Guideline for Complaints and Grievances
ANGLOGOLD ASHANTI
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
1
About this Guideline
AngloGold Ashanti’s mining activities affect our stakeholders in complex ways. It is therefore not unexpected that complaints and/or grievances may arise from communities and other
stakeholders throughout the mine lifecycle. While the nature of the complaints or grievances may vary, the manner in which we respond can enhance or adversely affect stakeholder
relations.
How to use this Guideline
This document is a guideline and not meant to be prescriptive. It aims to provide broad guidance in applying the requirements detailed in AGA’s Management Standard on Complaints
and Grievances. Sites, regions and the corporate office are encouraged to develop and use their own innovative and creative methods to meet the requirements of the standard.
For whom this Guideline is written
The primary audience of this Guideline are the Community Relations practitioners who are the main custodian of maintaining good stakeholder relations, based on cross-functional
approach, and who are responsible for implementing the Management Standard on Complaints and Grievances. However, the General Manager remains ultimately responsible for the
overall social performance of the site.
4. A detailed explanation of each main step in the
pathway for Complaints and Grievances
1. An overview of the main elements of the AngloGold
3. A pathway map, depicting the process of
Ashanti Standard for Complaints and Grievances
Complaints and Grievances
2.
A brief introduction outlining the key elements of
the AngloGold Ashanti approach to Complaints
and Grievances
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
2
Our approach to complaints and grievances
1. Receiving and resolving community Complaints and Grievances is part of
AngloGold Ashanti’s engagement with communities
In our engagement we aim to obtain and maintain a social licence to operate. Our
readiness to receive and respond to complaints and grievances contributes to building
strong and healthy relationships with our stakeholders, by demonstrating our ability to
listen and act to their concerns. An effective complaints and grievance mechanism
provides an avenue for affected or impacted stakeholders to express concerns in a
constructive and non-violent manner. It also contributes positively to stakeholder
relations, as it demonstrates that the company is ready and willing to be held
accountable.
3.
An effective complaints and grievances mechanism is an important part
of our commitment towards Human Rights.
AngloGold Ashanti is committed to respecting human rights wherever we
operate. An effective complaints and grievance mechanism may be used as a
source of information for the identification of any adverse human rights impacts
associated with our mining activities. An effective complaints and grievances
mechanism gives AGA the opportunity to address and remedy potential human
rights grievances in a timely, and transparent fashion. This view is also reflected
in the “Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights” developed by
Professor. John Ruggie, Special Representative of the UN Secretary General
on Human Rights and Transnational Corporations, which notes that an
effective complaints and grievances mechanism is essential to demonstrate that
a company embraces its responsibility to respect Human Rights.
2. An effective complaints and grievances mechanism provides us with valuable
information to assist us in management decisions
An effective complaints and grievances mechanism can be a useful tool for a site,
region, country and corporate office. Information obtained from an effective mechanism
can serve as leading indicators to potential conflict, can indicate where potential social
and community risks related to our activities may lie, and inform our stakeholder
engagement efforts.
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
3
Community Management Framework
The Community Management Framework establishes an overview of AGA’s approach to the management of community and social aspects of the business. The intent of the
Community Management Framework, in line with the Business Process Framework (BPF) is to reduce variation in our approach to community and social aspects as well as to provide
clarity to what the key strategic elements are in our engaging with communities. Doing the right work at the right time and in the right way will deliver the required social performance.
Within the Community Management Framework, we achieve this by setting the vision and intent, building our intent and vision into our organisational culture and by evaluation
performance and making the necessary adjustments.
[Building our intent and vision into our organisational cultural]
Community Management
Standards
[Setting Vision and Intent ]
•
[Evaluating Performance]
Engagement
• Community Complaints and
Grievances
Environment and
Community Vision
Values
•
Artisanal and Small Scale Mining
•
Cultural Heritage and Sacred Sites
•
Indigenous Peoples
•
Land Access and Resettlement
•
Socio-Economic Contribution
Measurement of
performance against
standards
Reviews of standards,
guidelines and procedures
Environment and
Community Policy
Community Management
Guidelines
•
Engagement
• Community Complaints and
Grievances
•
Socio-Economic Contribution
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
4
AngloGold Ashanti Complaints and Grievances Standard
Intent
The objective of AngloGold Ashanti’s (AGA) Standard on Community Complaints and Grievances is to ensure that each site implements a locally and culturally appropriate mechanism
to support AGA’s values, upholding and promoting fundamental Human Rights and contributing to building productive, respectful and mutually beneficial partnerships in the communities
in which we operate.
Principles
Attitude
Process Requirements
In implementing this standard, we will apply the
following principles:
In order to meet this standard, our people
need to:
To ensure that this standard is implemented effectively,
we need to have robust processes for:
•
Establish a mechanism early ideally during the
exploration phase;
•
•
•
Ultimate accountability for implementing this standard lies
with the manager in control of the site.
Understand that addressing complaints and
grievances is an important part of AGA’s
engagement with our stakeholders;
Be part of how AGA does business and be applied
with the same rigor and consistency as any other
business process;
•
Be aware of how the complaints and grievances
mechanism works and to encourage community
members to use it;
•
Each site must ensure that it has adequate and
appropriately experienced resources, including
human resources, to implement the mechanism.;
•
Be conscious of company’s responsibility to respect
human rights; and
•
•
Live company values;
Resolution of complaints and grievances should be
overseen by an internal party who is independent
of the grievance; and
•
Complaints and grievances must be documented
and tracked
•
Ensure that the mechanism is accessible
•
Responses to complaints and grievances should be
appropriately timely and transparent
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
5
Link to Management Standard Requirements
Requirement
Slide
7.1
Given that complaints or grievances can occur from the start of any project, a site must develop a mechanism before any complaints are received. This can be done
by conducting a baseline study and other site assessment activities which would identify potential issues that could give rise to community complaints . (A site
should always take steps to prevent complaints and grievances.)
11
7.2
The size, current and future impact of the site, and historical relationships with the community must be borne in mind when designing the mechanism, such that the
design is relevant to the local context.
11
7.3
Where there are legal or regulatory frameworks or requirements for handling community complaints and grievances, the site must first comply with those.
11-12
7.4
While the site is responsible for ensuring that the mechanism is developed and implemented, input from and involvement of its social partners and stakeholders is
required to enhance awareness of and trust in the mechanism.
11-12
7.5
The existence of the mechanism and the process for lodging complaints must be publicized as early as possible and also be easily accessible and understandable
to all affected members of the community.
16, 18
&19
7.6
All relevant employees should know this standard and the course of action to be followed in the event that community complaints are communicated through them.
16
7.7
In the event of a complaint being registered, the site’s complaint resolution process and the complainant’s rights must be explained to them
13, 18
7.8
Complaints must be classified as minor, moderate, high, major or extreme in line with the Company’s Incident Classification and Reporting Management standard.
19
7.9
Complaints classified as high, major and extreme , are considered grievances and must be reported to corporate office in line with the requirements for reportable
incidents in the Company’s Incident Classification and Reporting management standard.
19
7.10
The mechanism must be appropriate to the local culture and context, while recognizing AngloGold Ashanti’s values. Dispute resolution methods must take into
consideration special needs of Indigenous Peoples and disadvantaged minorities, where applicable.
13,
19,& 20
7.11
The procedure for receiving, addressing, and recording complaints should clearly indicate: the date and nature of the complaint; responsibilities for addressing the
complaint; a reasonable timeframe within which the complainant(s) can expect complaints to be addressed; follow up actions required to avoid delays; the final or
current decision on the complaint; the most culturally appropriate feedback mechanism and the management actions required to prevent recurrence.
18-22
7.12
Employees who are accountable and responsible for the mechanism should be appropriately trained.
9,13
7.13
A timeframe must be indicated within which the complainant(s) can expect the complaint to be addressed, and where possible, resolved or a milestone reached. In
instances where the agreed deadline cannot be met for good reasons, for example, where further investigations are required, an update must be provided, including
the reasons for the delay and the revised date for resolution of the complaint.
14, 20
7.14
The action taken to resolve the complaint must be approved by the manager of the site or a member of senior staff who is suitably qualified to assess the
effectiveness of the proposed response and/or intervention.
20
7.15
Feedback on outcome must be provided to all concerned with the outcome.
20
7.16
In the event that a grievance cannot be resolved, it may, with the agreement of the relevant community, be referred to third parties for mediation and/or arbitration.
23
7.17
The mechanism must be monitored and reviewed at least annually.
28
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
6
Definitions
Stakeholders: persons or groups that are directly or indirectly affected by a project as well as
those that may have interests in a project and/or the ability to influence its outcome either
positively or negatively. Stakeholders include operational staff, locally affected communities and
individuals and their formal and informal representatives, government, politicians, religious
leaders, civic organisations, and other groups with special interests, the academic community,
employees, their families, other businesses, shareholders and joint venture partners. These
stakeholders are further defined in the following non-mutually exclusive terms:
Social partners are stakeholders with whom we have or are building mutually beneficial
relationships and partnerships. By definition, some of those with whom we engage prefer not to
be referred to as “social partners” in order to maintain their impartiality and independence. It is
each site’s responsibility to define those it considers its social partners.
Community: a group of people who are directly or indirectly affected by the operation, both
positively and negatively, comprising local communities, including new arrivals, in which the
operation is located (also called host communities) and communities from which it draws its
labour (labour-sending areas); communities along the operation’s transport routes, if applicable,
and, in some cases, other groups, including former local residents and their families who have
moved away but still have strong familial, business or other interests in the area.
Civic and community-based organisations: religious groups, educational organisations and
organisations serving vulnerable and special interest groups such as children, the elderly and the
disabled.
Advocacy NGOs: human rights, social justice, environmental, or other group that seeks to
influence political decisions.
Issues are defined as questions, requests for information, or general perceptions related to
company or contractor actions unrelated to a specific impact or incident. If not addressed to the
satisfaction of the complainant, issues may become complaints.
Complaints refer to concerns, negative comments, expressions of displeasure or discontent,
which are relatively minor and either brought to the attention of, or raised (for example in the
media) about the site with regard to its activities or impacts.
Grievances refer to serious concerns, building resentment, and allegations that are made
against a site regarding its activities or impacts. These are complaints or issues that are
classified as high, major, or extreme by a site.
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) refers to the variety of conflict resolution approaches
that often involve third parties. ADR can involve facilitation, mediation, arbitration et cetera.
Each of these forms serve a different purpose and imply a varying degree of control over the
process by the company.
Media: the local, national and international press.
Development partners: non-profit organisation, government aid agency or multilateral
development agency that assists the site in achieving its societal aims.
Government: national, state/provincial and district/local authority. In some locations (e.g.
tribal areas) it may be appropriate to distinguish between elected and traditional forms of
administration.
Industry: Industry Associations and other mining companies.
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
7
Why a grievance mechanism?
The business case for a grievance mechanism is applicable, regardless of the geographical context in which the company operates. The
intended outcome of using this Guideline is to review and update existing grievance mechanisms or, alternatively, to development effective and
functional new grievance mechanisms. An effective grievance mechanism:
•
•
•
•
Provides an avenue for affected or impacted stakeholders to express concerns in a constructive and non-violent manner;
Improves impact management, as it helps identify issues/concerns at an early stage before they escalate and pose a risk (early warning);
Contributes positively to stakeholder relations, as it demonstrates that the company is ready and willing to be held accountable; and
Is now widely accepted as international industry ‘good practice’ (UN, ICMM, IFC etc.) and a lender requirement.
These developments were reinforced in June 2011, when the United Nations Human Rights Council endorsed the “Guiding Principles on
Business and Human Rights” developed by Prof. John Ruggie, Special Representative of the UN Secretary General on Human Rights and
Transnational Corporations. Access to Remedy is one of the three pillars of Ruggie’s “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework. Site-based
grievance mechanisms are explicitly mentioned as also being essential for a company in demonstrating that it embraces its Responsibility to
Respect Human Rights.
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
8
Effectiveness Criteria
The 2011 'Protect, Respect and Remedy' Framework includes eight effectiveness criteria, which are now broadly accepted as the benchmark against which grievance mechanisms
should be measured. The following table outlines these criteria and provides practical examples of what each principle means for AGA sites.
1.
2.
Criteria
Legitimate: Enabling trust from the stakeholder groups for whose
use they are intended, and being accountable for the fair conduct
of grievance processes.



