E Ink Holdings Inc. V Korean Confederation of Free Trade Unions (KCTU), Korean Metal Workers' Union (KMWU) and Hydis Local, Korean Metal Workers' Union

Overview

NCP Decision Decision Pending
Current Status Ongoing
Date Submitted 31/08/2015
Case Duration 171 weeks and 4 days so far
Host Country South Korea  (OECD member)
Issue(s) Failure to consult with trade unions on restructuring with employment effects; failure to provide trade unions with timely and accurate information
Provisions Cited V.1-b  V.6   

Organisations

Lead NCP South Korea NCP : Independent Expert Body 

Companies

Multinational Company HO, Shou-Chuan (1iiJ JII) (Home country: Taiwan)
Multinational Company E Ink Holdings Inc (Home country: Taiwan)
Local Company Hydis Technologies Co., Ltd. (Home country: South Korea)

Complainants

Lead Complainant Hydis Local, Korean Metal Workers' Union : Company Union 
Lead Complainant KMWU : National Sectoral Union 
Lead Complainant KCTU- Korea : National Centre 

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