77th year, number 1999/1

77th year, number 1999/1
http://www.cmt-wcl.org/en/pubs/labor99-1.html
info@cmt-wcl.org

Editorial Top

Global economy: a change in the outward appearance rather than fundamentals?

How curious! The worlds of business and finance are now feeling the need for a more "human face" to globalisation. All of a sudden, a handful of powerful men meeting in Davos realized the obvious —something that, a few time ago, was looked upon as outdated. Is it the dawning of a new age, as we heard and read after the private (private, but concerning us all) meeting of these men, or is it a mere cosmetic operation mounted for pulling the wool on the world’s eyes?

Financiers needed to be threatened by a panic coming from Asia. But at the light of the "new" positions, while some patterns of the world economy are being questioned, the core logic of the system remains the same. Economics is still predominant over politics, and the market over the social issues. Even though provided for by men and women for real, work remains a mere statistical "production cost".

The need for an opposition

77th year, number 1999/1
http://www.cmt-wcl.org/en/pubs/labor99-1.html
info@cmt-wcl.org

Enterprises: new approach of human rights Top

A new trend is on stage: to question enterprises on their practices regarding Human Rights. Representatives of international institutions are waving the flag for these initiatives. Even the NGOs such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are venturing themselves on this field, which is relatively new for them. Enterprises say to be concerned. Will trade unions find allies or contenders in this raise?

Enterprises have always financed social and humanitarian initiatives for human rights. However, a link had never established between the support given to those defending these rights and the possible practices carried out by some companies infringing them. Some of these companies do not hesitate about investing or subcontracting in countries which have not ratified the ILO conventions on child or forced labour, for instance. There are even companies having dismissed democrat employees who had had problems with the civil authorities.¹

Nevertheless, a new trend has recently appeared on stage. Now the direct consequences of an enterprise’s practices, its production facilities and its decision to invest in any country are questioned. Important international personalities and the NGOs defending human rights, which now join trade unions in this struggle, carry out the questioning.

Progress and ambiguity

In January, Kofi Annan, UN Secretary General, asked entrepreneurs gathered in Davos (Switzerland) to promote the respect for human rights: «Do not wait until each country passes legislation protecting freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining. You can at least make sure your and your subcontractors’ employees enjoy these rights. You can at least make sure you are not setting the stage for child or forced labour. You can make sure, through your recruiting and dismissal policies, that you’re not fostering racial, ideological, sexual or ethnic discrimination». Even more: «You can guarantee that your company respects human rights». The discourse is new and directed towards the enterprises used to hide themselves under the fragility of national legislation so as to justify the infringement of international rules.

Mary Robinson, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, holds a similar discourse. Its objective is to sensitize enterprises, individually: «each company is responsible for understanding and implementing the Universal Declaration in its internal and external activities.» (Le Soir, Brussels, February 3rd, 1999). Although interesting, both discourses are marked by a certain degree of ambiguity. Mary Robinson firmly believes in the entrepreneurs’ ethics, without placing emphasis on the duty factor. She talks about «power and, therefore, responsibility» but not about duties or accounting for their actions. In this sense, Kofi Annan does not question globalisation or the leadership of the companies’ managers, but asks them: «to make the right choice to protect global economy in the XXI century». Likewise, he considers that «to establish restrictive measures in trade and investment is not the best path to be taken». Therefore, everything would depend on the good will of the powers. Besides, such appeals to individual responsibility do not question human rights subordination before trade interests, as in the Chinese case.

Obligation through denunciation

Great human rights organizations have started worrying about the issue of enterprises and their attitude towards these rights. Human Rights Watch, dealing with this problem, does not want to intervene in the field of economic policy, whether it be micro (enterprises) or macro (the State). On the contrary, the organization considers that, regardless the kind of policy, a minimum of rights must be respected: the four fundamental rights defined by the ILO conventions and its 1998’s Declaration (banning of child and forced labour as well as discrimination, and the promotion of freedom of association and the collective bargaining) and the other rights and freedoms granted by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This is the reason why Human Rights Watch published two reports on the situation of the women working in the Mexican maquilas, and not, as it could be believed, because of a possible disagreement with the industrial model proposed. So far, the American organization has focused its attention mainly on mining and oil industries, particularly deemed to be the States’ accessories.

In this sense, Amnesty International’s progress has not been very significant. This organization is carrying out a pilot test in Myanmar (Burma), where enterprises’ implication is flagrant. However, a more systematic inclusion of non governmental actors among the targets of the organization still requires a time-consuming reflection, and trying to establish conclusions at this point would be premature. The organization’s report of 1998 is prudent and highlights the responsibility of companies such as Shell, which should lobby for the respect for human rights in the countries they invest, just as they do it when they want these countries’ governments to reduce the taxes they have to pay. «Nevertheless, once the rules for the States have been made clear, which would be the pertinent rules applying to multinationals?» wonders an Amnesty International representative (quoted by IPS agency).

In fact, if human rights texts are interpreted literally, the conclusion will be that such documents are subscribed by certain States and therefore, they are valid only for the signatory countries. Does this restrictive vision correspond to an era in which all the «international community» is concerned about the human rights respect? Enterprises do not openly acknowledge this fact. Shell, questioned by Human Rights Watch in 1995, answered that «the debate on human rights in Nigeria belongs to a political sphere where we are not enabled nor empowered to intervene». On the contrary, in 1997, this company stated «having, in some cases, held private talks with the authorities» and in some other cases, having taken public positions. In this sense, Mobil was clearer: «as a national enterprise, we hold talks with the government, but in general these talks are kept private». This evolution is not spontaneous: it is in fact the result of pressures and public reports by human rights organizations.

Indivisibility

Another target: Amnesty International did not hesitate, few time ago, about questioning intergovernmental organizations, particularly, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, given the negative effects of the structural adjustment programs on the human rights respect. In fact, the traditional discourse draws a line among the judicial, social and economic fields. Nevertheless, human rights are indivisible. Richard Dicker, previously quoted, stated before the European Parliament that: «The rights established in the International Pact on economic, social and cultural rights are a core element of human rights protection».

But without going any further, and only taking into account the civil and political rights, including freedom of association and no discrimination, enterprises have seen themselves increasingly forced to account for their actions. Some other rights are added to this group by Human Rights Watch, such as the rights of people displaced due to specific activities such as deforestation and shrimp aquaculture.

Other NGOs, as well as consumer associations, are also concerned about problems such as child work and low wages, among others. Their actions have negatively affected the image of some great companies which answered back to this initiatives with the elaboration of codes of behavior they commit themselves to respect.

Trade unions : allies or contenders?

The more the concern about workers’ rights is disseminated, the more the public opinion will be sensitized, and therefore, favorable results will be more likely to be obtained. Trade unions’ scope of action is limited, but it can be widened through the collaboration of other actors. Nevertheless, their timely intervention is essential. The NGOs dedicated to the development and defense of human rights, as well as consumers associations, risk easily accepting enterprises’ codes of behavior and unilateral agreements, which substitute employers/workers negotiations and compelling mechanisms. Such NGOs and the multinationals sometimes considering them as experts, risk focusing their attention on their image and feel satisfied, in detriment of an effective change, given the fact they benefit from funds coming from enterprises, just as Human Rights Watch does. Public opinion, moved by realities affecting them directly (namely child work), is completely indifferent to less emotional causes such as freedom of association.

Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the other NGOs are very competent in their day-to-day issues: political violence and civil freedoms... Workers’ rights are a new and complex element, for the control and sanction mechanisms which apply to the States are useless in the human rights field.

On the contrary, trade unions are the top experts in labour legislation. It goes without saying that their representativeness is not the same everywhere, and sometimes they are not very well perceived by public opinion. Nevertheless, they are in close contact with reality, they are integrated by workers, not researchers, and they master, since long time ago, the context and shades of the ILO conventions, labour legislation, the functioning of the International Labor Office and the way to entice enterprises to respect them. For trade union organizations, human rights organizations must, if they want to be effective, improve their competence and bear this expertise in mind.

Visit the web site http://www.corpwatch.com.

77th year, number 1999/1
http://www.cmt-wcl.org/en/pubs/labor99-1.html
info@cmt-wcl.org

From Indian gas to Nigerian oil Top

In January 1999, Human Rights Watch (HRW) published a 166-page report untitled «The Enron Corporation: Corporate Complicity in Human Rights Violation». Enron is an American giant in the energy field, which planned, in cooperation with the Indian government, to install an electric plant, the Dhabol Power Corporation, in Maharashtra. This project, regarded as cost-ineffective by the World Bank, immediately raised the inhabitants’ opposition, who feared an increase of electricity prices, the pollution of their fishing areas and the loss of water and land resources allocated to the plant.

