Atento V Bank Workers Union of São Paulo, Osasco

Overview

NCP Decision Accepted
Current Status Withdrawn
Date Submitted 28/02/2012
Date Closed 28/01/2015
Case Duration 152 weeks and 1 days
Host Country Brazil  (Adhering Country)
Issue(s) Failure to pay the national minimum wage
Provisions Cited I.2   
Case Description In February 2012, the Bank Workers Union of São Paulo, Osasco submitted a case to the Brazilian NCP against the Spanish multinational company, Atento, for failure to pay the national minimum wage, in violation of Decree Nº 7.655, of December 23 , 2011: "As January 1 ,2012, the minimum wage is R$622,00 (six hundred and twenty two reais)".
Developments On 14 September 2012, the NCP accepted the complaint and informed the Spanish NCP. It has published its initial assessment.
Outcome On 6 August 2014, the complainants requested by email that the case be withdrawn as the issues had been addressed. The Brazilian NCP then closed the case.

Organisations

Lead NCP Brazil NCP : Interministerial Body 

Companies

Multinational Company Atento (Home country: Spain)

Complainants

Lead Complainant Sindicato dos Bancários a Financiários de São Paulo, Osasco e Região

Related Documents

Brazil NCP  [Publication date: 28/1/2015] 'FINAL STATEMENT Atento/Bank Workers Union of São Paulo, Osasco and Region Complaint NCP No. 03/2012'
   https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz94i2-T4z5CbDlsRG5lb1dCRm8/view?pli=1 [Date URL accessed: 10/6/2015]

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