Accessible: Being known to all stakeholder groups for whose
use they are intended, and providing adequate assistance for
those who may face particular barriers to access.



3.
Predictable: Providing a clear and known procedure with an indicative 
timeframe for each stage, and clarity on the types of process and 
outcome available and means of monitoring implementation.

4.
Equitable: Seeking to ensure that aggrieved parties have reasonable
access to sources of information, advice and expertise necessary to
engage in a grievance process on fair, informed and respectful
terms.
Transparent: Keeping parties to a grievance informed about its
progress, and providing sufficient information about the
mechanism’s performance to build confidence in its
effectiveness and meet any public interest at stake.
Rights-compatible: Ensuring that outcomes and remedies
conform with internationally recognized Human Rights.
5.
6.
7.
A source of continuous learning: Drawing on relevant
measures to identify lessons for improving the mechanism and
preventing future grievances and harms.
8.
Based on engagement and dialogue: Consulting the
stakeholder groups for whose use they are intended on their
design and performance, and focusing on dialogue as the means
to address and resolve grievances.

What could this mean for AGA?
Include key aspects that stakeholders need to see to perceive the mechanism as legitimate and fair.
Involve intended users in the development of the mechanism.
Establish an independent oversight committee.
Broadly disseminate information about the mechanism and its functioning.
Establish multiple access points to lodge a grievance.
Make access points accessible in terms of location, ease of understanding, in the appropriate language,
without intimidation and accessible to non-literate people.
Be clear on process, response and resolution times.
Be clear on the types of grievances that can be accepted and those that cannot.
Explain how resolution plans will be monitored.

