Audit company: Bureau Veritas Report reference: Date: 06/07/2012 1

Transcription

1 Supplier name: SCATOLIFICIO SANDRA Site country: ITALY Site name: Parma SMETA Audit Type: 2-Pillar 4-Pillar Audit company: Bureau Veritas Report reference: Date: 06/07/2012 1

2 Audit Company Name: Bureau Veritas Italia Sedex Company Reference: (only available on Sedex System): Sedex Site Reference: (only available on Sedex System) Report Owner (payee): Scatolificio Sandra Srl (If paid for by the customer of the site, please remove for Sedex upload) S P (San Polo) P (Mezzani) Audit Conducted By Commercial NGO Trade Union Multi-stakeholder Purchaser Retailer Brand Owner Combined Audit (select all that apply) Auditor Reference Number: (If applicable) NA Audit company: Bureau Veritas Report reference: Date: 06/07/2012 2

3 Audit Details A: Report #: Audit Details B: Date of audit: / 07 / 2012 C: Time in and time out: Please see Best Practice Guidance v4.0 D: Number of Auditor Days Used: (number of auditor x number of days) Time in: 9.00 Time out: (day 1), (day 2) 2,5 E: Audit type: Full Initial Periodic Full Follow-up Audit Partial Follow-Up Partial Other - Define F: Was the audit announced? Announced Semi announced Unannounced G: Was the Sedex SAQ available for review? Yes No If no, why not? NA I: Auditor name(s) and role(s): Gerardina Glisci (Team Leader), Segio Signani (Team Member) J: Report written by: Gerardina Glisci K: Report reviewed by: L: Report issue date: 06/07/2012 M: Supplier name: Scatolificio Sandra Srl N: Site name: Site 1: San Polo di Torrile PR Site 2: Casale di Mezzani PR O: Site country: Italy P: Site contact and job title: La Rocca Luca - Health and Safety Environmental Manger Q: Site address: Site 1: via del lavoro 2, San Polo di Torrile (Parma) Site 2: strada della Pace 33 bis, Casale di Mezzani (Parma) Site phone: Site fax: Audit company: Bureau Veritas Report reference: Date: 06/07/2012 3

4 Site R: Applicable business and other legally required licence numbers: for example, business license no, and liability insurance S: Products/Activities at site, for example, garment manufacture, electricals, toys, grower T: Audit results reviewed with site management? P. IVA Design, development and manufacture of corrugated sheet and packaging printed and not through the phases of corrugating, bonding, printing, cutting, folding and packaging Yes U: Who signed and agreed CAPR (Name and job title) V: Did the person who signed the CAPR have authority to implement changes? Ferretti Fausto (CEO) Yes W: Previous audit date: NA X: Previous audit type: NA SMETA 2-Pillar SMETA 4-Pillar Other Full Initial Periodic Full Follow-Up Audit Partial Follow- Up Partial Other* *If other, please define: Audit company: Bureau Veritas Report reference: Date: 06/07/2012 4

5 Corrective Action Plan Corrective Action Plan non-compliances Non- Compliance Number The reference number of the noncompliance from the Audit Report, for example, Discrimination No.7 or Carried Over Is this a new non-compliance identified at the follow-up or one carried over (C) that is still outstanding Details of Non- Compliance Details of Non-Compliance Root cause (completed by the site) Preventative and Corrective Actions Details of actions to be taken to clear noncompliance, and the system change to prevent reoccurrence (agreed between site and auditor) Timescale (Immediate, 30, 60, 90,180,365) Verification Method Desktop / Follow-Up [D/F] Agreed by Management and Name of Responsible Person: Note if management agree to the noncompliance, and document name of responsible person Verification Evidence and Comments Details on corrective action evidence Status /Closed or comment The lathe and vertical drill in the workshop (San Polo site) are not equipped with the required safety devices (for example protection screen). 90 D Agreed The safety access to line 1228 in the Mezzani site is bypassed through copies of the keys. 180 F Agreed In the Mezzani site there is no shower in the women s changing room and no changing room for the cleaning staff 180 D Agreed The company s risk assessment process has 90 D Agreed Audit company: Bureau Veritas Report reference: Date: 06/07/2012 5

6 not definitively established what improvement actions are required where noise levels exceed 90 db(a), including required PPEs and safety signs. 6: Working Hours are not Excessive 8 workers (shift supervisors) performed overtime work in 2011 in excess of the maximum annual legal limit of 250 hours. 180 F Agreed 6: Working Hours are not Excessive In two cases sampled during June 2012 (production operators), overtime was above legal maximum limits (more than 8 hours per week) and ETI maximum limits (maximum worked were 14 and 15,5 hours in one week). 180 F Agreed 8A: Sub- Contracting and Homeworkin g Not all subcontracting contracts include safety costs, as required under Italian national legislation 90 D Agreed Corrective Action Plan Observations Non- Compliance Number The reference or Carried Over Is this a new observation identified at the Details of Observation Details of Observation Root cause (completed by the site) Preventative and Corrective Actions Details of actions to be taken to clear noncompliance, and the system Timescale (Immediate, 30, 60, 90,180,365) Verification Method Desktop / Follow-Up [D/F] Agreed by Management and Name of Responsible Verification Evidence and Comments Details on corrective action evidence Status /Closed or comment Audit company: Bureau Veritas Report reference: Date: 06/07/2012 6

7 number of the observation from the Audit Report, for example, Discrimination No.7 follow-up or one carried over (C) that is still outstanding change to prevent reoccurrence (agreed between site and auditor) Person: Note if management agree to the noncompliance, and document name of responsible person The fixing system for the footbridge guard rail in the Mezzani site could be better protected. 60 D Agreed The rest areas in the Mezzani site should be in higher number. 90 D Agreed 8A: Sub- Contracting and Homeworkin g The company control over subcontractors practices on site could be more effective (for example forklift maintenance by logistics provider) 90 D Agreed Good examples Good example Number The reference number of the noncompliance from the Audit Report, for example, Discrimination No.7 Details of good example noted Any relevant Evidence and Comments Audit company: Bureau Veritas Report reference: Date: 06/07/2012 7

8 2: Freedom of Association and Right to Collective Bargaining are Respected Good relationship with the union representatives and focus on stabilizing workers from labour agencies Interview to management and union representative Audit company: Bureau Veritas Report reference: Date: 06/07/2012 8

9 Confirmation Please sign this document confirming that the above findings have been discussed with and understood by you: (site management) Site Representative Signature: Fausto Ferretti Title : CEO Date 06/07/12 Auditor Signature: Gerardina Glisci Title : Lead auditor Please indicate below if you, the site management, dispute any of the findings I dispute the following numbered non-compliances: Date 06/07/12 Signed: Title Date Site Comments: Audit company: Bureau Veritas Report reference: Date: 06/07/2012 9