GLOBAL COMPANIES GLOBAL UNION ORGANIZATION/ACTION - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

shing
global companies global union organization action n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
GLOBAL COMPANIES GLOBAL UNION ORGANIZATION/ACTION PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
GLOBAL COMPANIES GLOBAL UNION ORGANIZATION/ACTION

play fullscreen
1 / 22
Download Presentation
GLOBAL COMPANIES GLOBAL UNION ORGANIZATION/ACTION
240 Views
Download Presentation

GLOBAL COMPANIES GLOBAL UNION ORGANIZATION/ACTION

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. GLOBAL COMPANIES GLOBAL UNION ORGANIZATION/ACTION The IUF’s Transnational Company Work & The Chiquita Case Cardiff Symposium, January 9, 2008

  2. IUF GLOBAL STRATEGY • Organize the Company internationally • If necessary fight them globally • Build pressure for recognition of global union organization • “de facto” and/or backed by a signed agreement • Recognition leads to global “bargaining rights” • normally in rights areas (around “access” to rights) rather than in interest areas (local bargaining) • Enhanced access to rights should mean greater levels of union organization and stronger workplace labour standards Cardiff Symposium, January 9, 2008

  3. IN PRACTICE WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? A COUPLE OF CASES • #1: A tough company and yet the most progress: The Coca-Cola System • #2 Tough as well but with less “global” impact: Chiquita Cardiff Symposium, January 9, 2008

  4. 20 Years of IUF Campaigns 1983 - 2003: Guatemala, South Africa, Pakistan, India, Peru, France etc. A series of conflicts - mainly victories…..but all temporary Cardiff Symposium, January 9, 2008

  5. 2003 From History to Plan • 1980’s - Global Campaign in support of Guatemalan affiliates • 1990’s - Sporadic conflicts against background of corporate chaos and declining corporate prestige • 2003-2007 - History turns to Plan: • unions organize throughout the system • achieve recognition of the IUF and affiliates internationally • establish a global negotiating table for rights & employment • avoid and win conflicts across this ”global bargaining table” - always backed by capacity for conflict when this fails to deliver Cardiff Symposium, January 9, 2008

  6. The Challenges“Company” vs. “System” • Employment - company and “system”: • TCCC employs 80,000+ people • Coke system employs 600,000+ people • “Top to top bottlers” (400,000+) • Franchisees (<120,000) • Labour Relations “in principle” handled by system bottlers - risks mainly lie with TCCC • TCCC controls: • Some major bottlers (large minority shares and board seats) • Concentrate (the “formula”) • Marketing and product strategy Cardiff Symposium, January 9, 2008

  7. 2003-2005: Global Union Recognition • March 2003 - First global meeting of CC unions (100+ unions in New York) • 2005 agreement to recognize the IUF and meet with a group of 5-8 IUF affiliates and senior Coca-Cola Executives twice yearly (normally in Atlanta) • De facto “contact group” - IBT and UFCW (USA), NGG (Germany), CAW (Canada), FESTRAS (Guatemala), UI ZENSEN (Japan), FAWU (South Africa), FATAGA (Argentina) led by IUF GS • 2005 signed statement formalized global recognition and recognized that Coca-Cola workers have ILO, OECD and all related rights - though nothing on access to rights Cardiff Symposium, January 9, 2008

  8. Results of global recognition and the “Contact Group” meetings: 2005-2007 • Reinforced union recognition and protection: Russia South Africa Haiti Pakistan • Membership decline reversal/growth: • Russia • Pakistan (included public campaign to Accelerate progress) • Philippines (close to +1,000 in 2007) • Local union recognition “victories”: • Pakistan: recognition of IUF federation • India: recognition of national Coca-Cola union federation • Russia: recognition of local and national union grouping • India • Philippines • Guatemala Cardiff Symposium, January 9, 2008

  9. Where do we stand today? • The following companies have refused recognition despite tough conflicts and direct union/IUF approaches: • Nestlé (at global level - though concession by CEO in December 2007 and first meeting likely in February 2007) • Unilever (though first meeting now on February 1 2008) • Hilton International • PepsiCo • Kraft (at global level) Cardiff Symposium, January 9, 2008

  10. “Open Door” Companies • Companies that recognize the IUF: • Hershey Foods • Imperial Tobacco • INBEV • Japan Tobacco International • Masterfoods (Mars Incorporated) • Permira (Private Equity Fund) • Bird Eye/Igloo • Galaxy Entertainment (Macau) • Philip Morris International • SAB (now SABMiller) • Scandinavian Tobacco • Sodexho • Accor • British American Tobacco • Cadbury’s • Chiquita • Coca-Cola • Compass • Danone • Del Monte • Dole • Favorita (bananas) • Fonterra • Heineken Cardiff Symposium, January 9, 2008