Provide a level playing field by offering third party technical support to the aggrieved party or by seeking
external facilitation / mediation support to resolve issues.
Provide a budget, funded internally or from an external donor, to cover the cost for such support.


Stay in touch with the parties and provide regular updates on progress until the issue is resolved or closed.
Report on the overall performance of the mechanism.


Verify that the proposed resolutions do not unintentionally infringe on the rights of others.
Where appropriate, and where they are not in conflict with internationally recognized human right standards,
take into consideration locally generated approaches to human rights.
Periodically review the voiced grievances to identify patterns and amend resolutions accordingly.
Respect differences in the local context to ensure resolutions remain locally relevant
Provide feedback on the grievance mechanisms to corporate departments, so that it can inform adjustment
and continuous improvement of policies and practices to avoid repeat grievances.
Share experience from within AGA and from industry peers.
Consult with stakeholder groups in the design process and performance evaluation of the mechanism (see
guidance on Engagement).
Institutionalize dialogue as the means to address and resolve grievances rather than unilaterally announcing
a company decision.






THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
9
Development and Implementation of Grievance Mechanisms
Implementing a grievance mechanism in isolation is ineffective and possibly counterproductive. By definition, a grievance mechanism needs to be
integrated into the larger community engagement approach of the company. If the grievance mechanism becomes de facto the only way by which the
company and the communities engage, it does not build a relationship and can even provide an incentive to create complaints simply to get company
attention.
Company approaches to employment, contracts and land acquisition can also be major sources of grievances. This highlights the need to have good
policies in place governing these processes. Effective implementation of such policies can go a long way towards grievance prevention, and providing
sufficient resources and trained staff on the ground must support the implementation of such policies.
Set business objectives
1
1. Determine
design process
Do
Plan
2
3
4
5
Act
6
7
mechanism
4. Receive and register
grievances
6. Response and
follow-up
3. Pilot and launch
5. Assess and investigate
7. Resolution and close
2. Design
8
9
8. Tracking and analysis
9. Reporting on performance
The diagram above outlines the pathway for designing, implementing and reporting back on an operational-level, non-judicial grievance
mechanism. This pathway defines four phases (Set business objectives, Plan, Do and Act) and 9 individual steps to this process, which are
aligned with the BPF and outlined in detail in the following pages.
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
10
BPF Framework
SETIING
BUSSINESS
OBJECTIVES
1.
PLAN
Determine Design Process
DO
2. Design Mechanism
3. Pilot and launch
4. Receive and register
5. Assess and investigate
6. Response and follow up
7. Resolution and close
Labour,
Materials &
Equipment
Input
Process Activity
Output
Set Budget
Work Management
Resourcing
Set
Production
Strategy
Set Asset
Performance
Targets
Set Business
Expectations
Set
Service
Strategy
Set
Operating
Master
Schedule
Approve
Work/Cost
Commitments
Acquire/
Replace/
Modify/
Remove
Plan
Work
Schedule
Work
Measure
Social
Performance
Measure
Work
Performance
Execute
Work
Asset
Performance
Measure
Asset
Performance
ACT
8. Tracking and analysis
9. Reporting on performance
Analyse
and
Improve
Copyright; McAlear Management Consultants 2000.
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
11
1
Setting Business Objectives - Determine the Design Process
Guideline for Complaints and Grievances
A first step in the development of the grievance mechanism is the design of the process. It includes the formation of a team, possibly including external stakeholder involvement, as well
as an analysis of the context in which the mechanism will operate.
Determine External
Involvement
Form a Design Team





Steps
Determine the required composition of the design
team
Identify key internal stakeholders and their positions
and interests
Determine what existing corporate mechanism or
protocols could be used
Determine the need for a site manager
Consider if external consultancy input is required



