1 TRADE UNION ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO THE OECD (TUAC) The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and Supply Chains A N A CTIVE R OLE FOR T RADE U NIONS CGIL, CISL, ETUI and UIL 22 March 2016 Trade Union Advisory Committee to the OECD (TUAC)

Structure Contesto Casi sindacali Risorse

Opening  Chi ha sentito parlare delle Linee Guida dell’OCSE per le Imprese Multinazionali (prima di essere invitato a questo seminario)?  Chi ha usato le Linee Guida dell’OCSE per le Imprese Multinazionali?

Overview -Prevedono (non vincolanti) raccomandazioni in tema di Condotta Responsabile del Business per MNEs basate su standard internazionali -Firmate dai governi (46) – no dalle MNEs -Applicabili a MNEs registrate o presenti in paesi che hanno firmato le Linee Guida, ovunque queste MNEs operano, così come per le MNEs che operano nel territorio di questi paesi -Coprono controllate così come fornitori, investitori e altri business partners di queste MNEs -Applicabili a tutte le tipologie di lavoratori: impiegati, somministrati, temporanei e lavoratori stagionali (avanzamento nel 2011 Update) -Includono la responsabilità per le MNEs di adottare la dovuta diligenza -Hanno un meccanismo per il trattamento dei reclami – I Punti di Contatto Nazionali

Overview OECD Guidelines for Multinational Companies 1. «Le Linee Guida sono raccomandazioni congiunte indirizzate dai governi alle imprese multinazionali. Esse forniscono principi e standard di buone pratiche coerenti con le leggi in vigore e con gli standard internazionali riconosciuti.» (Chapter I, paragraph 1)

Overview Capitoli delle Linee Guida I. Concetti e Principi II.Principi Generali III.Divulgazione di Informazioni IV.Diritti Umani V.Occupazione e Relazioni Industriali VI.Ambiente VII. Lotta alla Corruzione, all’istigazione alla corruzione e alla concussione VIII.Interessi del consumatore IX. Scienza e Tecnologia X.Concorrenza XI.Fiscalità

Overview –Adhering Countries OECD AustraliaHungaryPoland AustriaIcelandPortugal BelgiumIrelandSlovak Republic CanadaIsraelSlovenia ChileItalySpain Czech RepublicJapanSweden DenmarkRepublic of KoreaSwitzerland EstoniaLuxembourgTurkey FinlandMexicoUnited Kingdom FranceNetherlandsUnited States GermanyNew Zealand GreeceNorway

Overview – Adhering Countries –Adhering Countries Non-OECD ArgentinaLatvia BrazilLithuania ColombiaMorocco Costa RicaPeru EgyptRomania JordanTunisia

Overview – Adhering Countries –Adesioni in discussione Ukraine (nella fase di firma), Kazakhstan –Negoziazioni per diventare membri dell’ OCSE Russia (sospesa) –“Maggiore impegno” (i.e., cooperando con) China, India, Indonesia e South Africa –Non propensi a firmare in tempi brevi

Overview – NCPs Punti di Contatto Nazionali -Ai Governi che sottoscrivono le Linee Guida viene richiesto di istituire i Punti di Contatto Nazionale (PCN) per risolvere questioni connesse all’applicazione delle Linee Guida, inclusa la gestione di casi/istanze di violazione delle Linee Guida -Meccanismo delle istanze: caratteristiche tipiche -Sindacati e ONG possono presentare istanze contro le MNEs per il loro coinvolgimento in casi di violazioni delle Linee Guida in tutto il mondo -Il PCN offre un forum per il dialogo e per la risoluzione dei problemi attraverso la mediazione

Overview – NCPs Punti di Contatto Nazionale - Aventi sede nei paesi che aderiscono: »Non aventi sede nel perimetro OCSE –Completamente sostenuti dai governi (TU Guide, P.6, FIGURE 1.2), Maggioranza basata all’interno dei governi: –Italia: Monopartito, Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico (MISE); Comitato PCN composto da governo, sindacati e associazioni datoriali; –UK: Bipartito: Dipartimento Business/Dipartimento per lo Sviluppo Internazionale e Multi-stakeholder Board; –Francia: Struttura tripartita: governo, sindacati e datori. Minoranza fuori dai governi (gruppo di esperti indipendenti) –Danimarca, Olanda, Norvegia

