Define boundaries for non-employee workers under GHGP:

Greenhouse Gas Protocol
1

Hello Community,

I’m seeking advice on how to properly account for emissions from different types of non-traditional workers under the GHG Protocol. Specifically, I’m struggling with the following scenarios:

  1. Freelancers/Consultants:
  • For exclusive freelancers working solely for our company, should their vehicle emissions be under our Scope 1/2 even though we don’t have operational control over their vehicles?
  • For non-exclusive freelancers, is it correct to account for them under Scope 3 Category 1 (purchased goods and services) using Exiobase or other monetary values?
  • Where should we draw the line between exclusive and non-exclusive work? Is it strictly 100% dedication or perhaps 80% (4/5 days)?
  1. Temporary Workers:
  • Currently, we account for them as purchased services, but many clients prefer not to include their impact
  • Others treat them as employees without company cars and include their commuting emissions - which seems appropriate since they’re indirectly paid by the reporting company
  • This raises potential double-counting issues with the temp agency
  1. Students/Interns:
  • We typically include commuting emissions, but since they’re unpaid, they’re technically not employees under GHGP definitions

How would you handle these cases? What’s the most accurate approach under GHGP control approach definitions?

Thank you

(this post translated and forwarded from a C+A+D support inbox question)

2

Under the GHG Protocol’s control approach, most of the situations you describe are considered within the operational boundaries.
As long as you (or the reporting organization) has the power to change those workers behaviour or actions, they fall within your operational control and therefore should be reported on.

image
image1024×171 6.1 KB

If the worker’s behaviour is independent of your decisions, then they fall outside your operational control, and they should be considered an external service.

There is no exact contractual boundary between those. Operational control definition is purposefully vague. The goal is to draw the boundary at where you can or cannot change (“control”) the outcome, not to draw the boundary at some legal definition or cut-off point.

My quick take on things:

• Exclusive freelancers: Include their vehicle emissions under your Scope 1/2 as they function as an extension of your operations.

• Non-exclusive freelancers: Account under Scope 3 Category 1 (purchased goods/services) when they are actually fully independent in their decision-making. If they are part of day to day operations just like other employees (they have a schedule and they have to apply for leave etc.), then they should be considered within your operational control.

• Temporary workers: They function like regular employees and should be considered the same as full-time workers for the period they are employed at your organization.

• Students/interns: They fall within your operational boundaries, since you can give them instructions / control their actions. They Include their commuting under Scope 3 Category 7, since you control their schedules and work location, despite being unpaid

Hope this helps in applying the control approach to your situation!

1 Like