Important
 High-level management support from the outset
 Internal buy-in is critical, especially where a grievance
mechanism already exists
 Design team requires cross-departmental input and
consultation
Person/s accountable for outcomes:
• Community Affairs Manager
Who else is involved in the task?
•
Steps
Establish which external stakeholders (groups)
should be involved in the design of the mechanism
Determine the ideal stage of the process for their
involvement (i.e. from the outset or at a later stage)
Establish the purpose of their involvement
Important
 Clear guidelines for external stakeholders about their
involvement and responsibilities
 Commitment to the process from external
stakeholders
?
Who should be involved?
Internal and external stakeholders
Assess Site Context
Steps
 Consider expected type and volume of grievances given
current and future impacts
 Reflect and document historical relationships with the
community
 Presence of rights advocates (NGOs, unions, politicians)
that may use the mechanism
 Determine if there are established mechanisms (e.g.
ombudsman) that could be integrated into the design
 Gender roles affecting access to remedy
Important
 Design the mechanism in proportion to the anticipated
scale of company impacts and based on a
comprehensive baseline study
 Integrate legal or regulatory frameworks or requirements
for grievance handling
 Ensure alignment with applicable local laws
What you should consider
Outcomes you should aim to achieve
•
Vested interests may have the potential to
manipulate a particular constituency's influence
during the design process
•
A multi-stakeholder complaints and grievances
mechanism design team
•
Grievance mechanisms need to be fit for purpose
•
Using the baseline studies (see Engagement
Guideline), document site context.
•
Vulnerable groups in the design of a mechanism
•
Traditional ways for conflict resolution if
applicable
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
12
2
Plan - Design the Mechanism
Guideline for Complaints and Grievances
Once the design team is in place and the context analyzed, the design of the actual grievance procedure takes place. This includes determination of scope, logistics, resourcing and a
governance framework.
Steps
 Determine what type of complaints and
grievances to accept and which ones
not
 Determine whether to allow individual or
collective grievances or both
 How to integrate contractor related
grievances
 Determine how anonymous complaints
and grievances will be handled
 The stage of the mine lifecycle to which
the complaints and grievance
mechanism applies
Important
 Acknowledge existing ways to deal with
grievances
 One coordinated AGA-contractor
mechanism
Steps
Include the following in the design of the
procedure:
 Access points/methods (step 4)
 Registration methods and initial
response (step 4)
 Investigation process (step 5)
 Response and engagement process
including timeframes (see step 6)
 Third party involvement in recourse
mechanisms (step 7)
 Resolution and close out (step 8)
 Tracking, analysis and reporting (step 9)
Important
• Integrate existing conflict resolution
mechanism if available
?
Who should be involved?
Person/s accountable for outcomes:
• Community Affairs team
•
•
•
Internal and external stakeholders
•
•
Determine
governance processes
Steps
 Determine the necessity of
Hiring/appointment of Grievance Officer
 Select database systems/ specialized
software to capture recorded/registered
complaints or grievances
 Physical location of access points (e.g.
grievance office)
 Establish safeguards, such as automatic
escalation to senior management if a
deadline is missed
Steps
Determine and document:
 Roles and Responsibilities
 The department that will be accountable for
implementing the grievance mechanism
 The internal overseeing party
 Whether there is a need for a Grievance
Response Committee
 The integration of the grievance mechanism
into existing systems and processes (e.g. as
annex in contracts)
Important
 Resource appropriately
 Adhere to time sensitivity of procedural
steps
Important
• A clear and independent governance
structure with senior management
participation
What you should consider
Who else is involved in the task?
•
Plan logistics and
resourcing
Design and document
procedure
Define Scope
Outcomes you should aim to achieve
Where legal or regulatory frameworks exist for
handling community complaints, site must first
comply with those
Access of vulnerable groups to complaints and
grievances mechanism
Consider indirect costs to the user such as
telephone or mailing costs and identify possible
solutions
Costs associated with the development and
implementation of a mechanism (See Tip 1)
The grievance response committee may vary
depending on nature of the case
A complaints and grievances procedure document
which outlines the design and governance aspects of
the complaints and grievances mechanism
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
13
2
Plan - Design the Mechanism
Supporting Information
The Standard on Complaints and Grievances requires that all sites design and implement a complaints and grievances mechanism as well as to document the procedure. The following are
important aspects in the initial design of the mechanism and should be reflected in the procedure.
Defining access points/methods
Lodging methods and initial response
An important aspect in the design of the complaints and grievances mechanism is ensuring that it is
accessible to all stakeholders. In determining how to make the mechanism accessible, the following
aspects should be included into the design process:
Consider
• Using stakeholder mapping results (see Engagement Guideline), engage a representative crosssection of stakeholders and stakeholder groups on most appropriate which access venue.
• Use multiple access points and methods (phone, email, office etc.) depending on local context
Important
• Train all people/groups who are access points in how to accept a complaint or grievance
• Ensure ease of access points for women and vulnerable groups (fear, intimidation)
• Access point need to be open to anonymous grievances
Note
• Include trusted third party access points if these are more trusted than company access points
• Literacy levels and cultural nuances affect preferences for types of access points
Investigation process
The complaints and grievances procedure must indicate the process to be followed in
investigating each complaint and grievance.
Consider
The Investigation process should outline:
• Timeframes
• Accountabilities and responsibilities
The ease of lodging of complaints for all stakeholders is design element in a complaints
and grievances mechanism. It is also important to respond to each lodged complaint,
acknowledging receipt.
Consider
• Ensure that complaints and grievance procedure indicates that upon lodging of
complaint or grievance, the process and the complainants rights must be explained
• Ensure that lodging complaints is easy for complainants; use information about local
context to design simple lodging methods
• Outline the process should a grievance falls outside scope: refer to other options
• Provide non-literate options
• Establish appropriate ways to formally acknowledge complaint or grievance (paper slip,
email, sms etc)
Important
• Complaints can be made verbally but need to be documented
• Acknowledgement must be tangible (printed)
• When receiving the grievance, explain the steps of the mechanism
Note
• If possible, use the process of responding to lodged complaints as a means to engage
and have a dialogue
• Commit to a maximum response time in the acknowledgement
• Print contact details for process inquiries
Important
• Train all relevant and responsible personnel on the investigation process
• Ensure that should engagement with the complainant be necessary during the investigation
process, that this is done in a respectful manner.
• Investigation should be overseen by senior manager or an oversight committee
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
14
2
Plan - Design the Mechanism
Supporting Information
Third party involvement in recourse mechanisms
Response and engagement process
The complaints and grievances standard requires that “In the event that a grievance cannot be
resolved, it may, with the agreement of the relevant community, be referred to third parties for
mediation and/or arbitration”.
With regards to designing the response and engagement process aspects of the
complaints and grievance mechanism, the standard indicates that “A timeframe must be
indicated within which the complainant(s) can expect the complaint to be addressed, and
where possible, resolved or a milestone reached. In instances where the agreed deadline
cannot be met for good reasons, for example, where further investigations are required,
an update must be provided, including the reasons for the delay and the revised date for
resolution of the complaint” and “Feedback on outcome must be provided to all
concerned with the outcome.”
Consider
The complaints and grievances mechanism design must reflect the mediation and/or arbitration
requirement and determine:
•
When to use third parties
•
For what purpose
•