Overview – NCPs Presentazione Casi (TU Guide p.8 (1.11), p ) –No meccanismo delle istanze all’OCSE –Istanze presentate con i Punti di Contatto Nazionali Se la violazione ha luogo in un paese che ha sottoscritto le Linee Guida – il caso dovrebbe essere esaminato dal PCN del paese ospitante –E.g., violazione che coinvolge una MNE Italiana in Francia »PCN Francese –E.g., violazione che coinvolge una MNE Francese in Italia »PCN Italiano Se la violazione ha luogo in un paese che non ha sottoscritto le Linee Guida – il caso dovrebbe essere esaminato dal PCN del paese di origine –E.g., violazione che coinvolge una MNE Italiana in Bulgaria »PCN Italiano

Trade union cases 179 trade union cases (1 per month)

Trade union cases –Utilizzo sindacale delle Linee Guida 179 casi sindacali (1 al mese) -Rifiuto del riconoscimento al diritto di associazione e alla contrattazione collettiva -Vittimizzazione dei dirigenti sindacali/iscritti al sindacato -Minaccia di delocalizzare la produzione durante riorganizzazioni/contrattazioni -Mancata consultazione sugli impatti occupazionali durante i processi di ristrutturazione -Utilizzo eccessivo di contratti di impiego precario (temporaneo e/o somministrato) per ridurre i diritti ed il riconoscimento dei sindacati -Difetto di adeguata informazione per la contrattazione collettiva

Trade union cases

–Trade union use of the Guidelines 179 trade union cases (1 per month) –By NCP

Trade union cases –Trade union use of the Guidelines 179 trade union cases (1 per month) –By Host Country

Trade union cases –Trade union use of the Guidelines 3 Italian cases –(Only TU case in China)

Trade union cases UNI contro G4s –Organizzazione Sindacale: UNI Global Union –Multinazionale: G4S: sicurezza –Paese di origine: UK –Paesi ospitanti: DRC, Malawi, Mozambique, Nepal  Paese di origine PCN: UK –Problematiche: diritti sindacali/retribuzioni/condizioni di lavoro –Disposizioni: diritto alla rappresentanza sindacale (IV 1.a), sviluppo sostenibile (II. 1) –Ruolo del PCN: Fornire una mediazione professionale esterna –11 Dicembre 2008: accordo: DRC, impegno a realizzare elezioni sindacali; Mozambique, chiarificare problematiche inerenti lo statuto dei diritti dei lavoratori; Malawi, aumento del pagamento del lavoro straordinario almeno al 100% del salario normale e accordo sul diritto alla comunicazione; Nepal, il pagamento del fondo previdenza deve essere fatto su base mensile –16 Dicembre 2008: UNI e G4s sottoscrivono un Accordo Quadro Globale (Global Framework Agreement).

Trade union cases IUF contro Unilever –Trade union: IUF –MNE: Unilever (food - Brooke Bond and Lipton’s tea factory) –Home country: UK –Host country: Pakistan (Khanewal) »Home country NCP: UK –Issue: precarious work/abusive use of temporary contracts/agency work (22 v 723): –Provisions of the Guidelines: right to organise (V. 1a) –NCP Role: Provided professional external mediation Led to an agreement between IUF and Unilever “1. The IUF and Unilever have agreed there will be a significant change in the model of employment at Khanewal based on a combination of directly employed permanent labour in non-seasonal manufacturing and contract agency workers (labour engaged through third party service providers) for ancillary, non- manufacturing and seasonal positions. 2. Under the terms of this agreement, Unilever will establish 200 permanent positions at Khanewal. This is in addition to the existing 22 positions at this facility…”

Trade union cases UNI Global Union and ITF v Deutsche Post DHL –Trade unions: UNI Global Union and ITF –MNE: Deutsche Post DHL –Home country: Germany –Host countries: Colombia, India, Indonesia, Turkey, Vietnam »Home country NCP: Germany –Issue: Anti-union campaigns; retaliation against trade unions; infringements of the rights to join a trade union and to engage in collective bargaining; failure to do due diligence –Provisions of the Guidelines: IV.1., IV.2., IV.6., V.1a, V.1b –NCP Role: NCP itself provided mediation Led to an agreement between UNI Global Union and ITF and Deutsche Post DHL, which included provision for follow-up: “The NCP considers that the number of direct contacts of the complainants with the respondent could be increased to three monthly meetings, so that the complainants could raise issues of concern regarding labour relations in a more direct way… The NCP will receive reports on these meetings in the next two years.”

