A Labor Solutions Case Study This case study examines how targeted, role-specific training can function as a practical preventive measure within human rights due diligence systems. Designed and delivered by Labor Solutions in partnership with the Clean Electronics Product Network (CEPN) , the pilot addressed chemical safety risks in electronics manufacturing through training—particularly in lower-tier suppliers where awareness and access to remedy are often limited. Implemented across facilities in Vietnam and Malaysia, the initiative directly engaged 922 workers, managers, and supervisors, with an estimated 7,000 indirect beneficiaries. Following the training, 95% of workers  reported improved understanding of chemical safety practices, 97%  indicated they would use grievance mechanisms to raise safety concerns, and 89% of managers  committed to system-level improvements in chemical safety controls. The results demonstrate well-designed, accessible training  can measurably strengthen risk awareness, prevention, access to remedy, and management accountability—while supporting alignment with emerging expectations under the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD)  and international HRDD standards. From Policy to Practice: Strengthening HRDD Under CSDDD Under CSDDD, companies are required to identify, prevent, and mitigate human rights risks across their operations and supply chains. Occupational health and safety—including chemical exposure—is a recognized material risk in electronics manufacturing. Effective due diligence requires more than policies and audits. It depends on accessible information, worker and manager awareness, and operational systems that support safe practices and access to remedy. Targeted, scalable training plays a critical role in translating due diligence commitments into preventive action on the factory floor. The Approach Role-Specific, Scalable, Chemical Safety Risk Prevention Training for Electronics Supply Chains Labor Solutions, in partnership with CEPN, developed a Chemical Safety Training Series  designed to address chemical safety risks at both the individual and system level.  Target Groups  Workers who handle or are exposed to chemicals  Managers and supervisors responsible for chemical safety systems The Lessons Chemical Safety for Workers   5 lessons focused on rights, responsibilities, and safe handling practices  Chemical Safety for Managers   3 lessons plus a practical toolkit focused on oversight, prevention systems, and worker engagement  Delivery The trainings were delivered using a blended classroom approach to support scalability, accessibility, and repeatability  across supplier tiers and geographies. Learners received training in person, via webinars and digital learning platforms. Key Outcomes Training Drove Measurable Improvements in Risk Awareness, Reporting, and Prevention Improved Risk Awareness and Prevention  95% of workers  reported the training would be beneficial to their work  Workers demonstrated increased understanding of:  Chemical labeling and Safety Data Sheets (SDS)  Proper use of personal protective equipment (PPE)  Emergency procedures  This supports risk prevention , a core requirement under CSDDD. Strengthened Access to Remedy and Worker Voice  97% of workers  indicated they would use grievance mechanisms if they had chemical safety concerns  92%  expressed willingness to participate in safety committees and worker surveys  This reflects improved awareness of reporting channels and collective mechanisms , supporting access to remedy and stakeholder engagement obligations. Managerial Commitment to System-Level Improvements  89% of managers  found the training useful and relevant  88–92%  plan to review and improve chemical labeling and SDS processes  80%  intend to strengthen or establish:  Joint safety committees  Worker surveys  Grievance channels  These actions directly support mitigation and continuous improvement  under HRDD.  Next Steps Continuous Improvement and Localization  As part of ongoing due diligence and learning from the pilot, Labor Solutions and CEPN further strengthened the program by expanding language accessibility .  Following the pilot, training materials were further localized beyond Vietnamese and Malay. Additional languages now include: Simplified Chinese  Filipino  Thai  Expanding language coverage reduces barriers to understanding, strengthens worker access to information, and improves the effectiveness of risk prevention measures—particularly for migrant and contract workers.  Want to find out more about customizing trainings for your LMS? Why this Matters Training as a Strategic Lever for Human Rights Due Diligence This case demonstrates that well-designed, accessible training can function as a practical and scalable preventive measure within human rights due diligence systems. When embedded into broader worker engagement and compliance processes, training strengthens awareness, reinforces grievance mechanisms, and supports systemic improvement rather than operating as a standalone intervention. Specifically, the case shows that: Training can prevent risk , not just respond to it, by strengthening worker and manager awareness Language accessibility is essential  for meaningful worker engagement and effective implementation Scalable training models can be iterated and strengthened over time  as part of continuous improvement Increased awareness reinforces grievance mechanisms and collective processes , improving access to remedy Training supports alignment with international standards  when integrated into existing HRDD frameworks By embedding chemical safety training into due diligence systems, this approach supports companies in meeting CSDDD expectations by reducing occupational health and safety risks, strengthening supplier capacity, and improving worker awareness and access to remedy. In this way, training becomes a strategic lever for responsible sourcing and worker protection—rather than a one-off compliance activity. Get in touch to see  how integrated training strengthens safety, supplier capability, and CSDDD compliance for you.

