Html - PUMA CATch up

p : 65 | c : 3 PUMA.SAfe
For the first time ever in PUMA.Safe operations,
the majority of our social monitoring
activities focused
on factories of
PUMA licensees.
Across all tiers
and sourcing
partners, 62 percent
of all audited
facilities globally
were rated A or
B+ while 16 per-
B+ rating.
cent of currently
active facilities
achieved C or D
ratings and thus
failed our audits.
PUMA terminated its partnership with 29
Tier1 facilities for non-compliance found
in 2012. Forty-one facilities were assessed
recurrently in line with our monitoring and
remediation policies for facilities rated B-
or lower. In 12 percent of these we found
worse conditions during our follow-up visits
despite our remediation efforts. Conditions
in the other factories had improved.
In 2015,
90 percent of our
suppliers will
achieve an A or
facTory improvemenT
raTe for mulTiple audiTs
In 2012, PUMA.Safe formally accepted the
results of external party audits from organisations
that have been assessed to have
similar audit tools and rating standards. As
part of our commitment to Better Work, audit
reports for six facilities in Vietnam and
the results of the Footwear audit pilot in
Cambodia replaced PUMA.Safe audits for
PUMA BUSineSS And SUStAinABility RePoRt 2012
these facilities except for the environment
and some health and safety sections that
had not been covered. In
total, nine external audits
were accepted in place of
PUMA.Safe audits, after a
thorough review of the audit
tools used.
PUMA.Safe’s analysis of
audit findings collects similar
findings within general
f.15
t.1
worse.
12.20 %.
eQual.
24.39 %.
failure categories and subcategories. These
categories were modified against the preceding
year to accommodate new external
stakeholder requirements in 2012. A facility
may have several detailed health and safety
findings, for example, but for purposes of
analysis and remediation these are treated
collectively as being one key failure to facilitate
an overall management of these issues
by the facility. The analysis covered only Tier
1 facilities and included failed facilities (C
factory improvement rate for multiple audits
BeTTer.
63.41 %.
and D ratings) as well as A or B+ factories to
assess the scope of issues suppliers from
both grade categories face. Understandably,
certain issues were also found in A and B+
facilities, as noted in the table below.
Figure 15: 63.41 % of the factories were able to improve their standards during the course of multiple audits