Funding mechanism for third party involvement
•
Selection or vetting process for third party involvement
Consider
•
Establish and document within the procedure what milestones will be communicated
to the complainant, and the process of engagement should the resolution deadlines
not be met,
Assign roles and responsibilities for the communication of milestones or delays
Important
•
Third party credibility
•
•
Approval from both sides based on agreed selection criteria
Important
•
Third party involvement must reinforce not undermine company-community relations and
communication
•
The initial response on lodging the complaint or grievance creates an expectation
with the complainant about the process to be followed. Lack of responsiveness in a
timely and agreed manner can be damaging to the credibility of the mechanism and
the company
•
The engagement process should be assigned to relevant personnel and be reflective
of the seriousness of the complaint or grievance.
Note
•
Identify possible third parties during design phase
•
Credible third parties may already exist
•
Involving third parties does NOT mean loss of company control over the process; parties
can agree to disagree
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
15
2
Plan - Design the Mechanism
Supporting Information
Tip 1: Beware of the Need to Budget Associated Costs
• Public dissemination efforts,
• Consultancy fees
• Consultations costs,
• Third party costs
• Training of staff/contractors,
• Staff cost and expenses (computer, vehicle)
How does the Grievance Mechanism relate to the Whistle Blowing Line?
The Whistle Blowing or Ethics Line is one way by which employees, contractors, community members or other stakeholders can lodge a
grievance. The whistle blowing line is typically used for allegations of unethical practices or other concerns that the aggrieved party wants to bring
to the attention of the company at the highest level.
The whistle blowing line allows for anonymous grievances or allegations to be lodged directly to AngloGold Ashanti. This is to ensure no site level
interference in the case takes place.
As a general rule, allegations of corruption or other serious misconduct of AngloGold Ashanti staff could be made through the whistle blowing line.
For all other grievances, the community grievance mechanism should be used as a first point of entry.
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
16
3
Plan - Pilot and Launch
Guideline for Complaints and Grievances
Before formally starting to use the procedure, it needs to be tested first and subsequently, information about the new system broadly disseminated, both inside the organization as a well
as amongst intended user groups.
Test
Disseminate Externally
Disseminate Internally
Steps
• Test the procedure by using informal complaints or
media reports and handle these as if they were
formal grievances
• Use feedback from test to modify procedure
Steps
 Present the mechanism to senior managers and
internal committees
 Develop speaking points for (contractor) local staff
to inform their networks
 Conduct an internal awareness campaign;
newsletter, toolbox meetings etc.
Steps
 Use existing engagement forums to publicise
procedure and mechanism
 Identify the best existing media (radio, newspaper)
to inform stakeholders about mechanism
 Use company communications structure
 Use an official launch date to increase awareness
Important
• Ensure complete functioning of all aspects of the
mechanism before dissemination campaign. Do not
make it up as you go!
Important
 The most senior manager should make clear he/she
expects full collaboration from all Departments
 Disseminate amongst contractor staff
Important
 Do not officially start the mechanism before the
successful conclusion of the pilot
 Take, and be seen as taking, community feedback
and suggestions seriously
Who should be involved?
Person/s accountable for outcomes:
• Community Affairs team
?
•
•
Who else is involved in the task?
•
•
•
Internal and external stakeholders
•
•
What you should consider
Outcomes you should aim to achieve
Consider testing hypothetic complaints with vulnerable groups
to test, accessibility, ease of use, etc.
Establish and publish response time targets internally and
externally
Be clear on what should and should not be expected
Combine awareness on the mechanism with a focus on
grievance prevention
Make sure there is space for people to express their concerns
Expect peak in grievances immediately after official launch
•
Successfully piloted or tested mechanism prior to
launch
•
A public communication of the complaints and
grievance mechanism process both internally and
externally
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
17
3
Plan - Pilot and Launch
Case Studies
The link between Grievance Management and
Engagement in Colombia
Involvement of Third Parties in Madagascar
Know and Show questions in Kazahstan
The Challenge:
The Challenge:
The Challenge:
A company intended to have an independent
recourse mechanism. However, it felt that very few
civil society groups were genuinely independent. As
well, company management expressed concern that
the involvement of third parties could imply a loss of
company control.
The company had established a robust grievance
procedure including a data base system, a recourse
mechanism and a high level governance structure.
Many managers thought they had developed a fool
proof grievance mechanism. That was until an audit
asked how the company could demonstrate that its
grievance mechanism had credibility in the
perception of its intended users.
A company had spent a lot of resources on
formalising its grievance mechanism. The
mechanism was designed against a background of
nearly absent engagement efforts with local
communities. The company thought it would use the
public dissemination of the grievance mechanism to
revamp stakeholder engagement.
The Process:
The company decided to establish an oversight
committee made up of respected individuals (a
professor, an ex-judge and a business woman) who
had the mandate to review the grievance process
and verify that the company conducted a rigorous
investigation or, alternatively, ought to be conducting
a repeat investigation headed by the Head of the
Department associated with the grievance. This
showed the company was responsive to the wishes
of an independent and credible committee whilst
maintaining control over the investigation process
The Process:
The Outcome:
The Outcome:
The Outcome:
The company realized that a grievance mechanism
would not have any legitimacy in the absence of a
broader engagement strategy. It decided to triple the
number of community relations field officers in
addition to rolling out the grievance mechanism.
Heads of Departments had an incentive to ensure
that first order investigations were conducted in a
professional and rigorous manner. As a result, the
oversight committee is increasingly “ruled” that the no
second order investigation was needed.
Perception surveys identified that some of the
previously held assumptions were incorrect. This led
to discussions with user groups how to improve the
mechanism and to include potential complainants in
the development of KPIs.
The Process:
As part of the roll-out process of the new grievance
mechanism, the company visited impacted
communities, many which had not been in touch with
the company for many years. Some local
communities noted “This is the first time in twelve
years the company has visited this community. We
do not care about a grievance mechanism, we just
want to be in touch with you and be able to speak
with you.”
To the company, the ‘know and show’ questions
came as a bit of a surprise. Although these were
straightforward questions, the site struggled to readily
provide answers. It realised that many of their
positive impressions were based on assumptions that
had yet to be tested. Perception surveys were
subsequently conducted, as was the explicit tracking
of satisfaction on process and outcome on
investigation outcome forms.
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
18
4
Do - Receive and Register Grievances
Guideline for Complaints and Grievances
Once stakeholders are made aware of the procedure, the next step is to ensure potential users have unrestricted access to the procedure and that they get evidence of formal
acceptance of their complaint or grievance by the company.
Lodging Complaints or Grievances
Steps
 Complaints must be lodged according to the complaints and
grievance procedure
 If grievance falls outside scope eg a labour related complaint
and grievance, complainant should be directed to the correct
mechanism
 On lodging the complaint or grievance, it should be recorded
and documented according to pre-determined system by
person responsible
Steps
• Complaints and grievances should be formally acknowledge
grievance (paper slip, email, telephone call, sms) in a manner
pre-determine in the complaints and grievances procedure
Important
 Upon lodging the complaint or grievance, complainants
rights must be explained
 Complaints can be made verbally but need to be
documented
Important
 Acknowledgement must be tangible (printed)
 When receiving the grievance, explain the steps of the
mechanism
?
