You are here: UK Essays » Essays » International Studies » Global Labour Standards

Cookie Information

Privacy Information

Global Labour Standards

Enforcement of Global Labour Standards - Who is responsible and why?

Introduction

In the wake of extensive globalisation and emergence of several developing countries into the global arena, there is an unrelenting question as to the cost at which these countries are finding success. Considering that most developing countries are gaining a global foothold by their competitiveness arising from low wages and low standards of labour, they do bear several impacts both intrinsic and extrinsic. In this essay we will attempt to review who should be responsible for ‘enforcing' global labour an environment standards, why they should be doing it and if it should have a link with trade. However, before we do this, there are a few questions to be considered:

• What are the labour standards that need to be enforced?

• Should they be enforced? If yes, to what extent?

• Finally who is responsible for enforcing them?

The Core Labour Standards

Labour standards are regulations that preside over working conditions that range from human rights to minimum wages, health, welfare and so on. The ILO, out of over 180 conventions, has chosen few core labour standards.

Freedom of association and right to collective bargaining (conventions 87 & 98)

Abolition of forced or compulsory labour (conventions 29 and 105);

Minimum age and child labour (conventions 138 and 182);

Equal remuneration (convention 100);

Abolition of discrimination in employment and occupation (convention 111).

Should Labour Standards be ‘enforced'?

Countries of the North are more persistent that these standards be enforced as compared to those in the South. In the next section we will briefly go over the cases of the North and the South.

Arguments of the North

Advanced countries of the North have often complained that the South benefits from low wage and low labour standards and this is likely to cause a ‘race to the bottom' and thwart their bargaining power. In addition the South has also attracted many Northern based firms to shift production to the South resulting in loss of jobs in the former (Singh and Zammit, 2000:70-73). There is also strong emphasis laid on the core labour standards from a fundamental rights perspective, seeking to improve working and living conditions which eventually will aid development of the nation,(Norton et al in DFID, 2004:12). It aims at the reduction of poverty, elimination of discrimination, better bargaining capacity, abolition of child labour etc. There is also a strong drive to implement substantive labour standards in areas of healthcare, safety, physical assault, sexual harassment and so on (DFID, 2004:15). Also the North believes that the South can imbibe from their long experience with trade unions and other issues with labour standards. Sengenberger (2002:22) supports this in his argument that countries should dialogue and demonstrate the positive impacts of labour standards and elimination of misunderstandings and false perceptions.

Arguments of the South

Singh and Zammit (2000:50-59) argue that many developing countries are able to make a stance in the global market solely because of their ‘cheap labour'. Implementing core labour standards just might take away this edge and push them further into poverty especially the freedom of association and right to collective bargaining. Another factor to be considered is the lack of resources in the South. While the North enjoys a fairly easier access to capital, infrastructure and technology, the South still doesn't. This however gives the North an advantage bearing in mind that the bulk of the investment still revolves around the North. They reflect on the growth of countries like South Korea and Taiwan that initially repressed labour standards and then eventually began to implement them as compared to those of Latin America during the same period. This shows that labour standard needn't necessarily be linked to the development of a nation. Many developing countries tend to have dualist economies resulting in large majority of the workforce are not in a formal wage contract and it will be very difficult to apply labour standards to them

There are strong arguments on either side. However, a point worth considering is that; whilst the South maintains that it may be disadvantaged or may not find it feasible to implement core labour standards at the moment, there seems to be no argument that states they may not want to do it at all. O'Brien (2004:60-64) argues that the divide is not necessarily North versus South citing the case of the Congress of South African Trade Unions that supported a linkage between labour standards and wage.

Challenges to implementation of labour standards

In the previous section we saw that although it may be a good thing for developing countries to implement labour standards, they may not be an easy task. Conventions like freedom of association or right to collective bargaining may not be an option for many of these countries as it may take away their competitive edge. Though Sengenberger (2002:28) cites the example of the textile mills that invested in better working environments experienced increased productivity, the cost involved in setting up security measures, increases hesitancy amongst employers. Some neo-liberal paradigms of late claim that Child Labour, though deplorable, is considered an ‘unfortunate, yet inevitable and necessary part of the development process' (Lavalette and Cunningham, 2004:189). Abolition of child labour can worsen the situation rather than help it.

We can thus infer that all of the ILO's core labour standard may not be readily enforceable, at least not in its entirety. A lot will depend on the state, the economy and the labour standards they are trying to comply with.

