Country: France – Publication: Entreprise et Carrières – ID: 406_JA_FR
Type Award: General Award
Equality, Diversity, Responsibility. What is the point of labels?
More and more companies are having their HR processes audited by third parties to check that they
are in line with the principle of equal opportunities. This evaluation may take the form of labels,
diagnoses, testing procedures, and so on. Companies that have undertaken this process stress what
a solid structure it creates, but also how time consuming and, sometimes, costly it can be.
Labels, audits, diagnoses, tests... In recent years, there has been a proliferation of tools for evaluating
companies’ HR processes. While the methodologies may differ, the aim is the same: to evaluate
companies’ HR processes in terms of equal opportunities and, more generally, corporate social
responsibility.
In France, there are currently three labels that certify the compliance of HR processes with these
principles: the Equality Label, dedicated to equality between men and women; the Diversity Label,
which addresses other forms of discrimination; and the Social Responsibility Label, for customer
relations centres, which promotes virtuous HR practices in call centres. Alongside these compliance
audits, we find the “diversity diagnoses” of IMS Entreprendre pour la Cité, the audits of Vigeo, the
tests of ISM Corum and the Observatoire des Discriminations, and so on. The range of services is
added to regularly (see table on page 24).
The public authorities have clearly made these audits an important lever for combating discrimination.
The French government launched all three labels – two in 2004 and the third in 2008 – and has been
responsible for their promotion since then. There is now talk of a new label for occupational safety to
accompany the government’s occupational health scheme. It was also the government that, as part of
its scheme for older people, encouraged companies to undergo an audit by Vigeo. On 2 June, Nicole
Notat’s agency provided the government with a “compendium of good practice” based on companies
in the field (see page 5). The HALDE (French High Authority against Discrimination and for Equality),
meanwhile, supports and commissions the testing of recruitment processes.
Start of interest
Companies are beginning to show interest in these tools. To date, some forty Equality Labels have
been awarded, as well as around twenty Diversity Labels and a similar number of Social
Responsibility Labels. IMS Entreprendre announces that it has performed approximately thirty
‘diversity diagnoses’ in four years. Some companies (Adia, Casino, Schneider Electric, etc.) publicise
the tests they have undergone, while others have taken that step more discreetly. Over the coming
weeks, new waves of Diversity Labels are to be expected. Meanwhile, service providers are honing
their offers (see page 26).
The government and its responsibilities
“It seems as though the government doesn’t want to assume its responsibilities and is looking for
An initiative of the European Union
www.stop-discrimination.info
actors to exert pressure in its place”, comments François Fatoux, Executive Officer of ORSE (the
Study Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility), which takes a critical approach to labels (see page
31). Their growth reflects “a demand from the government and other actors for greater effectiveness
and recognition”, explains Thierry Geoffroy, a Project Coordinator at AFNOR Certification, the main
operator in this burgeoning market of HR process auditing.
More effective than legislation
Simple unilateral commitments from employers, such as charters, are no longer enough to tackle the
challenges of discrimination, particularly in recruitment, which many observers considered to be one
of the causes of the riots in France’s suburbs at the end of 2005. The growth of audits is also, no
doubt, a product of the observation that they are more effective than legislation at changing
mentalities, because they have educational and mobilisation dimensions that laws do not have.
The reasons why companies undertake these relatively costly and time-consuming audits are
manifold. “All the companies we work with are really keen to rectify their problems, even if they
secretly hope that we won’t detect any”, explains Eric Cédiey, a Research Consultant at ISM Corum,
which mainly carries out testing procedures. Indeed, many supervisors working on equality issues are
genuinely passionate about their subject, searching for the most effective tools to combat
discrimination.
Of course, economic benefits are also a driver: the desire to attract qualified workers – this argument
is always cited, despite the recession – or have an effective recruitment structure, particularly among
recruitment agencies. “If they don’t sort out the problems, they risk having to assume responsibility for
cases of discrimination instructed by others”, comments Eric Cédiey.
