Santander V Sindicato dos Bancários a Financiários de São Paulo, Osasco e Região and CUT Brazil

Overview

NCP Decision Accepted
Current Status Closed
Date Submitted 22/09/2009
Date Closed 30/03/2015
Case Duration 287 weeks and 6 days
Host Country Brazil  (Adhering Country)
Sector Financial Services 
Issue(s) Right to trade union representation; right to strike
Provisions Cited I.7  IV.8   
Case Description In September 2009, the Sindicato dos Bancários a Financiários de São Paulo, Osasco e Região (the Bank Workers Union of Sao Paulo) and the Central Union of Workers of Brazil (CUT-Brazil) submitted a case to the Brazilian NCP concerning the anti-union practices of the Spanish multinational bank, Banco Santander.

The unions report that Santander won a legal case to allow it to prevent the presence of union members of the Sao Paulo Bank in any one of its branches. The code was designed to prevent appropriation of property but is being misapplied as striking workers are fighting for better wages and working conditions and not the possesssion of property of the owner.

The Constitution of Brazil guarantees the rights of workers to strike.

Developments On 22 June 2010, the Brazilian NCP accepted the case.

The NCP invited the parties for mediation. The meeting took place on October 21, 2014, at the headquarters of the Ministry of Finance, in Brasília – DF. Participants represented Santander Bank, FENABAN, Bank Worker’s Union, National Confederation of the Financial Sector Workers, CONTRAF, Ministry of Labor and the Ministry of Finance.

Outcome The NCP reports in its Final Statement that while there was no agreement on the interpretation of Interdito Proibitório, the parties did agree to maintain an open channel and to continue dialogue.

Organisations

Lead NCP Brazil NCP : Interministerial Body 

Companies

Multinational Company Banco Santander (Home country: Spain)
Subsidiary Banco Santander Brasil (Home country: Brazil)

Complainants

Lead Complainant Sindicato dos Bancários a Financiários de São Paulo, Osasco e Região
Lead Complainant CUT Brazil - Central Única dos Trabalhadores : National Centre 

Related Documents

Brazil NCP  [Publication date: 22/6/2010] 'RELATÓRIO DE ACEITAÇÃO DE RECLAMAÇÃO Caso Banco Santander (22.06.10)'
   http://www.fazenda.gov.br/sain/pcnmulti/documentos/relatorios/RAR_02_2010.pdf [Date URL accessed: 22/6/2010]

Brazil NCP  [Publication date: 30/3/2014] 'Banco Santander S.A./ Bank Workers Union of São Paulo, Osasco and Region Complaint NCP Nº 02/2010'
   https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz94i2-T4z5CODE2UHNEdm9iQU0/view?pli=1 [Date URL accessed: 8/9/2015]

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

Conflict between federal law, national law and international standards on the right to strike