Firms question rankings in study
Human rights
Four Canadian companies are among 100 global corporations to be included in a new study that attempts to rank firms based on their human rights policies, practices and transparency.
The list, revealed Monday, was three years in the making, according to Corporate Human Rights Benchmark Ltd., a not- for- profit company backed by organizations including global investment management firms Aviva Investors, APG Asset Management, Nordea Wealth Management and Calvert Investments.
Companies that scored the highest included BHP Billiton, Marks & Spencer Group, Rio Tinto, Nestle, Adidas and Unilever, all receiving grades between 55 per cent and 69 per cent.
Three of the Canadian firms landed lower on the list with a majority of the 98 companies, obtaining a score below 30 per cent.
The three firms are Quebec- based Alimentation Couche-Tard Inc., Calgarybased Canadian Natural Resources Ltd., and Vancouver-based Goldcorp Inc.
Each was in the 20- to 29-per-cent category.
The fourth Canadian firm measured, Calgary- based Suncor Energy Inc., received a slightly higher score of between 30 and 39 per cent.
Scores were low in part because companies only received points if there was positive evidence and disclosure regarding their human rights policies and activities.
The benchmark is intended to help investors push companies to protect themselves from potential legal, reputational and financial risks that could arise from human rights abuses. The report suggests governments and regulators could also use the benchmark to formulate incentives to enhance t ransparency and standards for corporate behaviour.
“For the first time we have a public measure of companies’ human rights performance which will focus attention in the boardroom on their performance versus other companies and allow investors to ask the right questions,” declared Mark Wilson, group chief executive of Aviva, in a statement.
But some of the firms named disputed t he results, while others declined to participate at all, citing their existing public disclosure.
The benchmark ranked companies from what are considered to be three “high risk” industries — agricultural products, apparel and extractives — and is based solely on publicly available information from company websites and documents. The organization said nonpublic human rights policies, processes and practices were not taken into account.
Six themes were measured including policy commitments and governance, systems and processes for i mplementation, embedding of human rights due diligence, remedies and grievance mechanisms, performance and responses, and transparency, which were assigned different weights.
The overall average among extractive companies was 29 per cent.
Zero scores in certain categories did not necessarily imply bad practices or a lack of company action, CHRB said.
“Rather, i t means t he CHRB has been unable to identify in public company documents all of the elements required for a positive score,” the organization said in its key finding document.
Julie Woo, public affairs adviser at Canadian Natural Resources, said she was unable to speak to “how CHRB completes its rankings,” but added that the firm is “committed to maintaining the highest level of business ethics and principles” throughout its operations, including in the area of human rights.
“We have systems and processes in place to ensure that the day- to- day actions and conduct of our employees and contractors are in compliance with all applicable laws,” she said in an emailed statement, adding that Canadian Natural “demonstrates our commitment to human rights… through our Statement of Human Rights, and our Code of Integrity, Business Ethics and Conduct.”
A spokesperson for Goldcorp defended the firm’s human rights record, and said company officials are “disappointed” most of their responses to the benchmark’s methodology and i nitial findings weren’t incorporated in the final ranking.
“Goldcorp is deeply committed to respecting human rights. Our workforce is trained and expected to comply with our internal human rights standards and Goldcorp’s Human Rights Policy, which are aligned with the guidelines set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, and international humanitarian law,” Christine Marks, director of corporate communications, said i n an emailed statement.
Erin Rees, a s pokesperson for Suncor, said the Calgary- based company did not weigh in on the Corporate Human Rights Benchmark.
“We declined to participate in this pilot project because we already provide this disclosure publicly, like in our annual Report on Sustainability,” she said.
Officials at Couche-Tard could not be reached for comment.
No Canadian company was placed at the bottom of the rankings, in spots held by firms i ncluding Yum! Brands, Costco Wholesale, Macy’s, and China Petroleum and Chemical.
“Successful companies will have lowered their exposure to potential legal, reputational and financial risks that could arise from human rights abuses,” said the not- for- profit organization, which plans to expand the rankings beyond the initial three industries in subsequent reports.
MEASURE WILL FOCUS ATTENTION IN THE BOARDROOM.