Image enhancement
The Social Responsibility Label has even become an intangible asset for the customer relationship
services company b2s, as it is an eligibility condition of some invitations to tender (see page 29).
Considerations of suitability also come into play when choosing which companies to work with:
pressure from the government, concerns about lagging behind other companies, a desire to enhance
the organisation’s image or have counter-arguments in the event of accusations of discrimination,
anticipating changes in legislation, and so on.
Mobilisation effect
Companies that have undergone an audit of their HR processes come away with three main positive
lessons from the experience. It mobilises and raises the awareness of employees, the management
and directors to issues related to equal opportunities. It is an opportunity to take stock of HR
processes, define them in black and white, and structure them. It enhances social dialogue. The issue
of equal opportunities is even one of the rare topics around which it is possible to overcome the
“traditional clashes of interests” between management and unions, points out Catherine Belotti,
Diversity Manager at Schneider Electric (see page 26).
They all stress the fact that the audit is a major investment, in both money and time. For instance, it
cost Schneider Electric €17,000 to obtain the Equality Label for two of its entities. Vinci, meanwhile,
has announced that it spent €30,800 for the Diversity Label for seven of its entities, obtained at the
end of April, and spends €10,000 a year for the Vigeo equal opportunities audits (see page 26). A
testing procedure costs between €20,000 and €30,000. The starting price for a simple diagnosis is in
the region of €5,000. User criticism is beginning to emerge concerning the instability of prices and
An initiative of the European Union
www.stop-discrimination.info
services in this nascent market.
A large amount of work
Above all, an audit involves a large amount of work. “Some companies have no idea what a label
involves, like the person who contacts us just because his switchboard operator is black…” , recalls
Thierry Geoffroy. For example, it took Dell eight months to put together the necessary documentation
for its Equality Label (see page 28). The documentation for b2s’s Social Responsibility Label filled 47
folders. Obtaining a label is not a walk in the park.
The essentials
1 In recent years, there has been a proliferation of tools for evaluating HR policies in terms of equal
opportunities.
2 A market is developing: labels, audits, diagnoses, testing procedures, etc.
3 Companies that have undergone audits underline the mobilisation capacity of these tools, but also
their cost.
Two broad families of audits
The HR process audit market offers two families of products, which have completely different
underlying philosophies. Qualitative audits describe companies’ HR procedures, the resources they
invest and the actions they undertake. This is the principle behind Vigeo’s ‘social responsibility audits’,
IMS’s ‘diversity diagnoses’ and labels, the latter of which also certify compliance with certain
standards. These audits are carried out on the basis of documentation from the company
(agreements, comparative progress reports, internal newsletters, charters, etc.) and, where
necessary, interviews with the management, staff representatives and employees (on-site
assessment). The main players in this market are AFNOR (Equality and Diversity Labels), Vigeo and
IMS Entreprendre pour la Cité. Ernst & Young is the Social Responsibility Label operator in the call
centres sector. ISM Corum is also currently breaking into this market. The cost of these audits
depends on the number of employees and sites involved. Consequently, it can vary considerably,
ranging from €1,500 for a Diversity Label for a single-site firm with fewer than 20 employees to
€60,000 for a full audit of a large corporation.
Quantitative audits, meanwhile, statistically measure differences in the positions of different social
groups that suggest that equal opportunities are not being guaranteed, for example between the CV
of a candidate of immigrant origin and that of a control candidate. These audits are based on the
information contained in the staff records (file analysis) or that resulting from application tests. The
first tool is applicable to HR issues within a company (working conditions, careers, etc.), while the
second is specific to recruitment situations, as the condition is that the testee (the recruiter) does not
know the tester (the false candidate). In this market, which is smaller than the previous one, the main
actors are ISM Corum and Observatoire des Discriminations, directed by Jean-François Amadieu.
