|
There is no issue which inspires more intense debate among World Trade
Organization member governments than the issue of trade and core
labour standards.
Labour
standards are not subject to any WTO rules or disciplines at present,
and while the issue continues to be a deeply important one for some
developed country governments, it seems unlikely that the issue will
be taken up in any official way at the Doha Ministerial Conference.
Advocates
for including labour standards on the WTO’s agenda of future work
maintain rights including the freedom to bargain collectively, freedom
of association, elimination of discrimination in the workplace and the
elimination of workplace abuse (including forced labour and certain
types of child labour) are matters which should be considered in the
WTO. In the past, member governments have suggested that a WTO working
party be established to examine the link between trade and core labour
standards. Other member governments have suggested that a working
group involving a number of international organizations be established
to examine the social issues that are affected by globalization.
But
developing countries have another view. Member governments from the
developing world believe attempts to introduce this issue into the WTO
represent a thinly veiled form of protectionism which is designed to
undermine the comparative advantage of lower-wage developing
countries. Officials from these countries say that workplace
conditions will improve through economic growth and development, which
would be hindered should rich countries apply trade sanctions to their
exports for reasons relating to labour standards. Application of such
sanctions, they say, would perpetuate poverty and delay developmental
efforts including those aimed at improving conditions in the
workplace.
The
issue of trade and labour standards has been with the WTO since its
birth. In April 1994, when trade ministers gathered in Marrakesh to
sign the treaty that formed the WTO, nearly all ministers expressed a
view on this issue. The Chairman of that conference concluded that
there was no consensus among member governments at the time, and thus
no basis for agreement on the issue. The Marrakesh agreement itself
states in the preamble that “relations in the field of trade and
economic endeavour should be conducted with a view to raising
standards of living (and) ensuring full employment …”. In
addition, Article XX of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
1994, states that governments may restrict imports “relating to the
products of prison labour.”
At
the First WTO Ministerial Conference in Singapore in December 1996,
the issue was taken up and addressed in the Ministerial Declaration.
Ministers stated:
“We
renew our commitment to the observance of internationally recognized
core labour standards. The International Labour Organization (ILO)
is the competent body to set and deal with these standards, and we
affirm our support for its work in promoting them. We believe that
economic growth and development fostered by increased trade and
further trade liberalization contribute to the promotion of these
standards. We reject the use of labour standards for protectionist
purposes, and agree that the comparative advantage of countries,
particularly low-wage developing countries, must in no way be put
into question. In this regard, we note that the WTO and ILO
secretariats will continue their existing collaboration.”
Existing
collaboration between the WTO and ILO secretariats includes
participation by the WTO in meetings of ILO bodies, the exchange of
documentation and informal cooperation between the two secretariats.
Director-General Mike Moore meets regularly with ILO Director-General
Juan Somavia.
At
the 3rd Ministerial Meeting in Seattle in December 1999, the issue of
core labour standards was perhaps the most divisive issue on the
agenda. In the run-up to the meeting, both the United States and the
European Union put forward proposals for addressing the issue of
labour standards inside the WTO. Although, officials from both members
said they did not envision the use of trade sanctions in the context
of the labour standards issue, both proposals were fiercely opposed by
developing country governments.
At
the conference itself, the US, EU and other developed country
governments fought to get the issue addressed in a working group and
succeeded. Debate in that group was intense and there was strong
disagreement among members. On his way to the conference, Former-US
President Bill Clinton, told a Seattle newspaper that he believed that
trade sanctions might one day be used in retaliation for labour-standard
violations. When the story appeared the next day, the impact on the
conference was substantial. Developing-country delegates hardened
their resolve and although there was serious debate on how the issue
may be discussed inside an international framework, consensus on any
role for the WTO on the question of labour standards was not attained.
Since
the Seattle Ministerial Conference, governments from around the world
have turned their attention to the ILO as the forum for addressing
this question. During the June 2001 meeting of the ILO governing body,
the Working Party on the Social Dimension of Globalization reached
several agreements on how it might proceed with its work. It was
agreed informally that the technical capabilities of the Working Party
needed to be addressed and that issues for further discussion needed
to be decided in advance. There was general agreement that trade
liberalization and employment and investment, with special emphasis on
poverty reduction, should be issues taken up by the Working Party.
There
was also general agreement that a permanent forum for exchange of
views should be established. High-level meetings could be arranged on
an ad hoc basis. Members agreed generally as well that the ILO
contribution to the international policy framework on the question of
globalization needed to be enhanced and that a report on the social
dimension of globalization could be written. Views differed on the
issues that such a report may cover.
There
was further the idea that a global commission of eminent personalities
could be formed to examine the social aspects of globalization, but no
agreement was reached on this point, though there was consensus that
it was an idea worth pursuing in the future.
Among
the ideas discussed was that the report on globalization could be
written by this commission and that the commission could be launched
under the aegis of the United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan.
Additionally, there was discussion that the commission might be
serviced by a secretariat, under ILO organization, that may include
representatives from the secretariats of other interested
organizations. Final decisions on all of these elements will be taken
by the ILO’s governing body which meets in November 2001.
The
actions taken in June 2001 follow on from the ILO’s 1998 adoption of
the Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and it’s
Follow-up. This declaration states that ILO member governments endorse
some basic principles included in ILO core conventions. (These
conventions are the fundamental workplace rights and include: freedom
of association and recognition of the right to collective bargaining;
elimination of all forms of forced labour; the effective abolition of
child labour and the elimination of discrimination in hiring and
employment practices.)
ILO
members agreed to respect and promote these core conventions even if
they have not ratified all of them. The ILO issues annual reports in
which ILO officials obtain information from governments which have not
ratified all conventions on any changes that may have taken place in
national laws or regulations which may impact on these fundamental
labour rights.
In
1999, ILO member governments also agreed to prohibit and eliminate the
worst forms of child labour. These practices were defined as all forms
of slavery, child prostitution and pornography, the use of children to
traffic in drugs and work which is likely to harm the health, safety
or morals of children. ILO member governments said they recognized
that child labour is largely a function of poverty and that the
long-term solution to the elimination of exploitative and harmful
child labour is through sustained economic growth.
|
