Bata V ITGLWF

Overview

NCP Decision Accepted
Current Status Closed
Date Submitted 01/01/2005
Date Closed 01/11/2005
Case Duration 43 weeks and 3 days
Host Country Sri Lanka  (Non-adhering country)
Sector Textiles, Leather and Garments 
Issue(s) Dismissed employees without any prior information or consultation with the union; right to trade union representation
Provisions Cited IV.1-a  IV.6   
Case Description In January 2005, the ITGLWF informed the Canadian NCP of serious breaches of the Guidelines by a Bata subsidiary in Sri Lanka. In April 2004, the company dismissed 146 employees without any prior information or consultation with the union, which represented a breach of paragraph 6 of Chapter IV on Employment and Industrial Relations. Moreover, the Bata subsidiary interfered with the workers’ right to organise by dismissing the president of the union and filing police reports against the union leadership.
Outcome The case was closed by the NCP in November 2005.

Organisations

Lead NCP Canada NCP : Interdepartmental Committee 

Companies

Multinational Company Bata (Home country: Canada)

Complainants

Lead Complainant International Textile, Garment and Leather Workers Federation : Global Union Federation 

TUAC Analysis

Did the NCP publish its initial assessment? status-icon
Did the case involve parallel proceedings? status-icon
Was the existence of parallel proceedings an obstacle to the NCP accepting the case? status-icon
Was the businsess relationship other than that of a subsidiary? status-icon
Was the nature of the business relationship an obstacle to the NCP accepting the case? status-icon
Did the NCP inform other relevant government departments about its acceptance of this case? status-icon
Did the NCP offer mediation or conciliation? status-icon
Did the company accept the offer of mediation or conciliation? status-icon
Did the complainant(s) accept the offer of mediation or conciliation? status-icon
Was mediation or conciliation held? status-icon
Was mediation or conciliation conducted by a professional mediator? status-icon
Did the parties reach agreement? status-icon
If yes, did the NCP publish this agreement following the consent of the parties? status-icon
If mediation was refused or failed did the NCP make an assessment of whether the company had breached the Guidelines? status-icon
Did the NCP conduct in-host country fact finding? status-icon
Did the NCP make recommendations to the company on the future implementation of the Guidelines? status-icon
Did the NCP publish its final statement or report? status-icon
Did the NCP provide for follow-up of the agreement/recommendations? status-icon
Did the NCP inform other relevant government departments about its final statement or report? status-icon
Did the NCP inform public pension funds about its final statement or report? status-icon
Did the NCP apply any consequences in this case? status-icon
Did the NCP follow the indicative timescales set out in the procedural guidance? status-icon
Was there a positive outcome for the workers involved in this case? status-icon
Did the filing of the case under the Guidelines have a positive impact for the workers involved? status-icon
Did the lead NCP play a positive role? status-icon
If different, did the home NCP play a positive role? status-icon