FAQs: Common Just 3.0 Documentation Submission FAQs from Applicants

Purpose: The purpose of this document is to provide a comprehensive list of questions frequently asked by Just organizations as they go through the Just documentation process and corresponding answers from the Just team.

Written Policies

Q: Are there policy templates available for Just 3.0?

A: We are strongly encouraging organizations to develop their own policies that best fits their organization's needs and context while adhering to the policy requirements outlined in the Just 3.0 Program Manual's General Clarifications and Clarifications per Indicator.

However, we do have some policy samples for organizations to reference available here in the Just 3.0 Program Manual General Clarifications section.

Q: Overall/overarching written policy structure for multiple Indicators allowable?

A: Yes - as long as it meets the Policy component requirements and meets the Intent of each Indicator. Please see the first section in the Just 3.0 Application in Portal that allows organizations to upload written policies that address multiple Indicators while meeting the component requirements of each Indicator.

Q: Are Equal Opportunity (EEO) Statements allowed?

A: EQUAL OPPORTUNITY STATEMENTS

While Living Future supports organizations having equal opportunity statements, these are distinct from the Indicator’s policy requirement and will not be accepted as an alternative to the policy.

It is okay to have EEO statements, but they need to be tailored/specific and applicable to the organization, actionable, demonstrate evident accountability, and needs to meet the Intent of each specific Indicator.

Q: Do we need to change the name of our current Diversity and Inclusion Policy that covers all requirements in the Racial + Ethnic policy for Just 3.0 or can we keep the policy name and upload it to that section? Same with can we keep the policy name of Non-Discrimination Policy instead of changing it to Gender Diversity but still upload it to the Gender Diversity section because it has of all of the Gender Diversity policy requirements?

A: You do not necessarily have to change the name of your policy (the Just Team will change each policy name at the finalization stage), however, you must ensure that your policy meets the basic element (and additional, if applicable) requirements for Just 3.0 policies. These can be found here in the Manual. We also have some sample policies you can review in that section.

Additionally, please find our updated guidance on Equal Opportunity Statements below. If your statement is customized for your organization and aligns with both our policy and indicator requirements, it is acceptable for use. However, generic EEO statements will not meet the standards required for Just 3.0.

EQUAL OPPORTUNITY STATEMENTS

While Living Future supports organizations having equal opportunity statements, these are distinct from the Indicator’s policy requirement and will not be accepted as an alternative to the policy.

Q: What does the required policy component: "Defined requirements or components" mean?

A: This component just means that the specific requirements of an Indicator (based on the selected Level) are included within the policy. For example, for Levels 2-4 for the Well-Being Indicator, the organization should include the number of days of paid time off (vacation, sick, bereavement) each employee can expect to receive for full employee transparency. The sample Belonging policy you provided is a great example of this by including employee input and anti-bias protocols (assuming that metric requirements will be met once the work-in-progress content is finalized).

However, if this information is covered in the documentation, then it’s not required to be included in the policy. The only exception to this would be IF the policy metric requirement states that it should be in the policy. For example, for the Health Care Indicator:

1. Organization has a written policy that documents employee health care benefits and cost-sharing structure.

Other than that, it is OK if the information for the remaining required metrics is in the supporting documentation.

Please note that the "defined requirements and components" policy requirement does not apply to Level 1 performance: "Defined metric requirements or components, as applicable based on the targeted Indicator performance level".

Q: We will not be offering benefits to part time or temporary workers any time in the near future. In that case, we could not achieve Level 1 on benefits because we would have no policy verbiage meeting that requirement. Is that correct?

A: Part-time benefits only need to be provided if your organization is pursuing Levels 2-4, and therefore, only Levels 2-4 need to include the written policy requirement regarding applicability to part-time and temporary employees, interns, etc. So for Level 1, the written policy does not need to include part-time employees and temporary workers. There are specific Just 3.0 Indicators with additional Clarifications on this, for example:

HEALTH CARE POLICY

The Health Care policy must include a commitment that available health care benefits be accessible to all employees regardless of seniority. If pursuing Level 2 or above, the policy must also specify that the benefits are accessible regardless of employee type (i.e., full-time or part-time).

Q: Do we have to repeat each individual minimum written policy component requirement for each Indicator?

A: Not necessarily. If the person administering and overseeing, the frequency of reviewing, updating, and evaluating, the protocols for making suggestions or submitting concerns, etc. are all the same for all policies, organizations may submit an optional singular document that addresses these minimum written policy component requirements at the very beginning/top of the Portal application "Policy Elements" section (please see screenshot below). Please note that some policies may have additional written policy requirements and must be included in the respective Indicator's policy.

