In January 2003, the management of Metaleurop Nord, a French subsidiary of the Swiss-based Glencore group, announced its immediate closure, with the loss of over 800 jobs. The move provoked widespread indignation, and trade unions, together with the government and the MEDEF employers' organisation, have protested against the decision.
Download article in original language : FR0302103NFR.DOC
In January 2003, the management of Metaleurop Nord, a French subsidiary of the Swiss-based Glencore group, announced its immediate closure, with the loss of over 800 jobs. The move provoked widespread indignation, and trade unions, together with the government and the MEDEF employers' organisation, have protested against the decision.
On 21 January 2003, the chair of the board of Metaleurop Nord announced that the metalworking company was to cease production 'in five to eight days', making 830 employees redundant. The firm, a subsidiary of the Swiss-based Glencore group, appears to be taking advantage of a legal loophole concerning foreign-owned businesses, to avoid paying the costs of a redundancy plan and of the clean-up of its site, thought to be the most polluted in France.
This announcement came in the wake of several other recent plant closures which have had an impact on public opinion, including Daewoo in Lorraine (FR0302102N), and Palace Parfum, whose management left with no forwarding address in December 2002, apparently after having stripped the company of its plant machinery and other facilities. The Metaleurop Nord closure also occurred at the time when the conservative government had suspended the enhanced redundancy protection provisions of the 'social modernisation' law, which had been passed by the previous Socialist-led administration ( FR0201102F) after the furore generated by the closure of Marks & Spencer's French stores (FR0104147F).
The government has proved to have a rather narrow margin for manoeuvre in responding to the Metaleurop Nord situation, recalling the feeling of powerlessness expressed by the previous Prime Minister, Lionel Jospin, during workforce reductions at Michelin in 1999 (FR9910113F). The government’s indignation was articulated by the Prime Minister, Jean-Pierre Raffarin, and the Minister for Social Affairs. The latter felt that the fact of having been presented with a fait accompli was all the more shocking since his department had just received a plan, safeguarding 230 jobs and providing for staff retraining, that Metaleurop Nord had negotiated with its employees.
The Ministers of Ecology and the Economy are attempting to take legal action. With the assistance of a firm of lawyers, they are seeking possible legal recourse that would force Glencore to pay the site clean-up costs (around EUR 300 million) in addition to redundancy settlements. However, as a prerequisite to this, it would have to be proven that Glencore actually manages Metaleurop, which is not a simple matter, given that the relevant financial structures at the Swiss firm are very complicated. Critics allege that Glencore appears to have planned the insolvency of its French subsidiary in order to get rid of it without meeting the bill, or even informing the subsidiary’s chair.
The Ministry of the Economy plans to incorporate a measure preventing companies exonerating themselves from the burden of cleaning up sites that they leave into a bill on natural and industrial risks which is soon to be read in parliament.
The General Confederation of Labour (Confédération générale du travail, CGT), the French Democratic Confederation of Labour (Confédération française démocratique du travail, CFDT) and the General Confederation of Labour-Force ouvrière (Confédération générale du travail-Force ouvrière, CGT-FO) have condemned what they see as the company’s unacceptable attitude towards its employees. The general secretary of the CGT metalworkers’ federation is demanding that the firm be forced to keep and convert the site, which, in his view, constitutes 'the best guarantee if we want the company to pay for the site to be cleaned up'. Above all, he called for legislation 'to give greater rights to employees'. The general secretary of CFDT blamed the government for not having anticipated this type of situation. CGT-FO criticised both 'the cynical behaviour of Metaleurop’s management, which had no compunction about sacrificing hundreds of jobs for the sake of profits', and 'the deficiency of the state, which witnesses the deindustrialisation of the country without implementing alternative economic and industrial policies'. The Movement of French Enterprises (Mouvement des entreprises de France, MEDEF), France's main employers' confederation, felt that 'some of the unannounced and brutal decisions taken with immediate effect were reprehensible'.
For the time being, the future of the plant is uncertain. The Business Court (tribunal de commerce) has accepted the company’s bankruptcy request but has opposed straightforward liquidation. The chair of Metaleurop Nord has not given up hope of finding a solution for the company during the three months’ deferment period ahead.
Eurofound recommends citing this publication in the following way.
Eurofound (2003), Controversy over closure of Metaleurop Nord, article.
