The investigation that was conducted against Volkswagen as a result of the Rapid Response Labor Mechanism in Specific Facilities (RRLM), conducted by the Mexican government, showed that there was no denial of the rights of freedom of association and collective bargaining, as indicated by the United States.
Although the case, initiated under the Treaty between Mexico, the United States and Canada (USMCA) was closed successfully, the Department of Economy assured that the mechanism against the Volkswagen plant located at Cuautlancingo, Puebla, yielded three conclusions that show no evidence of violation of the abovementioned rights:
- “One. In the last election of union leaders and delegates, conducted in November of 2023, as well as in the previous three elections, there was no evidence of a pattern of dismissals or mandatory resignations at the end of the union assignment of the members of the Executive Committee or of the delegates of the Congress of the Volkswagen Independent Union of Automotive Industry Workers (SITIAVW).
- Two. “There are not sufficient elements to confirm that the termination of the labor relationship with the members of the union representation that is the subject of the complaint with the RRLMs, was motivated by their capacity and/or status of union representatives, their union responsibilities or their participation in union activities.”
- Three. Despite the foregoing, “there are elements that indicate that they were unjustified dismissals, as they were not conducted in terms of the applicable procedures in termination of the employment relationship matters.”
Even with the investigation, a remediation and implementation plan was outlined, after six roundtables of dialog and negotiation, organized and conducted by this agency, with the assistance of the Federal Center for Conciliation and Labor Registration.
Thus, the reinstatement of 8 out of the 10 people that were dismissed was agreed on, and one more was given a severance package in accordance to law and by means of an agreement to terminate the employment relationship, that included three months of salary plus 20 days for each year of service.
In addition to the foregoing, training was conducted, as well as the dissemination of the letter of commitment to neutrality in union matters and a document that defines the guidelines for conduct by the company’s personnel.
Volkswagen did not violate the USMCA
Oscar de la Vega, partner of the De la Vega & Martínez Rojas Firm stated that the investigation showed that no violation of freedom of association or of collective bargaining was found, as the dismissal of the union delegates was not found to have been related to their union activity.
He added that in the review of the USMCA, it should be required that the use of the Rapid Response Labor Mechanisms be limited exclusively to issues of union freedom and collective association, as its use in other matters that are not the ones strictly referred to in Annex 31-A “is opening the door for the United States to get involved in other matters.”
For example, in the case of Volkswagen, the investigation showed that the dismissals were not related to the denial of the right of union freedom or collective association, but the assembly company had to accept it because tariffs could have been placed on the product that it exports, if they did not apply the labor mechanism.
Another case is that of Pirelli, a case in which the United States started a labor mechanism that had nothing to do with union matters, as it requires a resolution on whether the industry-wide Labor Agreement is still in force or not, “that should be a matter to be tried in Mexico, but they are raising these issues to gain strength in labor matters, but this must be limited to freedom of association and collective bargaining matters.”
