Supplier Agreement Code Of Conduct Overkill? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 07:28:16 am
content: I've got to sign a supplier agreement (me being the supplier) for a company who shall remain nameless.These are a few of the gems from it:QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteWell, yeah, ok, I'm all for that stuff, but I can't help but thinkPISS OFF!Anyone else seen one of these kinds of things before?

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 07:35:22 am
content: Those seem reasonable if it is for YOUR OWN company.But requiring them for external suppliers seems way over the top.Please tell us this isn't some mainstream electronics entity.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 07:37:43 am
content: Quote from: Richard Crowley on August 11, 2014, 07:35:22 amNo, it's not.

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 07:50:06 am
content: Seems like someone's trying to change the world all by themselves...They are telling you that your principles may not be good enough, so you'd better sign up to theirs.I can understand why you might want to tell them to piss off.

author: jancumps
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 07:51:32 am
content: Suppliers and consultants that work with my employer have to do the same.As employee, I go through a code of conduct re-training and certification every year.

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 07:57:42 am
content: From the way it reads I would think that this is a media company and nothing to do directly with hardware. Its the sort of BS they go in for on there contract documentation then don't bother with complying themselves.

author: sunnyhighway
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 07:58:49 am
content: I'm asked to sing this kind of stuff all the time. I'm a software guy working on contract base.It seems almost company with headquarters in the USA has them.Most of it is already in the constitutional laws of almost every decent country. (discrimination, sexual harassment, bribes, etc. etc.)There are probably also some references to other documents. (to which you have to comply also)Ask for those documents!!!Scan those documents also for references to other document. Some of them will probably online and can change from day to day.Again, ask for ALL these documents too.Eventually you will find some references to documents where you don't have access to because you are not on the payroll.There will probably also references to webpages or internal phone directories where you can file reports if they are not adhering to their own rules. (some sort of internal ombudsman)Keep asking for all those documents and access to the online dynamic webpages which are referenced.Don't sign anything until all of this is done by them.In the meantime they wil start doing business with you. (money alway seems to be more important.By the time you have everything, you are probably done doing business with them.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 08:05:03 am
content: Let me guess. It is a Merikan company.Quote from: EEVblog on August 11, 2014, 07:28:16 amThis is standard procedure is many countries. Why do people feel like they need to force other people/company/community/country to do things their way? Even though this is hardly forcing.

author: josem
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 08:09:17 am
content: It's super easy to find who this is from on the web, global British co. starting with a W... Not sure if you want to keep the terms verbatim, Dave.You even have to sign junk like this to attend conferences these days. Some people don't know how to behave and every blog is a potential PR nightmare... Hard to believe but I've seen people complaining to companies for not having stuff like this.But no accessibility policy clause?

author: miguelvp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 08:17:26 am
content: There are many companies that have those clauses verbatim, on top of the one you mention, there is one that starts with M and another one that starts with LAs well as some academic institutions.

author: SirNick
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 09:07:21 am
content: Quote from: jancumps on August 11, 2014, 07:51:32 amSame here. I always assumed it was part of a face-saving plan, where the company can brag that not only are THEY ethical, but they hold their partners to those same standards, because they're all such good people. Then of course, reality sets in, along with all the usual high-jinks behind closed doors.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 09:19:50 am
content: Let me guess - PR/advertising dept?They're just trying to avoid the risk of bad publicity coming back on them.Most of it is so wooly & subjective as to be meaninglessQuoteI have examined your point, and consider it appropriate to call you dickhead.

author: apelly
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 10:17:44 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on August 11, 2014, 07:28:16 amWeak, Dave.Quote from: EEVblog on August 11, 2014, 07:28:16 amYep. Too much HR, not enough substance.Quote from: EEVblog on August 11, 2014, 07:28:16 amAll the time.As an employee of a consulting company I don't personally have to deal with it, but typically (always) a counter-contract squashes it on the spot.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 11:30:55 am
content: I think you should make up your own versione.g.QuoteQuote

author: lewis
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 11:39:34 am
content: It's all very gag-inducingly PC. It's a shame that in modern society we feel the need to enshrine into a written contract what used to be common sense.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 12:26:10 pm
content: The wife (who works in the government) just read it and didn't bat an eyelid, absolutely bog-standard corporate responsibility supplier agreement.

author: AndyC_772
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 12:35:02 pm
content: Your definition of "equivalent" may not be equivalent to mine

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 12:36:13 pm
content: Quote from: apelly on August 11, 2014, 10:17:44 amWhy?It's of no real public interest. I was given this in-confidence and their name will remain so.Now, if they had a Hobby Lobby type discrimination thing happening then you bet your arse I would have exposed them. Otherwise, no.But I raise it here out of community interest in such things, to promote discussion, and to see what's normal out there.

