UNI Global Union files OECD Guidelines complaint against Prosegur over alleged failure to address workers' rights abuses in Colombia, Peru & India
On January 13 2017, UNI filed a new Specific Instance against Prosegur with the NCP of Spain. In this new Specific Instance, UNI alleges that Prosegur has not resolved 'the problems which were identified in our initial filing (November 2013) – human rights violations in Brazil, Colombia, Paraguay and Peru. Unfortunately, Prosegur has been unwilling to mediate these issues with UNI, even when requested to do so by the Spanish NCP.'
UNI acknowledges that 'many of the specific issues concerning Colombia were addressed in an October 2015 collective agreement settlement between the Colombian union, SINTRAVALORES, and Prosegur.' But it states that 'the company’s underlying hostility toward unions and willingness to violate the human rights of workers has not ceased. In Colombia and Peru, our affiliates allege ongoing cases of harassment, retaliation, threats and assaults against union activists which they believe are condoned, if not instigated, by the company in some cases. Furthermore, the company’s disregard for the rule of law, as seen in India, where their employees are not represented by a union, is nothing short of deplorable.'
Business & Human Rights Resource Centre invited Prosegur to respond to the allegations in the Specific Instance. The company provided a response but it does not specifically address the issues in Colombia, Peru or India. It says that as in a recent decision by a Court in Paraguay, where the company was absolved, UNI Global Union uses “…an approach [that] does not correspond to the necessary distinction between the lack of an agreement on particular issues between company and workers […] and essential violations to labour rights contained in the Guidelines…”.
All components of this story
Author: UNI Global Union
...Prosegur’s response does not address any of the allegations in the Specific Instance that UNI filed last month with the Spanish National Contact Point, and relies instead on a general dismissal of the allegations which UNI submitted to the NCP four years ago. Prosegur asserts that many of the issues that UNI raised in the 2013 specific instance were resolved in favor of the company. In fact, many of the problems in the case were resolved because Prosegur withdrew or settled lawsuits, including those it had filed against its own workers for exercising their rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining...The new Specific Instance offers evidence that, while some of the problems in the older complaint were resolved, the company’s approach to industrial relations has not changed fundamentally. There continues to be a threatening and hostile atmosphere towards trade unionists and the new case provides significant evidence concerning incidents in both Colombia and Peru. In addition, the new Specific Instance documents widespread failure to respect minimum legal standards in India.
By its own admission, Prosegur continues to take a decentralized approach that in practice gives wide discretion to local managers working in countries with poor labor rights protections to use a lower standard, rather than imposing one global standard that upholds international human rights equally across all of its operations, not just in western Europe...
Prosegur responds to UNI Global Union OECD complaint re failure to address anti-union actions in Peru, Colombia & India
Business & Human Rights Resource Centre invited Prosegur to respond the allegations in the Specific Instance filed by UNI. The company provided a response. The response does not address the issues in Colombia, Peru or India. It says that like in a recent decision by a Court in Paraguay, where the company was absolved, UNI Global Union uses “…an approach [that] does not correspond to the necessary distinction between the lack of an agreement on particular issues between company and workers […] and essential violations to labour rights contained in the Guidelines…”. The response is only available in Spanish.
Author: UNI Global Union
UNI Global Union has filed a fresh complaint against Prosegur (called “Specific Instance”) with the Spanish government because of the Spanish security company’s systemic failure to uphold the rights of its employees in Latin America and India [...] UNI describes how Prosegur has continued to engage in conduct that violates the OECD Guidelines for Multinationals, following an earlier case filed in 2013 [...] UNI has felt it necessary to bring a new case because the situation has further deteriorated in the last few years. Prosegur has negligently omitted to carry out due diligence into serious complaints linked to anti-union behaviour by local managers, including the death of Colombian security guard, Alcides de Jesús Cotes Jurado, who was killed in a robbery on the job following threats against him because of his union membership, in circumstances never properly investigated by the company [...] UNI Global Deputy General Secretary Christy Hoffman said, “Prosegur’s gross failure to use “due diligence” in order to protect the human rights of its employees continues. The situation is worsening as Prosegur’s footprint expands across the globe. For example, in India there is extensive evidence that Prosegur does not respect the laws which protect minimum standards. We are calling on Prosegur to stop burying its head in the sand over a systemic failure which is becoming an epidemic.'...