Factory Audit form for:CHINA

Audit Area:ETHICAL STANDARDS

Form ID / 35 / Form Version / 65 / Form Name / ETHICAL STANDARDS AUDIT FORM FOR CHINA
Request ID / 4410502 / Section Count / 39 / Question Count / 302 / Country : / CHINA
Factory ID / 28085340 / Factory Name / NINGBO BATHING INT'L IND CO.,LTD
Factory Type / Primary
Contact Information
Contact Name / : / Manager,Felix
Address / : / No.771 Zhangxin N.Road,XiaolinTown,CixiCity,Ningbo,China
/
City / : / Ningbo
SubCity / : / NA
State / Province / : / Zhejiang
Postal Code / : / 315000
Country / : / CHINA
Phone / : / 86-138-574-09426 / Fax / : / 86-574-87148937 / Email / : /
COMPLIANCE OF WAGE
WAGE FOR NORMAL HOURS
Answers / NO
Pre Defined Comments
Comments / Previous Audit (May 14, 2017)
Not applicable. The previous audit was not conducted by Intertek.
Unannounced Orange Fire Safety-2 Follow Up Audit (November 17-18, 2017)
In this audit, based on the provided payroll records, the minimum wage of facility in the sample month was RMB 9.0 per hour, which is higher than local minimum wage RMB 8.45 per hour.
OVERTIME PREMIUM
Answers / NO
Pre Defined Comments
Comments / Previous Audit (May 14, 2017)
Not applicable. The previous audit was not conducted by Intertek.
Unannounced Orange Fire Safety-2 Follow Up Audit (November 17-18, 2017)
In this audit, based on the provided payroll records, the facility had paid 150% and 200% of normal rate wage for overtime work on normal working days and rest days respectively. No overtime work was arranged on holidays. And normal wages were paid for holidays when employees were off duty.
UNCLEAR WAGE SYSTEMS
Answers / NO
Pre Defined Comments
Comments / Previous Audit (May 14, 2017)
Not applicable. The previous audit was not conducted by Intertek.
Unannounced Orange Fire Safety-2 Follow Up Audit (November 17-18, 2015)
According the documents provided by the facility and facility tour, the auditor noted that the facility used electrical attendance system to record employee attendance situation and employee recorded their attendance when they entered in and out of the facility. Some records such as production order arrangement and finishing records , goods moving receipts, delivery in records, delivery out records, and etc. had been reviewed, those records matched with the attendance records, meanwhile through employee interview, no inconsistency was found.
Currently, all employees wage were calculated by monthly rate. The facility paid the employees by cash and pay slip was given to employees when the wages issued. All appropriate employees enjoyed the mandated benefits such as child-bearing leave and paid annual leave.
Remark:
Previous Audit (May 14, 2017)
Not applicable. The previous audit was not conducted by Intertek.
Unannounced Orange Fire Safety-2 Follow Up Audit (November 17-18, 2017)
1) 5 months f (from May 2017 to September 2017) payroll records were reviewed.
2) 1 payroll and attendance record from September 2017 (1st current month), 1 payroll and attendance record from August 2017 (2nd current month), 1 payroll and attendance record from July 2017(3rd current month), 1 payroll and attendance record from June 2017(random month) and 1 payroll and attendance record from May 2017 (random month) were selected respectively.
3) The local minimum wage standard for full-time work was set at RMB 1470 per month equivalent to RMB 8.45 per hour since August 1, 2017, RMB 1310 per month equivalent to RMB 7.53 per hour before August 1, 2017.
BENEFITS
MEDICAL CHECK UP / INSUFFICIENT INSURANCE COVERAGE
Answers / NO
Pre Defined Comments / Source:Payroll record
Source:Workers? interviews
Source:Others (please specify the source)
Comments / Previous Audit (May 14, 2017)
The previous audit was not conducted by Intertek.
