Addressing a Critical Need in Chemical Safety Training  The electronics industry relies on complex manufacturing processes, many of which involve hazardous chemicals. Without proper training, workers and supervisors may not fully understand the risks, leading to unsafe conditions and long-term health hazards. Recognizing this urgent need, the Clean Electronics Production Network (CEPN) , in collaboration with industry leaders, worker rights organizations, and manufacturers, set out to create a comprehensive, industry-specific chemical safety training program .  As the eLearning development partner, we worked alongside CEPN, Electronics Watch, ICRT, and other stakeholders to transform technical safety content into an engaging, accessible, and practical digital training solution . Our mission is to ensure that this training effectively reaches and empowers workers and supervisors in electronics supply chains worldwide.  A Worker-Centric Approach  Unlike traditional compliance training, this program puts workers at the center, with a dual focus on both frontline employees and their supervisors. Key features include:  Real-World Relevance  – Scenarios and strategies drawn directly from electronics manufacturing.  Role-Based Learning  – Training tailored for both workers and supervisors.  Collaborative Development  – Built with input from multiple stakeholders to ensure credibility and practical application.    How We Built It  We designed the program for flexibility, interactivity, and impact:  Collaborative Content Design  – Developed with subject matter experts, labor groups, and factory managers.  Flexible Delivery  – Offered in three formats:  In-person   Live webinars   SCORM-compliant digital modules  (launching August 2025)  Interactive & Inclusive  – Includes engaging interactions, case studies and multilingual support.    Tested and Refined in the Real World  The training was piloted in Vietnam and Malaysia from November 2024 to January 2025. Feedback from these sessions helped refine the final program. Early outcomes showed:  Greater worker and supervisor confidence  Improved hazard reporting  Seamless training platform integration for better tracking    Now Live: CEPN Chemical Safety Training The program is now officially available. It covers key topics like hazard identification, emergency response, and worker engagement, and will be available from June 2025 in Chinese, English, Filipino, Malay, Thai and Vietnamese languages with additional languages offered upon request. CEPN is also expanding its trainer network, with Train-the-Trainer sessions planned for August 2025 . Facilities implementing the training may be publicly recognized for their commitment to worker safety.    For companies looking to enhance their worker safety programs, this training represents a powerful and practical tool . We are proud to have played a role in its development and continue to support organizations in integrating it into their LMS platforms and workplace safety strategies .  Pilot Results Results Now Available. Preventing Chemical Safety Risk in Electronics Manufacturing Using Targeted Training Read More Here   Want to bring this training to your organization?    Reach out today to learn how we can help.

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 As expectations around human rights due diligence rise, seafood companies need tools that move beyond compliance and deliver real insight into worker experience.  This case study demonstrates that the WELL Survey is effective in the seafood industry, capturing credible worker voice at scale and translating it into actionable labor insights. The pilot revealed seafood-specific risks, exposed inequities within workplaces, and generated clear priorities for action—showing how worker-centered measurement can strengthen due diligence in complex supply chains. Pilot Objective  Testing Whether Worker Voice Delivers Actionable Insight in Seafood Operations The WELL Survey was piloted in the seafood industry to assess whether a worker-centered, cross-sector tool could effectively capture worker voice and generate actionable labor insights in a complex supply chain context. The primary objective of the pilot was to assess whether the WELL Survey could, in the seafood industry:  Accurately reflect workers’ lived experiences  Surface labor and wellbeing risks specific to seafood operations  Reveal differences across gender, job type, and work location  Produce insights that are relevant and actionable for seafood companies  Findings The WELL Survey is Effective at Uncovering Risks in the Seafood Industry The WELL Survey Works in the Seafood Context  The pilot confirmed that the WELL Survey is effective when applied in the seafood industry. Specifically, it demonstrated that the tool can: Engage seafood workers meaningfully, generating credible and differentiated responses Capture authentic worker voice across roles, genders, and work environments. The variation in results across worker groups confirms that the survey is sensitive to the realities of seafood workplaces, rather than producing uniform or superficial findings. Identify labor and wellbeing risks specific to seafood operations Reveal inequities within seafood workplaces that are often obscured in aggregate data Support informed decision-making and continuous improvement through actionable insights Seafood-Specific Risks Were Clearly Identified  The pilot surfaced risk patterns that are particularly relevant to the seafood industry, including:  Worker fatigue and exhaustion linked to production demands  Harassment and psychological safety concerns, especially among women  Unequal access to opportunity and voice across job types  These risks appeared even where traditional compliance indicators performed relatively well.  Disaggregation Added Critical Value in Seafood Operations  By disaggregating results, the pilot highlighted how worker experience differs significantly within seafood workplaces, particularly between:  Production and non-production roles  Supervisory and non-supervisory workers  Women and men  These differences are especially relevant in seafood supply chains, where hierarchy and job segregation are common.  Results Were Actionable for Seafood Companies  The pilot generated clear, sector-relevant priorities for improvement, including:  Strengthening harassment prevention mechanisms  Addressing workload and fatigue management  Improving worker participation in decision-making  Closing gender-based gaps in opportunity and voice  The findings were specific enough to inform corrective actions within seafood operations.  Next Steps Scaling Within the Seafood Industry  Based on the pilot results, the WELL Survey will now be rolled out at scale within the seafood industry. Scaling will enable:  Consistent benchmarking across seafood operations  Identification of systemic, sector-wide risks  Tracking of improvement over time  Stronger integration of worker voice into seafood-specific due diligence  Why This Matters Strengthening Seafood Supply Chains Through Worker Voice The pilot confirms that worker-centered tools, when validated in the seafood industry, can generate reliable insights and support stronger, evidence-based due diligence across complex seafood supply chains. Ready to find out how the WELL Survey can support you?

