contexto

Suzano is against any kind of discrimination both in and out of the workplace. To reinforce this position, our Code of Ethics and Conduct has a specific ethical pillar for this issue: equality and diversity. We strive to treat everyone we meet with respect, dignity and attention, whether inside or outside the company. We also value diversity and inclusion of people and ideas, opposing any form of discrimination based on race, political conviction, gender, religion, sex, sexual orientation, age, place of birth, disability, etc. 

In response towards this end, we started the Plural Program, a project that emerged at Suzano in 2016, organically and voluntarily, and was institutionalized in 2019, aimed at promoting a culture of valuing diversity and encouraging inclusion. In line with the company's sustainability and diversity, equity & inclusion (DE&I) strategies, the team in charge of the Program is co-responsible for promoting non-discrimination in the workplace, among other actions that cover the DE&I thematic.

Moreover, to ensure proper management of this issue, in December 2019 we launched our Diversity and Inclusion Policy, with the aim of determining the guidelines governing initiatives related to this issue in all of our operations. By doing so, we hope to ensure that cases of discrimination do not occur in the company and to promote a culture of respect for individuality throughout our value chain. To learn more, visit the "Diversity, equity and inclusion management" indicator".

Numbers of cases of discrimination¹

2020202120222023²
número total número total número total número total

Cases received

4

5

3

3

Cases for which a remediation plan is being implemented

0

0

0

1

Cases where the remediation plan has been implemented and its results analyzed through routine internal management analysis processes

0

0

0

1

Cases solved

4

5

3

2

  1. This indicator does not consider data from the Cerrado Project and Suzano Holding S.A.
  2. In 2023, we received three complaints of discrimination. One was closed as inconclusive due to insufficient information to open an investigation. Another is currently under investigation, while the third was closed with a finding of merit. In the latter case, the respondent received a written warning as a corrective measure.