Nestlé SA V International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers’ Associations (Indonesia)

Overview

NCP Decision Accepted
Current Status Closed
Date Submitted 10/11/2008
Date Closed 20/06/2010
Case Duration 83 weeks and 6 days
Host Country Indonesia  (OECD Enhanced Engagement)
Sector Food, Agriculture and Tobacco 
Issue(s) Refusal to negotiate wages in violation of ILO Conventions 87 and 98; attacks on bona fide trade union workers; yellow union
Provisions Cited IV.1-a  IV.2-b  IV.2-c   
Case Description In November 2008, the International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers’ Associations (IUF) raised a case against Nestlé Indonesia with the Swiss NCP regarding the right to bargain wages as a fundamental element of collective bargaining.
Developments The Swiss NCP accepted the complaint on the 5th January 2009. The Swiss NCP has offered its good offices for the purposes of solving the issue.

The NCP convened joint and separate meetings with the parties on the 28th and 29th August 2010 respectively. A meeting with the IUF on the 16th August involved representative of workers from Indonesia.

Outcome The NCP closed the specific instance on the grounds that agreement was reached between the unions and the company that the Union of Nestlé Indonesia Panjang Workers would be recognised for the purposes of collective bargaining. As other issues raised in the specific instance had not been addressed, the IUF did not agree that the case should have been closed.

Organisations

Lead NCP Switzerland NCP : Single Government Department 

Companies

Multinational Company Nestlé (Home country: Switzerland)
Subsidiary PT Nestlé Indonesia : Wholly-owned subsidary  (Home country: Indonesia)

Complainants

Lead Complainant International Union of Food Workers (IUF) : Global Union Federation 
Affected Party Union of Nestlé Indonesia Panjang Workers : Company Union 

Related Documents

IUF  [Publication date: 28/11/2003] 'Negotiated Agreement Ends Lengthy Conflict at Nestlé Korea'
   http://www.iuf.org/cgi-bin/dbman/db.cgi?db=default&uid=default&ID=1193&view_rec
   ords=1&ww=1&en=1
[Date URL accessed: 7/6/2010]

IUF  [Publication date: 24/11/2003] 'Korean Labour Relations Commission Finds Nestlé Guilty of "Unfair and Illegal Labour Practices"'
   http://www.iuf.org/cgi-bin/dbman/db.cgi?db=default&uid=default&ID=1184&view_rec
   ords=1&ww=1&en=1
[Date URL accessed: 7/6/2010]

Peter Rossman  [Publication date: 13/7/2010] 'Whose Workplace? The ILO and Nestlé'
   http://cms.iuf.org/?q=print/443 [Date URL accessed: 22/7/2010]

Swiss NCP  [Publication date: 24/10/2010] 'National Contact Point of Switzerland Specific Instance Nestlé Indonesia, Panjang Coffee Processing Plant Closing Statement'
   http://www.seco.admin.ch/themen/00513/00527/02584/02586/index.html?lang=en [Date URL accessed: 22/8/2011]

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

Implications

Constraints on NCP role due to evidentiary standards