The fight against forced labor remains one of the most urgent human rights challenges facing global supply chains. Millions of people worldwide are affected, and regulatory expectations on companies to identify, prevent, and remediate forced labor risks continue to increase. Recent assessments make clear that many companies are still struggling to meet minimum expectations. A report by the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre’s KnowTheChain  initiative found that only a small number of companies met baseline standards for forced labor due diligence. Among them, adidas  stood out for its approach to worker engagement, risk identification, and grievance mechanisms. This post examines what companies can learn from adidas’s approach, and how those lessons align with emerging legal expectations under the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) and the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD). Where Companies Are Falling Behind Across jurisdictions, mandatory human rights due diligence (HRDD) frameworks increasingly require companies to demonstrate that their systems function effectively in practice , not merely that policies or procedures exist. This expectation is grounded in: UNGP Principle 18, which requires companies to identify and assess actual and potential human rights impacts through meaningful engagement with affected stakeholders UNGP Principle 29, which calls for effective operational-level grievance mechanisms UNGP Principle 31, which sets effectiveness criteria for grievance mechanisms The CSDDD, which requires companies to take appropriate measures to identify, prevent, mitigate, and bring to an end adverse human rights impacts, including through stakeholder engagement and grievance mechanisms Two gaps consistently emerge in assessments of forced labor due diligence: Risk identification that is not grounded in worker experience Grievance mechanisms that exist on paper but do not function in practice Both gaps undermine legal compliance and effective risk management, because many forced labor risks are not visible without direct worker participation. Challenge #1: Risk Assessments That Don’t Reach Workers Many companies continue to rely primarily on audits and supplier self-assessments to identify forced labor risks. While these tools can play a role, they are often limited by: narrow audit windows management-selected interviews documentation that does not reflect daily practice lack of real-time insight into working conditions This approach is increasingly misaligned with legal expectations. Under UNGP Principle 18, companies are expected to assess human rights impacts by drawing on direct input from affected stakeholders, including workers, particularly where risks are severe. Similarly, the CSDDD emphasizes ongoing risk identification across the value chain, not periodic verification exercises. What Works Better in Practice Effective forced labor due diligence requires ongoing, systematic worker engagement that complements traditional tools. adidas’s approach demonstrates how worker input can strengthen risk identification by: surfacing risks that audits miss revealing country- and sector-specific dynamics enabling earlier prevention and targeted mitigation This approach aligns with both UNGP Principle 18  and CSDDD requirements to identify risks based on actual impacts, not assumptions. Challenge #2: Grievance Mechanisms That Exist on Paper but Not in Practice Many companies report having grievance mechanisms, yet worker usage remains low. Under HRDD frameworks, low grievance volume is not evidence of low risk. The UNGPs are explicit on this point: UNGP Principle 29  Requires companies to establish or participate in operational-level grievance mechanisms UNGP Principle 31  Specifies that such mechanisms must be legitimate, accessible, predictable, equitable, transparent, rights-compatible, and trusted The CSDDD similarly requires companies to provide a grievance mechanism that affected persons can access in practice, not merely in theory. In practice, low usage often indicates that grievance mechanisms are: unknown to workers inaccessible due to literacy, language, or technology barriers not trusted to protect against retaliation unable to deliver timely or meaningful outcomes What Operational Grievance Mechanisms Look Like Operational grievance mechanisms differ from traditional hotlines or compliance-only reporting channels. They are embedded into day-to-day operations and supplier management, rather than existing as symbolic or external tools. Effective mechanisms typically include: multiple access points appropriate to worker context anonymity and confidentiality safeguards structured case management and documented follow-up supplier responsibility for resolution, with appropriate brand oversight evidence of dialogue, outcomes, and learning over time These characteristics align directly with the effectiveness criteria set out in UNGP Principle 31 and the CSDDD’s emphasis on remediation and corrective action. adidas’s experience illustrates how embedding grievance mechanisms within supplier operations can increase trust, usage, and meaningful resolution. Why Supplier Engagement Is Central to Legal Compliance A key lesson from adidas’s approach is that grievance mechanisms are most effective when suppliers are actively involved in resolving issues, rather than bypassed. This is legally significant because: UNGP Principle 29 anticipates mechanisms that operate at the point where impacts occur The CSDDD expects companies to take appropriate measures to bring adverse impacts to an end and prevent recurrence, which often requires supplier-level action Supplier engagement supports: faster remediation