The GRI, MMSS and Azapagic (2004) Frameworks cover 31 aspects of social performance: “The social dimension … concerns the impacts the organization has on the social systems within which it operates… [including] Labor [sic] Practices and Decent Work; Human Rights; Society; Product Responsibility” (GRI G4 Implementation Manual, 2013, p.142). Similar to the environmental information, all aspects are important in assessment of social performance of mining companies. However, some social issues are more prominent than others, and the information which covers those issues will potentially be of greater interest to NGOs.
One of the main issues facing the mining industry in the social domain is employee health and safety (Azapagic, 2004; Laurence, 2011; Buxton, 2012). Mining industry bodies such as the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM), the Minerals Council of Australia and the Mining Association of Canada, have long recognised the importance of dealing with health and safety issues. Therefore, one of the ten principles in ICMM sustainable development framework designed to address social, environmental and sustainability issues in the mining industry is “continual improvement of [the] health and safety performance” (International Council on Mining and Metals, A Sustained Commitment to Improved Industry Performance, 2008, p.10). Similarly, the Minerals Council of Australia advocates the “industry free of fatalities, injuries and diseases”24 (Minerals Council of Australia, 2016). However, the Safe Work
Australia organisation reported high numbers of occupational diseases and fatalities in the five year period between 2007-08 to 2011-12, noting that: “The total number of deaths equates to 3.84 fatalities per 100 000 workers, which is almost 70% higher than the national rate of 2.29… On average there were 8 claims each day from employees
75
who required one or more weeks off work because of work-related injury or disease… [The average rate per 1000 employees was] 14.6 in 2010–11. This rate is slightly higher than the rate for all industries (12.7 claims per 1000 employees)” (Safe Work Australia, 2013). Despite efforts to improve, health and safety remains a priority issue with the mining industry. This industry continues to have a poor record on employee health and safety conditions according to the MMSD review (Buxton, 2012).
Given the importance of health and safety issues in mining industry and its continuing poor performance in this area, NGOs could be expected to have an interest in information covering injuries, diseases, and fatalities. The following question is posed to address the Research Question 1: What are the social and environmental information needs of NGOs with regards to performance of mining companies?
Survey Question: Do NGOs wish to see reported the information about the following aspect of the social performance of mining companies in Australia:
The types and rates of injury and occupational diseases?
Another important social issue is the relationship between mining companies and local communities which often include Indigenous peoples (Laurence, 2011). In fact, according to the Working with Indigenous Communities report (2007) produced by the Australian Government more than 60% of mining operations in Australia neighbour Indigenous communities.
There is arguably a plethora of impacts of mining operations on the communities in which they operate. These include capacity and infrastructure building (Rolfe et al, 2007; Greive and Haslam-McKenzie, 2010), sourcing and retaining employees from the local areas (Azapagic, 2004; Tonts, 2010; Laurence, 2011), commuter work arrangements such as fly-in/fly-out or drive-in/drive-out practices (Lawrie et al, 2011; Bruecker et al, 2013; Petrova and Marinova, 2013), demographic and social change (Petkova et al, 2009), as well as impacts of mine closure (Lawrie et al, 2011) and involving local communities in the decision-making and distribution of wealth created by mining operations (Azapagic, 2004; Laurence, 2011).
76
Among the recently emerged impacts, one of the most challenging is fly-in/fly-out (FIFO) or drive-in/drive-out (DIDO) practices (Lawrie et al, 2011; Bruecker et al, 2013; Petrova and Marinova, 2013). It affects the local communities in a number of ways; for example, influx of labour creates higher demand for housing and accommodation which results in higher prices and shortages (Pick et al, 2008; Petkova et al, 2009). This in turn leads to forced relocation, overcrowding and homelessness, especially prominent among low-income parts of local community and Indigenous peoples (Lawrie et al, 2011).
Further impact of the commuter work arrangements is reduction of vitality of the local community due to the fact that the income earned by working for the mining operation is not spent in the local community but in the place of FIFO’s or DIDO’s worker permanent residence (Haslam-McKenzie et al, 2009; Newman et al, 2010). Additionally, commuter labour has been argued to cause decline in well-being of the local community due to the breakdown in social bonds and structures in the local community (Taylor and Simmonds, 2009). This in turn leads to “increased crime and violence, substance and alcohol abuse, reduced sense of place or community, and lower levels of participation in voluntary work and community, sport and recreational activities” (Lawrie et al, 2011, p.144).
In addition to difficulties in obtaining housing and accommodation as a result of mining operations in the area discussed above, Indigenous peoples are largely disengaged from local mining operations and that contributes to their marginalisation (Langton and Mazel, 2008, Pick et al, 2008; Haslam-McKinzie et al, 2009; Langton, 2010) despite the claims by the Minerals Council of Australia (2016) that it is “the largest private sector employer of Indigenous Australians” 25 . Additionally, regardless of the
acknowledgement of the importance of a good relationship with local communities, Buxton (2012) reports that mining companies continue to violate indigenous peoples’ rights, which is shown by indigenous peoples’ complaints with regards to the social and environmental performance of mining companies.
