-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Labor obligations: record labor obligations included in contracts in new social object #404
Comments
Maybe:
Why was paid overtime changed to just overtime? |
Because I'd changed it from overtime to paid overtime initially and realised that it wasn't clear that this was what was intended when this code was originally suggested by CoST. It could have also been meant to reflect agreements around limiting overtime hours, e.g. in the SuRe standard Criterion S2.7 Working Hours and Leave asks for evidence that there is a:
@EvelynDinora was the overtime point relating to limiting hours or ensuring they are paid? |
@odscjen It is ensuring they are paid, but both are important to ensure good practice in working conditions |
Based on the previous comments and further research suggesting the following codelists with descriptions. These descriptions still need altered to ensure they use non-normative language.
Sources
Discussion
|
Hi Duncan, @duncandewhurst Source: |
That sounds good to me, I think that we can replace the reference to the mines convention with that clarification:
|
Thanks @mgraca-prado I've updated the table in #404 (comment) with Duncan's suggestion based on your clarification. @mgraca-prado @jpmckinney @EvelynDinora any objections or clarifications to the rest of the list or can we move this into the Agreed column? |
LGTM. Just make sure to use non-normative words instead of shall, must, etc. in the code descriptions when making the PR. Most codes just use "will", instead. |
@odscjen Agree with James, and no objections from our side. |
Great, thanks both, I'll move this to Agreed now and add a note to the proposal to update the descriptions with non-normative language as part of the PR |
Background
This issue relates to the following CoST IDS elements proposed in the CoST IDS/OC4IDS review:
Labour obligations
Labour obligations
Module: Social
Indicator: Labour compliance
Disclosure format
.summary.social.laborObligations.obligations
array..summary.social.laborObligations.description
. Publish the bidding documents that specify labor obligations: Add a document to.summary.documents
, set its.id
incrementally, set its.documentType
to ‘biddingDocuments’ and set its.url
to the URL at which the documents are available. Publish the signed contract that includes labor obligations: Add a document to.summary.documents
, set its.id
incrementally, set its.documentType
to ‘contractSigned’ and set its.url
to the URL at which the signed contract that includes labor obligations is accessible.Proposal
Create an
laborObligations
object within the newsocial
object (see overarching issue). This shall include anobligations
array of codes taken from the open ‘laborObligations’ codelist, and adescription
field.Research is still required to fully define the codelist
Add the following fields and objects:
Add the following codes:
Example
Sources
cc @EvelynDinora
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: