|
Editor's
Note
In
the present state of affairs on the issue of linkages, we have been
witnessing conflicting views and clashing interests. In the chaos and
turmoil we all still believe that there is a way out and agree to work
towards an equitable and sustainable world.
Providing
fuel to the debate, Hennes & Mauritz AB (H&M), the Sweden-based
garment retail giant with over 600 retail outlets in 12 European countries
has warned that it would withdraw imports from Indian manufacturers not
adhering to the code of conduct covering labour related issues. The code
covers issues such as wages to workers, working hours, health and safety,
compensation for overtime, environment and child labour. Around 900
suppliers, including Europeans, for whom H&M was buying garments, have
to comply with this code. The company said it would work proactively with
their suppliers and manufacturers association to improve conditions of
labour force. To enhance the reputation of the industry in this region,
manufacturers should either bring sub-contractors under the ambit of the
code or abolish the sub-contracting system.
The
exporters association of Tirupur, a textile city of India, at the same
time criticized H&M for making adverse comments on the
prevailing labour standards of Tirupur knit industry and the recently
signed long-term wage settlement. The association said that the capacity
of the industry to pay wage is directly related to the buying price and
has accused H&M for keeping the price as low as possible. It also said
that the regular suppliers had approached for a small revision in prices
and H&M sought to keep the prices at a lower level than last year.
What irked the body was H&M’s decision of discussing the issue among
accredited association of buyers and sellers. The association further
accused the buyer of rushing to the press without understanding the facts
of local situation and circumstances. H&M has around 15 suppliers in
Tirupur.
Looking
into the matter further we have to read between the lines and analyze the
reason behind these situations. Is it that in the course of development,
some of us forget that development incorporates ideas of improvement and
progress, including socio-cultural and economic dimensions, focussing on
relative distribution of scarce resources. If we aim at sustainable
development, it is crucially impacted by sustainable livelihood and for a
large number of workers, development boils down to finding a viable and
sustainable livelihood strategy.
The
fundamental challenge of out time is to ensure that no one is left behind.
There is an urgent need to bring both camps onto platforms within
themselves to understand each other's position better and address the
issues in an unbiased manner, thus resolving the conflict.
Pradeep
S. Mehta
Secretary General
______________________________________________________________
I
Global Programme on Linkages
1
Project
The preparatory work for the
project has been launched. While two dialogues have been organised at the
international level, one research project on child labour in India has
also been done. The event reports, research report (and a briefing paper):
“Eradicating Child Labour While Saving the Child” have been circulated
wide and far and have also been hosted on our website: www.cuts-india.org.
The three tools that will form the methodological aspects of the project
are research, advocacy and networking. The Research Matrices which spell
out the basic details of what are the issues and the questions, which need
to be answered, have been developed. The research will cover four major
issues, which are currently dominating the debate on trade and
environment:
-
MEAs,
trade and development;
-
DPGs,
shifting of dirty industries and waste trade;
-
Sustainable
production & consumption; and
-
Tariff
escalation & tariff peaks
-
Common
environment concerns between North and South, eg. The culling of
elephants in Africa and hunting of seals in Eskimo regions. It will
reflect into cultural practices and nature conservation. We request
for suggestions and ideas on the same.
On
trade and labour standards, the research will cover:
Research
is being undertaken to begin with on the below-mentioned to look into the
basic issues under trade and environment:
-
Primary
research will be taken up on child labour in South Asia in selected
sectors in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nepal, to study the
enforcement of laws, causes and conventions regarding child labour.
-
Research
on core labour standards to analyze and investigate its genesis, in
the context of political economy.
-
Research
on consumer behaviour taking up consumer boycotts such as rayon
shirts, readymade garments, tuna fish; and fair trade schemes and
codes of conduct such as Clean Clothes Campaign.
-
Research
on DPGs, technology transfer and toxic waste trade and the ‘push’
and ‘pull’ factors, analyzing the trends in development.