These testing procedures are quite costly as they involve complex logistics. According to ISM Corum,
the starting price is unlikely to be less than €20,000. File analyses are less expensive and their price
is not dependent on the number of employees included. The starting rate is around €5,000.
An initiative of the European Union
www.stop-discrimination.info
VINCI. Vigeo teaches Vinci how to self-audit
Since 2006, Vinci has got into the habit of inviting Vigeo’s auditors to scrutinise its diversity and equal
opportunities policy. The construction group, which was recently awarded a Diversity Label, hopes to
be in a position to self-audit by 2010.
This year, the Vinci Group began the third audit campaign of its diversity and equal opportunities
policy. This time, the audit will be performed by its own diversity auditors (half of whom are retired
managers), working in conjunction with those of Vigeo, the European extra-financial rating and
responsibility audit agency. “By 2010, we’re aiming for total autonomy, although regular assessments
will be carried out with Vigeo, or a hotline will be set up to help our internal auditors”, explains Erik
Leleu, the group’s HR Manager.
Promoting equal opportunities
Nicole Notat’s social agency came onto the scene in 2006. “Although we did recruit older people,
people with disabilities and employees from immigrant backgrounds, that wasn’t enough”, explains
the HR Manager. So Vigeo was brought in “to turn a culture of diversity into active promotion of equal
opportunities”.
The first step was to define the scope of the study. The group then asked the HR Managers of its
various branches to identify representative companies. In 2008, 40 subsidiaries from all branches of
the group (energy, construction, concessions and roads) and located in different countries (France,
Germany, Belgium, Czech Republic, Sweden) were selected.
Next, Vigeo orchestrated the audit. The agency studied the HR processes (recruitment, training,
career development, etc.) applied to different demographic groups (older people, women, people with
disabilities, etc.). “We don’t ask companies to do any prior written work or specific preparation. The
audit is performed on site, based on documentation. Interviews are conducted with managers,
employees and their representatives; various internal company documents are analysed, such as
minutes of staff representation bodies”, describes Samuel Dufay, Project Manager at Vigeo. The total
amount billed to Vinci is around €10,000 a year.
An incipient commitment
At first, on a scale of 1 to 4, the scores were between 2 and 3. Male/female equality, the place of
disabled people and the integration of employees from immigrant backgrounds all scored 2. “Which
confirms an incipient commitment and partial managerial appropriation, but poor control of
discrimination risks”, explains Vigeo. The score of 3 obtained for the employment of older people
reflects a solid commitment.
The Vigeo audit preceded another audit, carried out by AFNOR within the framework of the Diversity
Label, which was awarded to Vinci SA and 6 of its subsidiaries on 29 April 2009. The initial cost of the
audit (a second audit will take place in eighteen months’ time) for the Diversity Label was €30,800 for
the 7 companies.
An initiative of the European Union
www.stop-discrimination.info
Erik Leleu considers that these two approaches are complementary: “With Vigeo we were working on
the substance; the Diversity Label got all the companies working on the form, particularly traceability.
This audit has guided our approach towards establishing a more solid structure for the issues at play.”
An initiative of the European Union
www.stop-discrimination.info
Schneider Electric. The Equality Label cost €17,000
The Equality Label is an effective tool for mobilising employees and structuring the HR policy to
promote equal employment opportunities, but requires a heavy investment in time and money,
according to the company’s Diversity Manager.
Since October 2007, Schneider Electric France and Schneider Electric Industries, the two main legal
entities of Schneider Electric, have held the Equality Label. “An interesting, but expensive,
procedure”, sums up Catherine Belotti, Diversity Manager at Schneider Electric, who has held this
position since it was created in early 2008.
Established in 2004, on the initiative of the government, to recognise companies working to promote
equality between men and women, the Equality Label is awarded for three years. AFNOR issues it to
specific legal entities that have been audited, and not to the company as a whole (thus, 60% of the
French employees of Schneider Electric are covered by the label), on the strength of declarations by
the company. After eighteen months, AFNOR conducts an interim audit.
