abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb

Cette page n’est pas disponible en Français et est affichée en English

Procès

17 Aoû 2010

Auteur:
Business & Human Rights Resource Centre

Statoil lawsuit (re Human Rights Advisor)

Statut : CLOSED

Date de dépôt de la plainte
17 Aoû 2010
Féminin
Travailleurs
Lieu de dépôt de la plainte: États-Unis d'Amérique
Lieu de l'incident: Norvège
Type de litige: Transnational

Entreprises

Equinor (formerly Statoil) Norvège Hydrogène, Pétrole, gaz et charbon

Sources

Snapshot: In 2010, Statoil's Human Rights Advisor filed a lawsuit against the company alleging the company had made false promises and misrepresentationts about the Advisor position, which she had relied on in accepting the job. In 2012, the plaintiff and Statoil reached an out of court settlement. 

On 17 August 2010, Statoil's Human Rights Advisor filed a lawsuit against the company alleging the company had made false promises and misrepresentations about the Human Rights Advisor position, which she had relied on in accepting the job and forgoing another opportunity.  Specifically, she alleges that: (1) she was assured the job would involve the chance to develop and implement human rights policies for the company’s overseas operations, including the implementation of human rights risk assessments (HRRAs); and (2) she was assured that the job was more than a “public relations” role.  After working at her job for a year, the plaintiff claims that the majority of her duties consisted of external public relations matters, and claims that her attempts to implement HRRAs and human rights training programmes for the company’s overseas business operations were thwarted by her superiors.  She alleges that the corporate structure of Statoil made it impossible for her to implement the human rights policies she thought she was hired to develop and institute.  The plaintiff also claimed that her working environment became extremely stressful and impacted her health; she has been on medical leave since April 2009.

The lawsuit was filed in US federal court in California.  The plaintiff claimed she was subject to fraud and deceit and that the company breached California labour law.  Statoil has responded to the allegations by rejecting them as “unfounded and incorrect”.  Statoil further stated that it takes its human rights responsibilities very seriously.  It is a founding member of the UN Global Compact.  In October 2012 the plaintiff and Statoil reached an out-of-court settlement.

- "Lov og rett i Statoil ASA" [“Law and Justice at Statoil”], Simen Sætre, Morgenbladet [Norway], 3 Sep 2010 [available in Norwegian only]

- “Til sak mot Statoil” [“An action against Statoil”], Kristin Jonassen Nordby, Aftenposten [Norway], 3 Sep 2010 [available in Norwegian only]

- “Jeg ble syk av å jobbe i Statoil” [“I got sick from working for Statoil”], Toril Risholm, Aftenbladet [Norway], 1 Sep 2010 [available in Norwegian only]

- “Statoil tilbakeviser alle påstander” [“Statoil refutes all allegations”], Aftenbladet [Norway], 1 Sep 2010 [available in Norwegian only] 

- Statoil: [DOC] “Statement by Statoil Re: Human rights advisor sues Norwegian oil company over false representations about its commitment to respecting human rights", 24 Aug 2010

- Paul Hoffman & Michael Seplow [counsel for plaintiff]: [PDF] “Human Rights Advisor Sues Norwegian Oil Company Over False Rrepresentations About its Commitment to Respecting Human Rights”, 17 Aug 2010 

- [PDF] Complaint for Damages, in US District Court, Northern District of California, 17 Aug 2010

Chronologie

Informations sur la confidentialité

Ce site utilise des cookies et d'autres technologies de stockage web. Vous pouvez définir vos choix en matière de confidentialité ci-dessous. Les changements prendront effet immédiatement.

Pour plus d'informations sur notre utilisation du stockage web, veuillez vous référer à notre Politique en matière d'utilisation des données et de cookies

Strictly necessary storage

ON
OFF

Necessary storage enables core site functionality. This site cannot function without it, so it can only be disabled by changing settings in your browser.

Cookie analytique

ON
OFF

Lorsque vous accédez à notre site Web, nous utilisons Google Analytics pour collecter des informations sur votre visite. Autoriser ce cookie nous permettra de comprendre en plus de détails sur votre parcours et d'améliorer la façon dont nous diffusons les informations. Toutes les informations analytiques sont anonymes et nous ne les utilisons pas pour vous identifier. Outre la possibilité que vous avez de refuser des cookies, vous pouvez installer le module pour la désactivation de Google Analytics.

Cookies promotionels

ON
OFF

Nous partageons des nouvelles et des mises à jour sur les entreprises et les droits de l'homme via des plateformes tierces, y compris les médias sociaux et les moteurs de recherche. Ces cookies nous aident à comprendre les performances de ces items.

Vos choix en matière de confidentialité pour ce site

Ce site utilise des cookies et d'autres technologies de stockage web pour améliorer votre expérience au-delà des fonctionnalités de base nécessaires.