Toggle high contrast

Unilever needs to lift its game globally says TUC

Issue date

Unilever needs to lift its game globally, says TUC

Unilever currently has five complaints lodged against it under the OECD guidelines for multinational enterprises raising serious allegations of union-busting, intimidation and discrimination against workers in Pakistan, India and Turkey.

For example, Unilever Pakistan's tea factory in Khanewal, Pakistan employs some 750 workers to pack tea, but only 22 are employed directly by Unilever. The remaining 723 are employed by 6 labour hire agencies on a "no work, no pay" basis. They get no pension, no benefits, receive one-third the pay of the permanent workers and cannot join the union which negotiates pay and conditions with Unilever. When these workers formed a union and filed a petition to the Labour Court to secure their legal right to permanent employment they were met in mid-November 2008 with beatings, lock-outs and cuts in hours and pay.

Support these workers by sending a message to Unilever: http://www.iuf.org/casualtea/

TUC General Secretary Brendan Barber, recently wrote to Mr Paul Polman, the CEO of Unilever, demanding that Unilever resolve these disputes in good faith by working with the International Union of Foodworkers (IUF) to promote adherence to core labour standards.

16 March 2009

Dear Mr Polman

Global employment practices of Unilever

The TUC is seriously concerned at the deepening industrial relations problems in Unilever's operations in Pakistan and India. To resolve these issues, I urge Unilever to participate in good faith in the latest offer of mediation by the UK National Contact Point under the OECD guidelines and to work constructively with the IUF to ensure that fair labour standards are promoted and respected throughout its global operations.

As you are well aware, Unilever currently have four complaints lodged against it with the UK National Contact Point (NCP) under the OECD guidelines, and one filed at the Turkish NCP. They raise serious allegations of violence, intimidation and breaches of freedom of association of workers.

To take two of the cases: At Unilever's Rahim Yar Khan factory in Pakistan, management fired 292 temporary workers - many of them with long histories of service - when the union declared that it would open its membership ranks to temporary employees and assist them in obtaining permanent employee status, an entitlement under Pakistan law. All such employees were immediately replaced by agency workers performing the same jobs. These actions have nothing to do with operational requirements. They are clearly discriminating against workers for attempting to join a trade union.

A similar story has occurred at the Khanewal factory in Pakistan. There, Unilever has 22 permanent employees, while the remaining 700 or so staff are employed on a temporary basis by 6 labour agencies housed within Unilever and supplying labour exclusively to Unilever. Many of these so-called temporary staff have worked at the site for over 15 years. All of them work under a precarious employment status, and are denied a whole raft of basic employment benefits. When these workers formed a union and filed a petition to the Labour Court to secure their legal right to permanent employment they were met in mid-November 2008 with beatings, lock-outs and cuts in hours and pay.

Unilever's actions are falling short of the standards set in the OECD guidelines, and of Unilever's publicly stated aim of acting with the, 'highest standards of corporate behaviour towards its employees...'. Further, such industrial relations practices would not be attempted or tolerated in the UK.

In any event, it is in the interests of all parties to achieve a swift and fair resolution of these disputes. We believe that mediation offered through the UK NCP can deliver this and urge Unilever to fully participate in good faith.

I wrote to your predecessor, Mr Patrick Cescau, raising these concerns by letter of 23 July 2008. He responded on 1 August 2008 stating, among other things:

'...it is our view that the best solution to resolving any such disputes lies with agreements being concluded between national management and appropriate local trade union or employee representatives.'

Nearly eight months later, such an approach has seen a worsening of the industrial relations situation with unresolved disputes in Khanewal and the Rahim Yar Khan factory in Pakistan, and in Assam and Mumbai, India. There is clearly something wrong with how Unilever Hindustan and Unilever Pakistan handle their industrial relations. It is time for the Unilever family to apply - as a minimum - internationally agreed core labour standards and the OECD guidelines across its global operations and to put in place a strong management system to ensure this takes place.

In doing this, Unilever would be greatly assisted by formally recognising the IUF as the legitimate representatives of food workers worldwide. In very similar circumstances, the TUC was pleased to see the development of a global framework agreement between G4S and UNI - the global union federation for skills and services. The agreement, brokered partly through mediation offered by the UK NCP, provides clarity and certainty for the parties by ensuring that basic labour rights are adhered to throughout G4S' operations. It promises to greatly strengthen G4S' ethical reputation, and the morale and productivity of its workforce. It is an example we urge Unilever to consider and adopt.

I would be pleased to meet with you to discuss this further.

Yours sincerely,

Brendan Barber


BRENDAN BARBER

General Secretary

Enable Two-Factor Authentication

To access the admin area, you will need to setup two-factor authentication (TFA).

Setup now