1. This is in violation of PRC Labor Act (1995), Article 72 & 73, which requires that The sources of social insurance funds shall be determined according to the categories of insurance, and an overall pooling of insurance funds from the society shall be introduced step by step. The employing unit and laborers must participate in social insurance and pay social insurance premiums in accordance with the law.
It was noted that social insurance coverage is insufficient. Per the provided social insurance receipts of March 2015, there were 29 employees provided with retirement insurance, medical insurance, maternity insurance and unemployment insurance; and 110 employees provided with work-related injury insurance. There were totally 81 employees in March 2015, excluding 11 resigned employees. Per the facility management, there are a few relatives of the management included in the work-related injury insurance.
The facility was suggested that all employees shall be provided with social insurance.
2. This is in violation of Law of the Peoples Republic of China on Prevention and Control of Occupational Diseases (2002) Amendment (2011), Article 36 , which requires that With regard to the workers who engage in operation exposed to occupational disease hazards, the employer shall, in accordance with the regulations of the production safety supervision and administration department and public health administration department under the State Council, make arrangements for pre-service, in-service and job leaving occupational health checkups and truthfully inform the workers of the results of the checkups.
It was noted that no occupational health checks are conducted for employees handling chemicals such as glue.
The facility was suggested that occupational health checks shall be conducted to employees handling hazardous chemical.
Unannounced Orange Fire Safety-2 Follow Up Audit (November 17-18, 2017)
1. The previous finding 1 was corrected in this Orange Fire Safety-2 Follow Up Audit.
Through employee interview and reviewing the social insurances receipts of September 2015 (current month), it was noted that all 32 employees had participated in the 5 types of social insurance schemes (retirement, illness, disability caused by work-related injury or occupational disease, maternity or child-bearing and unemployment).
2. The previous finding 2 was corrected in this Orange Fire Safety-2 Follow Up Audit.
Through document review and facility tour, the facility provided occupational health checks for 16 employees contacting chemicals.
LABOR HOURS
7TH-DAY REST
Answers / NO
Pre Defined Comments
Comments / Previous Audit (May 14, 2017)
Not applicable. The previous audit was not conducted by Intertek.
Unannounced Orange Fire Safety-2 Follow Up Audit (November 17-18, 2017)
Based on the provided records and employee interview, all employees could enjoy at least one day rest per week.
INCOMPLETE AND INCONSISTENT TIME SYSTEM
Answers / NO
Pre Defined Comments
Comments / Previous Audit (May 14, 2017)
Not applicable. The previous audit was not conducted by Intertek.
Unannounced Orange Fire Safety-2 Follow Up Audit (November 17-18, 2017)
According the documents provided by the facility, the auditors noted that the facility used electrical attendance system to record employee attendance situation and employee recorded their attendance when they entered in and out of the facility. Some records such as production order arrangement and finishing records , goods moving receipts, delivery in records, delivery out records, and etc had been reviewed, those records matched with the electronic attendance records, meanwhile through employee interview, no inconsistency was found. The working hours could be verified in current audit.
NON COMPLIANCE WITH LABOR HOURS (REGULAR WORKING HOURS: DAILY, WEEKLY, MONTHLY / OVERTIME WORKING HOURS: DAILY, WEEKLY, MONTHLY)
Answers / YES
Pre Defined Comments / Source:Payroll record
Source:Time card record
Source:Workers? interviews
Non compliance with Wal-Mart Standards For Suppliers Section 3
Comments / WM Standard: Suppliers must provide workers with rest days and must ensure that working hours are consistent with the law and not excessive. Written approval from any local government permitting overtime in excess of normally applicable laws is not acceptable to permit additional overtime hours.
Previous Audit (May 14, 2017)
The previous audit was not conducted by Intertek.
This is in violation of PRC Labor Act (1995), Article 41, which requires that The employing unit may extend working hours due to the requirements of its production or business after consultation with the trade union and laborers, but the extended working hours for a day shall not generally exceed one hour; if such extension is called for due to special reasons, the extended hours shall not exceed three hours a day under the condition that the health of laborers is guaranteed. However, the total extension in a month shall not exceed 36 hours.