-
Tariff
escalation and peaks for leather, chocolate, cocoa, dairy products,
wheat and sugar, to analyze the relationship between tariff escalation
and peaks with development and environment issues.
-
Ecolabeling
schemes in three developed and developing countries, to analyze the
demand for sustainable consumption and production patterns in the
context of demand for ecofriendly production, trade and consumption.
2. Advisory Committee
An International Advisory Committee
of Economists and Social Scientists will guide the Research. The process
of setting up the Committee has already been launched. Many have agreed
while others are in the process. Those who have agreed are:
1.
Prof. Jagdish Bhagwati, Columbia University
2. Prof. Jasper Okelo, University
of Nairobi
3. Prof. Robert Stern, University
of Michigan
4. Prof. Manuel Agosin, Catholic
University Chile
5. Prof. Andre Sapir, ECARE,
Brussels
6. Prof. Arvind Panagaria,
University of Maryland
7. Dr. L. Alan Winters, University
of Sussex UK
8. Prof. Ravi Kanbur, Cornell
University
9. Prof. Kaushik Basu, Cornell
University
10. Mr. Stephen Woolcock, London
School of Economics
11. Ms. Diana Tussie, FLASCO
12. Dr. Victor Karunan, Save the
Children Fund UK.
13. Prof. Muchkund Dubey, Council
for Social Development, India
4.
Potential Partners
Many NGOs and research institutions
have been approached to join the campaign as dialogue partners, sponsors
and participants for the proposed roundtables and seminars, those who have
shown positive interest are:
1. MS, Denmark
2. Royal Institute for
International Affairs, UK
3. Sustainable Development Policy
Institute, Pakistan
4. World Vision International,
Australia
5. International Labour Rights
Fund, USA
6. South Centre, Switzerland
7. Uganda Consumer Protection
Association, Uganda
8. Consumer Information Network,
Kenya
9. National Council for Applied
Economic Research, India
10. Liberty Institute, India
11. UN Non Govt. Liaison Service,
New York & Geneva
12. Christian Council, Tanzania
13. Solagral, France
14. YLKI, Indonesia
15. ProPublic, Nepal
16. RAED, Egypt
17. ZEF, Germany
18. MISEREOR, Germany
19. WEED, Germany
20. MWENGO, Zimbabwe
21. SAWTEE, Nepal
22. Centre for Ecological
Economics, Thailand
Efforts
are being done to reach out to various organisations worldwide, which work
in the area of workers’ rights, environment protection and development.
Networking with local experts and resource persons including negotiators
and policy makers to speak on these issues at the appropriate forum, is
also on the anvil.
4.
Reflections
The project has received rich
responses from civil society organisations in the North and South. The
following are a few responses received from different organisations and
individuals.
a.
This very important subject is on our agenda
We at the International Labour
Rights Fund are very interested in your project. It remains for us to
finalize among our selves the extent to which we are able to cooperate
with your project this year. Please be assured this is very important
subject is on our agenda. I have just looked at the research matrix and
there are many issues of interest to us. (Bama Athreya, International
Labour Rights Funds, Washington DC)
b.
No third world country wants to make use of child labour
I am glad to learn about the
important project you have taken up. I especially liked your analogy of
the first world country citizens banning the purchase of goods
manufactures by using child labour but the rest of the world having to buy
goods from the US made by those whose neglect of children results in
making many of them social unfits at best or criminals at worst. But who
cares about them? No third world country wants to make use of child labour
only if they know how to solve such problems. We in India have passes any
number of laws banning child labour. But we are not in a position to stop
in given our poverty and other problems. (Bhamy Shenoy, Mysore Consumer
Council, India)
c.
Developing countries need trade to raise revenue to improve standards
Your concept paper reflects a
common sense approach to a problem which results from the lack of common
sense or logic, demonstrated in the action of some of the protesters in
Seattle. Their actions did not seem connected to their stated goals of for
example improving social standards in developing countries. These people
do not seem to understand that the developing countries need trade to
raise revenue to improve standards. Blocking the trade round does not
facilitate this.
