After 28 days of strike, the morale of workers is still high and the company tries to defeat them by violating the law.

The members of Sindicato Único Nacional de Trabajadores de Nestlé Perú S.A. (SUNTRANEP) commenced their strike on 29 October, in the case of a conflict declared legal by the competent authority. This strike was triggered by the fact that ever since the set of claims was presented in February and the ensuing bargaining period, there has been no progress.  On the contrary, during the 10 months elapsed the company has hindered the process by adding items in spite of being perfectly aware that such items would be rejected by the union. There are three key elements in the negotiations: 1)  salary recovery to compensate for the 4.5 inflation rate of 2007; 2)  management trying to impose unilaterally a new job categorization system (the present categories were imposed by management just over 20 years ago); and 3)  the company intent to sign a two-year agreement, which is unacceptable for the union if the two first items are not solved.

A letter received from Nestle corporate offices in Vevey, in reply to a note sent by the IUF General Secretary, stated, among other things: “our investigations indicate that Nestlé Peru is conducting these negotiations properly and in accordance with the law”. Vevey is either receiving distorted information or trying to conceal the reality. We have at sight the records of the three inspections performed by the National Authority of Labor Inspection on 7, 11 and 13 November, which results are included in a 12 page report, mainly stating:

§         It has been verified that the strike is peaceful.

§         Acts of substitution of striking workers have been confirmed, which is evidenced in different ways:

- Workers hired to perform the activities of striking workers.

- Worker rotation schemes in place at different positions to discharge duties different from the usual ones.

- Transfer of employees to the production areas in order to cover the working positions of striking workers.

- Extended work days for outsourced workers, with 4 hours overtime a day.

§     In the inspectors’ opinion, with the above actions the company intends to offset the main purpose of the strike: the interruption of work.

§     That Nestle contingent plan violates Peruvian laws and decrees because it is intended to impede and affect the total abstention of activities regularly performed by the striking workers.

The report also reminds that:

Supreme Decree N 011-92, Art. 70 states: “When a strike is declared in compliance with the legal requirements both in form and substance, all workers comprised by the respective field must abstain from working, and therefore, the employer may not hire personnel to perform the activities of the striking workers.”

Supreme Decree Nº 019-2006, provides that affecting the right to strike is a very serious offence in terms of labor relations.

Consequently, the inspectors’ report is harshly categorical: Nestlé is not proceeding in accordance with the law.

At the time of writing these lines, a meeting is being held at the Ministry of Labor, which has raised the expectations of the union that the company will show up, something that did not happen in the two last meetings. In turn, the Minister of Labor promised to attend the meeting.  We trust he will, because his political will to do justice is largely decisive for the solution of this conflict. And regarding Nestle and its widely advertised corporate responsibility policy, in Peru, like in many other countries, it is becoming a bad joke.