prevention of repeat violations clearer accountability stronger evidence of effective due diligence Moving Beyond Tick-Box Compliance Forced labor due diligence is no longer assessed by whether a company can point to: a policy a hotline a completed audit Instead, companies are increasingly expected to demonstrate: how risks are identified on an ongoing basis (UNGP 18) whether workers can safely raise concerns (UNGP 29) whether grievance mechanisms meet effectiveness criteria (UNGP 31) how remediation and prevention are carried out in practice (CSDDD) To acheive this adidas closely monitors worker engagement with performance metrics to “evaluate the efficacy of the grievance channels, see major cases in real time, and undertake timely interventions where necessary.” a didas’s experience shows that worker engagement and operational grievance mechanisms are central to meeting these expectations, not optional add-ons. What Companies Should Be Asking Themselves As forced labor and HRDD expectations continue to evolve, companies should ask: Do our risk assessments meaningfully engage workers as rights holders? Can workers raise concerns safely and without fear of retaliation? Do our grievance mechanisms meet the effectiveness criteria in UNGP Principle 31? Are suppliers equipped and accountable for resolving issues? Can we demonstrate prevention and remediation over time, as required under the CSDDD? Answering these questions requires systems that function in practice—not just on paper. Want to see what worker-driven HRDD looks like in practice? Explore how adidas operationalized worker engagement and grievance mechanisms to strengthen forced labor due diligence. If you’d like to discuss what these approaches could look like in your own supply chain, contact us at info@laborsolutions.tech .

Listening to Workers Isn’t Optional — It’s a Supply Chain Strategy   New research by Dylan Nelson and Nathan Wilmers at MIT  offers something rare in the labor space: causal evidence  that worker voice pays off. Their study, Earnings Effects of Direct Worker Voice in Production  (May 2025) , finds that when manufacturers actively use worker input in production decisions , three things move in the right direction: Productivity increases Earnings increase Turnover decreases For brands facing HRDD and CSDDD expectations, this isn’t a niche social outcome.It’s a core supply chain capability .   Worker Voice Creates Performance Gains You Can Feel Downstream   Source: Mandiri Abadi, 2022 Nelson & Wilmers show that moving from low to high use of worker input is associated with productivity gains of up to 15%   (Table 3, pp. 19–20). That’s not symbolic. In practice, higher productivity means: Fewer last-minute production crises More stable output and fewer quality dips Better ability to manage bottlenecks and shifts in demand When factories operate more smoothly, downstream partners feel it: Fewer surprises, fewer fire drills, more predictable supply. Worker voice doesn’t just improve the shop floor — it improves the flow . Worker Voice Is Now Evidence — Not Just Engagement   From “Engagement” to Evidence Under HRDD and CSDDD, the question is no longer: “Do you have a grievance mechanism?” It is: “Do workers trust it, use it, and does it change outcomes?” Audits can’t answer that. Worker-generated data can. In the Nelson & Wilmers study, workplaces that integrate worker input into decision-making show: Higher earnings  (Table 2, p. 18) Lower turnover  (p. 13) Stronger operational performance  (Table 3) These are exactly the signals regulators, investors, and brands look for when they ask whether worker voice is real  or just on paper. Worker voice becomes not only a practice — but proof .   A Functioning Voice System Shifts Power, and That’s the Point   One of the most important findings is that wage gains persist even after controlling for productivity  (pp. 19–20). That means the earnings effect is not just “workers produce more, so they earn more.”It reflects a shift in bargaining power : When workers’ knowledge becomes indispensable, Their ability to influence outcomes increases. This is precisely the kind of structural change that many due-diligence frameworks aim for: workers who can assert rights, shape outcomes, and negotiate remedy  because the mechanism works , not because an audit checked a box.   Voice Without Use Is Noise. Use Is What Matters.   Channels Don’t Matter If They’re Not Used. Nelson & Wilmers make a critical distinction: It’s not the existence of a mechanism that matters — it’s whether worker input is actually used  in decisions. Many systems collect data but never close the loop.Workers speak. Management listens (sometimes). Nothing changes. The study shows that when worker voice becomes: An operational tool , not a performative channel A regular input  into planning and problem-solving …both productivity  and earnings  rise. For brands evaluating supplier maturity, this is the key question: Are workers’ insights shaping decisions — or just filling reports?   Workers See What Audits Can't. Worker Voice Is Your Earliest Warning System Audits see the past .Workers see the present . Frontline workers are usually the first to notice: Deteriorating conditions Abusive supervision Wage inconsistencies Safety shortcuts Bottlenecks and inefficiencies When factories rely on structured worker feedback to make operational decisions, these signals are: Captured early Interpreted in context Acted on before they become non-compliances That is real-time risk mitigation  — and often the most cost-effective kind.   