C&A V CUT BRAZIL and CONTRACTS

Overview

NCP Decision Accepted
Current Status Withdrawn
Date Submitted 01/01/2007
Date Closed 17/05/2013
Case Duration 332 weeks and 4 days
Host Country Brazil  (Adhering Country)
Sector Textiles, Leather and Garments 
Issue(s) Failure to negotiate on profit sharing for workers
Provisions Cited IV.1-a  IV.2-a  IV.2-b  IV.2-c  IV.3  IV.8   
Case Description In 2007, the trade unions CUT-Brazil and CONTRACTS submitted a case to the Brazilian NCP concerning the activities of the Dutch multinational retailer C&A regarding their failure to provide information and negotiate with on profit share.
Developments On the 5 November 2007, the Brazilian NCP accepted the case. In May 2009, in its Annual report to the OECD, the Brazilian NCP reported that it had carried out an initial analysis and sent out a list of questions to the parties. In its 2010 Annual report to the OECD, the Brazilian NCP stated that it was focusing on dealing with new cases and that it expected to take some time to clear the backlog of old cases.
Outcome On 16 October 2012, CUT requested that the NCP close the complaint due to a commitment made by C&A to open negotiations related to a national agreement on PPL, and build a permanent social dialogue with workers and their representatives.

Organisations

Lead NCP Brazil NCP : Interministerial Body 

Companies

Multinational Company C&A (Home country: Netherlands)

Complainants

Lead Complainant CONTRACTS - Confederacao Nacional dos Trabalhadores do Comércio e Serviços : National Sectoral Union 
Lead Complainant CUT Brazil - Central Única dos Trabalhadores : National Centre 

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