A Labor Solutions Case Study Closing the Gap Between Grievance Mechanism Effectiveness + Worker Experience This case study examines how a global electronics supply chain assessed the practical effectiveness of grievance mechanisms across supplier facilities using triangulated worker voice data. The WELL Worker Survey , focus group discussions, and WOVO Improve ’s Supplier Self-Assessments (SAQ)  were combined to compare formal grievance system design with worker experience. The results showed a consistent pattern: workers generally recognize grievance channels and feel comfortable raising routine issues, but confidence drops when issues require escalation, transparency, or consistent follow-through. Suppliers largely reported mature systems on paper, while worker inputs highlighted uneven application across supervisors and uncertainty about what happens after a concern is raised.   All assessed suppliers entered a tracked corrective action phase, demonstrating how triangulation strengthens evidence of grievance mechanism effectiveness in line with UNGP criteria and emerging EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive ( CSDDD ) expectations. Context Regulatory Expectations Increasingly Focus on Grievance Mechanism Effectiveness in Practice Human rights due diligence frameworks, including CSDDD and the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs), require companies to demonstrate that grievance mechanisms function effectively for workers. This requires evidence beyond policy existence, including worker awareness, trust, use, and access to remedy. To respond to these expectations, a global electronics supply chain conducted a multi-site assessment of grievance mechanism effectiveness across supplier facilities. The Assessment Examined Access, Trust, Predictability, and Remedy The assessment evaluated whether grievance mechanisms were: Accessible and known to workers Trusted and used without fear Applied consistently across supervisors and departments Capable of delivering timely and credible outcomes The analysis focused on identifying gaps between formal system design  and worker experience . Triangulated Data Enabled Comparison Between Policy and Practice The assessment combined three sources of evidence: WELL Worker Survey , capturing awareness, comfort speaking up, and perceptions of fairness at scale Facilitated Focus Group Discussions , providing insight into worker behavior, trust, and escalation dynamics WOVO Improve 's Supplier Self-Assessments , documenting grievance system structure and procedures Triangulation allowed inconsistencies between documented systems and lived experience to be identified and validated. Results Worker Surveys Show Broad Awareness but Low Confidence in Escalation Survey results indicated high awareness of grievance channels and strong comfort raising routine operational issues, typically through immediate supervisors. However, confidence declined when survey questions related to escalation, response timelines, and outcomes beyond the first level of resolution. These patterns suggested that while access to grievance mechanisms was established, predictability and follow-through were less certain in more complex cases. Focus Groups Revealed Uneven Experience Within Facilities Focus group discussions clarified grievance mechanisms often worked well for day-to-day concerns but were less consistently trusted for sensitive or higher-stakes issues. Workers described uncertainty around escalation, uneven application across supervisors, and reluctance to use formal channels due to fear of identification or perceived performance consequences. These findings showed that grievance mechanism effectiveness varied within the same facility, depending on department and supervisor. Supplier Self-Assessments Confirmed System Design but Not Worker Experience Supplier self-assessments generally reported established grievance systems with defined channels and procedures. However, when compared with worker inputs, a consistent gap emerged. Workers reported limited visibility into timelines and outcomes and inconsistent application in practice. The assessment identified a recurring divergence between system existence  and system effectiveness as experienced by workers . Triangulation Produced Credible Evidence of Effectiveness Gaps Viewed together, the data showed that grievance mechanisms existed and functioned adequately for routine issues, but were less predictable and transparent when escalation or sensitive concerns were involved. Triangulation enabled the assessment to move beyond isolated perspectives and produce evidence aligned with UNGP effectiveness criteria , particularly predictability, transparency, and equity. Corrective Actions Targeted Predictability, Consistency, and Communication All assessed suppliers entered a corrective action phase using the Labor Solutions Improve Action Plan , with progress tracked over time. Actions focused on closing the specific gaps identified through triangulation and commonly included: Clarifying grievance steps and response timelines Strengthening escalation pathways beyond immediate supervisors Improving communication on case status and outcomes Training supervisors on consistent grievance handling Strengthening documentation and closure tracking Conclusion Triangulation Strengthens Due Diligence and Improves Worker Outcomes This case study demonstrates triangulating worker surveys, focus group discussions, and supplier self-assessments provides a practical and defensible method for assessing grievance mechanism effectiveness in practice. By converting findings into tracked corrective action, the approach strengthens human rights due diligence and supports grievance mechanisms that deliver more predictable and trusted outcomes for workers, consistent with UNGP criteria and the direction of CSDDD implementation.   Want to learn how to assess grievance mechanism effectiveness in practice? Explore our approach to worker-verified grievance assessment.

Digital Learning Modules for Due Diligence to Action  Introducing Labor Solutions’ Updated eLearning Learning Paths for HREDD Implementation  As Human Rights and Environmental Due Diligence (HREDD) requirements continue to evolve, brands and suppliers are increasingly expected to demonstrate not only commitments and assessments, but effective implementation across operations and value chains. A persistent challenge is ensuring that learning is relevant, proportionate, and clearly linked to the roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders.  Too often, training is delivered as a one-size-fits-all exercise, making it difficult to translate due diligence requirements into daily practice or to demonstrate how learning supports risk prevention, mitigation, and positive outcomes.  To address this gap, Labor Solutions has updated its eLearning structure to better align with HREDD expectations. The revised catalog is organized into role-based learning paths designed to support the practical operationalization of HREDD for workers, line leaders and supervisors, and company managers and practitioners across value chains.  A Role-Based eLearning Structure Aligned with HREDD   The updated eLearning catalog is organized into three purpose-driven categories, reflecting core HREDD principles such as risk-based prioritization, stakeholder relevance, and impact-oriented action.  Within each category, learning is delivered through structured learning paths. Each learning path consists of multiple lessons, with content differentiated by target learner group:  Workers  Line leaders and supervisors  Company managers and practitioners  Modular eLearning Curriculum This approach allows brands and suppliers to assign learning according to role and responsibility, while maintaining consistency in messaging and expectations across stakeholder groups.  