A/HRC/38/NGO/91

United Nations

General AssemblyDistr.: General
14 June 2018
English, French and Spanish only

Human Rights Council
Thirty-eighth session
18 June-6 July 2018
Agenda item 3
Promotion and protection of all human rights, civil,
political, economic, social and cultural rights,
including the right to development

Written statement* submitted by Centre Europe - tiersmonde, a non-governmental organization in general
consultative status
The Secretary-General has received the following written statement which iscirculated in accordance with Economic and Social Council resolution 1996/31.
[24 May 2018]* This written statement is issued, unedited, in the language(s) received from the submitting nongovernmental organization(s).

GE.18-09792(E)A/HRC/38/NGO/91

Workers’ Human Rights Violations By Glencore Around TheWorld1Introduction
1. The Europe–Third World Centre (CETIM) is alarmed by the increase of human rights violations committed bytransnational corporations (TNCs) around the world. This declaration highlights violations committed by Glencore
corporation, its subsidiaries and subcontractors in several countries.
2. Glencore PLC is one of the largest mining and commodities trading companies in the world. Headquartered in
Switzerland, its shares are publicly traded on stock exchanges. Civil society organisations have long criticized thistransnational corporation for its harmful impact on local communities and the environment. Glencore is also facing
increased scrutiny by regulators in many countries over its business dealings and corporate governance practices, aswell as a global campaign by unions to press the company to respect labour rights.
Workers’ human rights violations
3. Following is a brief report of some of Glencore’s recent violations of workers’ human rights as reported toIndustriALL Global Union2 by Glencore’s workers and their unions in different countries and sectors.
Health and safety
4. The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) asserts, among other rights, the rightof everyone to the enjoyment of healthy and safe conditions of work (art.7). According to first-hand testimony from theunions in the mining sector, Glencore rarely assures its workers these fundamental rights, guaranteed by international
human rights law.
5. For instance, in Bolivia, Glencore workers who are paid on a production basis complain that safety equipment issubstandard. Unions in that country say subcontracted workers in the Illapa and Sinchi Wayra group are not properlytrained, a situation that led to two fatal accidents in 2017. Ironically, the company is now putting pressure on theworkforce, threatening to close mines if there are any further accidents, as if the workers were responsible for the lackof safety measures.
6. In Zambia, a similar dynamic was reported from the workers of the Mopani Copper Mines, a Glencore subsidiary,
where the company reportedly threatened to close the mine if there were any fatalities in 2017. Mopani workers claimthat medical reports were falsified in order to force sick workers to return to work. In addition, regular silicosis checkups are not properly conducted, whereas the workers are daily exposed to harmful substances. Last but not least, faulty
equipment used by subcontractor companies put workers’ lives at risk. Following a large reduction in employment
levels, the operations are understaffed, and some employees must routinely work for 24-hour periods underground.
Glencore has adopted a so-called “zero tolerance” approach to occupational health and safety. While this might soundgood in public reporting, in reality it means a shift of blame and liability from the employer to the victims, with “zerotolerance” resulting in punishing the workers if there is a workplace accident. This translates into de facto suppressionof the reporting of accidents through employee fear of disciplinary measures, thereby artificially embellishing safety
statistics.

1 This declaration was drafted in collaboration with IndustriALL Global Union.
2 See http://www.industriall-union.org/2A/HRC/38/NGO/91