This,
I suspect was a more real motive behind the action of some of the Trade
Union movements in Seattle although they would claim that their goal was
to improve the conditions of their compatriots in developing countries and
show solidarity. Solidarity would not be useful for their compatriots if
the factories in developing countries are closed down for want of access
to western markets because social standards become linked to trade.
With
regards to your proposed outputs, they seem realistic in that their nature
tends to result in something which is difficult to measure. I would
suggest that you also add to your proposed outputs a statement(s) for
ratification and acceptance by Governments throughout the world. (James
Candon, EuroCommerce, Brussels)
d.
Do more work sensitizing people that there is this debate and its
implications for it
We are working on a capacity
building on trade policy project and so your invitation to participate in
the programme would fit in very much. However, the challenge in this
region is to do more work sensitizing people that there is this debate and
its implications for it, before we can come out with positions. I think we
would be able to organize some seminar, which is a multi-stakeholder
seminar in Zimbabwe at least. We would therefore, try to get private
sector, farmers, trade unions and NGOs, and Government together to have a
discussion around it. It would be useful to know which other organizations
from Africa are participating in the linkages capacity building programme,
so that we can perhaps pool in resources with them. (Nancy Kachingwe,
MWENGO, Harare)
e.
A much more open attitude to these issues are needed
I do believe that much more
discussion, clarifications and consensus building is needed on the
relation between WTO and labour and environment. This is a need I believe
many groups both in the North and in the South feel. I believe a that a
much more open attitude to these issues are needed, really looking at the
concerns both from North and South. (Maud Johansson, Forumsyd, Stockholm)
f.
The key difficulty will be ensuring that everyone listens
My understanding is that the study
will aim to bring together those who are pushing for changes in WTO rules
to accommodate environment and labour objectives with those who are
concerned that integrating labour and environment into the WTO rules is a
little more than to cover protectionism. I think that your outline is
pretty comprehensive but the key difficulty will be ensuring that everyone
listens.
Labour
and other NGOs in the North will attack the WTO and trade system if it
makes no attempt to address their concerns. For environment it would be
helpful to have some empirical evidence of the impact of voluntary
labeling schemes on trade and competitiveness. (Stephen Woolcock,
London School of Economics, London)
II
News Round up
1.
WTO is not the appropriate forum for discussing Labour Standards:
Australia
Australia supports New Delhi's
position on the issue of labour standards and believes that the WTO is not
an appropriate forum for discussing labour standards.
This was conveyed by the
Australian Foreign Minister Mr. Alexander Downer, when he met Mr. Murasoli
Maran, the Indian Minister for Commerce and Industry in New Delhi.
During the meeting, Mr. Murasoli Maran reiterated that it was necessary to
build a consensus before launching a new round so as to avoid the
repetition at Seattle. (Business Line, March 25, 2000).
2.
ICFTU Congress Calls for permanent WTO Working Group on Labour Standards
At the 17th Conference of the
International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU), held at Durban,
South Africa during 3-7 April 2000, the delegates called for increased
cooperation between the WTO and the International Labour Organisation (ILO).
In its statement on international labour standards and trade, the ICFTU
called for the establishment of a permanent WTO working group on labour
standards and for the adoption of a social clause in WTO agreements. With
the exception of India and Singapore most of the developing country unions
affiliated to ICFTU backed this proposal.
The
theme of this year's ICFTU congress was 'globalising social justice in the
21st century'. While addressing the delegates, the Secretary General Bill
Jordan urged the trade unions to fight the social and economic problems
brought on by globalization. “Globalization is not working for the
common people, he regretted. (Source: Bridges Weekly, Trade News
Digest, April 12, 2000)
3.
ILO Sets Stage for Action against Myanmar
In an unprecedented move, the ILO
Governing Body has recommended that the ILO Conference in June 2000 to
“take such action as it may deem wise and expedient to secure
compliance” by Myanmar of its obligations under the forced labour
Convention 29. This is the first time that this extraordinary
constitutional procedure (under Article 33 of the ILO Constitution) has
been invoked. The above article is designed to use only in the event a
country fails to carry out the recommendations of an ILO Commission of
Inquiry-a procedure reserved for serious, continuing violations of
international labour standards. Myanmar has ignored repeated ruling by ILO
supervisory bodies to take legal and enforcement action to end child
labour. (Source: Child Labour News Service, May 15, 2000)
4.
India rules out change in labour laws for SEZs
India plans to set up new Special
Economic Zones (SEZs) in Gujarat and Tamil Nadu, which allows 100 per cent
foreign equity in all industries. In a recent interview, the Indian
Commerce and Industry Minister Mr. Murasoli Maran ruled out any
flexibility in labour laws or the existing system should not be altered.
The only modification in the existing labour laws being sought was to
consider units in the SEZs with 50 per cent export obligation as public
utility services. This would enable them to prevent "wildcat
strikes" and other unforeseen labour problems. This is in national
interest as these units will be fulfilling international obligations in
the exports sector. (Source: The Hindu, April 1, 2000)
5.
Children of working mothers ‘held back’
An extensive survey on child
development of 4000 American children, suggests that the children’s
educational achievement can be significantly held back if their mothers
work. The findings will fuel the debate about balance between parent’s
careers and family responsibilities. In a paper published by National
Bureau of Economic Research, Christopher Ruhm, says 3 and 4 year-olds tend
to have lower verbal ability if their mothers worked during the child’s
first year. 5 and 6 year-olds tend to have worse reading and maths skills
if their mothers worked during any of the child’s first three years. The
conclusion of the study was that the parents should be given better rights
to parental leave, or helped with other family-friendly employment
policies that allow them to spend more time at home. (Source: Financial
Times, May 16, 2000)
6.
Clinton supports open and equitable international economic structure
Mr. Bill Clinton, agreed on a broad
vision statement with India, and stated that “We will work together to
preserve stability and growth in the global economy and will join in an
unrelenting battle against poverty in the world, so that the promise of a
new economy is felt everywhere and no nation is left behind. Opening trade
and resisting protectionism are the best means for meeting it. We support
an open, equitable and transparent rule-based multilateral trading system
and will work together to strengthen it. Developed countries should
embrace policies that offer developing countries the opportunities to
grow, because growth is the key to rising incomes and rising standards. (Source:
Business Line, March 21, 2000)
7.
Culling of Magpies in Britain
An urban gamekeeper keeps his south
London suburb free of magpies by catching them in a humane trap, using a
live magpie as a lure and dispatching them with an air pistol. Last autumn
he caught 30 magpies and believes this culling allows smaller birds to
breed in peace. Gamekeepers make no secret of their dislike of all members
of the corvid family, not only magpies but also jays and crows. Recently
they organised a countrywide shoot of them and other predators, ahead of
the breeding season. But are they right to target these birds? The Royal
Society for Protection of birds says, although some do eat smaller birds
and have their eggs, it is claimed they have no effect on bird populations
because their prey would die anyway of other cause like cold or damp. (Source:
Financial Times, May 06, 2000)
8.
Brazil assails US on ‘dolphin-safe’ label
Brazil expressed concern in the WTO
about a US proposal that could lead to an official mark for labeling tuna
products as ‘dolphin safe’. Brazil said ecolabeling schemes should be
discussed and analyzed in the WTO committee on Technical Barriers to Trade
as they can represent an important precedent to like initiatives in this
area which could be prejudicial to developing countries. The US notified
the WTO of a January proposal from the Commerce Department’s National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to implement provisions of the
International Dolphin Conservation Program Act. The measure requires US
commerce secretary to develop an official mark that would allow consumers
to distinguish dolphin-safe tuna products from products that are not
certified as dolphin-safe. (Source: International Trade Reporter, March
02, 2000)
III
Viewpoints
1.