Core Human Rights  Building a Shared Foundation for HREDD  Core Human Rights learning paths establish a common baseline of understanding on fundamental rights, responsibilities, and access to remedy. These learning paths ensure that all stakeholders understand internationally recognized human rights and how they relate to workplace practice.  From an HREDD perspective, these learning paths:  Supports policy commitment and communication requirements  Builds common understanding of internationally recognized human rights Strengthens awareness of grievance mechanisms and access to remedy  Learning paths include:  Workplace Communication & Access to Remedy  ILO’s Fundamental Rights & Responsibilities  HREDD in Action: A Practical Approach for Suppliers ( in Collaboration with GIZ and RBH )  Each learning path contains role-specific lessons for workers, line leaders and supervisors, and company managers or practitioners, ensuring that core human rights concepts are understood from the perspective of each stakeholder’s responsibilities.  Risk-based  Targeted Learning for Salient Risks  Risk-Based learning paths focus on salient human rights and workplace risks, r eflecting the risk-based and proportional nature of HREDD. These learning paths are designed to align directly with risk assessments, audit findings, and impact evaluations.  From an HREDD perspective, these learning paths:  Aligns learning with risk assessments, audits, and impact findings  Supports prevention and mitigation of adverse impacts  Enables targeted deployment based on site- or sector-specific risks  Learning paths include:  Chemical Safety ( by Clean Electronics Production Network )  Workplace Safety  A Gender-Inclusive Workplace  Forced Labor & Responsible Recruitment  Within each learning path, lessons are differentiated by learner group - from worker-level awareness and safe practices, to supervisory responsibilities, and management or practitioner roles related to systems, monitoring, and corrective action.  Impact Supporting Well-Being and Sustainable Performance  Impact learning paths focus on how workplace conditions affect people’s lives, supporting positive outcomes alongside risk prevention. These learning paths recognize that effective HREDD not only prevents harm, but also contributes to worker well-being, resilience, and sustainable performance.  From an HREDD perspective, these learning paths:  Contributes to continuous improvement and impact monitoring  Supports worker well-being, resilience, and retention  Strengthens the effectiveness of prevention and remediation efforts  Learning paths include:  Workplace Stress  Balancing Work & Family  Personal Emotional & Physical Well-being  Financial Well-being  Each learning path includes differentiated lessons by target learner group, recognizing that workers, line leaders, and managers play distinct roles in supporting well-being and positive workplace outcomes.  Designed for Practical HREDD Deployment at Scale    This modular, role-based structure enables brands and suppliers to:  Select learning paths based on risk profile and HREDD priorities  Assign role-appropriate lessons within a single learning path  Scale learning consistently across sites and value chains  Demonstrate proportionate, risk-based training aligned with HREDD expectations  Rather than treating training as a standalone compliance activity, learning is structured to directly support responsibility, accountability, and action.  What This Means for HREDD-Focused Brands and Suppliers    This updated structure enables brands and suppliers to:  Demonstrate risk-based and role-appropriate learning  Link training directly to identified risks, responsibilities, and outcomes  Assign learning clearly across workers, line leaders, supervisors, and management  Provide evidence of ongoing implementation and continuous improvement  eLearning is positioned not as a standalone activity, but as a core enabler of effective HREDD systems.  Whether responding to regulatory requirements, buyer expectations, or internal HREDD commitments, Labor Solutions’ updated eLearning learning paths are designed to help brands and suppliers translate due diligence into action — across people, roles, and risk areas.  Brands and suppliers seeking to align learning with their HREDD strategy are encouraged to explore how these role-based learning paths can be integrated into their due diligence processes and management systems.

How Food & Beverage Brands Are Scaling Worker Voice Beyond Audits  Implementing worker voice in food and beverage supply chains requires more than surveys and audits. Agriculture, seafood, and food processing depend heavily on seasonal, migrant, and informal labor—often in low-literacy, low-access contexts where traditional compliance tools struggle to capture real working conditions.  As brands strengthen human rights due diligence expectations, worker voice must be designed for these realities.  Labor Solutions works with global food and beverage companies to implement scalable, low-barrier worker voice systems that generate credible, decision-ready insight. Our approach combines worker surveys, grievance mechanism assessment, and targeted capacity-building to move from listening to action. At the center of this work is the WELL Worker Survey , deployed through WOVO and adapted to each supply chain’s operational context.  This article shows how worker voice in agriculture provides sector-specific evidence that strengthens human rights due diligence beyond audits. Context Designing Worker Voice for How Agriculture Actually Works  We begin by mapping how the supply chain functions in practice—farms, collection points, processing facilities, and seasonal gathering locations—and aligning deployment to production realities such as harvest cycles and peak processing periods.  Surveys are delivered through QR codes where feasible, and through human-led, in-person deployment where literacy, language, or access barriers exist.  Because limited literacy requires more support—not more automation—we do not rely on IVR. In agricultural and migrant worker settings, IVR consistently reduces understanding, engagement, and data quality. Trained deployment leaders are essential to ensure informed consent, trust, and meaningful participation.    What This Looks Like in Practice  Across agriculture, seafood, and food processing, worker-verified data revealed risks that audits alone did not surface—and enabled earlier, more targeted action.  Agriculture : Worker and farmer surveys deployed across multiple countries achieved 92% worker and 87% farmer participation, uncovering wage, working-hours, debt bondage, and safety risks missed by audits.  Migrant Labor (Southeast Asia) : Nearly 60% response rates revealed overtime coercion risks reported by 85% of workers, prompting contract revisions, management training, and strengthened worker committees.  Seafood : Worker surveys captured role- and gender-specific risks, including fatigue and psychological safety concerns, translating worker feedback into targeted improvement priorities.  Across these contexts, worker voice data strengthened supplier engagement, enabled earlier risk detection, and supported more credible human rights due diligence.    Why This Matters Beyond Agriculture Focusing on real worker experience While these examples focus on food and beverage supply chains, the lesson is broader: worker-centered due diligence depends on systems designed around workers’ realities—not audit convenience.  When worker voice is embedded into supply chain governance and linked to follow-up, remediation, and capacity-building, it becomes an operational asset rather than a reporting exercise.  Learn how brands use worker voice beyond audits.

