NCP Austria
This page provides information related to NCP Austria. Directly underneath, you find the scores of the NCP on the NCP Evaluation Project. The NCP is evaluated on the indicators with Yes, No or Partial/Not Applicable. The indicators are ordered per category. Only a few indicators per category are shown on this page. To see them all, click on “more…. indicators To see what indicator scores best among all NCPs go to the NCP Evaluation Overview. At the bottom, there is news related to the NCP.
Related complaints
In the OECD Watch Complaint Database you can find all the related complaints with NCP Austria
NCP allows complainants to withhold their identity from the company for security reasons.
Evaluation
The NCP will be transparent and information from a party will be forwarded to other involved parties unless there is a 'compelling reason (such as the protection of life and limb or the preservation of trade and business secrets)'.
Source
Terms of Reference of the Austrian National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (Article 6.2, Confidentiality) https://www.bmdw.gv.at/en/Topics/International/OECD-Guidelines-for-Multinational-Enterprises-and-the-Austrian-NCP/The-complaint-procedure-at-the-Austrian-National-Contact-Point-(Austrian-NCP).html
NCP policy commits it to handling complaints within 12 months and in practice NCP has followed this commitment or communicated punctually with parties over reasonable delays.
Evaluation
The Rules of Procedure state that the Initial Assessment stage should be done in 3 months, but there is no further indication of a recommended timeline.
Source
Terms of Reference of the Austrian National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises
Comment of NCP on score
RoP refer to the relevant provisions of the Procedural Guidance including the commentary, i.e. also the time lines.
NCP maintains transparency generally, but allows for confidentiality only over:
(a) the personal identities of parties for security/privacy reasons
(b) legitimately sensitive business information
(c) documents shared and discussions had during the good offices stage.
Evaluation
The Rules of Procedure ensure protection of sensitive data and information, as well as trade and business secrets. They also allow the NCP not to share information between parties if there is a compelling reason (such as the protection of life and limb or the preservation of trade and business secrets). The Rules also call for confidentiality to be observed during the entire duration of the proceeding.
Source
Terms of Reference of the Austrian National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (Article 6, Confidentiality) https://www.bmdw.gv.at/en/Topics/International/OECD-Guidelines-for-Multinational-Enterprises-and-the-Austrian-NCP/Activities-of-the-Austrian-National-Contact-Point-(NCP).html
Government has given consequences (e.g. limited access to export promotion or other economic benefits) to MNEs that refuse to engage in the complaint process, or if NCP has not yet encountered such a situation, NCP has made a policy commitment to request consequences from the government.
Evaluation
There is no indication the government has applied or committed to apply consequences to MNEs that show poor faith towards the complaint process.
Source
Human Rights Council, Report of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, 2 May 2018 (A/HRC/38/48)
Comment of NCP on score
NCP informs relevant institutions of the outcome of specific instances in order to allow them to take appropriate measures.
NCP makes a finding (determination) on whether the MNE has breached the OECD Guidelines when conciliation/mediation is refused or fails, or if NCP has not yet encountered such a situation, NCP has made a policy commitment to do so.
Evaluation
The Rules of Procedure do not mention determinations nor has the NCP issued any determinations.
Source
Scoping paper draft: Recommendations and Determinations in Specific Instances (p.7)
Comment of NCP on score
The Rules of Procedure do not rule out the possibility of the NCP making determinations it deems appropriate.
NCP sets no requirement to exhaust all other avenues to remedy before filing complaint.
Evaluation
The Rules of Procedure set no requirement to exhaust all other remedies.
Source
Terms of Reference of the Austrian National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises https://www.bmdw.gv.at/en/Topics/International/OECD-Guidelines-for-Multinational-Enterprises-and-the-Austrian-NCP/The-complaint-procedure-at-the-Austrian-National-Contact-Point-(Austrian-NCP).html
NCP conducts in-country fact finding, or if NCP has not yet received complaints, NCP has made a policy commitment to do so.
Evaluation
The Rules of Procedure state that the NCP will "contribute to the clarification of the facts" and can if necessary "make use of the Austrian representation authorities abroad". In practice, NGOs have requested in-country fact finding and the NCP has not complied.
