| United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW) and IndustriALL Global Union & Nissan Motor Co.,Ltd., Renault S.A.S. and Renault-Nissan BV | |
|---|---|
| Lead NCP | Japan |
| Supporting NCP(s) | France, Netherlands, United States |
| Description | Specific instance alleging a non-observance of the OECD MNE Guidelines. |
| Theme(s) | General policies, Human rights, Employment and industrial relations |
| Date | 20 Dec 2016 |
| Host country(ies) | United States |
| Source | Trade Union |
| Industry sector | Manufacturing |
| Status | Concluded |
| Summary | Read the Final Statement published by the NCP 30 March 2022: English / Japanese On 20 December 2016, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW) and IndustriALL Global Union submitted a specific instance to the Japanese NCP alleging that Nissan Motor Co.,Ltd., Renault S.A.S. and Renault-Nissan BV, a Japanese MNE and its French and Dutch business relationships, had not observed the General Policies (Chapter II), Human Rights (Chapter IV), and Employment and Industrial Relations (Chapter V) provisions of the Guidelines. Specifically, issues related to alleged violations of the Guidelines by Nissan North America (NNA), a wholly owned subsidiary of Nissan Motor Co Ltd, at a manufacturing plant located in Mississippi, USA. The submitters claimed that (a) NNA had “policies and practices of union avoidance, harassment and intimidation, which caused barriers to union organizing” and (b) the Companies involved had failed to meet their responsibility to undertake due diligence at NNA. Together with the NCPs of France, the Netherlands, and the United States, it was agreed that the Japanese NCP would lead on the handling of the specific instance. On 6 August 2018, the NCP completed its initial assessment deciding to accept the case for further consideration. The NCP noted it would focus on the due diligence aspects of the specific instance as the other issues had been previously addressed in a similar case handled by the US NCP in 2014, though the company had refused to participate in mediation. The companies declined to participate in a dialogue with the submitters unless the NCP republished the initial statement deciding the issues raised did not merit further consideration. The companies’ view was based on parallel proceedings taking place with the U.S. National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) in 2015-2018, during which the companies claimed the issues raised had already been addressed. On 30 March 2022, the NCP published a final statement concluding the case without agreement between the parties as the company had not agreed to participate in good offices. The Japanese NCP recommended Nissan continue to ensure the implementation of the OECD Guidelines in all Group activities. #duediligence #civilandpoliticalrights #FACB #automotive #coordination #parallelproceedings #localsubsidiary #fortune500 |