High-Voice Factories Are High-Value Partners   Taken together, the study describes a particular kind of workplace: More productive More stable With higher retention  and higher wages For brands, these are the facilities that tend to: Deliver more consistently Manage volatility better Absorb shocks more effectively Require fewer corrective action plans In other words: worker voice is not a social add-on. It’s a management competency. And in global value chains, good management cascades .   The Strategic Takeaway: Worker Voice Is a Capability, Not a Program  Nelson & Wilmers give empirical backing to what many practitioners have seen in practice: When worker voice is real, factories perform better and workers do better. For brands, that means worker voice should live in: Sourcing strategy Risk management HRDD and CSDDD reporting Supplier selection and performance criteria This is exactly where Labor Solutions works. WELL  helps brands and suppliers measure worker experience and trust at scale. WOVO  helps assess whether grievance mechanisms are trusted, used, and effective , not just in place. Improve  turns worker feedback into structured action plans , so suppliers can own and demonstrate progress. The study doesn’t just validate “listening to workers” as a principle.It validates it as a capability  — one that can be designed, measured, and scaled. Listening to workers isn’t good PR.It’s good operations  — and the brands that require it will be the ones better positioned for resilience in the decade ahead.

Executive Summary Human rights due diligence (HRDD) is increasingly evaluated as an operating capability , not a policy exercise. Across jurisdictions, companies are expected to demonstrate that their systems for identifying, preventing, and addressing human rights risks function effectively in practice. This article outlines how HRDD expectations have evolved and what companies are now expected to do differently. In particular, it highlights why worker-driven approaches —including worker voice, accessible grievance mechanisms, and rights awareness—are critical to effective due diligence. The key takeaway is that audits and policies alone are no longer sufficient. HRDD systems are strongest when they are grounded in direct engagement with rights holders , generate evidence of real-world functioning, and support ongoing prevention rather than one-time compliance. Human Rights Due Diligence Is Now an Operating Requirement. Are You Ready? Human rights due diligence (HRDD) is no longer a future requirement or a voluntary best practice. Across jurisdictions, it is increasingly becoming a baseline expectation for doing business in global supply chains . Driven by mandatory due diligence laws, expanded sustainability reporting requirements, and forced-labor import enforcement, companies are being asked not just whether they have policies in place—but whether they can demonstrate that their systems actually work . Failure to do so can result in disrupted buyer relationships, legal exposure, reputational damage, and in some cases customs enforcement that prevents goods from entering key markets. This article is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. HRDD obligations vary by jurisdiction, sector, and company profile. Companies should consult qualified legal counsel regarding their specific obligations. What Has Changed—and Why HRDD Matters More Now Since early HRDD laws came into effect, the landscape has shifted in three important ways: Mandatory due diligence expectations are expanding, particularly in the EU and other major markets. Sustainability reporting requirements increasingly depend on credible underlying due diligence systems, not just disclosure. Forced-labor enforcement has become more operational, placing the burden of proof on companies rather than regulators. Together, these trends mean HRDD is no longer evaluated as a policy exercise. It is increasingly evaluated as an operating capability . What Is Human Rights Due Diligence? Human rights due diligence is a risk-based process through which companies identify, prevent, mitigate, and account for adverse human rights impacts connected to their operations and value chains. While specific legal requirements vary by jurisdiction, most HRDD expectations are grounded in widely used international standards and converge around several core principles: proactive risk identification meaningful engagement with affected stakeholders prevention and mitigation, not just response access to remedy documentation and accountability over time In practice, HRDD has moved beyond audits and disclosure toward systems that generate reliable, defensible evidence . Several countries and regions have passed laws over the last few years regulating industries and imports into their country. Laws range from issue specific to disclosure reports to national -level mandatory due diligence and reporting that cover all human rights. The enforcement mechanisms vary from case to case and could result in hefty fines or customs’ seizure of goods. Here are a few: the UK , US  and Australia Modern Slavery Act , and the Dutch Child Labor Due Diligence Act . The  California Transparency in Supply Chains Act  and the EU Non-Financial Reporting Directive (EU NFRD) . Mandatory supply chain human rights due diligence laws recently passed in   France , Switzerland , the  Netherlands , Norway , Germany , and proposed in Canada , Japan , Spain  and the  EU . What HRDD Laws Generally Require Although requirements differ, most HRDD frameworks—largely informed by the   UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights —expect companies to be able to demonstrate the following: Policy and governance Clear commitments to respect human rights, embedded in procurement and supplier management, with defined accountability. Risk identification Ongoing identification of actual and potential