Company report
Summary of Results
- Teck
- RMI average
- Collective Best Score
While absolute results remain low overall, Teck shows one of the two stronger results in Lifecycle Management and one of the five stronger results in Community Wellbeing and Environmental Responsibility. In Lifecycle Management, Teck shows evidence of having systems in place designed to ensure its operations’ closure planning seeks continued livelihood viability for affected communities. The company has made formal commitments on a wide range of issues, including: preventing bribery and corruption, adopting a lifecycle approach, respecting human rights, ensuring safe and healthy working conditions, managing its environmental impacts systematically, and not exploring or mining in World Heritage Sites and respecting other protected areas.
As evidence of Teck’s continuous improvement efforts since the RMI Report 2020, the company’s approach to human rights now commits to respecting human rights defenders, giving Teck one of the two stronger results on the issue, and its new Expectations for Suppliers and Contractors, which include human rights requirements.
Teck is associated with several leading practices, including a living wage review and materials management to optimise recycling of goods used in their operations, with an overall target of zero industrial waste disposal by 2040.
However, Teck’s results in Economic Development are below the average and are limited by a lack of evidence of action on a number of issues, including for example working collaboratively with sub-national governments on socio-economic development planning, and developing procurement opportunities for suppliers at the national levels.
In the mine-site assessment Teck ranks 8th among the 40 companies on its mine-site-level results, with an average score of only 14%. Moreover, none of the seven Teck mine sites show any relevant evidence on four of the fifteen issues covered in the assessment: safety of communities, safety of workers, women workers, and living wage.
Overall results
Results per measurement area
Commitment
(9 indicators)Action
(42 indicators)Effectiveness
(20 indicators)Results per indicator
Economic Development
A.01 National and Supranational Socio-Economic Development Planning
A.02 National and Supranational Procurement
A.03 Collaborative Research and Development
A.04 Enhancing the National Skills Base
Mine-site Results
Mine sites selected for individual assessment (but not included in the overall company score)
Click on a mine site name to open its individual result page
Antamina | Carmen de Andacollo | Elkview | Fording River | Highland Valley Copper | Quebrada Blanca | Red Dog | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Local Employment (score /4) | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
Local Procurement (score /4) | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 |
Air Quality (score /4) | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.5 |
Water Quality (score /4) | 0.0 | 0.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 |
Water Quantity (score /4) | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 |
Rehabilitation and Post-Closure (score /4) | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 |
Tailings Management (score /4) | 1.0 | 3.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.5 | - | 1.5 |
Safety of Communities (score /4) | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
Community Grievances (score /4) | 1.5 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 |
Safety and Health of Workers (score /4) | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
Women Workers (score /4) | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
Workplace Deaths and Injuries (score /4) | 1.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
Training of Workers (score /4) | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
Decent Living Wage (score /4) | 0.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
Worker Grievances (score /4) | 1.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 |
Mine Site Score (%) | 17.0 | 15.0 | 20.0 | 20.0 | 11.0 | 11.0 | 16.0 |
Operational mine sites
Mine Site Name | Aliases/Other names | Country | Company's share (%) | Products | Mining types |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Antamina | - | Peru | 22.5 | Copper, Zinc, Molybdenum, Lead, Silver, Bismuth | Open-pit |
Carmen de Andacollo | - | Chile | 90 | Copper, Gold | Open-pit |
Elkview | Baldy Ridge, Natal Ridge, Elk Valley | Canada | 95 | Coal | Open-pit |
Fording River | Elk Valley | Canada | 100 | Coal | Open-pit |
Fort Hills | - | Canada | 21.3 | Bitumen (Oil Sands) | Open-pit |
Greenhills Operations | Elk Valley | Canada | 100 | Coal | Open-pit |
Highland Valley Copper | HVC, Bethlehem | Canada | 100 | Copper, Molybdenum | Open-pit |
Line Creek | Elk Valley | Canada | 100 | Coal | Open-pit |
Quebrada Blanca | - | Chile | 60 | Copper | Open-pit |
Red Dog | - | USA | 100 | Zinc, Lead, Silver | Open-pit |
Closed mine sites (known)
(controlled assets under care & maintenance, closure or post-closure management)
Mine Site Name | Aliases/Other names | Country | Company's share (%) | Products | Mining types | Year of closure |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Apex | - | USA | 50 | Copper, Gallium, Germanium | Underground | 1987 |
Beaverdell | - | Canada | 100 | Silver, Gold | Underground | 1991 |
Bluebell | - | Canada | 100 | Lead, Zinc, Silver | Underground | 1972 |
Bluebell | - | Canada | 100 | Lead, Zinc, Silver | Open-pit, Underground | 1972 |
Bullmoose | - | Canada | 60.9 | Coal | Open-pit | 2003 |
Cardinal River | - | Canada | 100 | Coal | Open-pit | 2020 |
Coal Mountain | Elk Valley | Canada | 100 | Coal | Open-pit | 2019 |
Duck Pond | - | Canada | 100 | Copper, Zinc | Open-pit, Underground | 2015 |
Louvicourt | - | Canada | 55 | Zinc, Copper | Underground | 2005 |
Magmont | - | USA | 50 | Lead, Zinc | Underground | 1994 |
McCracken | - | USA | 100 | Silver, Lead, Zinc | Underground | 1985 |
Pend Oreille | - | USA | 100 | Zinc, Lead | Underground | 2019 |
Polaris | - | Canada | 100 | Zinc, Lead | Underground | 2002 |
Quintette | - | Canada | 92.6 | Coal | Open-pit | 2001 |
Sa Dena Hes | Mount Hundere | Canada | 50 | Lead, Zinc | Underground | 1992 |
Sullivan | - | Canada | 100 | Zinc, Lead, Silver | Underground | 2001 |