7. In Colombia, the Sintracarbón union reported in August 2017 that, in less than one month, there were 13 work
accidents at Cerrejón, an open-cast coal mine co-owned by Glencore, BHP Billiton and Anglo American. Sintracarbón
has asserted that health and safety at the Calenturitas mine is substandard. Productivity is prioritized over health andsafety, safety equipment is not properly maintained, and the joint health and safety committee is not functioning
effectively. Disabled workers are given jobs collecting garbage or are isolated with nothing to do.
8. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, workers’ complaints against Glencore copper and cobalt mining subsidiaries
concern inadequate amounts of drinking water in some Glencore operations, with low quality food and lack of adesignated eating area, obliging mine workers to eat where they work, sometimes around chemicals. Above all, thesecomplaints highlight the extremely limited and inadequate healthcare provided by Glencore to workers and theirfamilies. These workers also complain about unfairly low wages, which in the DRC stand in particular contrast to theextreme profitability of Glencore’s operations. Nonetheless, Glencore categorically refuses to enter into negotiations
over long standing grievances.
Precarisation of working conditions
9. Among Glencore’s total workforce, the percentage of contractors, also known as sub-contracted workers, hasconstantly increased in recent years3. In 2017, over 62,000 of its workers, or 43% of its workforce, were contractors, up
from 38% the previous year. As demonstrated below, this issue is highly problematic with regard to workers′
fundamental rights.
Workforce numbers at year end
2015
Employees
100,614
Contractors
55,854
Total workforce
156,468
Source: Glencore Annual Report 20172016
95,95858,874
154,8322017 (excluding agriculture)
83,67962,298145,977

10. This phenomenon is causing a worrying casualisation of the workforce as it leaves workers without an adequate
standard of living, equal remuneration for work of equal value, equal opportunity of positions, security of a permanentcontract, pension and health insurance and, in practice, the right to form or join trade unions.
11. In Colombia, in 2016, Cerrejón was fined two billion pesos (over US$ 650,000) by the Colombian Ministry ofLabour for “excessive use of third-party contractors”.4 At Glencore’s Prodeco operation in Colombia, Sintracarbón
reports that Glencore has used outsourcing as a tool to undermine the union. Contractors who are on one-year fixed
contracts are deterred from joining a union, because doing so would put the renewal of their contracts at risk.
12. According to the Mineworkers’ Union of Zambia (MUZ), about half of the workers at Glencore’s majority-owned
Mopani copper operations are casual, and these workers make on average under one-third of the wages of permanent
employees. The regular workers are unionised while the casual ones are not, restricting the ability of the latter to speak
up about poor working conditions and sub-standard pay. Unions in Zambia also claim that subcontracted workers at
Glencore are being employed for longer periods than is permitted by law.
Breaking labour relations

3 Contractors are intended as those casual or temporary workers employed by third-parties (suppliers, subcontractors enterprises orother economic entities) which are under the economic control of the main parent company (in this case Glencore).
4 Cited in Vattenfall, “A Human Rights Risk Assessment in Colombia”, November 2017, p. 25, https://www.businesshumanrights.org/sites/default/files/documents/vattenfall_coal_sorcing_report_2017_0.pdf

