Deutsche Telekom AG V Communications Workers of America (CWA), ver.di and UNI Global Union

Overview

NCP Decision Accepted
Current Status Closed
Date Submitted 07/07/2011
Date Closed 09/07/2013
Case Duration 104 weeks and 5 days
Host Countries Montenegro  (Non-adhering country)
US  (OECD member)

Sector Telecommunications 
Issue(s) Undermining the right to trade union representation and collective bargaining
Provisions Cited I.3  I.5  V.1-a  V.4-a  V.8   
Case Description TUAC had (exceptionally) not published information on this complaint.
Developments The U.S. NCP determined that "the matters raised were international in nature, were bona fide, and were relevant to the implementation of the Guidelines. The basis for this determination included the link between Deutsche Telekom and T-Mobile’s activities in the United States; an assessment that the concerns about best practices raised by CWA were material and substantiated; and that consideration of the issues raised would contribute to the purpose and effectiveness of the Guidelines." Both parties indicated that they would continue to participate in the process.
Outcome A pre-mediation discussion was held on the March 5, during which the general approach to the mediation was discussed. The FMCS requested a date from the parties for a first mediation meeting. On March 12, the FMCS reported to the US NCP that it had not received a response from Deutsche Telekom T-Mobile regarding the initial mediation.

On March 19, 2013, the Office of the U.S. NCP informed the parties that based on the circumstances and the materials before it, the U.S. NCP could no longer contribute to a positive resolution of this dispute and withdrew its offer of good offices.

Organisations

Lead NCP US NCP : Single Department with Interagency Working Group 
Supporting NCP Germany NCP : Single Department with Interagency Working Group 

Companies

Multinational Company Deutsche Telekom (Home country: Germany)
Subsidiary Crnogorski Telekom (Home country: Montenegro)
Subsidiary T- Mobile USA (Home country: US)

Complainants

Lead Complainant CWA Communications Workers of America
Lead Complainant UNI Global Union : Global Union Federation 
Lead Complainant Ver.di : National Sectoral Union 

Related Documents

US National Contact Point  [Publication date: 9/7/2013] 'U.S. NCP Final Assessment: Communications Workers of America (AFL-CIO, CWA)/ver.di and Deutsche Telekom AG'
   https://www.state.gov/e/eb/oecd/usncp/links/rls/211646.htm [Date URL accessed: 24/7/2013]

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

TUAC Assessment

TUAC recognises that the US NCP made a significant effort to bring the parties togetherfor for mediation. However, it considers it unacceptable that a complaint should be closed because a company refuses to come to mediation. This renders the NCP process ineffective and weak and underlines the problem of NCPs, including the US, Australia and Switzerland, which refuse to carry out an examination of the case if mediation fails. Moreover the NCP should, according both to the rules of the OECD Guidelines and the US NCP's own procedures make recommendations on the future implementation of the Guidelines and also if the parties request provide for follow-up.

Implications

The company failed to set a date for mediation.