Q: Can we combine policies like racial, ethnic, and gender diversity into one policy?

A: There is no problem combining policies. For example, organizations have combined policies for the Compensation category, where the title might be “Pay Equity” titled it’s inclusive of Gender and Racial + Ethnic Pay Equity, and Pay Scale Equity. So, yes, you can combine them. It just needs to be very clear within the policy that 1) it meets the Intent of each individual Indicator, and 2) all of the general and additional (if applicable) written policy requirements are included.

Q: What is the difference between a Policy and a Narrative?

A: Please find the General Clarifications on Just 3.0's Written Policy definition and requirements here. There are policy samples (i.e., Community Connections) included in that link, as well.

The Narratives should briefly explain how your organization has implemented what is outlined in your policy (i.e. practices, processes), and should address at least some of the general areas we require for advocacy and action documentation (see Clarifications > Advocacy and Action > Documentation of Advocacy Efforts and Actions). The Narrative serves more as a summary or recap of the organization's work (per Indicator) in a bit greater detail than what has been codified in the policy.

Q: What is the difference between Narrative and Practices Documentation - see Recruitment Level 2 v. Level 3 Documentation Requirements?

A: For Level 2, organizations would just include the description of  their 1 practice per phase in their Narrative. The Narrative serves the purpose of being like the recap/summary of the organization's work. The individual documentation can be specific examples of documents that prove their work, like meeting attendance, letters sent, or initiatives implemented. There can be overlap between the two, for sure.

Applicability

Q: Our firm has all full-time employees, no part-time employees (PTEs) and no plan to eventually hire any PTEs for the foreseeable future. What language should we include in our policies and documentation to address this?

A: According to the Just 3.0 Program Manual, the Health Care Indicator applies to all employees (full- and part-time included):

APPLICABILITY

Indicator metrics apply to all employees (see definition in General Clarifications). If an organization with part-time employees is pursuing Level 2 or above, the policy must also specify that the benefits are accessible regardless of employee type (i.e., full-time or part-time)." 

If the organization does not provide pro-rated Health Care benefits to their employees, the organization is limited to a Level 1. The Just program is designed to capture your organization’s current/most recent employee conditions and opportunities (almost like a snapshot or sample of your organization’s current status). So generally speaking, if your organization’s lack of coverage impacts current employees, then yes, your organization would be limited to a Level 1. However, the Just team understands that asking organizations to preemptively update all their policies for a hypothetical situation (especially one they do not plan on being in) could feel like a lot. That being said, if your organization currently does not have PTEs and doesn’t plan on it for the foreseeable future, it is not really necessary for your team to include part-time pro-rated benefits in your current policy and documentation. Please just make it clear to the Just team in your policy and documentation (for employee transparency and metric evaluation purposes) that your team provides 100% [comprehensive] health care coverage for all full-time employees, and does not have any part-time employees nor plan on having part-time employees at your organization any time soon to qualify for higher level performance.

Organizations now also have the option at the beginning/top of the Portal application in the Policy Elements section to respond to the question of whether or not they have part-time employees (please see screenshot below).

Q: Can we get clarification on whether employees hired under limited duration-such as summer interns employed for approximately 2.5 months-should be included in the staff survey or in any of the reporting indicators?

A: The short answer to this question about including interns for the Belonging, Engagement, and Well-Being Surveys is yes, but it depends on when your organization surveys your employees. The survey should be administered to summer interns, for example, if the intern is present at the time the survey is administered. Generally speaking, all "data points" should be within 12 months of your documentation submission, so if interns are present during that time frame, they should be given the opportunity to respond to the surveys.

Please note that for the Well-Being Indicator, for example, we have added a Clarification regarding the extent of including Interns in documentation:

"APPLICABILITY

Indicator metrics apply to all of the following groups (see definition in General Clarifications):

• Employees
• Contract workers (employee well-being program and survey only)
• Interns (employee well-being program and survey only) (see definition of 'Intern' in General Clarifications)

Paid vacation and sick time as well as paid bereavement leave must be provided on a prorated basis to part-time employees who work at least 20 hours per week."

This (bolded) Clarification was added to specify that Interns should be included in the Well-Being Survey as well as soliciting feedback and benefitting from the organization's Employee Well-Being Program, but Interns do not need to be included for Well-Being benefits such as paid vacation, sick time, and bereavement leave.

Please note that there are other Clarifications per Indicator regarding limited-duration employees such as Interns beyond the 3 Indicators with Surveys (please see specific examples below).