Due to these widespread effects of mining operations on local communities and Indigenous peoples as part of those communities, NGOs would potentially wish to see information on the mining companies’ impacts, both positive and negative, on
77
communities where they operate. Additionally, the information on employment of the members of the Indigenous communities and other minority groups might be of interest. Therefore, the questions as follows will be included in the questionnaire in order to address the RQ1:
Survey Question: Do NGOs wish to see reported the information about the following aspects of the social performance of mining companies in Australia:
Impacts on local communities;
Respect for Indigenous peoples’ rights;
Total number of employees from minority groups?
Employment is of particular interest in relation to social performance of mining industry (Azapagic, 2004). The mining sector is one of the largest industries in the economy and the largest taxpayer and payer of State royalties according to the Minerals Council of Australia (2016). Thus the industry’s ability to keep contributing to country’s GDP and wealth, and tax and royalties receipts is dependent on its viability and profitability.
The mining industry’s viability is heavily dependent on its labour force (Dickie and Dwyer, 2011). The Minerals Council of Australia (2016) claims that the mining industry in Australia provides employment for as much as 30% of local population in some areas of Australia with more than 95% of all employees being in full-time employment. In terms of absolute numbers, it has been reported that in 2012 the mining industry in Australia employed 276,300 people compared to 74,800 in 2000 (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2013).
Declining ore grades and mineral depletion require the mining industry to innovate to stay profitable, which in turn means that its employees are increasingly required to be able to operate more sophisticated machinery and be aware of new technological advances (Dickie and Dwyer, 2011). This in turn leads to the need of continuous training and education of the labour force.
78
Another reason for mining companies to train and develop their labour force is the fact that in the next decade a large proportion of the current employees will be retiring (Dickie and Dwyer, 2011). This means that newly recruited employees need to be trained and educated to replace the highly experienced but soon retiring employees. Continuous development of new technologies in the mining sector also requires companies to train their employees to ensure they utilise the technology to the highest degree (Dickie and Dwyer, 2011). The question of training and retaining employees is crucial as the mining industry has traditionally had a poor image as an industry and requires its employees to work away from home for long periods of time (Dickie and Dwyer, 2011). The Minerals Council of Australia (2016) states that the “workplace training and skills development are much higher than the national average”26. Whilst
National Centre for Vocational Education Research (2013) reports that in 2011/12 mining industry spent $1.15 billion on training.
Thus, information on total number of employees and training and education programmes in the mining industry will be of potential interest to NGOs operating in Australia. Therefore, the following two questions will be included in the survey in order to address the RQ1: What are the social and environmental information needs of NGOs with regards to performance of mining companies?
Survey Question: Do NGOs wish to see reported the information about the following aspects of the social performance of mining companies in Australia:
Total number of employees; Employee training and education?
A further issue faced by the mining industry with regards to employment is labour/management relations. It is argued that mining industry has always been experiencing division between employees and management: “historically there has been a deep division in the mining and minerals industry between employees and management, which has often been a cause of disputes between trade unions and mining companies” (Azapagic, 2004, p.646). This culture of confrontation was reported
79
to change to a culture of collaboration when the mining industry in Australia adopted Australian Workplace Agreements. However, the Workplace Agreements do not seem to protect mining industry workers during the periods of decline in the industry’s production. The mining industry is inherently volatile and prone to alternating booms and busts which means that motivating employees in times of decline is especially important (Dickie and Dwyer, 2011, p.339).
Labour/management relations are also important when it comes to employee health and safety policies. This is especially relevant for the mining industry where there is a high risk of injury or occupational diseases (Safe Work Australia, 2013). It is argued that employee participation in developing programmes focused on health and safety brings more developments in corporate health and safety policies as the workers are more knowledgeable about the risks they face on a day-to-day basis (Gunningham, 2008). In view of these issues, information about the relationship between labour and management is assumed to be of interest to NGOs. The following question is included in the survey questionnaire to address RQ1:
Survey Question: Do NGOs wish to see reported the information about the following aspect of the social performance of mining companies in Australia:
The consultation and negotiation with employees?
The preceding discussion has highlighted several prominent issues pertaining to social and environmental performance of mining companies and thus included in the survey questionnaire as potential information needs of NGOs. The responses to this part of the survey by the participants will help answer the RQ1: “What are the social and environmental information needs of NGOs with regards to performance of mining companies?”
The next section addresses Research Questions 2 and 3. These questions are focused on whether and how mining companies engage with NGOs in order to identify their information needs.
80
5.3. Development of the Survey Questions to Explore the Engagement of Mining