  11. THE CASE OF CHIQUITA • “In the banana sector the first company we will try to build an organization within and gain recognition from will certainly NOT be Chiquita - they are the biggest, the worse, the most brutal and the most anti-union. We’ll take on a softer banana giant first….”. Statement in 2000 from... • Ron Oswald, general secretary, IUF Cardiff Symposium, January 9, 2008

  12. But research and experience revealed…... • Most vulnerable • Most committed to internal change • Most prepared to invest in real rather than cosmetic change • Most seriously committed at the very top of the company • And….. • Already the most unionized Cardiff Symposium, January 9, 2008

  13. IUF and COLSIBA work together • COLSIBA presence on the ground • IUF strategies and experience negotiating with major companies • Mutually reinforcing and comradely relationship arising pragmatically out of historical necessity (pre IUF entry into an agricultural jurisdiction in 1994) Cardiff Symposium, January 9, 2008

  14. Conferences and Crises • 1st International banana conference in Brussels in May 1998 • IUF, COLSIBA, NGO Proposal to meet all banana companies in Miami in 1999 To discuss “industry crisis” and the future • Chiquita, Del Monte, Dole and Fyffes accepted invitation • Corporate strategy clearly differed……. Cardiff Symposium, January 9, 2008

  15. Follow-up engagement • Costa Rica meeting in 2000 • Again all companies were invited • Difference in corporate strategies become even clearer…… • Chiquita and Del Monte came - Dole and Fyffes did not….. Cardiff Symposium, January 9, 2008

  16. “Engagers” vs “Fakes” • Chiquita - clearly committed to engaging with unions locally, regionally and internationally • Del Monte - nervously following Chiquita’s lead…..but little corporate commitment • Dole - hiding behind SA 8000 certification “fig leaf” - no willingness to engage seriously with unions • Fyffes - felt little “reputational impact” and so dropped out Cardiff Symposium, January 9, 2008

  17. IUF/COSIBA AGREEMENT WITH CHIQUITA • On June 14 2001 the agreement was signed at the ILO and witnessed by ILO Director general Juan Somavia • Mechanism was set up to review the agreement • Limitations: • Regional • Partial in terms of Chiquita employees • Weakest on “supplier” issues Cardiff Symposium, January 9, 2008

  18. What we think has worked • Credence given to Chiquita’s “will to change” and much of its internal and external CSR work (though concerns still about its certification programme both environmentally and particularly “socially”) • Increased union membership in Colombia and Honduras • Protection of union recognition in Costa Rica, Colombia, Honduras, Guatemala and Panama • Partially effective conflict resolution mechanism prior to public campaigns Cardiff Symposium, January 9, 2008

  19. Examples of what has worked…. • Colombia - over 4,000 new union memebrs and 27 new collective agreements • Honduras - newly unionized farms- Buenos Amigos • Union-management dialogue and recognition protected in Guatemala, Panama and Costa Rica • Agreement reached protecting rights in transfer of Colombian operations in 2004 • Opening to Ecuador Chiquita supplier(together with IFC pressure) Cardiff Symposium, January 9, 2008

  20. What has not worked……. • Adequately dealing with suppliers - notably supplier contract issues • Breaking free of the Costa Rican “Solidarismo” structures and rights vacuum • Establishing robust and effective mechanisms and an environment for discussing tough “change at work” locally in dialogue between Chiquita country management and national and local unions Cardiff Symposium, January 9, 2008

  21. CSR Issues and limitations • Can substitute for real engagement (Dole and SA 8000 example) so IUF does not work with Companies on “Codes” • Limited credibility arising from: • “Frauds and fakes” - not always the case of course • Lack of constant presence on the ground - always risk of “missing” things (Chiquita/RA and Colombia) • Worker rights/social issues challenge most CSR and NGO groups • Limited ambition………..IUF concerns about “access to rights” rather than simple acknowledgment of them Cardiff Symposium, January 9, 2008

  22. Fair Trade Issues • IUF in principle very supportive of “Fair Trade” initiatives • Difficult transition from small producer systems to plantations and thus corporate systems • Dangers of FT parallel structures - notably the establishment of joint bodies to oversee “premium” use in unionized plantations • Union concerns about worker right and “union presence” weight in FT criteria and evaluation Cardiff Symposium, January 9, 2008