Source
Terms of Reference of the Austrian National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (Article 3.13) https://www.bmdw.gv.at/en/Topics/International/OECD-Guidelines-for-Multinational-Enterprises-and-the-Austrian-NCP/The-complaint-procedure-at-the-Austrian-National-Contact-Point-(Austrian-NCP).html
Finance & Trade Watch Austria t al. vs. Andritz AG, https://complaints.oecdwatch.org/cases/Case_326
NCP engages in follow-up of recommendations made/agreements reached in Final Statements for all complaints reaching that stage, or if NCP has not yet received complaints reaching final assessment stage, NCP has made a policy commitment to do so,
Evaluation
The Rules of Procedure allow optional follow-up on complaint,s which was completed in one but not all complaints.
Source
Terms of Reference of the Austrian National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (Article 3.16)
NCP has offered to alter the location of mediation and/or enable remote video conferencing to increase accessibility for the complainants or has made a policy commitment to do so.
Evaluation
The Rules of Procedure make no commitment to alter the location of mediation, however the NCP has offered remote video conferencing in the past to facilitate participation of complainants.
Source
Terms of Reference of the Austrian National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises https://www.bmdw.gv.at/en/Topics/International/OECD-Guidelines-for-Multinational-Enterprises-and-the-Austrian-NCP/The-complaint-procedure-at-the-Austrian-National-Contact-Point-(Austrian-NCP).html
NCP covers mediation costs for parties. If mediation costs are not covered, the parties’ cost burdens are explained in the Rules of Procedure.
Evaluation
The NCP covers the costs of mediation (excluding individual costs for partners including human resources and transportation) and its Rules of Procedure do not state that mediation costs are not covered.
Source
Terms of Reference of the Austrian National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (Article 3.12) https://www.bmdw.gv.at/en/Topics/International/OECD-Guidelines-for-Multinational-Enterprises-and-the-Austrian-NCP/The-complaint-procedure-at-the-Austrian-National-Contact-Point-(Austrian-NCP).html
Comment of NCP on score
The new RoP clarify that the parties bear only their respective cost of their participation in the procedure.
NCP declares that parallel proceedings do not automatically bar complaints.
Evaluation
The Rules of Procedure explicitly state that parallel proceedings will not bar complaints.
Source
Terms of Reference of the Austrian National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (Article 3.10) https://www.bmdw.gv.at/en/Topics/International/OECD-Guidelines-for-Multinational-Enterprises-and-the-Austrian-NCP/The-complaint-procedure-at-the-Austrian-National-Contact-Point-(Austrian-NCP).html
NCP considers complaints ‘material and substantiated’ if they are plausible or credible.
Evaluation
The Rules of Procedure do not explicitly use a standard equivalent to plausibility to assess the substantiation of complaints.
Source
Terms of Reference of the Austrian National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises https://www.bmdw.gv.at/en/Topics/International/OECD-Guidelines-for-Multinational-Enterprises-and-the-Austrian-NCP/The-complaint-procedure-at-the-Austrian-National-Contact-Point-(Austrian-NCP).html
Comment of NCP on score
The RoP do not refer to any specific evidentiary standards. Nothing in the RoP hinders the NCP to use plausible arguments.
NCP provides external review process for parties who believe the NCP has not followed its internal procedures.
Evaluation
The Rules of Procedure do not include an option of review.
Source
Terms of Reference of the Austrian National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises https://www.bmdw.gv.at/en/Topics/International/OECD-Guidelines-for-Multinational-Enterprises-and-the-Austrian-NCP/The-complaint-procedure-at-the-Austrian-National-Contact-Point-(Austrian-NCP).html
Comment of NCP on score
All NCP activities are subject to regular review by superior authorities and courts.
NCP sets no statute of limitations for accepting complaints.
Evaluation
The Rules of Procedure set no statute of limitations for accepting complaints.
Source
Terms of Reference of the Austrian National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises
NCP sets a low threshold for accepting complaints by ensuring the use of a broad definition of “interest in the matter” when evaluating complainants.
Evaluation
The Rules of Procedure do not outline a broad definition of interest in the matter.
Source
Terms of Reference of the Austrian National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (Article 3, Specific Instances) https://www.bmdw.gv.at/en/Topics/International/OECD-Guidelines-for-Multinational-Enterprises-and-the-Austrian-NCP/The-complaint-procedure-at-the-Austrian-National-Contact-Point-(Austrian-NCP).html
Comment of NCP on score
The RoP do not explicitly refer to the requirement to have an interest on the matter or a definition thereof. Nothing hinders the NCP from applying a broad definition. In the past the NCP has never not accepted a complaint based on this.