For example, Interns must be included for Living Wage Analysis—high school students conducting job shadowing only may be excluded from the Living Wage calculation. In terms of Wage Composition, organizations may count living stipends provided as part of the position’s respective wage. Please see specific Exceptions for Living Wage here.

In another example, for Pay Scale Equity, organizations may exclude interns from their pay ratio calculation due to the nature of internships being both inherently term-limited as well as for the purpose of gaining experience in the organization’s respective field. Where applicable, organizations should prorate salaries for part-time employees and contractors based on the minimum hours that meet the organization’s definition of a full-time employee.

Again, please refer to the Clarifications > Applicability section of each Indicator to confirm whether or not term-limited employees such as Interns are included for documentation. 

Q: Are contractors and interns included for pro-rated benefits?

A: No. Only part-time employees are eligible and required for pro-rated benefits.

Surveys

Q: We have already conducted our own company-wide [Engagement, Belonging, Well-Being] survey, and we are concerned about survey fatigue. What are our options?

A: In terms of using results from existing surveys, that would work as long as there are approved equivalencies between the questions of your organization's survey and the ones we require. If the questions asked are different than what we require, we will just need to review and approve them. Please use this template to submit your equivalent questions. The Just Team will review and evaluate the proposed changes to ensure they align with the original question’s Intent. Maintaining consistency in the questions is crucial to support our ability to evaluate, track, and share meaningful data on how Just organizations are performing in these areas. Without consistency, we can’t responsibly and accurately compare data across organizations.

Please see relevant survey requirements here.

Q: Are the open-ended survey questions required for documentation?

A: Since our language says "should" instead of "must", it is ok if organizations do not include it in the documentation, though it is strongly encouraged to include the open-ended survey questions to better inform policy and program decisions. This was an intentional decision to include open-ended survey questions and encourage organizations to ask this type of question, while not necessarily making it a requirement. We wanted to include it as a learning opportunity for organizations, but the response doesn't affect their Just achievement.

Uploading Documentation

Q: I started the pre-process and was guided towards example policies and surveys, for example, but I’m trying  to understand what is the best way of going through the process? I started using a Word document including our policies, there are a lot of resources, so I’m lost on what’s the best way to get us going.

A: We strongly recommend that you review our Just Help Desk—which includes FAQs, How-Tos/Guidance Documents, Resources—and thoroughly review the Just 3.0 Program Manual (especially all of the guidance and resources within it) to answer any questions you may have before you get started as well as identify what resources will be most useful to you as you begin the documentation process. It may be helpful to first look at the Just All-In-One Table of Contents > Getting Started with Just Document hosted on the Just Help Desk. We have available a Just 3.0 Organizational Progress Tracker that is designed to serve as a tool for you to track your progress as you work through the application and documentation process. Lastly, we recommend that you reach out to the Just Team at just.support@living-future.org for any questions you may have on getting started, and signing up for Office Hours.

Q: How do I know what level to select when we start? Of course, the idea will be to hit Level 4, but I know the reality is different. Do people start at Level 4 and then start moving down levels or should we start at Level 1? And then as we go through the process and find more information, then start moving up in Levels?

A: One of the best ways to get started is to look at what you are already doing well, and then what’s missing. So maybe start with reviewing your policies from the very beginning. For example, you might ask, “Do we have a policy related to how we procure services fundamental to our operations?” “Do we have a policy that codifies our recruitment practices?” A policy is all that is needed for a Level 1. Maybe your organization already conducts a community assessment or provides a certain number of hours towards volunteering, so you can start at a Level 2 and go from there. In general, once you do an analysis of your policies, you can start to see if you have the approaches and practices in place that live up to those policies (or not), meet the metric thresholds and documentation requirements, as well as assess and implement what changes need to be made either for this round or for the future (i.e., during renewal).

Q: When is the deadline to submit our Just documentation?

A: Organizations have 12 months to submit all of their Just documentation from the time that they register for the Just program. For example, if your organization registered on May 31, 2024, your organization would have until May 31, 2025 to submit all Just documentation/your application.

Q: My question was around the Just 3.0 Application Progress Tracker. We don't use Google Docs, and so I'm having problems trying to download it into Excel. When I put it in Word, it goes all over the place. Is there another way to use it, or is it only in Google Docs? Otherwise, I have to sign out from a work account and go in through a private account.

A: Just to note, the Just 3.0 Application Organization Progress Tracker is just a resource for organizations to use to track their application progress in real time–it is not required for documentation. Essentially it is just a template for you to use. Right now the resource is hosted as a live Google Doc as this was the easiest platform to share it out and optimize its interactive features. That being said, please feel free to adapt the resource in whatever way works best for you and your team, including the platform. Unfortunately this may take a bit more work to transfer information in the tracker into Excel or another platform, but once done, it would allow your team to work from the adapted tool moving forward (i.e., renewal).