human rights risks across operations and supply chains, informed by credible data and effective complaints mechanisms. Prevention and mitigation Actions to prevent harm and reduce risk, including supplier engagement and follow-up—not one-off assessments. Remediation Processes to address harm and support remedy when violations occur. Tracking and reporting Documentation of risks identified, actions taken, and effectiveness over time. Enforcement mechanisms vary, but expectations around effectiveness are becoming more explicit. Why Worker-First Design Matters for HRDD Most workplace and supply chain systems are designed primarily for employers, auditors, or compliance teams, with workers treated as data sources rather than primary users. However, human rights due diligence is ultimately about protecting rights holders . Effective due diligence therefore requires engaging directly with those rights holders—not relying solely on proxy indicators, documentation, or management-filtered information. When workers are able to participate safely and meaningfully, accessibility, trust, and safety become core design requirements rather than optional features. This has a direct impact on HRDD outcomes, because many risks remain invisible unless workers can speak openly and be heard. Worker-first design helps turn HRDD from a theoretical exercise into a system that functions in practice. Demonstrating That HRDD Systems Work in Practice HRDD is increasingly evaluated not on whether systems exist, but on whether they function in reality . Traditional social audits can play a role, but on their own they are limited. Audits are periodic, often announced, and typically rely on documentation reviews and management-selected interviews. As a result, many risks—especially those affecting vulnerable workers—remain hidden or are identified only after harm has occurred. Worker voice changes this dynamic because workers experience day-to-day conditions that audits often cannot capture. Research and field experience show that worker surveys and feedback mechanisms are often more effective than audits alone at identifying risks , particularly those related to treatment, coercion, discrimination, and retaliation. Worker voice tools are especially important for: understanding lived realities and daily practices identifying bad actors even where formal systems exist revealing gaps between worker experience and management perception surfacing risks that fall outside audit windows identifying patterns that point to systemic issues rather than isolated incidents Real Access to Remedy Ensuring Grievance Mechanisms Are Known, Trusted, and Used Effective HRDD depends on grievance mechanisms that work in practice—not just on paper. Companies should be able to demonstrate that grievance mechanisms are: known and understood by workers accessible regardless of literacy, language, or technology constraints trusted enough that workers feel safe using them capable of responding and resolving issues in a timely and appropriate way Rather than simply confirming that a grievance policy exists, effective due diligence assesses whether workers can and do use the mechanism, and whether it leads to meaningful outcomes. This requires speaking to workers at scale. Informed Rights Holders Preventing Risk Through Rights Awareness HRDD is not only about identifying harm—it is also about preventing it . A recurring driver of risk is lack of clarity around rights and responsibilities. When workers and managers do not understand expectations, harmful practices can persist or go unchallenged. Companies should ensure that workers (rights holders) and relevant staff receive practical, accessible learning   on rights, responsibilities, and grievance processes. In many contexts, this requires training approaches designed for low-literacy and high-risk environments, using visuals, audio, and clear examples rather than legal or technical language. When people understand both their rights and their responsibilities, risks are less likely to occur—and more likely to be addressed early. Evidence-Based HRDD, Not Assumed Compliance The result of these approaches is an HRDD system grounded in evidence , not assumptions. Rather than relying solely on policies, periodic audits, or supplier self-assessments, companies gain: worker-informed risk data insight into whether grievance mechanisms function in practice documentation of prevention, mitigation, and remediation actions trend analysis that supports continuous improvement This type of evidence is increasingly critical when HRDD practices are reviewed by buyers, regulators, investors, or courts. HRDD Is Not a Project. It’s a Practice. Human rights due diligence is now evaluated as an operating capability: whether a company can identify risk early, prevent harm, and demonstrate credible action over time. Audits establish an important baseline, but their effectiveness often declines over time. Once checklist requirements are met, audits tend to reveal less about how systems function day to day. Human rights—and human resources—are not projects that get completed; they are ongoing practices. Worker surveys and engagement tools are better suited to this reality. They capture how systems function in daily practice, surface blind spots, and help validate or challenge audit findings. Used alongside audits, they support more continuous due diligence and help companies prioritize action—particularly for high-risk or strategic suppliers. It’s a lot, we know. Don’t worry, Labor Solutions is here to support you. If you want to understand how HRDD expectations may affect your business, or what an implementable HRDD system looks like in practice, contact us at info@laborsolutions.tech .

