Plaid Enterprises Inc. V FNV

Overview

NCP Decision Accepted
Current Status Closed
Date Submitted 08/08/2002
Date Closed 01/12/2005
Case Duration 173 weeks and 0 days
Host Country Netherlands  (OECD member)
Issue(s) Failure to inform workers on their decision to file for bankruptcy
Provisions Cited IV.6   
Case Description Breaches of Guidelines by the US wholesale company Plaid were raised with the Dutch NCP by the Federation of Dutch Trade Unions (FNV) at the beginning of August 2002. The Dutch subsidiary Plaid Nederland had applied for bankruptcy without informing the employees in advance. The FNV also brought the case to court and won in the first instance, but lost in the second.

After the NCP had deemed that the case was receivable, it held a meeting with the FNV in November 2002. In October 2003, the NCP responded that all traces of Plaid in the Netherlands had disappeared.

Outcome The case was not finalised until 2006. In its final report, the NCP stated that: " Since the management of Plaid went elsewhere, neither a tripartite meeting nor a joint statement could be realised. The NCP decided to draw a conclusion, based on the information gathered from bilateral consultations and Courts’ rulings. Part of this conclusion is that the company’s efforts of sharing information with its employees about the financial situation of the company apparently were not effective."

Organisations

Lead NCP Netherlands NCP : Independent Expert Body 

Companies

Multinational Company Plaid Enterprises Inc (Home country: US)
Subsidiary Plaid Nederland B.V. (Home country: Netherlands)

Complainants

Lead Complainant FNV Federatie Nederlandse Vakbeweging : National Centre 

Related Documents

Netherlands NCP  [Publication date: 1/12/2005] 'Statement of the National Contact Point on specific instance raised by FNV Bondgenoten about activities of Plaid Nederland'
   http://www.oesorichtlijnen.nl/wp-content/uploads/NCP/Verklaringen/NCP%20stateme
   nt%20Plaid-FNV.pdf
[Date URL accessed: 26/1/2010]

Netherlands NCP  [Publication date: 1/1/2004] 'Statement of the National Contact Point on specific instance raised by FNV Bondgenoten about activities of Plaid Nederlan'
   http://www.oesorichtlijnen.nl/wp-content/uploads/NCP/Verklaringen/NCP%20stateme
   nt%20Plaid-FNV.pdf
[Date URL accessed: 1/3/2012]

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

Good example of impotence of the procedures where the subsidiary no longer exists and the need for action to be taken in the home country.