Q: We are a small organization of about 10-11 people. Any advice for small organizations?

A: Please review our Just Small Organizations Resource Guide, which may be updated periodically as questions or case-by-case situations arise.

Q: I work at a small design consulting firm. More often than not, we’re hiring people and people are leaving. How do we mitigate that? At what point should we say, “this is the statistic” and give that information to you all?

A: This is ultimately up to the organization’s reporting period (see Clarification below) within the 12 month’s prior to submitting documentation. Please review the below Clarifications and Indicator Documentation Requirements from the Just 3.0 Program Manual regarding the timing of data collection for Retention Tracking:

GENERAL CLARIFICATIONS > REPORTING PERIOD

Unless otherwise specified in the Indicator metrics or clarifications, data should come from within the 12 months prior to documentation submission.

ENGAGEMENT > DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS

EN-3 Retention Data: The percentage of employees that have left the company during the reporting period.

RETENTION TRACKING

Organizations must track all forms of employee separations by 1) type (e.g., terminations, resignations, retirements, layoffs, etc.) and 2) known demographics of departing employees to begin identifying any trends and drivers of turnover so that organizations can in turn take action to address and minimize these drivers.

Q: Should the entire submission be uploaded at once or should we be uploading each section as we complete it? Does it matter?

A: There is no one "right" answer in uploading documentation. Our best advice is to make sure you're adhering to the Documentation Requirements per Indicator, and upload each piece of documentation in the respective fields in the Apply portal (see screenshot example below - "upload a file", data entry). Organizations typically upload information as they go through and complete each Indicator, and once each upload is complete, organizations submit for review. Another option is if you have compiled all of your required documentation but just have not yet uploaded to each respective field, you can upload all of that documentation and submit for review. Some find the latter too overwhelming and find it easier to just upload documentation as they move along through the application.

Screenshot of an example Indicator with file and data submission fields

Q: What are the pros and cons of submitting documentation on a rolling basis vs. all at once?

A: You are more than welcome to upload documentation either all at once or one Indicator at a time/a few Indicators at a time (i.e., rolling basis), etc. The Apply portal allows you to save your current documentation submission and come back to it to upload more documentation again when your team is ready before your final submission. It is ultimately up to you and your team if you want to upload documentation all at once once you have internally compiled all of your documentation, or if you would like to submit more so on a rolling basis. That being said, unfortunately our review team does not have the capacity to review your application after every time your team uploads a piece of documentation. We are more than happy, though, to take a look at a couple of example policies and documentation for Indicators that you have specific concerns or questions about before your team submits all of your documentation. Once you submit all of your documentation in its entirety, the Just team will review your application in its entirety and provide you with feedback for your team to review and respond to with additional requested information.

Q: What does the review process look like once we've submitted? Is there kind of a back and forth, or do we just get the review response? Is that two-to-three months?

A: Yes, there is usually a back and forth correspondence between the Just team and the organization. The below timeline is in reference to the Just 2.0 application process. While the process is the same, the timeline is likely in 3-4 week intervals (rather than 2 weeks) due to the additional requirements and more robust documentation required for Just 3.0:

The typical correspondence looks like: after you've registered, there's a full year where you have the chance to submit all of your documentation within that year. The Just Team reviews your application within 2-4 weeks for initial feedback (usually, there's feedback; it's very rare that any organization has everything submitted 100% correctly the first time.)

After this initial feedback, the organization has a chance to respond with additional information and any other comments or concerns. Depending on how much initial feedback needs to be resolved before another review takes place, this could take 2-4 weeks. This back and forth continues until all requirements and feedback have been resolved. After this process, the organization has the chance to review their final performance levels, and if the levels are in line with what the organization expects, we  would begin the drafting and finalization of your label. Ideally this would take 2-3 months, but for some organizations, renewal under Just 3.0 can take up to 6 months as there are more documentation requirements for this version.

In general, the Just team welcomes correspondence, questions, feedback, and/or comments at any point in time at just.support@living-future.org (Just Support).

Q: When the Just 3.0 Program Manual gets updates or changes, what's the best way for me to keep track of that?

A: The Just 3.0 Program Manual gets updated at the end of each quarter. All quarterly updates will be posted in the Just Online Community. The very end of the Just 3.0 Program Manual also includes a summary of changes/updates from previous to current.