Social Clause and International Solidarity
By David Bacon
"But
even assuming that negotiating a social clause is a good idea, in the
context of trade negotiations first of all it requires that labor agree on
a common agenda. The social clause the AFL-CIO proposes reflects the
institutional needs of unions in a wealthy, industrial country". This
is an abridged version of the article "Will a Social Clause in Trade
Agreements Advance International Solidarity?".
The
AFL-CIO is proposing a way of dealing with trade with which a number of
unions disagree. It proposes a social clause, which would
incorporate into future trade agreements core labour standards, including
prohibitions against child labor and prison labour, against
discrimination, and against violations of the right of workers to organize
unions and bargain. The WTO enforcement process, now used to protect
the ability of transnational corporations to move investments and
production freely across borders, could then be used to protect workers'
rights as well, the labor federation argues.
But
many unions, including leftwing ones in Europe and Canada, have serious
questions about the proposal for a social clause. Some equate it
with proposals in Europe to make a social contract between labor and
capital part of the process of creating a single European economy. The
social contract has tended to be a proposal of Europe's more conservative
unions.
Social
democrats are now in power in Britain, France, Germany and Italy. But all
these social democratic governments argue that for Europe to make it in
the world economy, productivity has to be increased, and social needs and
benefits brought into line. That often brings the governing parties
into basic conflict with the working-class base, which has brought them to
power. The conflict is not so different from that which has taken
shape in the U.S. between labor and the Clinton administration. The flaw
in the social democratic argument is that its assumption and purpose is
wrong.
But
even assuming that negotiating a social clause is a good idea, in the
context of trade negotiations first of all it requires that labor agree on
a common agenda. The social clause the AFL-CIO proposes reflects the
institutional needs of unions in a wealthy, industrial country.
Unions and labor in other countries see other needs as well, especially
the need for economic development. Parents of farm worker families
in the Philippines and Mexico, for instance, overwhelmingly agree they
would prefer that their kids had the opportunity to go to school rather
than work. But simply prohibiting child labor doesn't provide that
opportunity. It just cuts the income the family depends on to
survive.
Labor
federations in developing countries propose a large variety of programs
for economic development. Those kinds of development programs are the
antithesis of the economic framework the WTO enforces. Unless the
international trade structure is changed drastically, these national
development alternatives will not be possible. Our definition of what the
social clause should cover is narrow, reminiscent of the land reform
proposals of the AFL-CIO in El Salvador during the civil war, or of the
Sullivan Principles in South Africa. While labor rights are important,
there's a bigger struggle going on over who controls the economies of
developing countries, and what the development program is.
U.S.
unions need to negotiate a common agenda with labor in developing
countries, and recognize and respect differences of perspective and
opinion. Saying, for instance, that the All China Confederation of
Trade Unions is not a legitimate union body because it doesn't agree with
the AFL-CIO's trade agenda is a form of national chauvinism, and smacks of
the old cold war prohibitions and destabilization.
The
big problem in the new (or old) international economic order is the
difference in the standard of living between wealthy and poor countries.
The difference between Mexico and the U.S., which was about 3:1 in the
1950s, is about 16:1 today. That difference is the cause of the loss
of U.S. jobs as corporations relocate production. So long as this
huge gulf exists, U.S. workers will continue to have that problem, social
clause or no.
An
alternative program for international labor solidarity could be based on a
much broader set of ideas. They might include:
-
Negotiate
an agenda (including the terms of social clauses), based on mutual
respect and self- interest, with the unions and workers of all
countries.
-
Oppose
the negotiation of new trade agreements, and demand the restructuring
of the international economic order.
-
Make
international policy dealing with the difference in standards of
living from country to country a primary objective of AFL-CIO policy,
reexamining the role U.S. economic, political and military policy
plays in reinforcing that difference.
-
Make
independence from U.S. foreign policy a matter of principle, including
ending subsidies for AFL-CIO programs from USAID, NED or other
government institutions. The AFL-CIO should be unafraid to
publicly criticize imperial policies like the US counterinsurgency
program in Columbia, economic and military sanctions in Iraq and
Serbia, and the economic blockade of Cuba.