Trade union cases UAW v Nissan –Trade union: UAW –MNE: Nissan –Home countries: Japan, France (Renault) and the Netherlands –Host country: US (Canton, Mississippi) »Host country NCP: US –Issue: Anti-union campaigns; reprisals against trade unions; violations of the right to join a trade union and to engage in collective bargaining –Provisions of the Guidelines: IV.1., IV.2., IV.6., V.1a, V.1b –NCP Role: Offered professional external mediation –Nissan refused to come to mediation The NCP published a Final Statement with the following recommendations: "The U.S. NCP recommends that Nissan North America, Inc., in cooperation and with guidance from Nissan corporate headquarters in Japan, conduct corporate- wide labor rights review processes, consistent with the recommendation of the Guidelines, in particular the chapters cited above."

Supply chain case NGO v Nissan –German Member of Parliament –MNEs: Kik Textilien, C&A and Karl Rieker –Home country: Germany –Host country: Bangladesh (Tazreen Fashion Ltd) »Host country NCP: Germany –Issue: 112 workers killed and hundred more injured in a factory fire; failure to address identified health and safety issues (omission); failure to conduct due diligence; inadequate training; purchasing practices –Provisions of the Guidelines: II.A.11, II.A.12. 1V.I, IV. 2. IV.5., V.4c –NCP Role: Accepted part of the complaint Offered mediation to Kik and Karl Rieker Transferred the case to Brazil for C&A –Agreement with Karl Rieker –No agreement with Kik

Supply chain case Applying the concepts: Bangladesh -German NCP (case filed - 13/05/2013) -German Member of Parliament/NGO -Tazreen Factory Fire (24 November 2013) -Case against: -C&A -Karl Rieker -KIK

Investor case Coalition of NGOs v Dutch Pension Fund (ABP) and its Pension Manager APG –NGOs: Lok Shakti Abhiyan, KTNC Watch, Fair Green Global Alliance –MNE: Pohang Iron and Steel Company (POSCO) –Home country: South Korea –Host country: Odisha, India –Investors/minority share-holders: Pension fund ABP and its asset manager All Pension Group (APG) (0.8%) –Home country: The Netherlands »NCP: Netherlands –Issue: Displacement of 22,000 protected peoples, forced land acquisitions, human rights violations –Provisions of the Guidelines: II.A12 (linked to adverse impacts) –Request: investors to use their leverage with POSCO to address human rights impacts

Case against investors Coalition of NGOs v Dutch Pension Fund (ABP) and its Pension Manager APG »Home country NCP: Netherlands –NCP Role: Provided a forum for dialogue Led to a joint agreement between the parties on issues and next steps including continued dialogue. NCP Findings -“…the Guidelines are applicable to financial institutions and to investors, including minority shareholders. The NCP finds that the term “business relationship”, as referred to by the Guidelines, is applicable to financial relationships…. The fact that the term “business relationship” is not specifically defined for various types of financial relations does not mean that the Guidelines do not apply to them... “

Trade union cases Trade union experience -Mixed experience: -High rate of success with well functioning NCPs -NCPs have common rules -visible, transparent, accountable, impartial, predictable and equitable -No common performance -seek advice from GUFs/TUAC -Key obstacles to success -Other legal proceedings (parallel proceedings) -Companies refusing to participate in mediation -Lack of ‘consequences’ -(Need to grow teeth – e.g. Canada)

Resources -Trade Union Guide -Languages: - Arabic - Burmese - Chinese - French - German(DGB) - Italian (CGIL, CISL, UIL) - Japanese (RENGO) - Korean - Polish - Portuguese - Russian - Spanish - Swedish (LO-Sweden)

Submitting a Complaint The NCP Complaints Process (Trade Union Guide, Part 4.1, Page 40) –Stage 1: Initial Assessment –Stage 2A: Conciliation/Mediation –Stage 2B: Examination if mediation is refused or fails Most but not all NCPs »Not US, Australia, Switzerland –Stage 3: Final Statement/Report

Submitting a Complaint Trade Union Guide: Page 40

Submitting a Complaint The NCP Complaints Process (Trade Union Guide, Part 4.1, Page 41)

Submitting a Complaint (Trade Union Guide, Part 4.1, Page 41) Stage 1: Initial Assessment