Executive Summary  As part of a strategic shift toward more effective Human Rights Due Diligence, Carter’s, Inc. moved beyond traditional compliance audits to adopt a data-driven worker voice  model. By incorporating the scores from supplier worker surveys into their Vendor Scorecard, Carter’s is able to take a scalable, yet locally-tailored approach to supporting supplier standards focused on ensuring worker wellbeing and continuous improvement rather than audit and policing. By deploying the Labor Solutions WELL (Worker Wellbeing, Engagement and Livelihoods) Survey across its global supply chain, Carter’s heard from more than 65,000 workers across 24 suppliers  in five major manufacturing hubs: Bangladesh, Vietnam, Ethiopia, Thailand, and Cambodia . Carter’s selected the WELL Survey for its indicator-based structure, which the company described as helping them “ build a comprehensive understanding of workers’ experiences across each topic, ensuring we focus on the issues that matter most. ” This deployment supports Carter’s broader Raise the Future  commitment to improve the lives of one million workers by 2030. Scope of the Initiative Scaling Worker Voice Across Multiple Regions The deployment was designed to capture a representative, high-volume dataset across Tier 1 and Tier 2 suppliers, while minimizing operational burden on factories.  Geographic Reach:  Bangladesh, Vietnam, Ethiopia, Thailand, and Cambodia  Supplier Participation:  24 manufacturing partners  Worker Engagement:  Over 65,000 anonymous responses  Methodology:  Mobile-based, anonymous deployment using QR codes  Carter’s emphasized that the WELL Survey questions are “ simple, easy for workers to understand, and effective at capturing the reality on the production floor. ” Combined with a streamlined deployment model, the process was “ quick and highly scalable, allowing us to engage key suppliers simultaneously without creating operational burden. ”  Key WELL Survey Indicators  The WELL Survey’s modular design enabled Carter’s to measure 12 core dimensions  of worker experience, providing what the company described as “ fast, structured insights that help identify areas of risk and opportunities for improvement. ”  The indicators include Access to Remedy, Fair Pay and Working Hours, Gender Equity, Responsible Recruitment, Harassment and Abuse, Occupational Health and Safety, Wellbeing, and Workplace Climate, among others. Together, these indicators move beyond surface-level compliance to capture lived worker experience across facilities, scaling worker voice in varying local contexts.  Why Carter’s Uses Worker Survey Data  Incentivizing Worker Wellbeing Beyond Audits  By adding a worker survey to their supplier engagement toolkit, Carter’s signals to suppliers that how workers experience their rights and working conditions is a key indicator of supplier performance. By aligning with suppliers before the first deployment on the objectives of the survey and what lower results than expected mean in terms of support Carter’s will provide to help suppliers improve, Carter’s creates an environment of alignment, where all supply chain parties work towards improvement instead of perfection.   Strengthening Human Rights Due Diligence  Worker survey data has become, in Carter’s words, “ an important part of our Human Rights Due Diligence strategy. ” The WELL Survey enables Carter’s to “ validate conditions beyond traditional audits ,” strengthening supplier risk assessments with direct worker input rather than relying solely on documentation and scheduled interviews.  Enabling More Meaningful Supplier Engagement  Rather than functioning as a compliance scorecard, the survey data helps Carter’s “ guide more meaningful conversations with suppliers about worker well-being and responsible workplace practices. ” Indicator-level results allow suppliers to identify specific gaps and implement targeted remediation actions.  By listening directly to the voices of more than 65,000 workers, Carter’s has strengthened its ability to identify risk, validate working conditions, and engage suppliers in continuous improvement. As Carter’s summarized, the WELL Survey “ provides clear, reliable insights into workers’ experiences ,” supporting a more effective, worker-centered approach to Human Rights Due Diligence at scale.  Turn worker voice into actionable due diligence.  The WELL Survey helps brands move beyond audits to gain clear, reliable insight into worker experience at scale . Learn how WELL can strengthen your Human Rights Due Diligence, improve supplier engagement, and surface risks that traditional tools miss. → Explore the WELL Survey

Turning Supply Chain Transparency into Action We're excited to announce that Labor Solutions is partnering with Open Supply Hub to integrate our worker voice data directly into production location profiles. This collaboration, launching in Q1 2026 , represents a major step forward in making supply chain transparency truly actionable for workers, suppliers, and brands alike. Open Supply Hub is an open-source map of production locations, connecting over 150,000 facilities to the brands that purchase from them. Through our integration, users can now see worker voice tools, including Labor Solutions’ operational grievance channel, WOVO Connect , directly mapped to specific production locations, making confirmation of fundamental worker rights faster and more transparent. Benefits for Workers Improved Conditions for Workers  As the industry moves towards grievance mechanisms that reach all workers becoming the norm, we can increase focus on how grievances are managed and remediated, which is where we can really see access to remedy. Our data shows that visibility combined with aligned KPIs for internal management of grievances and remediation leads to measurable improvements in working conditions. Responsible Employers are Good Employers Facilities with strong operational grievance mechanisms and responsive management are usually doing other things right as well. Positive worker voice data becomes a competitive advantage, rewarding suppliers who invest in their workforce with good customers, which also allows workers to be paid well and be empowered at work. Benefits for Suppliers Demonstrate Commitment to Workers Suppliers using WOVO Connect can now showcase their use of digital grievance tools with enhanced transparency. Beyond simply having this tool in their facility, they can choose to share data and have conversations with buyers about responsiveness and workplace improvements. Attract Responsible Buyers As brands increasingly prioritize human rights due diligence, facilities with transparent worker voice data and documented improvements stand out. This integration helps responsible suppliers connect with buyers who value ethical production. Benchmark and Improve Access to aggregated industry data helps suppliers understand where they stand and identify areas where they are falling behind. We hope that factories that do not have digital grievance channels will consider it when they see their competitors have WOVO Connect or other tools in place.   Benefits for Brands Better Risk Assessment Brands that know that if a site has a digital grievance tool like WOVO Connect they don’t have to rely on audits or supplier assessments to collect basic data about the existence of an operational grievance mechanism, and can focus on quality of case management and remediation. Better grievance data means better understanding of actual risks and better outcomes for workers. Building a Collaborative Ecosystem This partnership reflects our belief that supply chain transparency requires collaboration. By contributing our worker voice data to Open Supply Hub's open platform, we're joining partners like Climate TRACE, Living Wage Institute, WageIndicator Foundation, amfori, Apparel Impact Institute, EcoVadis/Ulula, PEFC, SLCP, and Worldly in creating a comprehensive view of production locations worldwide.   As Labor Solutions partners with Open Supply Hub, we're making it easier for everyone in the supply chain to access the information they need to make responsible decisions—with workers' voices at the center. Learn more about Open Supply Hub's data integrations at: https://info.opensupplyhub.org/data-integrations Already using WOVO Connect and want to be listed on Open Supply Hub’s website? Contact us - info@laborsolutions.tech Interested in implementing worker voice in your supply chain? Contact Labor Solutions to learn how our WOVO platform delivers tangible outcomes for workers while strengthening your due diligence.

