How companies respond to complaints and grievances

How companies respond to complaints and grievances –

MPRL E&P perspectives3rd June 2015

Objective: Ensure communities are given a voice and to ensure impact associated with operations affecting the environment and surrounding communities are monitored and effectively addressed

Driving factor: Receiving a social license to operate

GrievanceAn issue, concern, problem, or claim (perceived or actual) that an individual or community group wants a company to address and resolve

ContextMPRL E&P works closely with Mann Field Operator, MOGE, to advise, guide, and supportFarmland in and around oil and gas fieldChanges in land occupancy

Mann Field, Minbu tsp, Magwe

PILOT PHASE

© 2015 MPRL E&P Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

o Piloted in 3 of 14 communities in August 2013

o Provided training to community volunteers

o Held community meetings , erected information boards and and distributed informational cartoons to improve awareness

o Placed grievance collection boxes in strategic locations

Timeframe: 7 days

Grievance warrants action with no payment

Individual(s) remain dissatisfied

FT provides feedback to complainant

Implement

Present to Sr. Mgmt

Negotiate/calculate/and agree FT provides

feedback to complainant


Approved

Grievance report

Incident happens

FT goes on site, acknowledges and registers case

MOGE/FT review and investigate

FMs;Camp

Volunteer

MOGE/FT develop sug. solutions and informs CSR YO

FT receives

grievance

FT/FM/MOGE address incident on-the-spot

Grievance warrants no action

Grievance warrants compens./pymt only

Grievance warrants action with payment


Closeout

Closeout

Implement Closeout

Timeframe: 2 weeks

Timeframe: generally 1-4 weeks

Closeout

Timeframe: generally 1-4 weeks

Individual(s) satisfied


PERFORMANCE

Number of cases filed 36

Number of cases addressed 33

Average time to acknowledgement (days) Target 1-3 days

3

Average time to feedback (days) Target 14 days

16

Average duration to closure (days) Target 30 days

35

Average time to compensation (days) Target 7 days

9

% satisfied with processTarget 50%

100

% satisfied with outcomeTarget 50%

100

PROGRESS UPDATE

o Planning for GRM information dissemination sessions to be delivered by community volunteers

o Providing Training of Trainers (ToT) to community volunteers using the GRM Procedures as a manual

o Target: 50% of households in all 14 communities to be covered by GRM information sessions


COMPLAINTS

04/15/23 MPRL E&P 7

CASES

04/15/23 MPRL E&P 8

CURRENT CHALLENGES

o Effectively addressing all complaints and/or concerns received within an appropriate timeframe, especially when it involves coordinating with multiple government stakeholders

o Coordinating with government stakeholders to engage in direct dialogue with community members as direct engagement with communities did not take place prior to 2012


NEXT STEPS

Closeout Form

Case No./HSE Incident Report Number: ____________

1. Close date:

2. Type of grievance resolution: a. No action b. Action only c. Action with compensation and/or payment d. Compensation and/or payment only

3. If action taken, summarize action taken: Completion date:

4. File Review

Documents to be completed as relevant Yes No N/A Comments, if any Grievance Report GM Record Log Receipt of Information Crop Compensation Calculation Agreement Crop Compensation Receipt Letter requesting payment by MOGE FT Memo Meeting minutes Attach recorded meeting minutes to Appendix 6-A

Evidentiary documentation (pictures, measurements, etc.) Attach pictures of implemented resolutions to Appendix 6-B

5. Meeting log

Date Type of contact People involved Key issues discussed Decisions made


• Community volunteers will deliver information sessions on the GRM process to members of at least 50 percent of households in all communities.

• MPRL E&P will measure the effectiveness of this peer-to-peer information dissemination program and track change in the level of community awareness of the GRM process.

REFERENCES

International Financial Corporation. 2009. Addressing grievances from project-affected communities: Guidance for projects and companies on designing grievance mechanisms. Washington, DC.

Compliance Advisor/Ombudsman (CAO). Advisory note: A guide to designing and implementing grievance mechanisms for development projects. Accessed at www.cao-ombudsman.org/howwework/advisor/documents/implemgrieveng.pdf

Rees, C. with Cahn, D., Sonnenberg, S. and Zandvliet, L. (2011) Piloting Principles for Effective Company–Stakeholder Grievance Mechanisms: A Report of Lessons Learned. CRSI Report No. 46, Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative (CSRI), Harvard Kennedy School, Cambridge, MA.

Rees, C. and D. Vermijs (2008) Mapping Grievance Mechanisms in the Business and Human Rights Arena. CRSI Report No. 28.

IPIECA. Community Grievance Mechanisms Toolkit. Available at http://www.ipieca.org/publication/community-grievance-mechanisms-toolbox

How companies respond to complaints and grievances

Government & Nonprofit

Transcript of How companies respond to complaints and grievances