stakeholder Advisory Committee
Concluding MACs in Bangladesh and Nicaragua Garner International Press 

On March 5 and 11 the concluding Multi-Stakeholder Advisory Committees (MACs) of the Pillars in Practice Project took place in Dhaka, Bangladesh and Managua, Nicaragua. Hosted by the local implementing partners, CSR Centre (Bangladesh) and uniRSE (Nicaragua), and international partner, the Danish Institute for Human Rights (DIHR), the MACs focused on the project's status in advancing the knowledge, understanding and implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) in the countries.

 

Participants in the multi-stakeholder forums recommended actions for companies, civil society organizations and government agencies to improve sustainability in the countries. Stakeholders also suggested concrete actions to improve their own performance and that of other sectors. All of the information gathered through the Pillars in Practice project will be made publicly available through the project partners' websites and the Human Rights and Business Country Guide (HRBCountryGuide.org), a free website hosted by the Danish Institute for Human Rights.

 

Here is a link to an article posted in The Financial Express on the Bangladesh consultation, and here is a link to an article posted in the Nuevo Diario on the Nicaragua consultation.

 

'Like' the Pillars in Practice Program on Facebook: http://on.fb.me/1dF8xMN.  For more information, contact SAI Sr. Manager of Research & Stakeholder Relations Alex Katz- [email protected].  

Tea Plantations Report
SAI on "The More Things Change" a report about conditions at tea plantations in India

  

'The more things change...,' an investigative report about conditions at the tea plantations of the APPL group in India, was published by the Columbia Law School Human Rights Institute in February. Based on field research conducted by a law school team led by Professor Peter Rosenblum, it reports that conditions at the plantations violate India's Plantation Labor Act, the performance standards of the International Finance Corporation (IFC),  the SA8000 Standard  and the Ethical Tea Partnership (ETP), all of which the company workswith.  SAI shares the research team's goals that tea jobs should be decent jobs, where worker health and livelihoods are protected and respected.

 

Tea production is vitally important to India; it is often considered the country's largest employer. Thus, it is essential that workers' rights are respected at plantations and working conditions are decent.  SAI strongly supports the report's call for compliance with national laws and international labor standards, and for cooperation in the remediation of non-compliances.  APPL holds a multi-site certification to SA8000, which means it undergoes semi-annual independent audits of the plantations, and must implement corrective action requests from the certification body.  These audits are not conducted by SAI but by certification bodies accredited and overseen by SAAS [Social Accountability Accreditation Services].

 

SAI considers the report to be a complaint against a certified company and has followed procedures to have SAAS investigate to see if improvements may be needed in certification and accreditation procedures.  

 

SA8000 certification audits require: extensive worker interviews that are both private and confidential; investigation of housing if provided by the employer; and verification that the certification applicant complies with local and national law.  SAAS is currently reviewing in detail the certification and surveillance processes and performance of the certification body that conducted APPL's audit. There is also considerable IFC work underway to guide the implementation of APPL improvement measures. 

 

The report incorrectly implies that this certification was influenced by the fact that SAI has a record of working with Tata companies. While Tata group commitments to sustainability are respected around the country and around the world, and supported by SAI's experience with Tata Steel and other SA8000 certified Tata companies, SAI plays no role in certification decisions and the auditors take each certification on a case by case basis, regardless of other activities.   

 

SAI agrees that the tea industry is crucial to India, and full of challenges not the least of which is the impact of price changes. Going forward SAI is committed tocontinuing to work with these and other interested parties to promote worker well-being on India's tea plantations and cooperating  to promote the advancement of human rights.

 

Statements about the report from IFC, APPL, and ETP have been issued and those from IFC and APPL are posted with the report on the Columbia Law School website:    

 

http://web.law.columbia.edu/human-rights-institute/initiatives/global-economy/tea-plantations/more-things-change  

SA8000 Auditor Calibration

Calibration meetings held for SA8000 auditors in Pakistan, India, and Vietnam

 

   

Last year, SAAS, in cooperation with SAI, organized SA8000 auditor calibration meetings in Karachi, Pakistan andBangalore, India. Building on the success of the 2013 meetings, SAAS and SAI extended the calibration meetings to Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam during Feb 17-18,  2014.These meetings address a need to engage with SA8000 field auditors, with a goal of their fully understanding the expectations of auditing emergency preparedness and fire safety.  The meetings offer a unique opportunity to blend classroom learning and field experience.  In Ho Chi Minh City participants joined each meeting to discuss the local context  related to fire hazards and risk assessment - subsequently, auditors took their classroom knowledge to  factories to evaluate compliance with the SA8000 Standard and SAAS Advisory 18.  Emergency preparedness expert Dundar Sahin from AKUT  and senior accreditation auditors Badri Gulur and  Richard Rowe moderated the various meetings.  A big thank you to the certification bodies for assistance in organizing the meeting and actively participating. To date 37 auditors have participated in these calibration meetings. The next one is planned in China, dates forthcoming.

 

SAAS sets strict standards and oversight procedures for the accreditation of qualified bodies to certify against SA8000 and other verification codes within its scope. With the ILO conventions and other international agreements as its foundation, SA8000 is a labour and social accountability standard that enables businesses and employers to implement decent working conditions. Given the diversity of social and legal contexts in which the standard is applied, auditor competence is an essential criteria for ensuring that certification processes are consistent and reliable.

Calibration meeting in Vietnam

Auditor calibration meetings are one mechanism through which SAAS assures and refines the ability of field auditors to verify compliance by providing a venue for exchange of ideas and alignment of approaches. SA8000 field auditor calibration provides one of the most direct opportunities for practical learning and clarification on how the SA8000 standard should be interpreted and applied. 

These field auditor meetings are designed as regional not industry-specific and SAAS determines their location and content based on the level of certification activity. Persistent compliance issues, the number of non-conformities, recurrent concerns in audits, and questions raised by auditors, businesses and other stakeholders are assessed and incorporated into calibration meetings. Interpretation of SA8000 is constantly being framed within new circumstances, owing to the variability of laws among countries (e.g. freedom of association or maximum hours worked) and the difficulty involved in assessing the legitimacy of an entity's operating practices. Calibration discussions often coalesce around subtle questions that are not explicitly defined in/addressed by SA8000, but for which a solid understanding is necessary in order to audit to the rule and intent of the standard. 

While field auditor calibration does provide input to revisions in SAAS's own procedures and the SAI - SA8000 guidance documents, these formal meetings are just one piece of the constant flow of dialogue that transpires between CBs, SAAS and SAI. This communication is necessary to ensure that due diligence is taken to address significant issues, generate common understandings and implement substantive changes at the appropriate level in the certification system. Questions of interpretation of the standard will often be communicated up to SAI, at which point the standard-setter produces guidance points that filter down to CBs, often delivered by SAAS via calibration meetings, advisories and other training methodologies.  
 

 

Deep discussions at the Vietnam calibration meeting

 

For more information about the SA8000 standard or contact information for SAAS, contact Sr. Manager of Stakeholder Relations & Research Alex Katz - [email protected].  

 

 


SA8000 Auditor Training Courses in
USA and China 

Snapshots from the courses that took place in New York City (USA) and Shanghai (China)
SA8000 Basic Auditor Training course in New York City  on March 10-14, 2014 with SAI Lead Trainer Doug DeRuisseau. [Photo credit: Emily Crain]
SA8000 Basic Auditor Training course in Shanghai, China  on February 24-28, 2014 with SAI Lead Trainer Shirley To. [Photo credit: Shirley To]
SA8000 Advanced Auditor Training course in New York City, USA on March 5-7, 2014 with SAI Lead Trainer Doug DeRuisseau. [Photo credit: Christie Daly]


Learn more about SAI's SA8000 Basic & Advanced auditor training course on SAI's website. For more information about SAI's SA8000 Auditor Training courses, visit sa-intl.org/trainingschedule or contact Emily Crain - [email protected]

Highlights & Announcements

Columbia Business School: Ethics and Leadership Week
On March 5, Eileen Kaufman (SAI), Bob Mitchell (HP), Tu Rinsche (Disney) presented on a panel at Columbia Business School. The panel discussion focused on outsourcing and the ethical challenges of a competitive supply chain. The panel was part of the school's Ethics and Leadership week, which engages student, faculty and community on topics of ethics, leadership and governance.
Pictured above from left to right: Prof. John Wilson, Moderator, Columbia Business School; Scott Zdrazil, Panelist, Amalgamated Bank; Eileen Kaufman, Panelist, SAI; Tu Rinsche, Panelist, Disney; Bob Mitchell, Panelist, HP; Cammie Erickson, Panelist, BSR

  

2020 Women on Boards Affiliation 

SAI is now an official affiliate of 2020 Women on Boards. 2020 Women on Boards affiliates are nonprofit or educational organizations that publicly and actively support the 2020 mission. 

 

2020 Mission
To increase the percentage of women on U.S. company boards to 20% or greater by the year 2020. The campaign will redefine good corporate governance and gender diversity standards and create a cultural imperative for corporate action.