Organizations:  GIZ Responsible Business Hub (RBH) Network; Labor Solutions  Launch Date:  July 2025  Geographic Scope:  Global (23 countries) Why This Matters  From Standards to Practice  Suppliers across global value chains are under increasing pressure to demonstrate compliance with Human Rights and Environmental Due Diligence (HREDD) requirements. While expectations are rising, many suppliers—particularly in sourcing countries—lack access to affordable, practical, and localized training that enables them to translate due diligence standards into day-to-day operational practice.  To address this gap, the GIZ Responsible Business Hub (RBH) Network and Labor Solutions co-developed HREDD in Action: A Practical Approach for Suppliers , a free, scalable, multilingual e-learning program designed to build supplier implementation capacity rather than awareness alone.  The course is delivered via the atingi learning platform  and WOVO Educate , expanding access for suppliers, brands, and ecosystem partners.  The Gap Suppliers Face Barriers to implementing HREDD in practice  Suppliers face recurring structural challenges, including:  Limited access to affordable, high-quality training  Language and localization gaps  Difficulty translating international standards into operational processes  Misalignment between buyer expectations and supplier realities  Without targeted and practical support, these barriers slow progress on responsible business conduct and increase compliance and reputational risk for both suppliers and buyers.  Turning Expectations Into Action  The HREDD e-learning solution  The RBH Network and Labor Solutions designed a supplier-centric, practice-oriented e-learning program  focused on operationalizing HREDD requirements.  Key design principles included:  Free and scalable access to remove cost barriers  Multilingual delivery to support suppliers in sourcing countries  Practical, application-first content embedded with tools and templates  Alignment with buyer expectations through multinational peer review  The program enables suppliers to apply HREDD concepts through e-learning directly within existing business processes.  Designed for Application, Not Theory  Program design and methodology  The course was developed using a learner-centered methodology, including:  Needs-based design informed by pre-survey data on supplier challenges across RBH countries  Modular structure enabling flexible, self-paced learning  Scenario-based learning and country-specific case studies reflecting real operating environments  Embedded implementation tools, including:  Risk identification and assessment templates  Responsible Business Conduct (RBC) integration checklists  Sample grievance mechanism components and remediation pathways  Monitoring, documentation, and communication templates  Peer review by 11 multinational enterprises to ensure alignment with buyer expectations  Localization and translation to enhance relevance and comprehension  Delivery via atingi and WOVO Educate enables open access, learner tracking, and certification.    What the Program Covers  Curriculum and module overview  The program consists of 17 interactive modules , covering:  Foundations of HREDD   Introduction to HREDD  Business relevance and resilience  Human rights and environmental risks and impacts  The HREDD Process (Supplier Perspective)   Embedding Responsible Business Conduct (RBC)  Risk identification and assessment  Prevention and mitigation of adverse impacts  Grievance mechanisms and access to remedy  Monitoring and communication of performance  Country-Specific Case Studies   Cambodia; Tunisia; Pakistan; Türkiye; Bangladesh; Vietnam; Serbia  Responsible Contracting   Introduction to Supplier Model Contract Clauses  Assessment and Certification   Participants complete a knowledge assessment and receive an official certificate upon successful completion.  Built for Global Access  Accessibility and localization  The course is available free of charge in: English; Khmer; Mandarin; Spanish; Turkish; Vietnamese; Urdu; French; Serbia; Bangla.  This multilingual approach supports supplier learning in local business and regulatory contexts.  What Changed  Results and outcomes  Within months of launch:  Suppliers reached in 23 countries   Hundreds of suppliers  trained on practical HREDD implementation  17 modular learning units  delivered at scale  11 multinational enterprises  engaged as peer reviewers  Strong uptake across sourcing regions, signaling demand for practical, supplier-focused capacity building    How It Was Built  Collaboration and governance  The program was developed through collaboration between:  GIZ Responsible Business Hub (RBH) Network  Labor Solutions  Responsible Contracting Project  11 multinational enterprises serving as peer reviewers  This ensured technical credibility, operational feasibility, and alignment across buyers and suppliers.  How This Fits Within an Integrated Due Diligence Approach  The HREDD in Action e-learning program supports suppliers and brands at multiple points in the due diligence cycle. It can be deployed as a standalone capacity-building intervention or used alongside other tools to strengthen implementation and outcomes.  Supporting Supplier Improvement  The course builds practical understanding of roles, responsibilities, and implementation steps, increasing readiness for corrective action, remediation, and continuous improvement.  Responding to Worker Insights  Insights from worker voice and survey data, including WELL Survey results, can guide targeted deployment when gaps are identified in grievance mechanisms, access to remedy, or due diligence processes.  Strengthening Grievance Handling  When paired with CONNECT , the course ensures that individuals receiving worker messages understand:  Worker rights and supplier responsibilities under HREDD  How grievance mechanisms should function in practice  Appropriate response, escalation, and remediation pathways  This ensures worker messages are not only received, but  understood and acted upon appropriately .  Complementing Worker Education  Supplier training can be paired with worker-focused education on rights awareness and grievance use, strengthening shared understanding, trust, and system effectiveness.  Put It to Work Check out the course today Organizations seeking to strengthen supplier due diligence implementation, improve grievance mechanism effectiveness, or translate worker insights into action can deploy HREDD in Action: A Practical Approach for Suppliers as a standalone intervention or as part of an integrated approach. The course is available free of charge  via:  atingi:   https://lnkd.in/gFr-W-TA   WOVO Educate To learn more about implementing custom eLearning curricula at your organization with WOVO Educate or your own LMS, get in touch with us.