Enforcing Labour Standards

ILO, WTO and Labour

In the first Ministerial Conference of the WTO in December 1996, Western European nations and the US pushed strongly for the WTO to enforce global labour standards whilst a ‘coalition of neo-liberal (UK, Australia and New Zealand), authoritarian(Indonesia) and anti-imperialistic states(India) strongly opposed it' (O'brien, 2004:61). O'brien then also reflects on the difference in opinion amongst trade unions where the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) and World Confederation of labour support the link but Indian trade unions opposed it. Though they acknowledged the necessity of labour standards they maintained that the WTO, IMF and the World Bank were more North centric. Therefore we can deduce that countries aren't against enforcement of labour standards eventually but are against the enforcement of labour standards by linking it to trade using an institution such as the WTO. ‘This is proposal is amongst the most controversial currently before the WTO' (www.wto.org).

Given that it is the ILO that set the core labour standards, it may seem that it will have to be them that enforce labour standards. Sengenberger (2002:7-8) argues that the ILO is restricted in its abilities and lacks the stature of an organisation like WTO. ILO does not have the sanctions to be able to take corrective or punitive steps towards member states that violate the core labour standards. This point can be argued using the case of Burma in 2000 where the ILO invoked article 33 which gives it authority to take actions against member states who do not comply (DFID, 2004:22).

‘The ILO's supervisory procedures amount to one of the best guarantees that you can have that international labour standards will be applied' (info.worldbank.org, 2000). This paper shows that member states have an obligation under article 22 to report measures and progress that have been taken towards the Conventions that they have ratified. These are then reviewed by the Committee of Experts on Applications and Recommendations. The findings of these reviews indicate serious issues or non compliance; the countries in question are then invited to explain the causes. Also suggested is a ‘country centred' approach rather than a ‘convention centred' approach which might bring about better results to reporting. Going ahead, the ILO may also consider alternative and innovative paradigm in the rapidly evolving work place to maybe re-design what translates into effective changes in the work place.

Conclusion

Having looked at the arguments of the North and South; if labour standards have to be enforced in the first place, the challenges the might arise in attempting to standardize industries across the globe, we can infer that the concept of labour standards being linked to trade sanctions will not be readily accepted and hence the WTO may not be the appropriate body to enforce labour standards. The member states have expressed solidarity in their support towards the ILO and have also reflected that they will take measures towards ‘decent work'. At this juncture, we may be able to inject that if labour standards are to be ‘enforced', the job is best left to the ILO. To achieve this; the ILO may require to be better empowered. It then may be irrelevant what methods the ILO chooses to enforce labour standards; even if it does affect trade sanctions it might be in cases of extreme severities which member states should then be accountable for. The member states must be more open to dialogue to benefit from the experience of the ILO and seek its assistance at every opportunity possible. The ILO may also consider re-structuring the core labour standards based on more recent paradigms to better suit the markets of today, but if it will ever happen; only time can tell.

References

Department for International Development (DFID), (2004) Issues: Labour Standards and Poverty Reduction, [Online], Available: http://www.dfid.gov.uk/pubs/files/labourstandardsJune04.pdf [31 Oct 2007]

International Labour Organisation (ILO), International Labour Standards by Subject,[Online], Available: http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/english/subjectE.htm#s01 [03 Nov 2007]

Lavalette, M. and Cunningham, S. (2004) ‘Globalisation and Child Labour': Protection, Liberation of Anti-Capitalism?' in Munck, R. (ed.) Labour and Globalisation: Results and Prospects, Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.

Norton, A., Conway, T and Foster, M (2001) in DFID (2004) Issues: Labour Standards and Poverty Reduction, [Online], Available: http://www.dfid.gov.uk/pubs/files/labourstandardsJune04.pdf [31 Oct 2007]

O'Brien, R. (2004) ‘Globalisation, Imperialism and the Labour Standards Debate' in Munck, R. (ed.) Labour and Globalisation: Results and Prospects, Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.

Sengenberger, W (2002) Economic Globalization and Social Progress - What can be Done to Promote International Labour Standards?, [Online], Available: http://www.uta.fi/laitokset/sospol/opetus/kokemuksia/Sengenberger.PDF [07 Nov 2007]

Singh, A. and Zammit, A. (2000) The Global Labour Standards Controversy: Critical Issues for Developing Countries, [Online], Available: http://www.southcentre.org/publications/labour/labour1.pdf [03 Nov 2007]

World Bank (2000): International labour standards: The challenges of the 21^st Century, [Online], Available: http://info.worldbank.org/etools/docs/library/76309/dc2002/proceedings/pdfpaper/module8ilo.pdf [07 Nov 2007]

World Trade Organisation (WTO), Trade and Labour Standards: Subject of intense debate, [Online], Available: http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/min99_e/english/about_e/18lab_e.htm [08 Nov 2007]

Sign up and be the first to receive our latest offers: