The Struggle of Muhammad Asif Javed Against Nestlé
Introduction: Nestlé has demonstrated how it can devastate the lives of dedicated employees who have committed significant portions of their lives to the company. Despite their loyalty, workers like Muhammad Asif Javed and their families are left struggling to meet basic needs. Javed’s children have been deprived of education and healthcare, fundamental rights that every child deserves. For the past eight years, Nestlé has entangled Javed in relentless litigation, failing to substantiate any claims against him regarding his participation in the fact-finding committee. This case exemplifies how Nestlé not only targets innocent workers but also inflicts suffering on their families.
For more details, visit Nestlé Violations Against Labor Rights.
Key Questions and Injustices:
- Why was Asif Javed punished for participating in the committee? Javed attended the committee to help resolve issues for the benefit of the company, yet Nestlé accused him of participating with the intent to defame and malign them.
- Where is the proof? The show cause notice issued by Nestlé did not specify a single word on how Javed’s actions in the committee led to their defamation or maligning.
- What misconduct? Nestlé used an unproven accusation as the sole basis to dismiss Javed, without providing any evidence of misconduct.
Employment History:
Muhammad Asif Javed began his career at Nestlé Pakistan on October 8, 2007, and was confirmed as a permanent employee on January 8, 2008. He was a dedicated worker and was promoted to senior process operator, supporting the company through various challenges and always supporting the local management against troublemakers.
Background and Formation of the Committee
The fact-finding committee was established due to the law and order situation created by the local management’s own mismanagement, corruption, and hidden intentions at Nestlé’s Kabirwala factory. The local management orchestrated the chaos by manipulating circumstances to their advantage. They facilitated the entry of disruptive elements into the factory, intensifying the ongoing tensions between labor groups. This deliberate creation of unrest was a tactic to cover up their corrupt practices and target specific employees. The committee was formed to investigate these escalating tensions and bring clarity to the situation, which was fundamentally caused by the local management’s actions.
For the complete fact-finding report, visit Fact-Finding Report.
The Incident at Kabirwala Factory
Chronology of Events
In September 2015, tensions at the Kabirwala factory reached a boiling point. The unrest was triggered by the management’s decision to introduce new labor, bypassing the existing workers. This move, facilitated by local management, led to violent clashes within the factory premises. The situation was further exacerbated by the management’s use of Gate No. 1, reserved for management staff, to bring in disruptive elements at 2 AM, deliberately creating chaos.
Role of Local Management
The local management’s involvement in the incident was significant. The fact-finding report pointed out that on April 7, 2015, a fake labor group was introduced through Gate No. 2 by the factory management. The committee recommended that Nestlé’s higher management should investigate this conduct. Moreover, during the night incident, the criminal elements were identified among the new labor group. The committee recommended that Nestlé should check the criminal records of any new labor hires to prevent such incidents in the future. Additionally, an FIR No. 300/15 was lodged against the management for firing at protesting workers, highlighting the severe mismanagement and corruption within Nestlé’s local operations.
For more details, see Mismanagement at Nestlé Pakistan.
Mismanagement and Corruption
Deliberate Mismanagement
The fact-finding report revealed deliberate mismanagement by the local management, particularly in how they orchestrated incidents to destabilize the factory environment for personal gain. The introduction of disruptive elements into the factory at inappropriate hours was a clear example of their misconduct.
Corruption and Nepotism
The local management facilitated entry for their people into the factory to cause disruptions and gain promotions based on false claims of handling the situation. This nepotism undermined the integrity of the factory’s operations and contributed to the ongoing tensions.
Financial Exploitation
The local management has been accused of spending substantial company resources on legal battles and delaying tactics, receiving commissions from lawyers for dragging out cases. This financial exploitation not only strained the company’s resources but also prolonged the suffering of the affected workers.
Lack of Accountability
Higher management has been misled by the local management, who declare anyone opposing their actions as part of the MHB group. This lack of accountability has allowed corruption to flourish, with little oversight or consequences for those involved.
For more details on the fact-finding report findings, visit Fact-Finding Report.
The Show Cause Notice
Details of the Notice
On September 23, 2015, I received a show cause notice accusing me of misconduct. The notice claimed that I participated in the fact-finding committee unlawfully representing workers without authorization and with the intention of defamation and maligning the management.
For more details, see Show Cause Notice Reply.
Allegations Against Muhammad Asif Javed
The allegations against me were baseless and lacked any supporting evidence. The show cause notice did not specify how my actions in the committee led to defamation or maligning of the management. The entire process was a facade to victimize me and cover up the management’s own failings.
Rebuttal and Response
Despite submitting a detailed rebuttal, the inquiry process proceeded unfairly. The management’s actions were marked by bias and coercion, aiming to extract a confession from me under duress. The inquiry officers exhibited clear prejudice in favor of the management.
For a detailed rebuttal, visit Rebuttal to Show Cause Notice.
Summary of Inquiry Proceedings
In response to the allegations, I, Asif Javed, present the following summary of the inquiry proceedings and the objections regarding the unfair process I was subjected to.
Unjust and Fabricated Inquiry
The inquiry process was designed to victimize me. I was compelled to attend the proceedings under inconvenient and unfavorable circumstances, working extended hours without adequate rest. The inquiry officers exhibited evident bias, and my perspective was not given proper consideration. This violation of natural justice deprived me of a fair opportunity to present my side of the story.
Summary of Key Inquiry Dates and Events
- November 25, 2015: Only the show cause notice and my reply were presented by the management representative. The inquiry officer then directed me to bring the co-worker and postponed the proceedings.
- December 2, 2015: The inquiry faced multiple interruptions, including the unavailability of the co-worker’s duty roster, causing further delays. My application requesting copies of the notes to be used in the proceedings was unjustly denied.
- December 8, 2015: The management representative cited a medical issue at the accused person’s residence as a reason for further hearing delays, despite my presence in the inquiry proceedings.
- December 26, 2015: The inquiry proceedings were postponed again due to the management’s failure to provide the co-worker, as the co-worker’s duty roster did not align with the inquiry dates. My application requesting the presentation of evidence used in the show cause notice and a copy of the proceedings was dismissed.
- January 28, 2016: The inquiry proceedings encountered another interruption due to the co-worker’s absence, attributed to his daughter’s illness.
- February 3, 2016: Despite the presence of both the accused person and the co-worker, the inquiry officer postponed the proceedings, citing concerns about exceeding permissible duty hours.
- February 11, 2016: After the attendance of the accused person and the co-worker, no immediate action was taken, and no further proceedings were conducted. The inquiry officer and the management representative refused to address my applications seeking material evidence regarding the show cause notice and further postponed the inquiry proceeding.
Subsequently, I sought to continue the inquiry proceedings via email on June 7, 2016, which was acknowledged by the management on June 11, 2016, stating that the inquiry was closed. I replied to the email, expressing disbelief in the closure of the inquiry and demanding an opportunity to defend myself in accordance with the principles of natural justice.
After the vacation of the stay order on June 30, 2016, the dismissal letter issued on July 11, 2016, lacked an official inquiry report. It has come to light that a self-initiated inquiry was presented as evidence in court proceedings. This inquiry purportedly submitted by the management to the National Industrial Relations Commission (NIRC) portrays an ex-parte decision against me. In this alleged inquiry, a fabricated letter dated March 15, 2016, was presented, asserting it was dispatched to me by TCS and REGISTRY. No substantive evidence or receipts have been produced by the management to substantiate this claim. The inclusion of a computer-generated fake online delivery report from TCS, lacking essential information, further exposes the petitioner’s false claims and the concealment of facts.
For more details on the inquiry proceedings, visit Inquiry Proceedings.
Legal Battles and Delays
Step-by-Step Legal Journey
- Show Cause Notice: On September 23, 2015, I received a show cause notice accusing me of misconduct. Despite submitting a detailed rebuttal, the inquiry process proceeded unfairly.
- Inquiry and Dismissal: The inquiry, marked by coercion and bias, concluded with my dismissal on July 11, 2016.
- Filing Petition with NIRC: Determined to seek justice, I filed a petition with the National Industrial Relations Commission (NIRC) on September 15, 2016.
- NIRC Ruling: On May 27, 2019, the NIRC ruled in my favor, ordering my reinstatement. The ruling highlighted the unjust and harsh nature of my dismissal.
For the complete NIRC order, visit NIRC Order.
Nestlé’s Appeals
When Nestlé filed a writ to suspend the NIRC trial court’s order to stop its operations, they obtained a stay. The High Court, however, ordered Nestlé to submit my salary to the NIRC during the appeal. Nestlé provided 15 salary checks. After their appeal was dismissed by the full bench of the NIRC, Nestlé filed another writ in the High Court against both the trial court and full bench orders. They got both orders suspended again. Currently, they use delaying tactics to prolong the case, spending substantial company resources. They mislead the court by giving various excuses and avoid setting a next hearing date.
For more details on the legal delays, see Nestlé Appeals Before Full Bench NIRC, Full Bench Lahore, and Delaying in High Court.
Continued Legal Struggles
Despite multiple favorable rulings, I remain unemployed as Nestlé uses delaying tactics to evade reinstatement and accountability.
Personal Impact
The unjust dismissal and prolonged legal struggles have severely impacted my financial stability and health. I was forced to sell my property to meet basic needs, and the stress has led to the development of diabetes and heart conditions. The ongoing battle has also affected my ability to provide for my family’s educational needs.
- Financial Hardship: The prolonged legal battle and unjust dismissal have severely impacted my financial stability. I have been unemployed for nearly eight years, leading to the sale of my property to meet basic needs.
- Health Problems: The stress and financial strain have exacerbated my health issues, including the development of diabetes and heart conditions. The ongoing legal struggles have also affected my ability to provide for my family’s educational needs.
For more details on my litigation, visit My Litigation.
Mismanagement at Nestlé Pakistan
Although Muhammad Hussain Bhatti was dismissed in 2015, local management continues to use his name to justify actions and deflect from their issues. Higher management is consistently told that Bhatti’s group is still active. Whenever local management’s negligence or mismanagement is highlighted, they deflect blame by associating the accuser with Bhatti’s group, thus hiding their own incompetence and wrongdoing.
Local management has been spending substantial company resources on legal battles and delaying tactics. They receive commissions from lawyers for dragging out cases. There is a lack of accountability, and higher management is easily misled by claims that anyone challenging the corruption is part of Bhatti’s group. I was Deputy General Secretary of the Workers Welfare Union, the opposing union to Bhatti’s group, during the incident, making it clear that I was not aligned with them.
For more on the internal corruption, see Mismanagement at Nestlé Pakistan.
Conclusion
Muhammad Asif Javed’s struggle against unjust dismissal is a testament to the systemic issues within Nestlé Pakistan. His story highlights the need for accountability and reform within the company’s operations. By shedding light on these injustices, this narrative seeks to inspire others to stand up for their rights and hold Nestlé accountable.
For more information on labor rights violations by Nestlé, refer to sources such as:
- Amnesty International – The Great Palm Oil Scandal
- Rainforest Action Network
- International Labor Rights Forum
- Business & Human Rights Resource Centre
This comprehensive account of Muhammad Asif Javed’s struggle against unjust dismissal by Nestlé serves as a powerful example of the need for accountability and reform within the company.
For more detailed information on Muhammad Asif Javed’s case, you can visit Nestlé Violations Against Labor Rights.