It was noted that excessive monthly overtime was conducted, and it was 68 hours in August 2013 and 42 hours in March 2015 at most.
The facility was suggested that monthly overtime shall not exceed 36 hours.
Unannounced Orange Fire Safety-2 Follow Up Audit (November 17-18, 2017)
The previous finding was not corrected in this Orange Fire Safety-2 Follow Up Audit.
Local Law: In accordance with the PRC Labor Law article 41 The employing unit may extend working hours due to the requirements of its production or business after consultation with the trade union and laborers, but the extended working hour for a day shall generally not exceed one hour; if such extension is called for due to special reasons, the extended hours shall not exceed three hours a day under the condition that the health of laborers is guaranteed. However, the total extension in a month shall not exceed thirty-six hours.
Finding: Overtime hours exceeded the legal requirement. It was noted that:
1) In August 2017(2nd current month) Cthe monthly overtime of only one randomly selected employee (1 from dusting power workshop) were 56 hours;
2) In July 2017 (3rd current month), the monthly overtime of only one randomly selected employee (1 from dusting power workshop) were 58 hours;
3) In June 2017(random month), the monthly overtime of only one randomly selected employee (1 from injection workshop) were 56 hours;
4) In May 2017(random month), the monthly overtime of only one randomly selected employee (1 from injection workshop) were 56 hours.
Remark:
1) A from injection workshop, (June 2017) the maximum numbers of working hours (Regular Working Hours + Overtime Hours) in a week =40 + 14(Regular + OT) = 54 hrs/week (maximum); the maximum working hours (Regular Working Hours + Overtime Hours) per day =8 +2 (Regular + OT) = 10hrs/day (maximum); the maximum overtime hours in a month = 56 hrs/ month (maximum)
2) B from dusting power workshop, (August 2017) the maximum numbers of working hours (Regular Working Hours + Overtime Hours) in a week =40 + 14 (Regular + OT) = 54hrs/week (maximum); the maximum working hours (Regular Working Hours + Overtime Hours) per day =8 +2 (Regular + OT) = 10hrs/day (maximum); the maximum overtime hours in a month = 56hrs/ month (maximum)
3) C from dusting power workshop, (July 2017) the maximum numbers of working hours (Regular Working Hours + Overtime Hours) in a week =40 + 14 (Regular + OT) = 54hrs/week (maximum); the maximum working hours (Regular Working Hours + Overtime Hours) per day =8 +2 (Regular + OT) = 10hrs/day (maximum); the maximum overtime hours in a month = 58hrs/ month (maximum)
Recommended Action: To conform to the PRC Labor Law article 41 and Wal-Mart Standards for Suppliers, the facility should reduce the overtime hours to ensure it is within 36 hours per month.
Management Comments:
1) What is the reason of this finding? The order is busy
2) How many employs were affected by this issue? 100% employees
3) How to correct this problem? Strengthen the management.
4) When this problem can be corrected? December 30, 2017.
Employees have no comment for the above questions.
Remark:
Previous Audit (May 14, 2017)
Not applicable. The previous audit was not conducted by Intertek.
Unannounced Orange Fire Safety-2 Follow Up Audit (November 17-18, 2017)
1. 6 months and 16 days f (from May 1, 2017 to November 16, 2017) attendance records were reviewed.
2. During employee interview, all 5 randomly selected employees stated that they worked overtime on voluntary basis.
3. 1 payroll and attendance record from September 2017 (1st current month), 1 payroll and attendance record from August 2017(2nd current month), 1 payroll and attendance record from July 2017(3rd current month), 1 payroll and attendance record from June 2017(random month) and 1 payroll and attendance record from May 2017 (random month) were selected respectively.
4. Based on the attendance records provided by the facility, working hour statistics were as follows:
1) For September 2017 (1st current month), the average number of hours worked in a week for the 1 selected sample were 49 hours. Maximum working hour per week were 50 hours. And maximum working hours per day was 10 hours, maximum overtime hours in the month was 36 hours.