-
Respect
differences in cultural and social norms, including different social
systems. Some countries believe in the rehabilitation of
prisoners through work, for instance, (a principle supported in the
past by reformers in the U.S. as well), while recognizing that workers
don't want to have to compete against the products of unpaid labor.
-
Prohibitions
against some forms of labor, such as child labor, also need to include
alternatives, which will actually increase the incomes of the families
affected, so that they can survive without the earnings of children.
-
Support
an independent system for the enforcement of labor standards- not the
WTO system, which should be opposed on principle.
-
International
labor standards should include those, which affect people in the U.S.
and developed countries, as well as developing countries. U.S.
working people, for instance, need a prohibition on strikebreaking,
living wages, the right to free health care, the elimination of
mandatory overtime, an end to welfare reform, and protection for the
rights of immigrants.(Source: Charles Brown, CharlesB@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us)
2. Campaign for Labour
Standards will prolong poverty
By Bernard Wasow
Strengthening
International labour standards seems to be a cause worth fighting for. It
was one of the issues that environmental and labour activists close to
dramatize in the streets of Seattle and Washington. But have the
anti-globalisation forces got their target right? What many of them framed
as a struggle between capital and labour looks suspiciously like a
conflict between the rich north and the poor south.
To
be sure, the Clinton administration has expressed sympathy for those who
demand higher international labour standards. But such activism has been
greeted with fierce opposition from governments in developing countries.
Their reaction highlights the crux of the debate.
Others
however claim that these governments are pursuing a perfectly legitimate
policy: they fear that higher standards will simply become an excuse to
deny their exports access to rich world markets. Under this perspective,
labour rights campaigns only serve the interests of workers in rich
countries that fear competition from cheap foreign labour.
But
under a long-term perspective, profit distribution between capital and
labour is far less important. If one were to examine the development of
average wages in any member of the Organization for Economic Co-operation
and Development over the past 50 years, one could do so without having to
refer to changes in labour’s share of the income pie. Changes in total
income and productivity are much more important than changes in income
distribution between capital and labour.
Every
attempt to strengthen labour-that is shifting profits towards
labour-carries the risk that it will discourage new investment and lead to
the closure of existing plants. These risks should be assessed on the
scene by those who bear them, not by people half a world away. Perhaps
governments in developing countries are right: there is little to be
gained in the long run by strengthening global labour standards. If such
standards reduce the rate of investment in poor countries, they may
undermine rather than speed the growth of incomes among the world's poor.
This
is not to repudiate all labour standards. It is beyond doubt that there
should be a ban on products of prison labour, slavery, torture,
involuntary unemployment and discrimination by ethnicity or sex should be
banned. And the right to organise and bargain collectively must be
respected. Wages in Bangladesh are persistently low, not because labour
laws are weak or because workers lack unions.
The
poor of the world need opportunities. They take jobs that look miserable
to us because otherwise their lives would be even worse. Do we have better
jobs to offer them? Perhaps we should think twice before we promote laws
that eliminate better jobs. It is perfectly legitimate to wish for minimum
labour rights for everyone. But those that want to impose rich-world
standards on developing-world societies are clearly misguided. There
“moral crusade” will not help the poor of this world. (Source:
Financial Times, May 06, 2000)
IV
Announcements
1.
CUTS Panel Discussion: Labour Linkage from the Viewpoint of Trade
Sanctions, Geneva, June 29, 2000
A panel discussion on “Labour
Linkage from the Viewpoint of Trade Sanctions” will be organized on June
29, 2000 on the side lines of World Social Summit for Development-5, being
held in Geneva from June 26-30, on June 29, 2000.
2.
Roundtable on Linkages between Trade and Labour Standards, New Delhi,
July, 2000
A roundtable will be organized on
the linkages issue, with Prof. Jagdish Bhagwati as the lead speaker, in
New Delhi in the month of July.
3.
Seminar on Linkages between Trade and Environment, New Delhi, October 12,
2000
A seminar will be held in New Delhi
on the issues related to linking trade with environment, on October 12,
2000 |