“Compared with the procedure for obtaining the Diversity Label, which includes an on-site audit, the
Equality Label procedure is straightforward”, comments Catherine Belotti. Except that all the
information-gathering work rests on the shoulders of the company. Catherine Belotti estimates that
putting together the documentation for the interim audit in October 2008 took her “one week of fulltime work”. The manager in charge of the initial audit back in 2007, before the creation of the Diversity
Department, enlisted the help of a consultant.
In hindsight, Catherine Belotti thinks that the benefit of the label lies more in the preparatory work than
in the approval stamp itself. “I would have done that work, even without the label”, she says.
The label and the process of obtaining it are, therefore, an opportunity to “communicate with
employees, raise their awareness of equal employment opportunities and evaluate HR practices”,
explains Catherine Belotti. She can now say that the pay gap, all things being equal, is 2.5% in each
group of jobs, that the proportion of female managers recruited rose from 14.5% in 2004 (the year the
company signed its equal employment opportunities agreement) to 17% in 2008, and that “in recent
years, more women have been promoted to positions of responsibility”.
Enhancing social dialogue.
Above all, by providing an overview of the main actions for promoting equal employment
opportunities, the label “enhances social dialogue. It allows genuine collaboration between
management and labour, beyond clashes of interest”, she observes.
Although the label is marketed as being an asset with drawing power, Schneider Electric has not
really sought to publicise it externally. In fact, the company is not currently recruiting. And besides,
“the label isn’t that well known among job applicants”, points out Catherine Belotti. In her view, it is
better to publicise Schneider’s actions for the promotion of diversity, for example the “100 chances100 jobs” and “Our boroughs have got talent” operations, or the signing of the “Suburban Hope” plan.
The Diversity Manager identifies two weaknesses of the Equality Label. The Equality Label Club could
An initiative of the European Union
www.stop-discrimination.info
be “a foundation for building on the factors of success and resistance”, but, for now, it is merely an
inventory of best practices.
An excessive cost
“The cost of the label is excessive in relation to the services provided by AFNOR: the company did
most of the work”, she complains. For the two legal entities concerned, the initial audit and the interim
audit cost the company €17,000. The service should have cost around €23,000. “The cost is
determined by the time spent studying the documentation, which itself depends on the specifications
set by the government and the social partners”, clarifies Thierry Geoffrey, Project Coordinator at
AFNOR Certification. “Once we’ve received the documentation, we carry out a thorough appraisal.
The client companies don’t see this work, but it’s a major task.”
Shortage of time
Another source of dissatisfaction (but this time AFNOR is not to blame) is that, at the proposal of the
Labelling Board, the date of the renewal audit fell in October 2008, twelve months after the initial
audit, and not eighteen as stated in the initial contract. That meant that the company had to go and
find information in October, and was not able to wait for the usual December consolidations.
“Regardless of the date on which the interim audit takes place, the duration of the label is always
three years”, states Thierry Geoffroy.
SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC
• Activity: electrical distribution and automation products.
• Staff in France: 20,000 employees.
• Global turnover in 2008: €18.3 billion.
Diversity Label: the go/no-go decision
The French government is increasing the pressure on companies to apply for the Diversity Label. The
Minister for Immigration, Eric Besson, wrote to France’s prefects in February, asking them to take the
necessary action. Meanwhile, Yazid Sabeg, Commissioner for Diversity, never misses an opportunity
to promote it. But Schneider Electric is hesitant. The company has told Yazid Sabeg that it will “study
the feasibility of obtaining the Diversity Label in 2009”.
“Our ambition motivates us to look into this”, explains Gilles Vermot-Desroches, Sustainable
Development Manager, who is campaigning internally to push the application through. In particular,
he argues that “diversity contributes to the performance of the company, just as R&D does. Our
diversity budgets won’t be reduced this year”, despite the recession, he assures. “We’re an
engineering company that has been committed to certification processes for a long time”, he reminds.