Who should be involved?
Person/s accountable for outcomes:
• Community Affairs team
Who else is involved in the task?
•
Acknowledge Receipt
Internal and external stakeholders
What you should consider
Outcomes you should aim to achieve
•
Use the lodging process as a means to engage
and have a dialogue
•
•
Pro-active approach: roaming officers, presence
during market days etc
A complaints and grievances mechanism that
stakeholder find accessible and easy to register
their complaint or grievance.
•
Responsiveness by ensuring that all complaints
and grievances within the mechanism’s scope are
acknowledged.
•
Commit to a maximum response time in the
acknowledgement
•
Print contact details for process inquiries
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
19
5
Do - Assess and Investigate Grievances
Guideline for Complaints and Grievances
Prior to investigating a grievance by an assigned party, it should be assessed against risk and, where possible, responded to quickly to ensure that small issues are addressed
immediately and before they become bigger challenges.
Classify complaint or
grievance
Determine
Investigation Party
Initial Follow-up
Carry out
Investigation
Steps
• Shortly after the recording of the
complaint or grievance, the site must
allocate a classification in accordance to
the AGA Incident Classification and
Reporting Standard
Steps
 Initial response should be quick to
address small issues (within 24
hours)
 Defer to appropriate department if
deeper investigation is needed
Steps
 Determine which department should conduct the
investigation
 Contractor related grievances should be
addressed through contract owner
Steps
 Determine the root cause of the
grievance
 Keep parties informed about progress
 Log and document all information
gathered to ensure final decision is
evidence-supported
Important
• High, major and extreme risk grievances,
must be reported to corporate office
• The classification of the complaint or
grievance, can inform social, community,
security etc. risks.
Important
 Behavior is key: listen, respect, inform
 Maintain confidentiality of grievant
when requested
Important
 Train investigating parties in engagement
techniques and culturally appropriate behavior
 Provide expected timelines
 Define roles and responsibilities: investigators
from the associated department only determine
the technical accuracy of the grievance, they do
not negotiate
Important
• How to ensure to escalate the case
internally in case timelines are not met
?
Who should be involved?
Person/s accountable for outcomes:
• Community Affairs team
What you should consider
Do not ignore minor complaints as they may indicate
larger trends
•
Decide how to direct specific grievances (e.g.
Human Rights related) through specific internal
channels
Who else is involved in the task?
•
Outcomes you should aim to achieve
•
Internal and external stakeholders
•
A delayed response can become a grievance in
itself
•
Designing a database system that automatically
triggers reminders and escalates a case internally
•
For all complaints and grievances received,
conduct an investigation in accordance with the
procedure, with necessary documentation
•
If appropriate, reassess site level community and
security risks based on individual complaints and
grievances and on trends
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
20
6
Do - Response and Follow-up
Guideline for Complaints and Grievances
The response needs to be considered against various factors, such as the risk of setting a precedent, and typically involves multiple company disciplines. Once the response is
formulated it is discussed with, rather than announced to, the complainant. Subsequent dialogue aims to seek mutually agreeable solutions.
Formulate response
Communicate and Discuss
Steps
 The appropriate department/accountable person, will determine an
appropriate action plan for the resolution of the complaint/grievance.
 The action plan for resolution needs to be approved by the site
manager or a suitably qualified senior staff member
 Ensure the proposed resolution addresses the root cause of the
grievance
 Review the proposed response through a human rights lens and
ensure that it is rights-compatible
Important
 Some company responses may set a precedent for future cases
 Mandate the grievance officer to determine a response to low/medium
grievances to make the mechanism more flexible and less
bureaucratic
 Avoid using legal language
?
Who should be involved?
Person/s accountable for outcomes:
• Community Affairs team
Who else is involved in the task?
•
Internal and external stakeholders
Steps
 Provide response within a set timeframe.
 If more time is needed, communicate this in writing and verbally
 Ensure that feedback mechanism is culturally appropriate
 If complainant does not agree with proposed response, explain
the options available
 Ensure that acceptance or non-acceptance is tracked (e.g.
through a signed or thumb-printed outcome form). Clearly explain
the content of the form in non-literate circumstances
Important
• How the response is discussed is often as important as what is
discussed
What you should consider
Outcomes you should aim to achieve
•
Action plan for the resolution of
complaint/grievance should be developed with
multiple internal stakeholders as necessary
•
Providing responses through an assigned staff
member responsible for complaints and
grievances, as appropriate
•
A comprehensive action plan which appropriately
reflects the seriousness of complaint or grievance
•
Formal response to the complaint or grievance
•
Dialogue with the complainant concerning the
resolution process
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
21
6
Do - Response and Follow-up
Supporting Information
Tip 2: Addressing False Claims
•
Inevitably claims will be made that appear false, exaggerated, unfounded or frivolous in nature. Despite the incurred cost and effort, it is important to investigate these
claims nonetheless, as:
•
Addressing every grievance with the same approach ensures consistency,
•
Apparently unfounded grievances may relate to a separate more important issue that deserves attention, and
•
False grievances to, for example, claim compensation can be rejected based on evidence and the results made public to discourage repeat cases.
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
22
7
Do - Resolution and Close-out
Guideline for Complaints and Grievances
When parties agree on a resolution, an implementation plan should be developed and, where needed, include timelines, monitoring options and a close out mechanism to determine if
the outcome of the procedure was satisfactory and indeed addressed the initial grievance.
Agreement on
Resolution
Implementation
Plan
Steps
 Agreement on resolution must be made
verbally and in writing
 External communication of the result if it is in
the public interest
 Safeguards to ensure resolution does not
lead to intra and intergroup conflict
Steps
 Determine timeframe
 Define indicators for “success”
 Determine roles and
responsibilities
 Agree on monitoring mechanism
Steps
 Conducting Monitoring and Evaluation
of the implementation plan jointly with
the aggrieved parties
Steps
 Grievance closure form must be signed
 Verify that outcome was satisfactory
 Verify that the resolution process was
undertaken in a respectful manner (e.g.
through checkbox on the outcome form)
Important
 Verify that the proposed resolution addresses
the cause
 Document results also when there is no
agreement
 Be as specific as possible
Important
• All departments and contractors
concerned should be informed
Important
 Disseminate how monitoring of
resolutions will be implemented
 Ensure that Monitoring and Evaluation
efforts are tracked and measured
against implementation plan
Important
• A signed closure form defines the
resolution period
?
Who should be involved?
Person/s accountable for outcomes:
• Community Affairs team
What you should consider
Internal and external stakeholders
In some cases, the resolution of a grievance could
include an apology or other non-tangible gesture
•
Not all resolutions can be implemented quickly (e.g.
no road repair during rainy season)
•
Including third party reviews of community
agreements or mechanism performance enhances
legitimacy, transparency and credibility
•
Closure
Outcomes you should aim to achieve
•
Who else is involved in the task?
•
Monitoring and
Evaluation
External communication of the result could increase
legitimacy and credibility of the mechanism
•
An agreed upon solution, if possible, that reflects
the internal investigation and engagement with
the complainant
•
Written account of the resolution of the complaint
or grievance
•
No complaints and grievances that have
exceeded the agreed upon date of resolution,
without prior feedback to complainant
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
23
7
Do - Resolution and Close-out
Supporting Information
Escalation and Involvement of third parties
Escalation of the grievance only occurs when dialogue and negotiation does not lead to a satisfactory outcome and when the aggrieved party wants to appeal the initial company
proposition. This recourse mechanism may include third parties.
Consider

