Sodexo V Service Employees International Union and CGT

Overview

NCP Decision Rejected
Current Status Withdrawn
Date Submitted 30/07/2010
Date Closed 01/09/2011
Case Duration 56 weeks and 6 days
Host Countries Colombia  (Adhering Country)
Dominican Republic  (Non-adhering country)
Morocco  (Adhering Country)
US  (OECD member)

Sector Food, Agriculture and Tobacco 
Issue(s) Violations of freedom of association, including firing of workers for trade union activities; inadequate health and safety
Provisions Cited IV.1-a  IV.4-b   
Developments The case was withdrawn following an agreement between the US trade union Service Employees International Union and Sodexho.
Outcome Since the case the global union for food workers, IUF, has signed an agreement with Sodexo that will establish a basis for future dialogue.

Organisations

Lead NCP France NCP : Tripartite (involving several government departments and the social partners) 
Lead NCP US NCP : Single Department with Interagency Working Group 

Companies

Multinational Company Sodexo (Home country: France)

Complainants

Lead Complainant SEIU Service Employees International Union : National Union 
Lead Complainant Confédération Générale du Travail (CGT) : National Centre 
Affected Party SINALTRAINAL : National Sectoral Union 

Related Documents

'Sodexo USA Files RICO Lawsuit Against SEIU' [Date URL accessed: 22/8/2011]

France NCP  [Publication date: 20/9/2012] 'SODEXO: Communiqué of the French NCP for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises'
   http://www.tresor.economie.gouv.fr/File/401149 [Date URL accessed: 15/10/2014]

France NCP  [Publication date: 20/9/2012] 'SODEXO: Communiqué du Point de contact national français chargé du suivi des principes directeurs de l’OCDE à l’intention des entreprises multinationales'
   http://www.tresor.economie.gouv.fr/File/375193 [Date URL accessed: 15/10/2014]

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