However, he is forced to admit that “during a period with almost zero recruitment, we could question
the relevance of such mechanisms”.
Taking plenty of time
Catherine Belotti, Diversity Manager, thinks that it is important to take plenty of time. In fact, she
considers that neither Schneider Electric nor the label are ready: “The Diversity Label is a quality
label, just like ISO certification; it calls for a different approach to that developed for the Equality
Label. So we must pay careful attention to suitability and timing.”
In addition, she is not yet convinced that AFNOR’s offer is stable. Indeed, several companies involved
in the label have found that its auditors are not yet up to speed. Thierry Geoffroy, Project Coordinator
An initiative of the European Union
www.stop-discrimination.info
at AFNOR Certification, believes that this criticism is the result of a misunderstanding among
companies of the service that they are entitled to expect: “The Diversity Label is a tool for ensuring
equal treatment; companies shouldn’t expect an audit of the suitability of their HR policies. We’re not
consultants.”
An initiative of the European Union
www.stop-discrimination.info
B2S. A label turned intangible asset
Over a period of two years, the b2s group has coordinated and structured its HR practices with a view
to obtaining the Social Responsibility Label for its customer relations centres, which is now a
prerequisite of some invitations to tender.
Association du Label de Responsabilité Sociale (ALRS), which audits and certifies call centres,
awarded the label of the same name to all nine of b2s’s sites (six in France and three in Morocco) on
28 January. Created in 2004, this label was initially designed to distinguish call centres employing at
least 60% of their staff in France. Today, its aim is, more modestly, to improve the image of the
sector. The label rewards good HR practices: recruitment, career guidance, integration of people with
disabilities, social dialogue, training, working conditions, and so on.
Two years’ work
For b2s, this reward is the fruit of two years’ reflection and work, according to its HR Manager,
Catherine Deyfus-Mazières. “We are currently a UES (economic and social unit); our group is the
result of external growth. Consequently, our social organisation is very diverse, with various collective
agreements and different models”, she explains. This labelling procedure has been an opportunity to
harmonise the various parts and structure the HR practices. But not without a great deal of effort.
“We started by creating a dedicated unit on each of our sites, consisting of an HR representative and
the manager. Then we set up an intranet, which has gradually been added to, so that everyone has
access to a toolbox and the procedures in force within the company”, explains the HR Manager.
The Ernst & Young consultants finally carried out the audit: four sites were visited, including one in
Morocco; 33 employees were interviewed and 44 staff representatives were met. “Informed in
advance, the representatives were obviously consulted about the introduction of the new HR
procedures, as with the annual review or the anti-discrimination code of conduct”, clarifies Catherine
Deyfus-Mazières.
Indicators to be established
The constraints? According to Catherine Deyfus-Mazières, “there were two types”. Firstly, any
missing processes had to be identified and defined, with indicators being established and
implemented, and finally, the application had to be supported and documented. The b2s application
filled a total of 47 folders. According to b2s, the entire process, including time spent, human input,
travel, and so on, cost €150,000. Catherine Deyfus-Mazières believes that it was worth it: “It has
drawing power when it comes to recruitment and is a guarantee of quality for our clients.” And that’s
not all: “Some of our clients now demand this label as a precondition, in black and white, in their
tender specifications”, explains the HR Manager.
Eric Dadian, President of the AFRC (French Customer Relations Association) sees this label as a
means of setting oneself apart in a context of growing international competition. “It has become an
intangible asset that enhances the value of the company, for example, when it is sold.” It is also a
sales argument. In invitations to tender, the civil service demands this label and EDF and Canal +
have followed its example.
B2S
An initiative of the European Union
www.stop-discrimination.info
• Activity: customer relations centres.
• Staff: 2,300 employees in France, 1,260 in Morocco.
• Turnover in 2008: €80 million.