Determine the appeals process; internal appeals process (repeat investigation) or an external process

Appropriate ways to establish a joint company-community recourse mechanism

Define the conditions to trigger third party involvement (e.g. only in the case of grievances or also for complaints)

Determine the purpose of possible third party involvement (facilitation, mediation, arbitration, technical expertise etc.)
Important

To have an appeals process in case the complainant does not accept initial company response

Avoid the company being seen as an investigator and a judge at the same time, for example by unilaterally announcing a
decision
Note

In some contexts sites will have to create an external appeals committee

Do not exclude alternative dispute resolution (ADR) or mediation upfront; even if the case would stand up in court, ADR
might yield additional options for resolution
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
24
7
Do - Resolution and Close-out
Supporting Information
Addressing versus Resolving Grievances
How grievances are being handled is as important are the outcome of the grievance. Even if people get what they asked, this does not necessarily mean that they are satisfied
if they find the company difficult to deal with. Conversely, and this is especially true in cases where there is little evidence to substantiate a claim but where the process is
respectful, even if the grievant does not obtain what they initially demanded the grievance mechanism provides an opportunity for people to feel they are listened to and to
move on in their relationship with the company.
Asking people to sign off on their satisfaction with the outcome of the grievance procedure (did they get what they wanted) as well as with the process of the procedure will
allow the company to verify the level of residual risk after a complaint has been dealt with. For example, if people received the outcome they were looking for, but say they are
not satisfied about the process, this would be a negative Key Performance Indicator (KPI). Conversely, if people did not get what they wanted but valued the process by which
their case was dealt with, this would be a positive KPI. An independent third party can be contracted to verify the assessments periodically and to assure such statements are
genuine
Addressed
Not addressed
People get what they asked for
Resolved
People are satisfied
Not Resolved
People are not satisfied
People do not get what they asked for
Success
The system works
Success
Indicator that the process was respectful (positive KPI)
Failure
The way the complaint was handled increased risk
exposure (negative KPI)
Failure
Alert people to recourse mechanisms available to them
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
25
8
Act - Tracking and Analysis
Guideline for Complaints and Grievances
To ensure assessment of the performance of the mechanism, KPIs are developed and tracked on an ongoing basis. Analysis is conducted to identify trends that pinpoint opportunities for
improvement.
Tracking
Analysis
Steps
• Determine first what management information you need, then
develop Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
Steps
 Conduct periodic analysis of trends and developments
 Share analysis with associated departments
management team
Important
• Cross referencing of multiple fields of information in order to
monitor different trends, mechanism capacity and response
efficacy
Important
• Determine feedback mechanism that includes management
actions required to prevent recurrence
?
Who should be involved?
Person/s accountable for outcomes:
• Community Affairs team
What you should consider
•
Who else is involved in the task?
•
•
Internal and external stakeholders
•
and
Outcomes you should aim to achieve
Consistency in company approach – dealing with the
same issue in different ways at different times is likely
to compromise community confidence in the system
and the system’s overall efficiency, effectiveness and
credibility.
Trends in grievances may be better resolved with a
policy change than continuing to address them
individually
In analyzing results, evaluate not only whether it
worked for the company but whether it worked for the
community
•
Data demonstrating performance of complaints
and grievances mechanism
•
Analysis of complaints and grievance trends
•
If appropriate, reassess site level community and
security risks based on complaints and
grievances trends
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
26
8
Act - Tracking and Analysis
Supporting Information
Key Performance Indicators
Below are a number of suggested Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that help measure the performance of a
mechanism and patterns in usage:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Number of New/ Closed cases
Percentage of cases that were not acknowledged within the specified timeframe
Trends in grievances per theme
Trends in grievances per community/village
Trends in grievances per department
Trends in grievances per contractor
Average resolution time
Division between true versus false claims
Number/percentage of company decisions that are being challenged
Number of court cases
Trends in repeat grievances associated with the same department
Trends in non-compliance of company departments with the timeframe for investigation
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
27
8
Act - Tracking and Analysis
Supporting Information
Figure 1: Trends in Volume of Grievances over Time
The immediate period following the initiation of a grievance
mechanism will be busy, as communities test it out and
unaddressed complaints and grievances that have accumulated
are finally addressed. This initial period where the effectiveness of
the mechanism is demonstrated is generally followed by a period
of calm. At the point where the company has addressed the initial
caseload of grievances, it could consider including legacy cases,
which will likely see a second, less intense, peak in grievance
volume. Once all current and legacy cases are dealt with, the site
could choose to focus on grievance prevention, which should
show a gradual decrease in the number of cases that need to be
managed.
Tip 3: How do you know the mechanism is working?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
After an initial spike, frequency of grievances decrease/types of demands are less severe
Decrease in violent or obstructive behavior
People say they feel they have an effective avenue to discuss grievances in a non-confrontational manner
Decreased repetition of the same grievances filed against the same department
Decrease in bogus claims
Decrease in the number of appeals made
More people sign the grievance outcome form even if outcome is not in their favor
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
28
9 Act - Measuring Performance and Reporting
Guideline for Complaints and Grievances
The information that is obtained from the analysis is fed back to relevant departments to avoid repeat grievances. Externally, company performance, as well as the public perception of
that performance, is reported publicly.
Measuring Performance
Steps
 Determine ways to obtain community feedback on legitimacy, ease of use and any
changes, positive or negative in the overall community perception of the grievance
mechanism and the company (such as a perception survey)
 Use past complaints and grievances cases to train new staff on site realities
Important
 Develop criteria that allows the site to “know and show” the mechanism is aligned with
the Ruggie effectiveness principles
 The mechanism must be reviewed at least annually
 Understanding and using the information gathered in reports should cycle back into
the system through mechanism improvements and policy changes
?
Who should be involved?
Person/s accountable for outcomes:
• Community Affairs team
•
Internal and external stakeholders
Steps
 Determine how site results might be shared more broadly with the company or
the industry to promote learning (see supporting information for reporting
examples)
 Establish reporting requirements on performance in accordance with regulatory
and AngloGold Ashanti reporting requirements such as the Global Reporting
Initiative, Board reports and governance reporting requirements
Important
 Be transparent about the learning the company has gained as a result of the
mechanism. This will also enhance the company’s overall accountability,
legitimacy and credibility.
 Provide feedback to community, as this demonstrates the company both values
community input and community involvement in the continuous improvement of
the grievance mechanism
What you should consider
•
•
Who else is involved in the task?
Reporting
•
•
Outcomes you should aim to achieve
Be aware that KPIs that track numbers of grievances,
response times etc. do NOT necessarily measure
overall performance of the mechanism
Involve user groups in the development and
monitoring of overall grievance mechanism
performance
Review the grievance mechanism periodically and
independently
Communicate successes internally to promote the
utility and understanding of the mechanism and to
build trust in the mechanism
•
Performance of mechanism to be determined and
reported internally and externally as appropriate.
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
29
9
Act - Measuring Performance and Reporting
Supporting Information
The following are examples of the types of reports based on the statistics generated in a grievance mechanism.
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
30
Retrofitting Existing Mechanisms
Most publicly available guidance focuses on developing a complaints and grievance mechanism from scratch. The reality is that most sites will
already have an existing way to handle grievances. Updating or replacing such a mechanism can pose some particular challenges. Some key
lessons learned highlight the need for:
Being sure to acknowledge existing good practices. Determine what work well already, what does not and how successful, existing practices
can be incorporated into the new approach.
Conduct a gap analysis and risk assessment of the existing process against the Effectiveness Criteria. Such an analysis will
demonstrate the degree to which the existing mechanism is out of date and can serve to create internal support for a possible revision of the
mechanism (See Appendix 1).
Expect, and plan for, dealing with push-back. Especially when people feel ownership for the old way of dealing with grievances, or wonder
