Nutreco V Milieudefensie and Ecoocéanos - in consultation with the Federación Provincial de Trabajadores de la Industria Pesquera de Puerto Montt

Overview

NCP Decision Accepted
Current Status Closed
Date Submitted 01/08/2002
Date Closed 01/10/2003
Case Duration 60 weeks and 6 days
Host Country Chile  (OECD member)
Issue(s) Right to join a trade union; right to collective bargaining; health and safety; environment
Provisions Cited II.2  II.10  IV.1-a  IV.2-b  V.2-a  V.3  V.4   
Developments This case was referred to the Cilean NCP in line with the rules of the Guidelines that the case should be handled by the NCP in the host country.
Outcome In October 2003, the Chilean NCP issued a report that included recommendations and proposals for dialogue including regarding the need to recognise the rights of workers to join a trade union and engage in collective bargaining. The NCP also recommended that the company shold bring its standards into line with those applied in the Netherlands.

Organisations

Lead NCP Chile NCP : Single Government Department 
Lead NCP Netherlands NCP : Independent Expert Body 

Companies

Multinational Company Nutreco (Home country: Netherlands)
Subsidiary Marine Harvest Chile SA. (Home country: Chile)

Complainants

Lead Complainant Milieudefensie
Lead Complainant Ecoocéanos
Supporting Complainant Federación Provincial de Trabajadores de la Industria Pesquera de Puerto Montt : Regional/state 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