NCP ensures broad expertise in its complaint handling and promotion functions through formally involving diverse relevant government departments, having a multipartite structure, or having an independent expert structure.
Evaluation
The NCP has an individualised decision making structure only involving officials of the Ministry for Digital and Economic Affairs. The final sign-off for acceptance of specific instances and final statements lies with the head of the NCP.
Source
National Contact Point 2018 Report to the OECD: Austria (p. 4)
Comment of NCP on score
NCP is supported by a Steering Committee with representatives of relevant ministries, Chamber of Commerce, Trade Union, Federation of Austrian Industries, Federal Chamber of Labour, OECD Watch Representative/NGO and an Independent Expert on extrajudicial dispute resolution. The Steering Committee is formally involved in Complaint handling and promotion functions thus ensuring wide breadth of expertise.
NCP is not housed within a ministry focused on economics, trade, or investment to ensure there is no real or perceived conflict of interest.
Evaluation
The NCP is located in the Federal Ministry for Digital and Economic Affairs, Unit for OECD and Sustainability.
Source
National Contact Point 2018 Report to the OECD: Austria (p.3)
Comment of NCP on score
The Austrian NCP is in the Federal Ministry for Digital and Economic Affairs, Unit for OECD and Sustainability. Being within this Ministry it is assured to get a broad array expertise in amongst others economic questions and on business and human rights questions for which the ministry has a special unit. The more general question is, whether the allocation in the Ministry for Social Affairs or Ministry for Environmental Affairs or any other Ministry also could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
NCP has an independent expert structure whereby complaints are handled strictly by non-governmental independent experts.
Evaluation
The NCP has an individualised structure in which complaints are handled strictly by government officials.
Source
Annual Report on the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises 2019 (p.29)
NCP has undergone a peer review, or has a peer review formally scheduled in the near future.
Evaluation
The NCP's peer review was conducted in 2019.
NCP employs the equivalent of two or more full-time staff.
Evaluation
The NCP has 1 fulltime staff member (Official of the Federal Ministry for Digital and Economic Affairs) & no part-time staff.
Source
National Contact Point 2018 Report to the OECD: Austria (p.3)
Comment of NCP on score
The NCP has possibility to use secretariat of up to two full time staff. For promotion and organisation of information events and multistakeholder-forum there will be up to two more additonal staff provided and NCP has possibility to access experts in ministry.
NCP has multi-stakeholder advisory body involving representatives of all three core stakeholder groups (labour unions, business, and NGOs) consulted at least 2 times in the past year.
Evaluation
The NCP has an advisory body, called the Steering Committee, consisting of 5 representatives from different Ministries and the Austrian Chamber of Agriculture, Austrian Trade Union Federation, Federation of Austrian Industries, Austrian Federal Economic Chamber, OECD Watch Representative NGO, and a University Professor. Under its Terms of Reference, the Commitee meets twice a year. The Committee may be consulted on specific instances and supports and consults on the proactive agenda, but does not have decision-making authority regarding specific instances or promotional activities.
Comment of NCP on score
NCP formally involves representatives of all three core stakeholder groups (labour unions, business, and NGOs) in its governance and decision-making structure. Examples are quadripartite NCPs and NCPs in which the three stakeholder groups nominate an independent member of the NCP or steering board.
Evaluation
The NCP has a single-ministry decision making structure only involving officials of the Ministry for Digital and Economic Affairs. The final sign-off for acceptance of specific instances and final statements lies with the head of the NCP.
Source
Annual Report on the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises 2019 (p.26)
National Contact Point 2018 Report to the OECD: Austria (p.3)
Comment of NCP on score
NCP is formally involving to ensure wide breadth of expertise within Complaint handling and Promotion functions the Steering Committee with representatives of relevant ministries, Chamber of Commerce, Trade Union, Federation of Austian Industries, Federal Chamber of Labour, OECD Watch/NGO as a representative of civil society and an Independant Expert on extrajudicial dispute resolution.
Website publicizes NCP’s budget and spending streams.
Evaluation
The website does not show the NCP's annual budget and spending streams.