3

A/HRC/38/NGO/91

13. Far from negotiating in good faith with unions as representatives of the workforce, Glencore is constantly accusedof actively trying to break unions. In Australia, the company locked out workers at its Oaky North mine for over 230
days for resisting a plan that aimed to replace permanent workers with subcontracted labourers. Australia’s state labour
arbitrator, the Fair Work Commission, ordered the company to stop the surveillance of workers and to withdraw the banon wearing union t-shirts. According to testimony given, workers and their families, during social events as well as
throughout their daily lives, were followed and filmed by private security guards employed by the company.
14. In Canada, workers at the Glencore-managed CEZinc zinc refinery in Quebec went on strike for nine months in2017 after the company tried to cut costs by weakening their pension scheme. During the strikes, the company
reportedly illegally hired strike-breakers in order to deligitimise the workers’ grievances.
15. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, Glencore workers contend that different treatment and conditions ofemployment between Glencore’s Mutanda and KCC operations constitute a deliberate attempt by the company to divide
and weaken trade unions.
16. In Colombia, Glencore’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Prodeco, refuses to negotiate as a single employer, a situationthat leads to inequality of treatment and discrimination among workers. The company continues to operate Carbones La
Jagua, Consorcio Minero and Calenturitas as three distinct entities, although the Colombian authorities requested that it
integrate the three operations into a single business enterprise. In practice, all three mines are run from the same floor of
the same building in Baranquilla, and they share the same top management. However, workers from the three mines aresubjected to different terms and conditions and are denied the opportunity to join forces to negotiate with a common
employer.
17. Sintracarbón reports that Prodeco has blatantly violated the right to freedom of association at its Calenturitas mineby discriminating against union leaders and members, by interfering with the right of workers to freely choose theirunion affiliation, and by undermining the collective bargaining process. Management has discriminated against union
leaders by changing their shifts or positions, by applying drastic disciplinary measures – including dismissals or
multiple suspensions for the same offence – or at times by sending them on paid leave as a means of marginalizingthem. The company has granted preferential treatment to representatives of non-unionized workers, including duringnegotiations and in terms of work opportunities. Further, the company persuaded union members to resign from theunion through a combination of threats and incentives. As an additional means of weakening the union, 70 percent ofjobs have been outsourced, including in the core functions of the mine.
18. In Peru, Glencore’s Compañía Minera de Antapaccay has taken advantage of the weakness of Peru’s regulatory
framework to unfairly prevent technical staff from exercising their right to freedom of association. The company has
resorted to arbitrary dismissals, coercion and interference in union affairs since 2013. In 2010, the company reclassified
450 technicians, supervisors and administrative employees as ‘employees of confidence’, even though the staff inquestion perform ordinary operational duties and do not report directly to management. In so doing Glencore was taking
advantage of a provision in Peru’s retrograde labour legislation limiting the right of managerial and ‘trusted’ staff toorganise and bargain collectively as well as making them vulnerable to dismissal for ‘subjective’ reasons. The ILO hasrepeatedly warned the government that an overly narrow definition of ‘employee of confidence’ could unfairly restrict
the rights of such workers and has asked the government to review its legislation to ensure that all workers enjoy theright to organize and bargain collectively. In 2013, in response to unfair treatment (particularly in relation to pay andpromotion opportunities) as well as their sense of vulnerability as supposed ‘employees of confidence’, a group oftechnicians and administrative staff decided to form a union in order to have a voice at work. The labour authorities
issued the union registration on 27 November. Two days later, all 35 union members received letters of dismissal,without explanation. Shortly afterwards, management offered to take the fired workers back, under the conditions thatthey accept to quit the union and sign a letter drafted by the company’s lawyers. Five union leaders who refused to4

A/HRC/38/NGO/91

accept the conditions were not reinstated, despite being union leaders protected by ‘fuero sindical’ (protection fromdismissal for union activities).5Conclusion19. IndustriALL Global Union attempted to engage Glencore in meaningful global social dialogue about the company’s
poor health and safety practices, poor treatment of workers, unresolved labour disputes and anti-trade union practices.
Glencore failed to do so. Facing this, workers and unions, including IndustriALL, are trying to reach global agreementson common strategies and jointly agreed labour principles, necessary to the respect and enforcement of the international
norms with regard to labour and human rights.
20. Glencore’s systematic practice of violating workers’ human and labour rights around the world with almost total
impunity and without being held accountable highlights the urgent need for an international legally binding instrument
allowing the regulation of transnational corporations′ activities and their impacts on human rights. As well, thisinstrument would be an essential tool to guarantee access to justice for the victims and the affected communities.
21. The CETIM urges the host states of Glencore and its subsidiaries to honour their human rights and international
labour standards commitments by taking concrete steps to ensure that this company respects, in particular, workers'
rights to safety, health, decent income and freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
22. The CETIM also urges the Swiss authorities to comply with its obligation to assure that transnational corporations
based within its territory do not violate human rights, in particular while carrying on their activities in other countries
and, should violations occur, to grant victims access to justice. We appeal in particular to the government of
Switzerland to intervene in order to put an end to Glencore’s violations of the human rights of workers, and to ensurethat victims obtain justice.

5 Since then, the union has filed an ILO complaint which is available here (CFA Case No. 3069):
http://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:50002:0::NO::P50002_COMPLAINT_TEXT_ID:3237745. According to afollow-up submission dated August 2017, the union says harassment of the trade union leaders has continued.

5