author: VK5RC
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 12:37:52 pm
content: To me it smells of Government Department, no one else would bothered writing all that BS.I have to swear to an abbreviated version of that every so often when I log into a Government work data system.The funniest thing is the bit about intimidation and bullying and I think having to keep on testifying is actually a form of intimidation!I try to ignore it as it just gets my BP up.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 12:38:20 pm
content: Quote from: lewis on August 11, 2014, 11:39:34 amThis is why we have laws that apply to everyone.To put this stuff in a private contract (which probably has almost zero validity anyway) is just silly

author: GreyWoolfe
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 12:43:02 pm
content: I'm with jancups. We go through the training/certification every year. My company does business strictly on the government (federal/state) level and they have their own code of conduct (cough, cough, ahem) that we have to work in alignment with, though the 2 sets of codes do pretty well line up. Not sure abou the international contracts as I am too far down the food chain to be involved there.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 12:56:45 pm
content: Quote from: lewis on August 11, 2014, 11:39:34 amThat is what I'm saying. It is not common sense, and this is not the accepted business model around the world. In east europe/russia/middle east/india it is expected to give a substantial present if you get a contract, I even heard percentages for goverment related order (reliable source, winning those orders).Companies shouldn't have this "I'm on the moral high ground, and I require you to be also" mentality, because there is always a higher ground or a different look.Next time you look around, and they require equal wage for workers and the CEO, the usage of only recycled materials, or you pay 10 percent to the Jehovah's Witnesses (or equivalent).

author: bwat
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 01:09:13 pm
content: Quote from: NANDBlog on August 11, 2014, 12:56:45 pmWhich is why these companies use consultants to "handle" the sales. If you're being asked to sign the contract then you're probably not being asked to sell directly to these other cultures.

author: jridley
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 01:19:42 pm
content: Not allowed to possess weapons on property - the last mailbag might get you in trouble there Dave.

author: sleemanj
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 01:26:18 pm
content: Sounds like an advertising supply agreement. It's stupidly PC and overkill, but fair enough, advertisers payinggood moneydiddly squat for space on a website want to make sure that website isn't going to do stuff that will damage their reputation by association.Personally I prefer an agreement like "1. don't be a dick; 2. see 1.".

author: jay
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 01:39:26 pm
content: These Code of Conduct agreements are nowadays quite common. It's kind of a trend but it also makes sense.Let's assume a supplier uses monkeys as slave labor for manufacturing components for iPhone and then a reporter finds out that they don't give them any bananas then Apple can at least tell that the supplier had agreed to different policies and they do not condone such treatment of monkeys.The point in these CoCs is really to tell suppliers that we don't want to deal with suppliers that don't care about such things and also to tell the employees that they shouldn't do certain things. For example, I used to work for a company that had operations on almost every continent. It was more than well known that the business suffered in many countries, because our code of conduct made it clear that lubrication money, gifts or bribes were out of question - even in countries where it's (semi-)legal and a common practice. Many competitors didn't care.. Business first, ethics last.

author: KJDS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 01:57:57 pm
content: I first saw that sort of thing when I worked at Tyco, just after the Cheif Executive got a very long jail sentence and the company was keen to ensure it could show that they were doing all they could to absolve themselves of the actions of any employees behaving in similar ways.It was so badly drafted that I signed it, but only when they agreed with the four pages of objections I'd raised.

author: zapta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 02:45:00 pm
content: >> Supplier Agreement Code Of Conduct Overkill?It's just one more aspect of the utopia-at-any-cost that the political left tries to push for years. Around here for example, supermarkets are not allow to give or sell plastic bags with handles.

author: pickle9000
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 02:46:36 pm
content: In my experience a supplier agreement means a new and typically long term customer.

author: BillyD
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 02:50:02 pm
content: Hah, I googled one of the sentences in the first post and the first 2 results are a company which shall remain nameless and... this thread.

