News type
Date end
News memo
The agreement (here) signed on 23 May puts in place a European body for “information, exchange of views and social dialogue” at the dairy giant, which employs close to 31,000 people in Europe. Under the agreement, consultation will only cover reorganisations and mergers of companies with a transnational impact, as well as staff reductions or company closures for structural reasons or circumstances that are transnational in nature, and which occur following the most recent plenary meeting. Consultation is defined in this agreement as an exchange of views and a discussion of the group and members of the body “after implementation of the project”. One might think there is a typo in the text, such is the clear contradiction with the idea of consultation having a useful effect. The agreement is indeed the result of negotiations and the directive allows the social partners to define the operating methods of the European body as well as its rights. However, this agreement is one that must be negotiated by a truly representative special negotiation body (SNB), which may not have been the case. According to EFFAT, the European Federation of Trade Unions in the Food, Agriculture and Tourism sectors, some countries in which the group operates have not been involved, with the management apparently not having sought to involve them. Moreover, even though this has never been decided judicially, freedom of contract must still respect the central notion of useful effect – namely information and consultation prior to a decision being taken – meaning staff representatives should be involved. Things did not get off to the best of starts. The dairy giant committed to setting up an SNB after legal action was brought against it, to force it to open talks over the creation of a European works council (see article n°10557)
Source Info
News Ref
11167
News date