Global Hyatt V International Union of Food Workers

Overview

NCP Decision Rejected
Current Status Closed
Date Submitted 23/03/2009
Date Closed 22/04/2011
Case Duration 108 weeks and 4 days
Host Country Philippines  (Non-adhering country)
Sector Hotel, Restaurant and Catering 
Issue(s) Replacement of permanent workers with agency and casual workers and refusal to engage in collective bargaining; right to trade union representation; lack of consultation and failure to give notice
Provisions Cited IV.1-a  IV.2-b  IV.2-c  IV.3  IV.6   
Case Description In March 2009, the IUF submitted a complaint to the US NCP on behalf of its affiliate, in the Philippines, the National Union of Workers, in Hotel Restaurant and Allied Industries (NUWHRAIN) concerning the activities of Global Hyatt. NUWHRAIN has been the officially registered exclusive collective bargaining agent
for workers at the Hyatt Regency Manila since 1996 . The IUF contends that since 2001, Hyatt management has committed a serious of violations of provisions under Chapter IV of the Guidelines aimed at undermining the union: replacing 40% of workers with temporary and casual hires to do the same jobs; refusal to bargain in good faith; harassment and intimidation, sometimes violent, of union members; and abuse of legal measures to cause financial and reputational hardship to the union. Finally, the site was closed down by management in May 2007, with severance packages being made conditional to employees’ dropping their claim of reservation to an awaited decision by the Supreme Court.

Developments On 11 September 2009, the US NCP responded to the IUF by letter, requesting clarification on what role the US NCP could play in the matter. On the 9 November 2009, the IUF reiterated its request for the US NCP to offer its good offices to facilitate a dialogue with Hyatt.
Outcome On 22 April 2011, the NCP rejected the case.

Organisations

Lead NCP US NCP : Single Department with Interagency Working Group 

Companies

Multinational Company Global Hyatt (Home country: US)
Local Company Hyatt Regency Manila (Home country: Philippines)

Complainants

Lead Complainant International Union of Food Workers (IUF) : Global Union Federation 
Supporting Home Country Trade Union National Union of Workers in Hotel Restaurant and Allied Industries (NUWHRAIN) : National Sectoral Union 

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

Implications

The dominant business model in the international hotel sector does not involve ownership - the requirement for there to be a subsidiary or investment nexus would mean that the Guidelines would not apply to large swathes of this sector.