Why workers’ use of workplace grievance mechanisms signals trust, and why third-party helplines should be a backstop, not the starting point.   As human rights due diligence requirements expand under laws such as Germany’s Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG) and the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), grievance mechanisms have become a core expectation for buyers sourcing from global value chains.  But in practice, the challenge is rarely whether a supplier has  a grievance mechanism. The real question is whether workers trust it enough to use it — and whether buyers know how to interpret what they see.  Setting the stage Grievances Don’t Start as Complaints — They Start as Questions  For most workers, raising a concern is intimidating. Calling a third-party helpline or reporting an issue outside the workplace often feels extreme — something people do only as a last resort.  In reality, most grievances begin as questions , not accusations:  Is this allowed?   Was my pay calculated correctly?   Can my supervisor speak to me this way?   Who can I talk to if something doesn’t feel right?   When workers have no safe way to ask these questions, concerns either remain hidden or escalate unnecessarily. This is why operational-level grievance mechanisms  are so important.  What Is an Operational Grievance Mechanism?  An operational grievance mechanism is the system that exists inside a workplace  — at the factory, farm, or site level — that allows workers to raise concerns directly with their employer.  When done well, it allows workers to: Ask questions anonymously  Raise concerns early  Receive explanations and follow-up  See issues addressed close to where they occur For employers, this enables faster resolution and clearer communication. For buyers, it is often the earliest and most reliable signal of risk .  Why Third-Party Helplines Are Still Necessary — but Not Enough  Third-party grievance mechanisms and helplines play a critical role, especially when:  Workers do not trust local management  There is fear of retaliation  Serious abuse or exploitation is involved  Independent oversight is needed  However, these channels are typically used only when workers feel they have no other option . Operational grievance mechanisms and third-party helplines serve different but complementary purposes :  Operational mechanisms  support early dialogue and everyday problem-solving  Third-party mechanisms  act as a safeguard when internal systems fail or feel unsafe  The strongest grievance ecosystems include both — and workers understand when and how to use each. Understanding Effectiveness What an Effective Operational Grievance Mechanism Looks Like  From a worker’s perspective, an operational grievance mechanism works when it is:  Safe Workers can raise concerns anonymously or confidentially, without fear of retaliation.  Known The system is clearly explained, regularly promoted, and discussed during onboarding and team meetings.  Accessible It reflects workers’ realities — their language, literacy levels, and access to technology.  Open-door policies are helpful, but they are not enough on their own. Many workers will not raise sensitive issues face-to-face, especially where power dynamics exist.  From an employer’s perspective, effective mechanisms allow for:  Two-way communication and clarification  Clear tracking and follow-up  Identification of recurring or systemic issues  Why Operational Grievance Mechanism Utilization Matters — and How Buyers Should Interpret It  One of the most common mistakes buyers make is assuming that fewer grievances mean lower risk . In practice, the opposite is often true.  What “Good” Utilization Looks Like  High utilization of operational grievance mechanisms is usually a positive sign.  It suggests that workers:  Trust their employer enough to speak up  Feel safe asking questions  Believe they will receive a response  At the same time, low utilization of third-party grievance mechanisms can also be a healthy signal  — when operational systems are trusted and effective.  In these cases, third-party channels function as a backstop, not the primary entry point.  A Simple KPI Framework for Buyers  When assessing grievance mechanisms, buyers should focus on patterns , not just numbers. 1. Operational Mechanism Utilization  High use generally reflects trust, accessibility, and effective communication. 2. Types of Issues Raised  A healthy system captures both questions and complaints across topics such as pay, supervision, and health and safety.  3. Response Time and Follow-Up  Fast acknowledgment and clear communication strongly correlate with worker trust and continued use.  4. Escalation Patterns  Occasional escalation to third-party mechanisms is expected. Frequent escalation may indicate gaps in operational systems.  What Buyers Should Not Assume  “Zero grievances” does not mean zero problems.  In many cases, it means workers do not feel safe, informed, or confident enough to speak up. Buyers should apply healthy skepticism when suppliers report no grievances at all, especially in higher-risk contexts. Why This Matters for Buyers  Under HRDD laws now in force, buyers are increasingly expected to understand how risks are identified and addressed — not just whether policies exist.  Operational grievance mechanisms are one of the most practical tools buyers have to:  Detect risk early  Prevent harm  Reduce escalation  Strengthen supplier relationships  The goal is not silence. The goal is trusted systems, early dialogue, and problems solved before they become crises .  Turning Insight Into Action  Buyers often understand why  grievance mechanisms matter — but need support implementing and assessing them in practice.  If you are:  Assessing supplier grievance mechanisms  and need a framework to understand the gap between what employers think is happening and what workers actually experience, our survey and improvement tools can help.  Looking for an effective operational grievance mechanism , WOVO Connect allows workers to anonymously message their employer while giving buyers appropriate oversight into how concerns are handled and resolved.  Working to strengthen operational grievance mechanisms across your supply chain, we support buyers and suppliers in building systems that encourage early dialogue rather than last-resort escalation.  If you’d like to discuss how to assess, design, or strengthen operational grievance mechanisms in your supply chain, get in touch  — we’re happy to continue the conversation.

Human rights due diligence in agriculture starts with listening to rightsholders. But listening in agricultural supply chains is fundamentally different from listening in factories or offices. Workers and farmers are dispersed across remote locations, employment is often seasonal or informal, and many face barriers related to language, literacy, and access to technology. When worker surveys fail to account for these realities, participation drops and critical risks remain hidden. At Labor Solutions, we’ve built a scalable worker-voice model designed specifically for agricultural and food supply chains —one that works in low-literacy, low-tech environments and produces data companies can actually use. Our approach centers on the WELL Survey and is guided by a simple principle: the survey must fit the worker’s reality, not the other way around. This principle is embedded into the design of Labor Solutions’ worker technology platform, WOVO. We outline our broader approach to inclusive, low-literacy, and worker-first product design in  Designing Worker Technology That Works at Scale . How We Deploy Worker Surveys in Agricultural Settings Effective worker voice in agriculture begins with understanding how and where people work. Rather than relying on formal worksites alone, we map farms, collection points, mills, and seasonal gathering locations. Deployment is timed around harvest cycles, market days, and delivery schedules—when workers and farmers are already present and available. Survey methods are selected based on worker needs and access. In some contexts, workers respond via QR codes or mobile devices. In many agricultural settings, however, human-led, in-person deployment is essential . Labor Solutions staff or trained local deployment leaders support workers directly, explaining what the survey is, why it matters, and how anonymity is protected. Informed consent is actively ensured, not assumed. Surveys are deployed in locations workers already trust—such as delivery points, community hubs, or health centers—rather than in unfamiliar or employer-controlled environments. Participation is monitored in real time so gaps can be addressed, and the loop is closed by sharing outcomes with supply chain partners to reinforce accountability. Designed for Low Literacy and High-Risk Contexts The WELL Survey is designed to be accessible regardless of literacy level. Questions focus on lived experience rather than technical or legal concepts, making them easier to understand and more effective at uncovering hidden risks. Surveys use standardized, tested translations and are supported by images and voiceovers to reduce literacy barriers. Because many agricultural and migrant workers face literacy and technology constraints, human-led deployment is critical . In-person engagement builds understanding, trust, and participation—key foundations for reliable data. This is also why we do not rely on IVR. When literacy or access is limited, workers need more support, not more automation. In agricultural and migrant worker settings, IVR consistently leads to confusion, disengagement, and unreliable responses. When Worker Voice Reveals Hidden Agricultural Risks In one partnership with a global Food & Beverage brand, Labor Solutions deployed the WELL Survey across remote agricultural supply chains. By aligning deployment with harvest cycles and trusted gathering points, participation reached 92% among workers and 87% among farmers. The data revealed excessive working hours and insufficient wages across both groups, along with highly localized risks that had not been previously identified. These included debt bondage among farmers linked to local agencies, as well as occupational safety and drinking water concerns among workers in Mexico. Because these insights came directly from workers and farmers, the company was able to conduct targeted follow-up assessments and implement remediation grounded in worker-verified evidence, strengthening its human rights due diligence. Migrant Workers Without a Voice—Until Deployment Met Their Reality In another engagement, a global food company operating across Southeast Asia faced challenges reaching migrant workers. Language barriers, low literacy, and inconsistent phone access meant that existing feedback channels were largely ineffective, despite audit results suggesting compliance. Labor Solutions deployed the WELL Survey using indicators tailored to migrant labor risks and a mixed deployment approach. On-site support helped workers understand the survey and build trust, while QR codes enabled discreet participation where appropriate. Nearly 60% of workers responded across facilities , demonstrating strong demand for a safe and accessible way to speak up. The data uncovered overtime coercion risks reported by 85% of respondents —a critical issue that audits had failed to surface. In response, the company strengthened buyer–supplier communication, updated contract terms, reformed incentive and target-setting structures, and delivered targeted management training. Worker committees were upskilled, and grievance mechanisms became more effective and trusted. Today, the survey is embedded as an annual continuous-improvement tool, enabling earlier detection of forced labor risks and building trust among migrant workers who see that their voices lead to action. From Listening to Action Across agricultural and food supply chains, worker surveys only matter if they lead to change. Through dynamic dashboards, companies can see where risks are concentrated, whether issues are isolated or systemic, and how conditions evolve over time—at site, supplier, and global levels. This is not about collecting more data. It is about generating decision-ready worker risk intelligence that supports proportional, risk-based human rights due diligence. In agriculture, listening requires intention, adaptation, and human engagement. When done well, worker voice does more than identify risk—it becomes the foundation for credible, effective due diligence. Ready to move from audits to worker-verified evidence? Labor Solutions helps companies deploy scalable, low-barrier worker surveys that work in agricultural and low-literacy settings — and turn worker voice into actionable due diligence insights. Contact us to learn how the WELL Survey can strengthen your agricultural supply chain due diligence.