Website shows description of every complaint the NCP has received.
Evaluation
The website shows descriptions of all complaints that are pending or concluded.
Website shows instructions on how to file complaints.
Evaluation
The website shows a template for the submission of a complaint available in German, English and French.
Website shows contact information for NCP.
Evaluation
The website shows a mailing address, telephone number and email address.
NCP reports on its activities at the national level, to a government office or parliamentary committee, at least once a year.
Evaluation
The NCP reports to the government more than three times a year. Members of Parliament have the right to make requests to the NCP via the competent Minister (right of interpellation).
Source
National Contact Point 2018 Report to the OECD: Austria (p. 6)
Website shows text of all of the OECD’s Due Diligence guidance.
Evaluation
The website contains links to the OECD Due Diligence guidance under a page on "Evoluton of the OECD Guidelines"
Website shows comprehensive Final Statement for each complaint reaching that stage.
Evaluation
The NCP did not issue a final statement in a 2014 case withdrawn by complainants or in a 2004 case that did not reach agreement.
Website shows comprehensive explanation of the Guidelines.
Evaluation
The website summarises all the chapters of the OECD Guidelines in German and English but only explains the Procedural Guidance and responsibilities for NCPs in German.
Source
https://www.bmdw.gv.at/en/Topics/International/OECD-Guidelines-for-Multinational-Enterprises-and-the-Austrian-NCP/Objectives-and-content-of-the-OECD-Guidelines-for-Multinational-Enterprises.html https://www.bmdw.gv.at/Themen/International/OECD-Leitsaetze-multinationale-Unternehmen-OeNKP/Die-Arbeit-des-%C3%B6sterreichischen-Nationalen-Kontaktpunktes.html
Website shows text of the OECD Guidelines in national language(s) and English.
Evaluation
The website has links to German, English and French translations of the OECD Guidelines.
Website shows Initial Assessment identifying parties in every complaint received, which is posted directly after the initial assessment stage is concluded, or if NCP has not yet received complaints, NCP has made a policy commitment to directly publish initial assessments.
Evaluation
The NCP does not publish initial assessments for any complaints.
Comment of NCP on score
The NCP is committed to a transparent procedure including publication of initial assessments as long as it is compatible with all relevant legitimate interests.
NCP maintains website with key parts in both national language(s) and English.
Evaluation
The website is available in both German and English, and some French.
Website explains NCP’s functions in promoting the OECD Guidelines and handling complaints.
Evaluation
The website shows a description of the two functions of the NCP.
NCP submits its most recent annual report to the OECD secretariat and publishes it on its website.
Evaluation
The NCP has submitted its annual report to the OECD Secretariat and published it on its website.
NCP or government conducted activities abroad in the past year to promote the OECD Guidelines.
Evaluation
The NCP distributes brochures on the NCP and Guidelines at Austrian embassies abroad.
Source
National Contact Point 2018 Report to the OECD: Austria (p.8)
NCP organises or co-organises at least 1 promotional event annually on the OECD Guidelines attended by business, union, and civil society stakeholder groups.
Evaluation
The NCP organised/co-organised events on the Guidelines in the past year involving all stakeholder groups.
Source
National Contact Point 2018 Report to the OECD: Austria (p.7-8)
NCP has developed in print and on its website promotional materials on the OECD Guidelines and due diligence guidance.
Evaluation
The NCP has developed promotional materials both in print and on its website and will email printable material free of charge.
Website shows NCP’s promotional plan outlining upcoming activities.
Evaluation
The website shows information about past events, but no forward-looking promotional plan.
Comment of NCP on score
The NCP gives Information /pubishes the Work Program of the NCP in the framework of the Steering Committee meetings/protocol. In the future this will be made more visible.
Website shows NCP’s Rules of Procedure for complaint handling in national language(s) and English.
Evaluation
The Rules of Procedure are available on the website in German, English and French.
Source
https://www.bmdw.gv.at/en/Topics/International/OECD-Guidelines-for-Multinational-Enterprises-and-the-Austrian-NCP.html (Downloads) https://www.bmdw.gv.at/en/Topics/International/OECD-Guidelines-for-Multinational-Enterprises-and-the-Austrian-NCP/Activities-of-the-Austrian-National-Contact-Point-(NCP).html (Complaints procedure)