Indicators

Recruitment

Q: We are having some trouble finding evidence for the equitable candidate search to show that we post our listings on DEI-intentional recruitment platforms. We do, but we don't have any active job openings currently, and don't have access to previous postings that are no longer active. Do you have any ideas for ways to document this?

A: You can provide the names of the platforms you use in your documentation. For Level 4 performance, the Recruitment Process Documentation is asking for a screenshot of how you communicate the recruitment process to potential applicants. If you have any draft versions of those job postings with those details, that would work for this documentation if you're applying for Level 4.

Accessibility

Q: Under digital accessibility, what would count under providing communications in multiple formats? For example, during our staff meetings, there are hybrid meeting options with captions and we have external communications in multiple languages.

A: This examples provided works for the purposes of Just. The Just Team's initial thought for providing communications in multiple formats included communications both verbally and in written format, providing captioning options, etc. But these are just examples! Organizations can propose approaches, tactics, and practices that makes the most sense for employees' needs.

Q: Under Digital Accessibility, we offer accessibility software to all computers. However, employees do not have it if they don't prefer it. Does this count under "add accessibility software to all computers"?

A: Similar to the above question, the list provided in the Just 3.0 Program Manual are just examples, so if your organization offers all employees accessibility software but not everyone wants to use it, that is totally fine!

Q: Under Attitudinal Awareness, I saw that the examples the Just team provides are all related to engaging people with disabilities, however, I was wondering if we could use some of our actions regarding other inclusivity measures? For example, our team all completed unconscious bias training.

A: It is important for the training to create awareness specifically around accessibility to meet the Intent of the Indicator. Does the unconscious bias training focus on accessibility? If not, it would not count towards this Indicator. If so, it could count towards metric thresholds.

Q: Would you be able to expand on what is meant by "engage in external advocacy for greater accessibility within the industry?" Is this only related to accessibility for people with disabilities?

A: We are looking for advocacy of accessibility, regardless of one's abilities (universal design inherently benefits all, for example). Though, to be clear, we would not say an organization that only advocates for greater accessibility for people with disabilities could not count.

Q: Our office moved last year and we are located on an upper floor of a shared office building. There is no elevator access, though there is a series of ramps. Unfortunately, these ramps are too steep to be considered accessible. Does this limit our opportunity to receive anything higher than a Level 1 for this category? Otherwise, we would qualify for a Level 2.

A: For this Indicator, to reach a Level 2, you have to initiate at least 1 (one) practice in each aspect of workplace accessibility (physical accessibility, digital accessibility, attitudinal awareness). Your specific scenario, while unfortunate for physical accessibility purposes, would not limit the organization to a Level 1 (if you can demonstrate another practice of physical accessibility).

The following list represents examples of accessibility approaches in each aspect:

1. Physical Accessibility
   • Conduct an overall accessibility assessment of the physical workspace;
   • Complete ADA Checklist for Existing Facilities;
   • Make changes to the physical workspace to support and accommodate employee needs;
   • Provide a variety of work equipment (e.g., desks and chairs) that can accommodate different needs; and
   • Provide a stipend for remote employees to set up their own accessible work environments.
2. Digital Accessibility
   • Conduct a comprehensive accessibility assessment of workplace technology;
   • Complete Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Checklist;
   • Encourage staff to become certified in digital accessibility;
   • Add accessibility software to all computers or shared equipment; and
   • Provide communications in multiple formats.
3. Attitudinal Awareness
   • Provide training to all members of the workforce about the importance of engaging people with disabilities and how to engage;
   • Establish an employee resource group for employees with disabilities and allies to connect, educate, and work for organizational change;
   • Engage in external advocacy for greater accessibility within the industry; and
   • Ensure relevant operations and HR staff are trained in handling disability accommodations so employees are not required to disclose disabilities to their managers or team members unless they wish to do so.

Engagement

Q: In regards to Retention Data Documentation (“percentage of employees that have left the company during the reporting period”): Do different types of leaving need to be distinct such as lay-offs v. resignations?

A: Below are the details on this that we have in the Clarifications section for this Indicator.

For Retention Data Documentation, we are looking for the percentage calculated from the Employee Retention Rate:

EMPLOYEE RETENTION RATE

• A = the number of employees at the beginning of the period
• B = the number of employees at the end of the period
• Retention rate = (B/A) x 100

For Retention Narrative Documentation, we are looking for a brief (one- to two-page) narrative describing implemented methods (e.g., exit interviews) to better understand the drivers of turnover, which should include the following:

RETENTION TRACKING

Organizations must track all forms of employee separations by 1) type (e.g., terminations, resignations, retirements, layoffs, etc.) and 2) known demographics of departing employees to begin identifying any trends and drivers of turnover so that organizations can in turn take action to address and minimize these drivers.