An initiative of the European Union
www.stop-discrimination.info
DELL. Eight months of reporting to obtain the Equality Label
The computer manufacturer Dell had already done a lot of work to promote equal employment
opportunities when it applied for the Equality Label. Nonetheless, it took another eight months of work
for it to put together the necessary documentation.
When the Financial Director, who is also responsible for a network of Dell employees in Europe,
learnt of the existence of the Equality Label, she immediately approached the management about it.
“The response was positive, because the label was immediately perceived as a way of reviewing the
actions already undertaken”, comments Sandra de Pauliny, HR Manager at the Montpellier site (850
employees), Dell’s headquarters in France. The computer manufacturer already had a solid starting
point: an equality agreement signed in 2007, a company crèche, a corporate concierge...
Recognition of the progress made
When the company was awarded the label for its entire French operations in March 2008, it was
viewed as recognition of the progress made and a real source of pride, “because we were the first
group in the sector to obtain that distinction and the first site in the Languedoc-Roussillon region”,
explains the HR Manager enthusiastically.
In total, it took eight months to prepare the application. Two people in the HR Department were
especially assigned to the task.
Scorecards for monitoring equality had to be prepared and all the identifiable data on the subject had
to be studied. The unions were involved in the process through monthly meetings. “All the data was
crunched: the social audit, statistics…”, recalls Sandra de Pauliny.
Florence Méaux, General Manager of AFNOR Certification, considers that the work required to obtain
a label, whichever one it is, depends on the culture of the company with regard to internal auditing: “A
company may have carried out lots of actions but not be awarded a label, due to a lack of supporting
evidence, as its processes are uncoordinated. The processes must be traceable. That requires
diagnoses, inventories and follow-up, because a label forces the company to adopt a mindset of
improving the existing set-up.”
Beneficial introspection
“The introspection was beneficial: it revealed certain weaknesses”, reflects Sandra de Pauliny. Those
weaknesses did not concern pay gaps or the overall female presence, but rather representativeness
among older people and the glass ceiling.
Moreover, “the label enabled us to improve our HR policy, social dialogue and corporate culture”,
considers the HR Manager. For Sandra de Pauliny, all these improvements support talent retention
and enhance the attractiveness of the company, despite threats of a redundancy programme. In
addition, the 52 articles published in the press brought the process to the attention of Dell customers.
François Fatoux, Executive Officer of ORSE*
“Companies must weigh up the pros and cons of an audit”
An initiative of the European Union
www.stop-discrimination.info
E & C: There are numerous audits, ratings and labels on themes of social responsibility and equal
opportunities. Why is that?
F.F.: Yes, there really has been a proliferation of initiatives, to the point that companies are now
saying that it’s hard to find their way around. The government wants them to commit to labels and
other benchmarks. That gives the impression that the government doesn’t want to assume its
responsibilities and is looking for actors to exert pressure in its place.
E & C: Are these labels and other audits effective at promoting equal opportunities and social
responsibility?
F.F.: By developing these types of external controls, isn’t there a risk that companies will forget about
internal controls, which also have an important place? Of course, I’m talking about the social partners
and social dialogue. A collective agreement has virtues that audits don’t have, particularly because it
involves the unions, which then take the issue on board as their own. I’m not sure audits generate the
same leverage effect. What’s more, their results aren’t public, unlike the content of a collective
agreement.
E & C: Label specifications do insist on social dialogue though...
F.F.: But without the obligation to reach an agreement. What’s more, the 2006 national cross-industry
agreement (ANI) on discrimination isn’t even referred to as a founding text by the Diversity Label.
E & C: Are audits effective in terms of the investment made by companies?
F.F.: Managements must carefully weigh up the pros and cons of undertaking an audit. They’re not
free. Anything that’s spent on an audit is taken away from something else, such as training. Another
consideration is that the cost of an audit is proportional to the audit scope. As a result, companies are
forced to limit the audit to certain entities. Finally, isn’t it cheaper to negotiate an agreement with the
unions?
* Study Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility.
An initiative of the European Union
www.stop-discrimination.info