RIYADH, 11 January 2004 — Lucent Technologies, which has produced Nobel Prize winners and has made major scientific advances, has been taken to court in Saudi Arabia and in the US for violating Saudi regulations in one case and not following Equal Employment Opportunities Commission (EOC) rules in the other.
The litigants include, among others, Vikraman Nannoo, an Indian national, who was fired when he protested some of Lucent’s policies. Earlier last year, National Group of Communications and Computers Ltd (NGC), a Saudi company, filed a civil lawsuit against Lucent Technologies. NGC currently operates as Silki La Silki Telecommunications Company.
Among the charges filed against Lucent Technologies were its departure from corporate governance rules and good business ethics, not obeying the laws of the Kingdom, disregarding the provisions of contracts signed with employees and depriving employees of their legitimate dues.
Speaking to Arab News, Nannoo said Lucent’s policies compelled some employees to leave; however, they had to resort to legal action to redress their grievances. He said he was eligible for an ESB amounting to SR128,370, but Lucent offered only SR78,820.
As a result, he filed a case in Riyadh on April 6 last year. “Eight months later,” Nannoo pointed out, “Lucent produced a draft for SR129,640 which was more I was due. I have not accepted this since I filed another claim for damages done to me during the period. The damages were: Taking the Iqama for sending me on exit-only visa while the labor case was pending, putting me in police custody by making false complaints, describing me as a criminal in front of other employees and not allowing me to accept employment with another company.”
Nannoo was also testing whether the Kingdom’s labor committee would support employees. Citing an example of discriminatory practices followed by Lucent, he said the company had a published policy that employees leaving the company due to shortage of work could pursue other employment opportunities in the Kingdom with companies that are not in competition with Lucent.
At the same time, there were instances in which the company allowed employees to work for its rivals, the litigant said, naming some of the employees.
An American employee of Lucent observed that some actions taken by local executives, if taken in the US, “would bring down the company with multimillion-dollar lawsuits. The Equal Employment Opportunities Commission rules and regulations and Foreign Corrupt Practice Act also bind all American companies doing business outside the US. Lucent Technologies is no exception to the rules.”
Asked to comment on the litigation, Abdul Rahman Al-Azzam, country leader at Lucent Technologies, told Arab News: “As a world-class company, Lucent’s labor policies and practices comply with labor laws in countries where Lucent operates. In fact, in most cases, Lucent’s practices are best-in-class or on a par with industry and regional benchmarks.”
Asked about Lucent’s shrinking presence in the Kingdom since its last multibillion-dollar contract, he said: “Lucent continues to play an active role in the Kingdom’s telecommunications market and values the good relationship we have established with each customer. We do not comment on speculations about our business dealings with our customers.”