Q: For people manager engagement, do we have to do 360 reviews?

A: 360-degree performance reviews are part of metric requirements for Levels 2-4. However, as long as the organization can demonstrate within their documentation and explain how their people manager engagement reflects the main components of 360 reviews (i.e., multi-source, reciprocal, ideally-anonymous feedback that can be acted upon) that meet the minimum Indicator metric requirements, this should work as an alternative.

Check out Lattice’s “25 Questions to Ask During 360-Degree Performance Reviews” for reference.

Racial + Ethnic Pay Equity

Q: Do we show all pay scales, or just ones where there is racial/ethnic diversity?

A: If you’re referring to the Compensation > Racial + Ethnic Pay Equity Indicator, then yes, please include all pay scales using this worksheet that includes a template for calculating racial and ethnic pay scale variance. You are welcome to use a different template as long as the submitted data meets the documentation requirements.

Additionally, any eligible exclusions in calculating the racial and ethnic pay scale variance are as follows:

ELIGIBLE EXCLUSIONS

The following salaries can be excluded from calculations:

• An organization’s top-level executive (e.g., Chief Executive Officer, Executive Director, etc.), as disparities between the highest- and lowest-paid employees are addressed in the Pay Scale Equity Indicator
• Pay classes in which all employees have the same racial or ethnic identities; and
• Pay classes with one employee.

Physical Health + Safety

Q: Can you explain what a "context specific safety assessment" is?

A: PHYSICAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT

For the purposes of Just, organizations should use an assessment tool (or suite of tools) that best addresses the safety- and hazard-related risks specific to the industry and/or physical context of the organization and its working locations. For example, while manufacturers might complete facility-specific safety inspection checklists, all-remote organizations might conduct an assessment of employee needs while traveling for work-related purposes.

Q: Can we modify/create a custom assessment?

A: Please see Resources for further resources on Assessments, as organizations are strongly encouraged to use a certified assessment rather than developing their own.

Q: Our firm has the WELL Health-Safety rating. Can this be used as an alternative compliance path given that it is a fully remote office?

A: Please see below relevant Clarifications regarding the WELL Health-Safety rating.

WELL HEALTH-SAFETY RATING

Organizations with the WELL Health-Safety Rating (HSR) alone do not qualify for using the WELL Building Certification alternative compliance path. The WELL HSR and WELL Building Certification differ in scope, focus, and requirements, and this alternative compliance specifically aligns with the latter.

ORGANIZATIONS WITH REMOTE WORKERS

If 50% or more of an organization’s employees primarily work remotely, the organization is ineligible to use a building certification path and must follow the general compliance path using the CDC Workplace Health Model.

Q: For Ergonomic Assessments, the NIH example that the Just Team provides is great! However, I reached out to their team, and they only offer reviewers for their own employees. Under your requirements, do we need the reviewer, or could we just complete the self-assessment and then take the necessary steps to improve on our own?

A: Your team can do a self-assessment with the ergonomic checklist as we do not require 3rd-party reviewer for this assessment.

Well-Being

Q: What does "company-wide time off" entail?

A: “Company-wide time off” is an example listed as an Emotional Well-Being program component. The Intent for this is basically encouraging organizations to see the value of providing additional time off for the entire staff to rest and reset. This time off would not include things like individual federal/mainstream holidays. So an organization can have a holiday break, but saying that your organization gives employees all federal holidays off would not meet the Intent; solely giving off days for federal holidays does not count.

This language is meant to entail organization-wide closures in addition to holidays (though holidays might be adjacent/related). For example, Living Future has a winter break between Christmas and New Year's Day as well as the day after our Living Future Conference off, and there are other organizations that do a week off in the summer (e.g. "organizational wellness weeks") that might overlap with July 4 or Labor Day (or not!).

Q: There is a new Well-Being component for paid time off. Could you clarify if the total vacation + sick paid time off (20 days, 25 days, 30 days, etc.) include holidays?

A: For the purposes of Just, paid holidays do not count toward the metric thresholds unless they are specifically designated as floating holidays (i.e., paid days off that employees can self-determine when to take).

Please see relevant Clarifications regarding paid time off here and below:

PAID VACATION AND SICK TIME

Living Future encourages organizations to have separate provisions for paid vacation and sick time; however, for the purposes of Just, these may be combined. Additionally, sick time should be available to use at the employee’s discretion for both physical and mental health needs of their own and their family members. For the purposes of Just, paid holidays do not count toward the metric thresholds unless they are specifically designated as floating holidays (i.e., paid days off that employees can self-determine when to take).

Q: We provide 8 paid holidays, and staff choose from a list of 10 holidays to observe. If one or more holidays someone wishes to observe is not on the list of 10 options, they can substitute alternate dates to take off. We don't technically have a limit on the number of holidays someone can swap, but generally people swap one or two at the most. It doesn't have to be an official holiday and the date doesn't have to be approved by anyone. Does this work?

A: These days can count toward the threshold, as employees have the flexibility to swap and use them as they choose, similar to floating holidays. We would just need to ensure that this flexibility is clearly outlined in the policy if it isn’t already. The key here is that the employee is getting to choose how those couple of floating days are used, so this can count towards the threshold.

Health Care

Q: We have encountered a significant challenge in meeting the specific metric and policy requirement to include cost—sharing details-such as premiums, deductibles, copays, and coinsurance—in a publicly available format. After careful review and consultation with our human resources teams, we have determined that publicly disclosing this level of financial detail presents several concerns around privacy and legal compliance, plan variability and complexity, and policy vs. financial disclosure. Based on these concerns, what do we need to include as part of the cost-sharing structure within the policy and still meet metric requirement?

A: The Just Team completely understands the concern around risk/compliance—while it would be great for the policy to include the full details of the available health care options and benefits, we understand why that might not be feasible for inclusion.

What we would at least want to see within the Health Care Policy is enough information for an employee to have a clear sense of what they can expect, what their coverage options are, including what benefits they have access to, and how much (if any) the employer and/or governmental entity (if applicable) covers.

While the inclusion of the cost-sharing structure within the policy does not need to be an incredibly comprehensive breakdown, the policy does need to include at least a general rundown of the high-level options.

Q: We are international in British Columbia (BC). We have our written policy that documents employee health care benefits and cost-sharing structure. We provide 100% comprehensive health care coverage to all full-time employees. We do pay 100% health care insurance benefits as our plan for all of our staff - is this what is referred to as health care coverage in the general requirements? We don’t then need to provide proof of Universal Health Care Coverage if we take the General Compliance Path?

A: Yes to the first question. Yes to the second question but it is ideal to include both benefits available to employees (i.e., 100% employer-sponsored health care coverage and Universal Health Care coverage) in your policy for full employee transparency.

Q: We are international in Canada (BC, Alberta) and have Universal Health Care coverage. We are taking the alternative compliance path. What documentation are you looking for HC-4 Universal Health Care Coverage Documentation?

A: Organizations must meet the written policy requirements outlined in the metrics for this Indicator (i.e., for Health Care, "employee health care benefits and cost-sharing structure" within the policy is required). For the policy, your organization can just include something about how the universal/government-provided healthcare applies to all Canadians or something similar. In terms of the documentation, we basically just need a summary stating (i.e., "we abide by our countries' government-provided policy..."). This could include a simple summary narrative along with a link to a government website that outlines all employees’ coverage (i.e., "BC citizens are eligible for the full range of publicly-funded comprehensive health care by including [i.e., medical, dental, and vision, prescriptions, preventive care, etc.]" We just need to comprehensively know what employees can expect from their universal/government-sponsored healthcare coverage / how their universal health care/government-sponsored healthcare coverage applies to all employees in summary form as part of the written policy and Universal Health Care documentation (for full employee transparency). Please see below for Just 3.0 Program Manual’s Health Care > Clarifications > Government Role for reference:

GOVERNMENTAL ROLE

If the government of a locale fulfills any of the requirements for a given metric, those government benefits may be included in the percentage of the organization’s coverage.

In areas where the government provides universal health coverage, organizations are eligible to achieve up to Level 3 for this Indicator even if the governmental coverage does not align with Living Future’s definition of comprehensive health care (i.e., inclusive of dental and vision) since the determination of covered services is outside of the organization’s direct control. Organizations in this context must provide access to comprehensive health care in order to achieve Level 4 recognition. Living Future recognizes there is wide variation on how countries choose to approach universal health care provision and welcomes conversation from international organizations on how best to adapt Indicator metrics.

Q: We currently offer group coverage for healthcare for full time employees, and a prorated stipend to part time employees. We were curious what the term "available healthcare benefits" include. Right now, we offer group medical. We have looked into other options down the line like offering an HAS, HRA or a medical stipend that employees could use on the open market. If that was something we pursued, would this still qualify as a healthcare benefit?

