Cheap labour preferred
HE preamble to the recently concluded GATT agreement states that: " ...relations in the field of trade and economic endeavour should be conducted with a view to raising standards of living, ensuring full employment and a large and steadily growing volume of real income... (our emphasis)."
Of course, what happens in practice is quite another matter, and in no way does the above amount to the adoption of a "social clause", which is what sectors of the international trade union movement (and not just those in semi or late industrialising countries) have been arguing for in relation to all international trade agreements. Indeed, this latest declaration of intent does not even go so far as those of the past. For example, the 1948 Havana Charter, which laid the basis for GATT, included a far more specific defence of workers' rights in so far as it stated that " ...all countries have a common interest in the achievement and maintenance of fair labour standards [and] the improvement of wages and working conditions.." It was, however, never ratified. Nor has anything comparable been incorporated into international trade agreements since then. "..fair labour standards improvement in working conditions.."
### Question
By and large, for the international union bureaucracy the question is not whether GATT (or indeed the IMF and World Bank) should interfere in national policies- it accepts that it should — but whether minimum labour standards are (1) a legitimate element in international trade regulations and, (2) at least one guarantee that "fair" trade will ensue. This latter point is of particular concern since it involves a wholesale acceptance of the framework for the restructuring of the international economy which is in progress. A briefing paper produced last year by the International Textile, Garment and Leather Workers Federation (ITGLWF), on the
Calpag for a social clause, campaign for a social clause, goes so far as to welcome the liberalisation of world trade precisely because it will provide considerahle incentivec to de considerable incentives to countries to be more competitive. Their support for a social clause is based on the belief that minimum labour standards "will ensure that competitive pressures have a floor which all countries should be expected to respect", and further, that "by enabling unions to press for wage increases, [they] encourages employers to seek productivity improvements. [A social clause] would therefore help to ensure that demand and output [are increased for] the benefit of both employment and trade."
### Advocates
On that basis it is little wonder that the USA, for example, has been one of the strongest advocates of the social clause. At the Ministerial Meeting in 1986 which launched the Uruguay Round of GATT, it was the us representative, undoubtedly acting on pressure from the domestic union movement, who proposed that wor... kers' rights be included as a subject for negotiation. Since GATT operates by consensus, minimal opposition was sufficient to stall the proposal. However, following indications that the subject would be taken up at a later stage, in both 1987 and 1990 the US proposed at the GATT Council that a Working Group be established to consider "the relationship between international trade and respect for internationally recognised worker rights."
The us already operates such a scheme under its 1974 Trade Act. Its General System of Preferences (GSP) legislation provides "duty-free entry to eligible products from beneficiary developing countries"; but eligibility for GSP benefits depends, among other things, on whether a country "has taken or is taking steps to afford to workers in that country, including any designated zone in that country, internationally recognised worker rights."
The social clause proposed for GATT was the following: "The Contracting Parties gorep to take stens to encure the Parties agree to take steps to ensure the observance of the minimum labour standards specified by an Advisory Committee to be established by the GATT and the ILO."
Among the ILo Standards to be put forward were:
• freedom of association;
the right to bargain collectively; freedom from forced labour; protection from child labour; and
• non-discrimination on the basis of sex, race, religion, etc.
These are amongst the most widely ratified ILo Standards - principles which governments of all countries, regardless of their stage of economic development, should legitimately be expected to observe. The minimum rights which the us operates under its GSP are identical save that the last is excluded, while included is "acceptable conditions of work with regard to minimum wages, hours of work and occupational safety and health."
### Legitimacy
There can be little argument about the legitimacy, and necessity, of including (at least) minimum labour standards in international trade agreements. We do, after all, live in the real world. But this should not imply subjugation to the economic framework of those same agreements. This is the real problem which should be tackled by the international union movement.
One union which has raised this question is the left-wing Ceylon Mercantile, Industrial and General Workers' Union (CMU) of Sri Lanka. At the 19th
1. "Union pressure" will have been channeled through the national federation, the AFL-CIO, which since the end of World War Il has, often quite perniciously, acted as if it were the international union movement in totem and, further, an ambassedor for USA foreign policy. We can only hope that a number of the recent progressive developments within American unions will bring change in time.
14
International Viewpoint #258 July 1994
ROLAND
WOOD
Congress of the International Federation of Building and Wood Workers (IFBWW), the cmu submitted a resolution entitled "For a new democratic world socio-economic order", which was adopted unanimously. The resolution's concluding passage is a succinct hons concluding passage Is a succinct summary not only of an alternative framework for day-to-day struggle around minimum demands and standards, but also for an alternative future.
### Resolution
...the international trade union movement, in association with other democratic social forces, should address itself to the increasingly vital question of providing a way out for humanity from its present state of widespread poverty, unemployment and disease, with resulting social discontent and disorder, as manifested by the spread of organised crime, terrorism and armed conflict, as well as alcoholism and drug abuse, by bringing about the establishment of a 'new democratic world socio-economic order", in which the world's resources may be controlled and utilised on a democratic basis, to satisfy human and social needs and to guarantee all human rights, with proper protection of the environment, instead of these resources being appropriated and utilised for private profit."
Just fine words on paper? Given the long-standing predominance of classcollaboration as a way of life for much of the union bureaucracy,- such small victories should not be underestimated. Instead they must be built upon. *
2. See R Wood, Taming the new unions', International Viepoint, no. 249, getober 1993,
INDUST CEYLON MERCANTILE, DECI від 558, Quies
C-223
THE