The WELL Survey Most supply chain engagement and risk management is top-down, causing duplication, resistance, and misalignment. With governments, consumers, and investors demanding greater supply chain transparency , accountability, and proof that companies are protecting workers’ rights, having effective strategies and tools to engage with workers is more important than ever. Whether for forced labor bans, Human Rights Due Diligence (HRDD)  laws, or to comply with other standards for ethical and responsible business, global businesses must now demonstrate both that they understand risks and also that they are taking steps  to mitigate, remedy and prevent harm to workers.  The WELL Survey (Worker Wellbeing, Engagement, and Livelihoods)  is designed to help companies meet this moment, with a tool focused on hearing worker perspectives, aligning the interests of suppliers and customers, and creating actionable insights that lead to real improvement in workers’ lives.  Listening to Workers, Driving Change Worker Voices Drive Results At the heart of responsible supply chains lies one simple truth: trust and communication create lasting change  and better outcomes for workers. Building trust and communication is also the heart of Labor Solutions’ approach. The WELL Survey uses experience-based questions  that encourage open, honest feedback from workers, listening to their perspectives rather than using them against their employers .  Our worker-centered approach results in reliable data because there are no wrong answers, and no pitting workers against their employers. When workers feel heard, they engage. When suppliers listen, they improve. When customers support, they improve resiliency and become leaders.  The WELL Survey transforms worker voices into actionable insights, empowering companies and suppliers to strengthen relationships, reduce risks, and improve worker wellbeing regardless of industry or supply chain tier. Comparable and Credible Data Built through collaboration with leading global companies and experts, the WELL Survey’s standardized indicators  enable cross-industry and cross-country aggregation with evidence-based scoring bands . Indicators are groups of questions about one specific topic or issue that help to provide a multi-dimensional understanding of all of the aspects of that issue. Single questions alone can be misleading or taken out of context, but indicators provide a reliable way of holistically understanding worker experiences of an issue. Choose our Core WELL Indicators, or a mix of Core and Risk-based indicators that best reflect by seeing differences in the survey and indicator scores year-on-year, changes in worker sentiment that indicate issues with wellbeing and rights in the workplace are clear.   Clear, Actionable Insights Companies that deploy the WELL Survey receive in-depth reports that include:  Employee Net Promoter Scores (eNPS)   Demographic breakdowns and insights (including by role, self-identified gender and tenure)   Key Indicator Scores   Year-on-year comparisons   Areas to focus on for support and improvement   These insights help companies measure progress, demonstrate compliance with human rights due diligence   obligations, and communicate how risks are being managed confidently to stakeholders and regulators.  Ongoing Relevance The WELL Survey will evolve as workplaces and risks do. Through regular updates, the tool remains aligned with emerging global standards and real-world challenges from gender equity and mental health to climate change and labor migration. This ensures the survey stays relevant, enabling continuous improvement rather than one-off assessments.  In doing so, the WELL Survey helps companies move beyond compliance, embedding responsibility and resilience into supply chain operations.  Recognition for Commitment Each year, workplaces participating in the WELL Survey can earn the WELL Seal,  a mark of transparency and commitment to worker wellbeing. The seal shows customers, partners, and investors that they are not only monitoring worker wellbeing and working conditions but taking action to improve it .  The WELL Survey seal is a tangible way to communicate leadership in ethical supply chain and worker engagement.  Accessible across Geographies Inclusive and Accessible Worker voices matter everywhere - and language should never be a barrier.  The WELL Survey is Multilingual , covering every language that workers in global supply chains speak and read fluently, with expert translation and local adaptation to ensure understanding and comparable answers. This ensures that all workers, regardless of geography, literacy level, role or background, can share their experiences confidently and confidentially.   Building Better Workplaces, Together By transforming worker surveys  into a tool to build trust and active worker feedback in global workplaces , the WELL Survey provides the foundations for companies to proactively identify risks, remedy issues, and strengthen wellbeing across the entire supply chain.  With the WELL Survey, companies like yours can take an evidence-based, risk-based, and worker-centered approach to building better workplaces  - where listening leads to learning and learning leads to lasting impact.  Want to learn more or receive information on how to deploy the WELL Survey?