A: The allotted money/stipend needs to cover premium of medical, dental, and vision (to meet the comprehensive metric requirements). Please see relevant Clarifications regarding HRAs and the like here and below:

HEALTH REIMBURSEMENT ARRANGEMENT (HRA)

Organizations may use health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs) as a means of providing health care benefits to employees. Organizations must demonstrate that the HRA amount allotted to each employee meets the metric requirements for the corresponding performance level. Given the nature of HRAs, health care plans do not necessarily need to be comprehensive since individual employees use their HRA funds at their discretion.

Q: Do we need to cover X% of the premium of a family plan to qualify for level 2, or is the math based on the premium for an individual employee only?

A: No, only an individual (employee) plan is required. The family plan requirement is only required for Level 4.

Community Connections

Q: Would we be able to use our Community Assessment from our LBC process for the Community Assessment requirement?

A: Yes, as long as it meets the metric and documentation requirements and addresses the Clarifications of the Community Assessment in the Just 3.0 Program Manual.

Q: Could we get a clearer understanding of what "advocacy efforts" means? Would donations count? We currently have a policy to match donations from staff, we donate our produce to the neighboring homeless shelter, and we have a grant set up in our community that advocates for human-powered modes of transportation. Would any of these count for the 5^th point under Level 4: "Organization demonstrates active participation in advocacy efforts on issues that underrecognized or underserved community members have expressed as priorities."?

A: It really depends on how these activities were chosen - if there was community input on advocacy efforts per the Clarification requirements, then this could potentially count. Overall, though, donations and matching aligns more with the Charitable Giving Indicator.

Q: We don’t do traditional community engagement assessments in the very detailed way that is described in the Just 3.0 Program Manual, but we embody that approach in every design project that we pursue and develop. We are considering all of the things that go into a more traditional community assessment. We can cite multiple projects but we have not turned these into a formal document that we then share with the community. We are advancing the Community Connections principles but we’re just doing it in a slightly different way than what is literally described in the Just 3.0 Program Manual. Is there any latitude for embodying the spirit of [the Community Connections] requirements or do we have to follow the very strict interpretation of the requirements outlined for the community assessment?

A: The Just team acknowledges that every organization will approach this Indicator in a way that best suits the organization (i.e., intentional flexibility in how the organization defines “community”) and we recognize that the capacity for a “true” community assessment may be limited for organizations (i.e., HR solely working on applications). This Indicator is designed for organizations to adapt to their specific context. Please note that the documentation does not have to be formalized; as long as the organization can demonstrate that they have done a community assessment first and within their context, it is ultimately up to the organization how their direct community-centered actions are reflected in subsequent documentation (i.e., partnership engagement strategy).  It would be most helpful for our team to actually see the organization’s documentation once we see it altogether for full evaluation. Additionally, the Just team has added a Community Assessment outline of components within the Clarifications section to support organizations in meeting the minimum requirements for the Indicator while leaving space for organizations to demonstrate their varying approaches and contexts.

Procurement

Q: As our firm is 100% remote, I was wondering if we could get some additional clarity on how we may meet the metrics criteria. Every employee is located at a different location around the US. How have fully remote businesses in the past met these requirements?

A: For this Indicator, the Clarification guidance around socially responsible, goods, services, and contracting procurement are as follows:

GOODS AND SERVICES

For the purposes of Just, goods and services refer to all purchases made on behalf of an organization. Within this Indicator, the scope of goods and services included must be comprehensive; however, due to limited available options (if any alternative options exist at all), the following services may be excluded:

• All forms of insurance
• Rent
• Retirement plans
• Utilities

So for remote organizations, using our Just 3.0 Procurement Tracking template, analyzing your organization's procurement of software services, contractors and consultants, IT (e.g., organization-provided laptops) and ergonomic equipment, virtual and/or hybrid events, and catering for any in-person convenings, etc.--anything that your organization still purchases--would work towards this Indicator.

Q: Is the Just team evaluating the organization's due diligence? If they have purchased from companies facing human rights allegations or lawsuits, would that disqualify them from achieving a L3+ rating?

A: For Procurement Level 3 performance, organizations need to submit documentation of their purchase analysis (PR-4) using the template we provide in the Just 3.0 Program Manual (or another tool that accomplishes the purposes of the metric requirements). We cannot say definitively yes or no regarding based on the specific companies, as it depends on what your organization finds through your due diligence process. If it helps at all, the same reporting period would apply to due diligence timeframe (i.e., last fiscal year).

For the purposes of Just due diligence toward ensuring a socially responsible procurement process includes the following steps, at minimum: 

• Confirm whether the business has a published commitment regarding human rights;
• Identify whether the business has an active certification that includes vetting for human rights approaches (e.g., B Corp); and
• Review the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre Company Dashboards to view available businesses’ records of human rights allegations, lawsuits, and defender attacks