TGW International - American Chance Casinos V Czech-Moravian public catering, hotels and tourism trade union federation

Overview

NCP Decision Accepted
Current Status Withdrawn
Date Submitted 01/02/2004
Date Closed 01/08/2004
Case Duration 26 weeks and 0 days
Host Country Czech Republic  (OECD member)
Issue(s) Preventing workers from establishing a trade union; refusal to bargain collectively; yellow unions
Provisions Cited IV.1-a   
Case Description In February 2004, the Czech NCP received a submission from the Czech-Moravian public catering, hotels and tourism trade union federation concerning a subsidiary of TGW International - American Chance Casinos. The company was alleged to have prevented workers from establishing a trade union and refused to bargain collectively. It had also set up a management-controlled 'union' (yellow union). .
Outcome According to the 2005 OECD report on the Guidelines, the NCP closed the case at the trade union’s request in August 2004.

Organisations

Lead NCP Czech Republic NCP : Single Government Department 

Companies

Multinational Company TGW International - American Chance Casinos

Complainants

Lead Complainant Czech Moravian Trade Union of Catering, Hotels and Tourism : National Sectoral Union 

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