Following Geodis stakeholder consultation meeting in December 2010, some of Geodis stakeholders have accepted to comment Geodis Sustainable Development Report 2010 published in 2011. We would like to thank them for their collaboration.
Patrice Person, sustainable development manager, MICHELIN
“The Geodis Sustainable Development Report for 2010 is clear, accessible and agreeable to read. It is a relevant document in both form and content. Several sections and presentations deserve to be pointed out. I particularly appreciated:
- The commitment expressed by the senior management in the first pages of the report concerning ethics and the involvement of all employees.
- The section concerning sustainable development issues is interesting because it describes the context without drowning the reader in information.
This report is precisely targeted on the environment and carbon.
The diagram showing the revenue distribution among stakeholders will be a source of inspiration.
On the whole, the content of the Geodis Sustainable Development Report for 2010 is strongly focused on the environment. I would have liked to learn more about the social, societal and economic impact of the Group’s activities.
Some subjects are scarcely dealt with, such as Geodis’ commercial ambitions, the risks related to freight transport, the issues of diversity and the balance between employees’ professional and private lives. The infographics are useful, but some key figures would have made them more complete. Some quantitative data could back up Geodis’ ambitions.
To conclude this general assessment of the document submitted to us, one significant improvement would be to have the data verified and certified by independent auditors. This would add to the credibility of Geodis’ sustainable development policy.”
Philippe Ponchaux, technical purchasing manager, FRAIKIN
“In my view, the Geodis Sustainable Development Report for 2010 covers the full spectrum of sustainable development. I had the impression on reading it that Geodis has a fundamental approach that goes beyond simply doing what is required. It does not seem to me that Geodis uses sustainable development as a pretext for doing things.
The various elements of the summary (the infographics, for example) are interesting because they provide an overall picture, and the document is structured in a way that seems logical and easy to follow.
I found the report very instructive. It puts the environmental and social subjects that it deals with within everyone’s reach, which is very good thing.
The sections dealing with carbon and the environment interested me the most. I thought the exposition was very good. I do have a few remarks:
- It would be interesting in some cases to put the data in perspective. For example, the composition of the fleet is presented in terms of the EURO standards, while there are other standards in the world.
- I was sorry that no distinction was made between the obligatory and voluntary aspects of the environmental policy, particularly with regard to the handling of waste. What does Geodis do because it is obligatory (and how much does that cost?), and what does it do above and beyond that?
- Last, this document does not deal with one issue that I believe is increasingly important: noise pollution. What is Geodis’ approach to noise?
As for the document’s form, though posting it on the Internet is essential, I think it is very useful to continue publishing a print version as well. In my opinion, dematerialising this document entirely would deprive a number of people of the opportunity to read it.”
Jean-Marc Veaux, a representative of the CFDT trade union and Secretary of Geodis’ European Consultation Committee
“I read this document attentively, comparing it to the preceding edition. I think the Geodis Sustainable Development Report for 2010 is much more accessible and agreeable to read than last year’s. The preceding year’s document seemed too centred on economics, too focused on the group in the manner of a communications document. It seemed to be intended mainly for the management.
This year’s report, on the other hand, seems meant for everyone and to concern the employees as well as the management. It is much more accessible: one of the main points of improvement, for example, is the presentation of the indicators, which are much easier to understand. It is better to present a few indicators and to be able to comment on them than to present a lot of data without explanation.
I found the content of the Employees section much more informative than last year, since certain subjects that have received little or no attention until now are dealt with in detail. This is the case for the issues of social dialogue with the European Consultation Committee and safety.
I only regretted that the Employees chapter came at the end of the report, after the Partners chapter. In my opinion, the employees are the driving force of the company and should be front and centre.
I would also like to see more follow-up of initiatives: what progress is being made with the best practices presented in the preceding report?
To conclude, I am satisfied with this document. I believe, however, that its distribution and communication are two key points needing improvement. In my opinion, this report is still too confidential; the personnel at Geodis’ regional sites tend not to know about it.”