Submitting a Complaint (Trade Union Guide, Part 4.1, Page 42) Stage 2A: Conciliation/Mediation At the 2011 update it was agreed that providing mediation was the core function of NCPs

Submitting a Complaint (Trade Union Guide, Part 4.1, Page 42) Stage 2A: Conciliation/Mediation

Submitting a Complaint Stage 2A: Conciliation/Mediation (TU Guide, Part 4.1, P. 42)

Submitting a Complaint Stage 2B: Examination (TU Guide, Part 4.1, P. 44)

Submitting a Complaint Stage 3: Final Report/Statement (TU Guide, Part 4.1, P. 46)

GROUP EXERCISE 2 (p, 47-49) –Who are the complainants? What is their interest/standing? –Which enterprises (MNE and local) are involved? What is their relationship (subsidiary, supplier, franchise)? –Which National Contact Point(s) are you submitting the case to? –What are the violations of the Guidelines and where did the violations take place? –Which paragraphs of the Guidelines have been breached? –What evidence are you providing? –What are you asking the NCP to do?

Key Resources -Trade Union Guide -Languages: - Arabic - Burmese - Chinese - French - German(DGB) - Italian (CGIL, CISL, UIL) - Japanese (RENGO) - Korean - Polish - Portuguese - Russian Spanish - Swedish (LO-Sweden)

Key Resources (See Part 5 of the Trade Union Guide) -TUAC web site on trade union cases and NCP performance: –OECD Watch web site on NGO cases: - OECD web site:

Closing Vote VOTE Closing Vote on the OECD MNE Guidelines Do you think the OECD MNE Guidelines are: –Useful for your work? Yes or No More useful than you thought at the start? Yes or No Less useful than you thought at the start? Yes or No

Key Resources (See Part 5 of the Trade Union Guide) -TUAC web site on trade union cases and NCP performance: –OECD Watch web site on NGO cases: - OECD web site:

Responsibility of an enterprise determined by its adverse impacts –Not determined by the level of control or equity –Not determined by an enterprise’s ’sphere of influence’ –Determined by its adverse impact – baseline responsibility »Impacts can occur in the supply chain, can involve contract workers or any other types of business relationships Key Concepts – responsibility determined by impact

(TU Guide, Page 17) Key Concepts - Responsibility for Adverse impacts

Enterprises have a responsiblity to respect human rights –The corporate responsibility to respect human rights »NEW GLOBAL STANDARD -Enterprises should -Avoid violating the human rights of others (including workers) and address such adverse impacts when they occur (Chapter IV, Human Rights) -Know and show that they are respecting human rights (and the OECD Guidelines) by undertaking human rights due diligence Key Concepts – Corporate Responsibility to Respect

Key Concepts - Corporate Responsibility to Respect Chapter IV: Human Rights 1.«Respect human rights, which means they should avoid infringing on the human rights of others and should address adverse human rights impacts, with which they are involved.” Commentary 37.«(…) Respect for human rights is the global standard of expected conduct for enterprises independently of States’ abilities and/or willingness to fulfill their own human rights obligations, and does not diminish those obligations. » (Commentary on Human Rights, paragraph 37) 38. «A State’s failure either to enforce relevant domestic laws or to implement international human rights obligations or the fact that it may act contrary to such law or international obligations does not diminish the expectation that enterprises respect human rights.(…). » (Commentary on Human Rights, paragraph 38)

Key Concepts - adverse human rights impacts 1.«Respect human rights, which means they should avoid infringing on the human rights of others and should address adverse human rights impacts, with which they are involved.” Commentary 39. «In all cases and irrespective of the country or specific context of enterprises’ operations, reference should be made at a minimum to the internationally recognised expressed in the International Bill of Human Rights, consisting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the main instruments through which it has been codified: the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and to the principles concerning fundamental rights set out in the 1998 ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work. » (Commentary on Human Rights, paragraph 39) 40.«(…) Depending on circumstances, enterprises may need to consider additional standards. For instance, enterprises should respect the human rights of individuals belonging to specific groups or populations that require particular attention….In this connection UN instruments have elaborated further on the rights of indigenous peoples; persons belonging to national, or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities; women; children; persons with disabilities; and migrant workers and their families. » (Commentary on Human Rights, paragraph 40).

Key Concepts - due diligence

(TU Guide, FIGURE 2.5, Page 22) Key Concepts - due diligence