When Workers are Heard, Workplaces Improve.  For over a decade, Labor Solutions has been building tools to give workers a voice and help organizations act on collected data. Today, we’re proud to launch The WELL Survey (Wellbeing, Engagement and Livelihoods Survey) - a smarter, more adaptable way to capture and understand workers’ experiences across global supply chains. This worker engagement survey doubles as a digital worker wellbeing survey and workforce listening platform, helping brands capture worker voices at scale. Workplaces Thrive When Workers Thrive. Leading the Future of Worker Surveys Across industries regulators, investors and consumers are demanding greater supply‑chain transparency and ethical operations. Europe’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive and other emerging human‑rights laws make it clear that companies must protect workers’ rights. Co-Created, Trusted and Used Globally The WELL Survey is the result of collaboration across the industry. Contributors and early adopters include adidas , H&M , Decathlon , carter's , Lake Advisory , and others. Together, we’re streamlining surveys, strengthening worker trust, and enabling cross-industry comparisons. Its functions as a supply chain worker survey and labor rights survey tool is ideal for human rights due diligence worker surveys and ESG due diligence surveys that benchmark conditions across countries. By combining a standardised core with optional modules and "build‑your‑own" questions, it provides global comparability with local relevance. Built for Global Benchmarks and Local Impact The survey’s modular design enables cross‑industry collaboration and reduces duplication. Organizations can start with a fixed set of standardized questions - The WELL Core Questionnaire - on themes like safety, pay, wellbeing, equality and more. To focus on local needs, locally relevant indicators - such as grievance mechanisms, recruitment or fair working hours - or up to three custom questions for specific risks or priorities, can be added. The WELL Survey is a workplace wellbeing monitoring solution that scales from a factory worker feedback system to a multinational program. Because each indicator is a fixed grouping of questions, results remain comparable across users and suppliers. Experience-based questions build trust and uncover real issues Turning Insights Into Action Worker Voices Drive Results: Experience-based questions encourage open, honest feedback. Ongoing Relevance: Biannual updates ensure the survey reflects workplace realities. Recognition: Participating workplaces earn the annual WELL Seal, demonstrating their commitment to worker wellbeing. All surveys are multilingual, ensuring accessibility and comparability across diverse regions. Organizations receive in‑depth reports featuring indicator rankings, employee Net Promoter Scores (eNPS), demographic breakdowns and year‑over‑year tracking - turning worker voices into actionable insights. These are best practices for worker engagement surveys and highlight how to collect worker feedback digitally in ethical supply chains. Ready to Lead with Worker Wellbeing? The WELL Survey offers a structured way to listen, measure and improve. Whether your goal is regulatory compliance or genuine worker wellbeing, this tool gives you the data and benchmarks to drive meaningful change. To learn more or deploy the survey, visit The WELL Survey website and join the movement to create better, safer workplaces. Workplaces Thrive when Workers Thrive.