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 03:03:20 pm
content: I always work on the principle of if you never offend or upset anyone you never do or get anything done. As they say you cant make an omelet without cracking eggs. also rely on someone somewhere getting offended by something done,said or unsaid.

author: Fsck
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 03:30:28 pm
content: Quote from: jridley on August 11, 2014, 01:19:42 pmthe question is, did they define weapon?otherwise, wouldn't it be in a big fat legal grey area?

author: Stonent
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 04:16:31 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on August 11, 2014, 12:36:13 pmDiscrimination...what?Asking to be exempted from adding 3 abortifactant drugs to the 17 other contraceptives they already provide is discrimination?Now to the matter at hand, if you were to accept their agreement, how do they intend to enforce it?If you were to swear in a video, say "Won Hung Lo", make an unhappy comment about non-atheists, etc would that constitute a breach of contract? You wouldn't last two seconds.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 04:18:17 pm
content: It's not a weapon, it is a Big Ass letter opener, box trimmer and roof tile edging utensil. That some have used it as a weapon is a sad commentary on modern society, and a terrible injustice to all those poor letter openers who do packing and roof tile trimming as a part of work, who are hobbled by the banning of the tools they need to operate their trade properly.Then again, that is a pretty boiler plate set of conduct rules, almost invariably printed on any such contract or other communications, and pretty much like any other shrink wrapped EULA. It might be part of a 30 page document, written in 3 point Flyspec font in 18% grey.Almost universally ignored, and you probably could put Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum in there as well and it would also be accepted.

author: Stonent
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 04:21:38 pm
content: Quote from: Fsck on August 11, 2014, 03:30:28 pmThat's not a weapon!Here's a weapon!

author: abaxas
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 04:22:34 pm
content: Quote from: Stonent on August 11, 2014, 04:16:31 pmCouldn't he just end his videos with 'I think everyone is a cnut'.Job done.... no discrimination

author: cimmo
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 04:25:13 pm
content: Quote from: Stonent on August 11, 2014, 04:16:31 pmUh oh, I can smell a thread-locking around the corner.And in answer to your question:Yes.

author: Stonent
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 04:25:31 pm
content: Quote from: abaxas on August 11, 2014, 04:22:34 pmOr "I don't discriminate, I hate you all!"

author: Stonent
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 04:28:01 pm
content: Quote from: cimmo on August 11, 2014, 04:25:13 pmNo, telling an employee they would be fired if the company found out they purchased them with their own money would be discrimination.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 04:45:38 pm
content: All it says is that you have an "equivalent", but doesn't appear to ask for the actual policyIt should easily be arguable that "Equivalent" this covers adaption to local norms, and that of the target demographic.In terms of ass-covering, it may be worth actually writing a policy, so at least you have something that you can claim is equivalent. This would better match the terms than having no written policy.Another thing - does the agreement state that the policy must be in force for ever, or only at the time of making the agreement ?Polices can change

author: Stonent
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 04:54:58 pm
content: Besides, how many suppliers in China would fit the criteria of this agreement?

author: apelly
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 09:33:34 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on August 11, 2014, 12:36:13 pmBecause this sort of PC crap annoys me. I do essentially agree with the spirit, but why do you need such a specific document? HR people with too much time on their hands. There is no other reason. Anyway, now they've managed to annoy me by proxy. Cunning.Quote from: EEVblog on August 11, 2014, 12:36:13 pmOK

author: chrisbrown
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2014, 10:03:53 pm
content: Everyone is calling this an example of PC gone mad, but let me just toss this out there:Say a company establishes a long-term agreement with a supplier, with penalties for cancellation. If that supplier is subsequently caught using unethical practices, the company's reputation may come under fire because of that partnership. Should the company be penalized for the supplier's transgressions (be it through cancellation penalties or tarnished image) or should the company have a means of escape in these circumstances? That's what I believe these clauses to be.

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2014, 12:25:10 am
content: Quote from: chrisbrown on August 11, 2014, 10:03:53 pmThat's fine, and I don't disagree. But they could say: "These are our values. We prefer to do business with vendors who share our values, and we reserve the right to terminate our arrangements with you if your actions cast any negative impression of our company." But I guess lawyers don't talk like that, do they?

author: zapta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2014, 12:58:35 am
content: Quote from: Stonent on August 11, 2014, 04:16:31 pmIt was a bait, don't fall for it.

author: aroby
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2014, 02:35:17 am
content: However asinine and objectionable you may find this, clearly you should not sign it if you cannot comply with the terms. It becomes a contract and you obviously need to read the rest of the contractual terms that deal with liability, indemnification, breach etc. Last thing you want is one of their customers suing them for some comment you made that falls foul of a set of policies and then they come after you for indemnificationAnthony

author: Corporate666
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 12, 2014, 03:01:05 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on August 11, 2014, 12:36:13 pmInteresting.I sell through Amazon (not their reseller program, but they stock our stuff). I sell through Walmart. I sell through quite a few large home stores in the USA, and I sell through distributors who are billion-dollar companies and have thousands of resellers all across the USA and Canada.... and I've never been presented with such an agreement.Can you say how large this company is in general terms? It sounds like the kind of thing (not to name names) Adafruit or something would ask for. ... whereas much larger companies either wouldn't ask or would do some due diligence on your business first and see how you run things for themselves.

author: warp_foo
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 12, 2014, 03:07:14 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on August 11, 2014, 07:28:16 amTo be honest, this PC stuff is getting out of hand,At some point, denigrating the snail darter is going to exclude you from bidding on or competing for business...m

author: SirNick
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2014, 05:04:11 am
content: Quote from: Corporate666 on August 12, 2014, 03:01:05 amHuh uh. I work for a small part of a VERY large company. (You've definitely heard of them.) We are required to view training videos on this more than once yearly. It's a giant dog and pony show where they very publicly proclaim that we are the company who'sstaunchlyagainst ethical violations,totallyfor including the little guy in their supply chain, andvaluesdiversity in the workplace.I expect it's business-as-usual despite all of this, but the ability to distance themselves from partners who get caught with hands in the cookie jar is no doubt worth all the effort.Small companies try to change the world. Large companies learn to play the game. And nothing has changed since elementary school, where no one will sit by the kid everyone makes fun of, because they don't want to be ridiculed themselves. Apparently that behavior sticks for life.

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2014, 06:41:44 am
content: Part of this stuff is even coming from 'da laws. Those laws the US is attempting to enforce world-wide. Sarbanes–Oxley is one of them.Companies put this stuff into their own rulebook for fear of getting into trouble doing business in the US or having problems doing business with a US company. If you then add a bit of PR, a bit of paranoia, and a bit of PC you end up with this stuff.I have seen one company where they had outsourced the process of becoming a supplier for that company to a compliance agency, because the paperwork was getting too much for the company itself. You had to provide certificates of no child labor, confirmation that you permit union activities, a detailed list of workplace incidents, detailed list of harassment complaints in the last ten years, safety material handling, description of your rat-out-a-colleague (whistleblower) system, etc. The list was going on and on. We had already supplied the goods when we finally got the certificate that we were a certified supplier. We didn't go through the trouble to get recertified every other year and dropped them as a customer.In Dave's example it is interesting to see that they give their business partners a backdoor, the "equivalent policy" requirement. Of course, this also gives them a excuses to get rid of a supplier at will, claiming his equivalent policy isn't equivalent.

author: ejeffrey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2014, 07:19:03 am
content: Quote from: Bored@Work on August 12, 2014, 06:41:44 amThe flip side of this is of course that companies use a mutli-level supply chain precisely to avoid responsibility for child labor, slavery, unsafe working conditions, illegal environmental practices, product safety, and so forth. Outsourcing isn't just about saving money, it is also a way to take a bunch of problems you don't want to worry about and handing it over to someone who won't worry about them for you.It would be nice if some of these things were solving actual problems, rather than just creating more paperwork, but sadly that does not appear to genuinely be the case. A few companies may be trying to actually clean up problems in their supply chain, but it is trendy, and it is much easier to copy someone's paperwork than their actual work.

author: ConKbot
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2014, 04:16:39 pm
content: The obvious answer is to add a line item to the quote for handling compliance paperwork, billed at 2x the normal rate.

author: Bassman59
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2014, 05:08:25 pm
content: Quote from: Stonent on August 11, 2014, 04:21:38 pmMy father is a retired butcher, and several of his knives are bigger and badder than that toy you're brandishing there, Dave. Nobody seems to worry about a butcher walking through a store with what looks like a machete, but if you thought about it for a moment, he's the one guy with whom you donotwant to fuck.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2014, 05:51:36 pm
content: Yes, cheap Chinese steel that will not hold an edge well. will go blunt pretty fast. Looks nice, but not going to cut like a proper knife with a proper edge.

author: SirNick
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2014, 06:47:02 pm
content: Seeing that reminded me a little of Final Fantasy VII.

author: zapta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2014, 07:24:36 pm
content: Quote from: SirNick on August 12, 2014, 06:47:02 pmOr this

author: Stonent
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2014, 08:11:26 pm
content: Quote from: zapta on August 12, 2014, 07:24:36 pmI see you've played Knifey-Spooney before!

author: lewis
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2014, 09:12:08 pm
content: Quote from: Stonent on August 12, 2014, 08:11:26 pmBeat me to it!

author: allikat
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2014, 10:55:53 pm
content: These guys have dealt with cheapskates across the world before.Notice how it says that you must have a similar policy in place, but doesn't say anything about upholding or enforcing that policy...That's how they can deal with ... certain countries that don't actually uphold that sort of thing...