That headline does not read right.
If you fail an audit, that’s a bad thing.
US and UK companies with foreign operations use audits to prevent worker abuse – but auditors say the checks aren’t working
I think they mean that they fail to accomplish their goal. But you’re not wrong in that it’s poorly worded.
And how can you fail at worker abuse? it’s the easiest thing, everybody’s doing it.
The solution is obvious. Hire an auditing firm to audit the auditing firms.
Bonus points if the auditing firm, hired to audit, subcontracts the auditing to the firm they are supposed to audit.
And that’s because there are no consequences.
Giving jackass in finance a wink wink laden dressdown for their behavior, but then giving them a bonus every year and laughing about the whole thing during your next golf match, doesn’t change their behavior.
Throwing their ass out on the street might.
EDIT: and then there’s the issue of the bosses themselves being at fault and nothing will ever be done against them unless there are actual criminal charges upcoming, like with Ubisoft.
That’s because of the purpose of the audit.
The purpose of the audit isn’t to find and fix something, but to say that an audit was performed. That way, a consumer can see that an audit has been performed and feel better about buying something whether or not it is was performed correctly.
Audits only really have teeth when someone who has a vested interest in the quality of the audit participates in the audit.