September 5, 2025 – Singapore  – Labor Solutions is proud to announce the promotion of Lordiclaire (Lordi) Suriawinata  to Chief Operating Officer (COO) . Lordi has been an integral part of Labor Solutions for more than a decade, consistently demonstrating exceptional leadership, strategic vision, and deep commitment to the company’s mission of empowering workers and businesses worldwide. Lordiclaire Suriawinata, COO Over the past 10 years, she has played a pivotal role in driving operational excellence, leading critical projects, and expanding and developing Labor Solutions’ product offerings. Known affectionately as the “WOVO mama,” Lordi has led the platform’s growth from zero users to millions, transforming it into a trusted tool for worker voice and engagement. She is admired not only for her results-driven approach but also for the support and collaboration she extends to peers and team members. In her new role as COO, Lordi will oversee Labor Solutions’ Product, Technology, Implementation, Operations, and eLearning teams, as well as day-to-day operations. Her leadership will ensure the company continues to scale effectively while maintaining the high standards and innovation that define Labor Solutions’ work. “Lordi’s dedication and vision have been instrumental in shaping Labor Solutions into what it is today,” said Elena Fanjul-Debnam, CEO of Labor Solutions. “We are confident in her new role as COO, she will continue to drive growth and strengthen our impact. I am proud to have her as a partner in leadership.” “Lordi is such a sharp and innovative leader, but what makes her truly stand out is how she balances that brilliance with incredible organization, communication, and empathy,” added Bijie Li, SVP at Labor Solutions. “I have no doubt she’ll take Labor Solutions to even greater heights as COO!” “After ten years at Labor Solutions across multiple roles, I’ve seen how vital frictionless operations are to serving our teams, strategy, and business goals,” said Lordi Suriawinata, COO of Labor Solutions. “I’m honoured to step into the COO role—expect fewer handoffs, clearer ownership, and faster value across every team and project.” Labor Solutions is fortunate to have such a dedicated and visionary leader helping to shape its future. About Labor Solutions Labor Solutions partners with global companies to empower workers, improve workplace communication, and build scalable, sustainable solutions for worker engagement. Its innovative platforms, including WOVO, are trusted by companies and millions of workers around the world.

As new legislation like, CSDDD comes into effect, global companies work to implement new and upcoming human rights due diligence policies and practices, it is essential to place workers at the centre. The intent of the laws is to protect workers and what better way to protect workers than engaging workers.  A Worker-Centric Human Rights Due Diligence (HRDD) approachplaces the well-being of workers at the forefront of supply chain management.   Supporting Suppliers, Protecting Workers   The Worker-Centric HRDD approach represents a paradigm shift in how we conceptualize and implement corporate responsibility within supply chains. At its core, this approach empowers suppliers to take ownership of human resources practices and processes within their own facilities, and prioritizing the rights and well-being of workers.   The scale of the challenge is huge. Without engaging suppliers in the solutions, global companies will be unable to meet the expectations of the new laws.    Key Components  1. Worker-Centric Focus   The cornerstone of this framework is its commitment to listen to the needs and voices of workers. By prioritizing the rights and dignity of workers, companies and suppliers can create a culture of respect and empowerment throughout the supply chain.   The Worker- Centric approaches requires engaging workers throughout the entire process.  This starts with educating workers on their rights and extends to engaging unions and worker representatives in the remediation of grievances. This approach requires companies think about workers needs and perspective first.     2. Supplier Engagement    Unlike traditional top-down approaches to corporate responsibility, this framework requires supplier engagement. It focuses on competencies, rather than issues. This fosters accountability and encourages proactive engagement in addressing human rights issues. Trust is key for both workers and suppliers to be successful. If suppliers think worker feedback will be used against them, they will supress worker voices—making workplaces unsafe. Its key that suppliers are trusted and that trust is passed down to workers.    Every supplier will begin in a different place. This multilevel framework operates as a guide for suppliers to elevate their operations through strategic planning, implementation, and empowering engagement. It focuses suppliers on building competencies and systems with the hope of building trust that cascades throughout the workplace and supply chain. The goal is to ensure suppliers are constantly engaging workers, seeking feedback and acting on that feedback.    3. Collaboration and Transparency   Central to the success of this approach is collaboration and transparency among all stakeholders. By fostering open communication and sharing best practices, companies can collectively work towards more ethical and sustainable ecosystem. Brands should track suppliers’ progress and ensure open dialogue is active and ongoing. When workers stop trusting their employer, brands should be concerned and intervene.    4. Continuous Improvement   The journey towards a truly ethical supply chain is never-ending.  The Worker-Centric HRDD approach emphasizes the importance of continuous improvement, encouraging companies and suppliers to regularly assess and refine their practices to better protect workers' rights.   The Worker-Centric HRDD approach offers a forward-thinking solution to the complex challenges facing modern businesses. By prioritizing the rights and well-being of workers and fostering collaboration among all stakeholders, companies can build more resilient, ethical, and sustainable supply chains for the future. Embracing this framework is not only a moral imperative but also a strategic imperative for businesses seeking to thrive in a rapidly evolving global landscape.   Contact us for more information