Questions have arisen this week over the rights of workers who work within European companies and the results of activities by management staff within those companies in Europe, in European companies in the USA, and European companies abroad. The most drastic example of some worker’s responses towards management comes with the recent suicide of ten France Telecom workers in the last ten days, making up 23 suicides at France Telecom in 2010 alone. This number is added to the 19 from 2009 and others from previous years. The suicide scandal at France Telecom was already at its peak when in 2009 one 32 year old woman jumped from her France Telecom office and one worker plunged a knife into his own stomach during a board meeting with fellow employees. The suicides up until March of this year lead to a replacement of management staff for the mishandling of the crisis before 2010, but the move to become more efficient since France Telecom was privatised in 1998 has lead to internal practices that have an obvious effect on France Telecom’s workforce. It is hard to imagine that the alternatives are not considered by France Telecom employees, to the point where leaving a job or working in a dire situation are no longer options for many France Telecom employees, and for reasons which still need to be investigated, suicide has become a common solution for many inside of the company.
Human Rights Watch recently took to investigating many practices of European companies working in the United States in a recent report on European Companies violating European and International labour standards while working in the United States. The assumption of many of European companies is that they are more socially progressive and work hand in hand with labour leaders and within the liberal labour laws within Europe’s labour minded culture. The objective of cooperation on labour issues was established to create a working environment that goes above and beyond the minimum standard of labour rights for companies working in the European Union and their workforce. Europe is seen as the most liberal and open society towards unions and labour, and the assumption in the HRW report was that these standards and laws would be passed on to their employees abroad. The report details numerous anti-union activities and violations of the rights of assembly and rights of association by normally liberal European companies over their workforce operating in the United States. Comparisons are made between laws internationally, in Europe and via company policy and the laws in the United States which are not as robust towards workers than in Europe or abroad. Several examples are also made where US labour laws had been violated, and little could be done to settle the cases without the passing of a lot of time and great economic loss towards the affected workforce. Several European companies from several difference countries were taken as examples, and the focus of the report was mostly on the active frustration of rights demonstrated by European companies working in the United States towards their workers forming unions, and how they violated their rights of assembly and association when organic discussions began between workers on their rights and abuse demonstrated by management staff over the workforce. In some cases, low wage Latino workers were specifically targeted for their low skilled jobs and personal work situations where employers knew they had little options but to work in poor conditions in order to feed their families in their countries of origin. While no cases of suicides made it into the report, the conditions that might have lead to many at France Telecom to commit suicide might have some relation to the malicious attitude demonstrated by managers in the HRW report.
Where laws exist, does the application of laws create a situation where abuses can be prevented and situations like those in France Telecom can be stopped? There is no doubt that commitments by European companies towards stringent laws in the European Union demonstrate a strong legal regime against labour abuses by management, including the prevention against discouraging rights under freedom of association and freedom of assembly. In the France Telecom case, investigations are ongoing and the union and management have to figure out how to stop the epidemic of suicides in the workplace. Despite the ten recent suicides, the real reasons are not yet clearly known nor is it proven that France Telecom has violated any labour laws to great effect which lead to the deaths. Regarding the companies in the HRW report, it is shown that stricter labour laws and the prompt application of existing laws is required by all parties in order to prevent the violation of worker’s fundamental rights in the US by European and all companies. As recently as June 15th 2010, one of the strictest labour laws internationally have been applied in Ontario, Canada in response to a workplace disaster, but no one knows how the law will be applied at this point nor how broadly it will develop.
Ontario’s Health and Safety Act was amended by Bill 168 on Harassment and Violence in the Workplace on June 15th as a response to a case a few years ago where a nurse who was dating a colleague was killed by the coworker after numerous complains where ignored by the management staff when the colleague was harassing her and demonstrated violent tendencies. The new current law defines harassment in the workplace broadly, showing that any discrimination is prohibited, not solely based on sex, ethnicity or beliefs. The prevention of violence in the workplace forces all employers in the Province to post a detailed Violence in the Workplace Policy and forces employers to do a detailed investigation and ensure the safety of the employee if any reasonable fear or threat exists towards them in the workplace. In the case one employee is seen to have threatened their coworker, the aggressive employee would not be able to work with others in the workforce without their direct consent and knowledge by the fellow employees that the person has violent tendencies. The employer is also liable if they are aware that a domestic violence situation may occur in the workplace as well. With regards to rights of assembly and association, it is prohibited to take reprisals against any employee who wishes to apply their rights under the act defined under S.50. It is not yet known how much weight the act will have, but with new cases being presented all the time, the narrowing of the act to include only those situations where violence is likely to occur will most likely stand, and would still be a strong deterrent to abuse by employers over their employees in that regard. Laws are only as effective as those which are being followed, and as HRW recommends, it is up to the governments and organisations as well as the unions and the employers themselves to establish clear and effective rules so that employees are protected and do not see bullying by management or the system in their career as their only last option before taking their own lives. This issue is not solely one that can occur in France Telecom, it is a reality in all advanced economies, even those with stringent legal regimes on labour rights.
