Standard Chartered Plc V UNI Global Union and the Korean Finance Industry Union

Overview

NCP Decision Rejected
Current Status Closed
Date Submitted 28/07/2011
Case Duration Not known
Host Country South Korea  (OECD member)
Sector Financial Services 
Issue(s) Wages and working conditions
Provisions Cited V.4-a   
Outcome The case was rejected by the Korean NCP on the grounds that the same issues were part of a negotation between management and labour being handled by the Seoul regional office of the Ministry of Employment and Labor. The NCP has reported in its 2012 Annual Report that the initial assessment is published on its web site. However, TUAC is unable to find this assessment perhaps because it is published in Korean only.

Organisations

Lead NCP South Korea NCP : Independent Expert Body 

Companies

Multinational Company Standard Chartered Bank (Home country: UK)
Subsidiary Standard Chatered First Bank (Home country: South Korea)

Complainants

Lead Complainant KFIU - Korean Finance Industry Union : National Sectoral Union 
Lead Complainant UNI Global Union : Global Union Federation 
Affected Party SC First Bank Labor Union : Company 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