“why fix it if it’s not broken.” Others may feel exposed or view a grievance as a failure.
Develop a process map. A carefully planned process allows for the involvement of internal stakeholders at the right time and in the right order.
Ensure that you first build up internal support from a small group of stakeholders to generate critical mass.
Involve Heads of Departments early. In contexts where resolving a complaint has traditionally been the responsibility of the Community
Relations team, a new mechanism will change this and involve active investigative participation from the departments associated with the
grievance. Heads of departments may initially need to get used to assigning team members for grievance handling.
Sites that feel they have effective processes in place to handle complaints and grievances may want to assess their mechanism against the
“know and show” questions, which are based on the Report of the Special Representative on Business and Human Rights. It is expected that
audits on complaints and grievance mechanisms will increasingly request companies to know and show how their mechanisms are aligned with
the Effectiveness Criteria.
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
31
Learning embedded into Organisational systems
Guideline for Complaints and Grievances:
The overall engagement performance of the site, region, country office and corporate office, measured through the analysis of the outcomes and process indicators, should be
incorporated back into the setting of business objectives and the engagement planning process through appropriate review mechanisms.
.
Learning embedded into
organisational systems
Plan
Set business
objectives
1
1. Determine
design process
2
Do
4
3
5
Act
6
7
8
6. Response and
follow-up
7. Resolution and close
9
8. Tracking and analysis
2. Design
mechanism
4. Receive and register
grievances
3. Pilot and launch
5. Assess and investigate
?
What you should consider
Outcomes you should aim to achieve
•
Analyse complaints and grievance data such
as KPIs to influence engagement strategy/plan
•
•
Formal, appropriate and timely feedback on
Performance of Complaints and Grievances
Mechanism and improvement/modification
Involve stakeholders in the formulation of
recommendations for improvement
•
Trends identified through complaints and
grievances should influence engagement strategy
•
Multidisciplinary/Multi-stakeholder Review of
mechanism at least on an annual basis with
deficiencies, learnings, review outcomes to be
incorporated in the design of the mechanism.
Who should be involved?
Person/s accountable for outcomes:
• Community Affairs Manager
Who else is involved in the task?
• Community Affairs team, Management committee
at site
9. Reporting on performance
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
32
Conclusion
Grievance mechanisms are now broadly implemented in the mining industry. Based on experience, the following are some key lessons learned:
-
-
-
-
-
-
A grievance mechanism is NOT a silver bullet for establishing relations and cannot substitute for engagement. Whereas a grievance mechanism
focuses on managing or addressing grievances and is inherently responsive, stakeholder engagement aims to prevent grievances from occurring by taking a
pro-active approach. Thus, these approaches are complementary.
It is better not to have a grievance mechanism than to have a poorly implemented one. Every grievance that is accepted implies a promise to respond to
an individual or group. Not following through on this promise, or suggesting a response that is biased or disproportionate to the complaint raised, undermines
company efforts to establish and maintain stakeholder relations. Thus, a grievance mechanism must be adequately resourced and staffed.
Have a fast track procedure to deal with minor issues. Many grievances can be addressed easily if they are responded to within 24 hours. Keep the
design of the mechanism ‘light’ with room for quick response times where possible but also has the capacity to respond rigorously where needed.
Support from site leadership is key. The implementation of a grievance mechanism may mean that the responsibility for resolving an issue is no longer the
responsibility of the Community Relations department but of the department associated with the grievance. Especially in the early stage, management may
have to encourage the departmental head to collaborate in the investigation process.
Acknowledge existing good grievance handling practices. Most sites will already have a way of dealing with complaints and grievances. Be sensitive to
an existing sense of ownership over a different method. Especially at existing sites, gaining internal buy-in for a new grievance mechanism can be at least as
challenging as gaining buy-in from external stakeholders.
The personality of the Grievance Officer is important. Such a position requires a person who is compassionate but firm with external stakeholders, and
assertive with internal stakeholders in soliciting their collaboration.
The grievance mechanism needs to be resourced adequately. There needs to be sufficiently dedicated resources (officers, transportation) to implement
the mechanism to prevent grievances from falling between the cracks, or being sidelined by other duties.
The manner in which a grievance is handled is as important as the outcome. Addressing a grievance is not the same as solving a problem. Providing an
aggrieved person or group what they want does NOT mean that they will be satisfied. In some cases, aggrieved parties get what they asked for but are upset
by the manner in which they were dealt with; they still pose a social risk to the company. Conversely, others may not get what they wanted, but a wellimplemented grievance handling process increased their respect and appreciation for the company.
Resolving an issue is not a way to seek a legal ‘win’. It is a relationship-building tool aimed at maintaining local support and being open to solutions. For
example, sharing feedback regarding the outcome of internal investigations, even if the complaint has no valid cause, is essential to be seen as responsive
and respectful to local concerns.
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
33
Appendix 1: “Know and Show” Questions for Consideration in Applying the Effectiveness Criteria
There are no generally agreed KPIs that measure the success of the mechanism. Instead, companies will be expected to know and to be able to demonstrate (“to know and show”) that their mechanism
is aligned with the Ruggie effectiveness criteria. The following table outlines questions related to each of the criteria listed in chapter 1 that will help guide the Site team in developing KPIs or be able to
gather evidence that would demonstrate alignment with the principles. This list is not meant to be exhaustive, but aims to instill rigor in the grievance mechanism by asking some hard questions.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Legitimate
a. What are the ways the site knows and can show the complaints and grievance mechanism has legitimacy in the eyes of its users?
b. How does the company know, and how is it able to show, that people are not using the mechanism because they have no need, rather than because they lack trust in the
mechanism or do not know about its existence?
c. How does the company know and is able to show, that stakeholders feel that the logging of a grievance will have no detrimental effect on community benefits, career
opportunities or personal retribution in case of a grievance?
Accessible
a. How do you know what the best way is to disseminate the mechanism amongst the broader population, especially amongst those currently not using the mechanism,
vulnerable groups, and indigenous populations?
b. How does the company know and able to show, that the complaint and grievance mechanism is known amongst intended users, especially those that have a verbal
culture?
c. How would you know and be able to show that the complaint and grievance mechanism is perceived as accessible and free from obstacles to its use?
Predictable
How will the Site know and be able to show, that local people and staff find the complaint and grievance mechanism predictable in terms of process, for example that their
grievance is being taken seriously?
Equitable
a. How does the company know if communities and employees feel they can engage and negotiate with the company on an equal footing?
b. What are ways by which aggrieved parties could have access to third parties in case they feel they lack the technical expertise or proper understanding about their rights?
Know
Show
Know
Show
Know
Show
Know
Show
Transparent
a. What are the areas where transparency can be enhanced (e.g. with regard to outcomes)? What are the areas where confidentiality is essential?
b. How would you know what local stakeholders and employees find an appropriate level of transparency other than legal requirements regarding confidentiality?
Rights-Compatible
a. Have rights for specific groups, such as Indigenous Peoples, been considered?
b. Has the company considered traditional rights with regard to conflict resolution?
c. Are proposed resolutions reviewed through a Human Rights lens?
A Source of Continuous Learning
a. What are the appropriate KPIs that will allow the company to measure performance of the mechanisms against the Principles?
b. How does the company show that lessons learned from the complaint and grievance mechanism are integrated into policies and practices and are addressed
systematically?
Based on Engagement and Dialogue
a. How does the company know that people who are dissatisfied with the outcome of the mechanism and effectively have no recourse option other than to go to court, are
not forming a group who could become a social risk for the company?
b. How does the company know who affected communities and vulnerable groups trust as their representatives for the purposes of dialogue and engagement?
c. How does the company know and is able to show that aggrieved people feel that a solution was based on engagement and dialogue rather than being unilaterally decided
by the company?
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
Know
Show
Know
Show
Know
Show
Know
Show
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE
34
THIS DOCUMENT IS UNCONTROLLED IN HARDCOPY FORMAT
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
VERSION
DATE
Complaints and Grievance Guideline
5
10 December 2012
PAGE