2) For August 2017 (2nd current month), the average number of hours worked in a week for the 1 selected sample were 54 hours. Maximum working hour per week was 54 hours. And maximum working hours per day was 10 hours, maximum overtime hours in the month was 56 hours.
3) For July 2017 (3rd current month), the average number of hours worked in a week for the 1 selected sample were 54 hours. Maximum working hour per week was 54 hours. And maximum working hours per day was 10 hours, maximum overtime hours in the month was 58 hours.
4) For June 2017 (random month), the average number of hours worked in a week for the 1 selected sample were 54 hours. Maximum working hour per week was 54 hours. And maximum working hours per day was 10 hours, maximum overtime hours in the month was 56 hours.
5) For May 2017 (random month), the average number of hours worked in a week for the 1 selected sample were 54 hours. Maximum working hour per week was 54 hours. And maximum working hours per day was 10 hours, maximum overtime hours in the month was 56 hours.
EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES
NO ROBUST HIRING PROCEDURE.
Answers / NO
Pre Defined Comments
Comments / Previous Audit (May 14, 2017)
Not applicable. The previous audit was not conducted by Intertek.
Unannounced Orange Fire Safety-2 Follow Up Audit (November 17-18, 2017)
Currently, through document review and employees interview, the facility had established appropriate and legal written policy and procedure for hiring and disciplinary practices; the management also checked identification cards and sufficiently maintained all the employees f identification cards copies. The facility signed the labor contracts with all the employees within they joined one month. The facility provided suggestion box and regular meeting to gather the feedback from employees.
PPE / CHEMICAL SAFETY
NO MSDS / NO OR INSUFFICIENT HAZARDOUS SIGNING / NO OR INPROPER LABELING / INVENTORY
Answers / YES
Pre Defined Comments / Source:On site observation
Non compliance with Wal-Mart Standards for Suppliers Section 7
Comments / WM Standard: Suppliers must provide workers with a safe and healthy work environment. Suppliers must take proactive measures to prevent or manage workplace hazards. An inventory of all hazardous substances used and stored in the facility must be kept, including an up-to-date Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS)/Safety Data Sheet (SDS) for each substance. Workers must be appropriately trained to handle hazardous substances in their workplace in accordance with the substance MSDS/SDS.
Previous Audit (May 14, 2017)
None observed The previous audit was not conducted by Intertek.
Unannounced Orange Fire Safety-2 Follow Up Audit (November 17-18, 2017)
One new finding was raised in this Orange Fire Safety-2 Follow Up Audit.
Local Law: In accordance with the Regulations on the Safe Use of Chemicals in Workplace, Article 12 The unit, which uses chemical, shall set up identification label for all chemicals in using. For dangerous chemical, a safety label shall be applied and MSDS be provided for worker.
Finding: No safety label for hazardous chemical. During facility tour, auditor found that there was no label for chemical (such as glue) using in the dusting power workshop located at 2/F of one 4-storey building.
Recommended Action: To conform to the Regulations on the Safe Use of Chemicals in Workplace, Article 12 and Wal-Mart Standards for Supplier, safety labels should be attached for all hazardous chemicals for identification.
Management Comments: The facility management agreed with the finding and would take corrective actions without any comments.
Agreed deadline for correction: December 30, 2017
NO TRAINING FOR PPE / INAPPROPRIATE TYPE OF PPE / WORKERS NOT WEARING PPE APPROPRIATELY / NO PPE PROVIDED TO SOME WORKERS OR SOME DEPARTMENTS IN THE FACTORY
Answers / NO
Pre Defined Comments / Source:On site observation
Comments / Previous Audit (May 14, 2017)
The previous audit was not conducted by Intertek.
This is in violation of PRC Production Safety Law (2002) Amendment (2009), Article 37, which requires that Production and business units shall provide their employees with work protection gears that are up to national standards or industrial specifications, and they shall give instruction to their employees and see to it that they wear or use these gears in accordance with the rules for their use.