Total FinalElf and Accor Hotels V CFDT, FO and UNSA

Overview

NCP Decision Accepted
Current Status Closed
Date Submitted 01/03/2001
Date Closed 28/03/2002
Case Duration 56 weeks and 0 days
Host Country Burma  (Non-adhering country)
Issue(s) Investment in Burma
Provisions Cited IV.1-c   
Case Description In March 2001, the French unions CFDT and FO (and later UNSA) requested the French NCP to investigate whether French companies operating in Burma were violating the Guidelines.
Developments The French NCP organised a number of meetings with the oil company Total/FinaElf and the hotel chain Accor to discuss their operations in Burma.
Outcome In December 2001, the NCP issued draft recommendations to companies investing in Burma. These were later finalised and posted on the French NCP website .

In October 2002, Accor announced that it would withdraw from Burma, but TotalFinaElf is still present.

Organisations

Lead NCP France NCP : Tripartite (involving several government departments and the social partners) 

Companies

Multinational Company Accor (Home country: France)
Multinational Company TotalFinaElf (Home country: France)

Complainants

Lead Complainant UNSA Union Nationale des Syndicats Autonomes : National Centre 
Lead Complainant FO - Force Ouvrière : National Centre 
Lead Complainant CFDT - France : National Centre 

Related Documents

The Irawaddy  [Publication date: 4/8/2009] 'Total Chief: Critics Can ‘Go to Hell’'
   http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=16479 [Date URL accessed: 6/8/2009]

Associated Press  [Publication date: 3/8/2009] 'Total targeted in debate over Myanmar sanctions' by Herve Rouach
   http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5isnsZK2GnYJ8q1ZmgthuPjyvHknQ
   
[Date URL accessed: 12/8/2009]

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

TUAC Assessment

The French NCPs recommendations indicated that it took the case and the issues extremely seriously. However, they are unsatisfactory as they did not recommend disinvestment from Burma.