Executive Summary WOVO  is a worker engagement platform used by 3.8 million workers globally  to raise grievances, participate in surveys, and access digital learning. The platform is designed for low-literacy, low-trust, and high-risk environments , where traditional HR tools often fail. Accessibility is treated as core infrastructure , not a feature—through visual design, simplified security, WCAG 2.0 standards, and human-led deployment where needed. When technology alone is insufficient, Labor Solutions supports workers on the ground , ensuring informed consent, trust, and reliable participation. Worker technology only works when workers can actually use it—safely, confidently, and on their own terms. Today, 3.8 million workers  use Labor Solutions’ worker technology platform, WOVO , to raise concerns, participate in surveys, access learning, and engage with workplace systems that often fail to reach them through traditional human resource tools. As WOVO has scaled, one principle has remained constant: access must come before complexity . Technology cannot support worker voice if workers cannot use it safely, intuitively, and confidently—especially in low-literacy, low-trust, and high-risk environments. We design WOVO not as a one-time product update, but as an evolving system for worker engagement at scale. What WOVO Does—and Who It’s Built For WOVO is a worker engagement platform designed for real-world labor contexts, including supply chains and workplaces where: Literacy and language access vary widely Trust in employers or formal grievance mechanisms may be low Anonymity and safety are essential Smartphones are common, but formal digital training is not Through WOVO, workers can: Submit grievances safely and anonymously Participate in surveys and feedback mechanisms Access training and eLearning content Engage with systems designed to support worker voice and remedy These realities shape every product and design decision we make. Why Worker-First Product Design Matters Most workplace technology is designed primarily for employers, auditors, or compliance teams , with workers treated as data sources rather than primary users. Labor Solutions takes a different approach. Our tools are designed exclusively around worker and supplier engagement , which fundamentally changes how product decisions are made. When workers are the primary users—not a secondary audience—accessibility, trust, and safety are no longer optional features. They become non-negotiable design requirements. This focus is why WOVO is built to function in low-literacy and high-risk contexts, why anonymity and informed consent are central to the experience, and why design decisions are tested against real-world worker behavior rather than theoretical usability standards. Product design looks very different when worker voice is the goal—not just data collection. Don’t Assume Low Literacy Means No Access to Technology Research shows m any workers who struggle with reading are active smartphone users. They regularly watch and share videos on platforms like Facebook or YouTube and are often highly comfortable with numbers, icons, and visual interfaces. Designing for inclusion means recognizing these realities rather than relying on assumptions. At Labor Solutions, we aim to build tools that serve everyone without simplifying experiences in ways that feel patronizing or exclusionary . Respectful design acknowledges workers’ existing skills and adapts technology to match how people already interact with their devices. Inclusive product design is not about lowering expectations—it’s about aligning systems with real user behavior. We aim to build an inclusive product that serves everyone without belittling. Designing Through Iteration, Not Assumption The WOVO team follows an iterative, feedback-driven design process grounded in how workers actually interact with technology—not how we assume they should. As the platform grew from early deployments to millions of users, our focus has been on expanding access while simplifying experience , ensuring WOVO remains intuitive even as functionality grows. At this scale, design decisions are no longer theoretical. They directly influence how millions of workers understand information, share experiences, and seek remedy. Accessibility as Core Infrastructure WOVO serves workers globally, across wide variation in literacy, language, and digital familiarity. UI that relies too heavily on texts further alienates vulnerable illiterate population s  and restricts access to valuable information and opportunities. Rather than treating accessibility as a compliance requirement, we treat it as core infrastructure . The goal is not to create separate experiences for different users, but to design shared systems that work across contexts . Visual Orientation + User Confidence When text cannot be relied upon, orientation becomes critical .  Without visual guidance, illiterate workers’ sense of orientation and navigation relies entirely on memory . Across the WOVO app, visual indicators show: When to navigate to other pages and how they got there What next steps the user needs to take and how many more What completion of a task looks like These cues are used throughout key workflows, including registration, grievance submission, surveys, and eLearning modules—building clarity, confidence, and completion. Communicating Visually To support both literate and illiterate users, key workflows within WOVO rely on: Clear, universally recognizable icons Visual cues that reinforce meaning without relying on text Simple, guided flows that reduce cognitive load For example, registration uses visual representations to help users understand what is happening and what is required, regardless of reading ability. Expanding Accessibility Through WCAG 2.0 and Audio Support As WOVO continues to scale, accessibility must evolve. Our eLearning modules are compliant with WCAG 2.0 standards , making them compatible with text-to-speech and other assistive technologies available and already relied upon by many workers struggling with literacy. Content can be accessed through listening, visuals, and guided interaction—not text alone. Reducing Cognitive Overload One of the most impactful design decisions we made was also the simplest: removing what wasn’t necessary . We intentionally: Eliminated redundant text Kept instructions concise Designed each screen to ask for only one clear task For workers navigating unfamiliar systems or sensitive issues, less information often leads to better outcomes. Rethinking Security for Real Users Research shows when systems require complex passwords or security protocols usability often suffers . Long combinations of letters, numbers, and symbols increase the likelihood that users will forget their credentials—particularly in low-literacy contexts. Based on these insights, WOVO uses: Security questions answered numerically (such as dates) A simple 6-digit PIN  instead of complex passwords This reduces forgotten credentials, avoids easily guessable passwords, and aligns security with real user behavior. Personalization Without Compromising Anonymity Trust is foundational to worker voice. To balance engagement, safety, and anonymity, WOVO includes: Avatars  that allow users to personalize their account without revealing identity Illustrated security questions  that rely on recognition rather than written responses These features help workers feel ownership over their experience while maintaining the anonymity required for grievance and feedback mechanisms. Technology With Human Backstops Designing for accessibility also means recognizing when technology alone is not enough . Survey and engagement methods are selected based on worker needs and access—not assumed digital readiness. In some contexts, workers engage through mobile devices or QR codes. In others—particularly agricultural and migrant worker settings— human-led, in-person deployment is essential . Labor Solutions staff or trained local deployment leaders support workers directly, explaining what the engagement is, why it matters, and how anonymity is protected. Informed consent is actively ensured, not assumed. Engagement takes place in locations workers already trust—such as community hubs or health centers—and participation is monitored in real time so access gaps can be addressed. Outcomes are shared with partners to reinforce accountability. When literacy or access is limited, workers need more support—not more automation . For this reason, we do not rely on IVR in high-risk or low-literacy contexts, where it consistently leads to confusion and unreliable data. Read more about how we implement and deploy in Low Literacy and High-Risk Contexts. Designing Worker Voice at Scale Is Ongoing Work Today, WOVO supports 3.8 million workers , reinforcing a simple truth: inclusive design is not static. As the platform continues to evolve, Labor Solutions remains committed to designing systems that reflect real-world worker behavior, build trust into grievance mechanisms, and expand access to voice and remedy. Worker technology only works when workers can actually use it. If you’re interested in inclusive design or worker engagement systems at scale, we’d love to continue the conversation at info@laborsolutions.tech .