However, this is not what Human Rights Watch claims in its report. This organization limited its scope to the human rights field and states that all the opposition demonstrations against the project were violently mitigated, an action which goes against people’s integrity and their freedoms of speech and assembly. What is worst: the report blames Enron for having paid the local policy for the mitigation of opposition movements. Industries operating in dictatorial countries can allege at some point that they favor local economy, and therefore, contribute to the respect for human rights. However, in this case we are dealing with a relatively democratic country, where infringements of these rights have increased in the region concerned.

Human Rights Watch informs about specific cases of violence and concludes that the enterprise is accessory to these infringements, that it fostered them and directly benefited from them. Enron replies that local authorities did not register violent demonstrations, and retakes the discourse of the US ex Ambassador to India, subsequently appointed to the directive board of Enron Oil and Gas. According to HRW, this was precisely due to the pressure exerted by the enterprise.

The price of oil

The responsibilities of the enterprises mentioned in another report (1) by Human Rights Watch are alike.

In this case, the organization talks about the oil companies Shell, Chevron, Elf, Mobil and Agip, which operate in the delta of the Niger River, and which are now in the hot seat. This region produces most of the oil exported by Nigeria, but its inhabitants feel despoiled: not only is the region polluted, but also the only beneficiary of the oil exploitation is the central government.

Within its logic, Human Rights Watch does not dwell upon the issue of oil exploitation advantages for that region, but questions the fact that the companies concerned contribute or do not stand against the infringement of human rights by Nigerian police forces. This organization confirms, on the one side, the enormous benefits received and, on the other, the handling of equipment belonging to these companies (namely helicopters) in order to carry out the repression movements denounced in the report. As an answer to this statement, companies say that their investments are carried out in joint venture with the State, who therefore is coproprietary of the equipment. For local communities, enterprises and the State are so closely related that they become one and the same actor.

In this case, companies do not contest the facts, but state that they have some influence on the human rights policy in the countries they operate. Nevertheless, as stated in the precedent article, these companies’ attitude has changed through the time. Human Rights Watch acknowledges their private and public initiatives and considers that they are responsible, up to a certain point, for the injustices carried out. The last sentence of the report can be applied to all countries: «Enterprises must avoid being accessories and benefiting from the infringement of human rights». And this is the case, for production is no longer possible without the use of power against contenders.

(1) The Price of Oil. Corporate responsibility and Human Rights Violation in Nigeria’s Oil Producing Communities, 202 p., 1999.

77th year, number 1999/1
http://www.cmt-wcl.org/en/pubs/labor99-1.html
info@cmt-wcl.org

Interview with Michel Hansenne Top

Since March of this year, the International labour Organisation has had a new Director-General: Mr. Juan Somavía, a Chilean, whom Belgian Michel Hansenne handed over to. The opportunity is perfect for drawing a balance on the challenge of employment at global level in 1999.

Michel Hansenne:"The ILO has been able to adapt"

Labor: Mr. Hansenne, after ten years as Director-General of the ILO, you are now handing over. Do you see an evolution of the employment issue during these ten years? Do you think the challenge is posed the same way as a decade ago?

Michel Hansenne: Employment in a country is always the result of the country’s economic good shape. But the economy has changed a lot over the last ten years, and for the first time in history, we can talk about a genuine global economy, for two main reasons: on the one hand, the whole world, except Cuba, has adopted market economy as a model; on the other, the market economy has got more globalised as commercial and financial exchanges have increased. As a result, employment and the possibility to create jobs depend more and more on each country’s ability of integration into the globalised economy, and on the global economy’s ability to remain under control so as not to spoil employment.

L. What is the concrete result?

M.H. As a matter of fact there are major contrasts since some countries have experienced a successful global integration, while others are still struggling. Paradoxically, the world has progressed a lot thanks to the economic growth, but it has also become larger: more people live better than in the past, but inequities are growing among and within countries. And this is the first challenge: how to avoid or reduce the inequities and perils of cleavages?

A second problem refers to the kind of jobs created through globalisation. New technologies have mainly three effects: heterogeneous statutes (part-time jobs, fixed-time contracts, variety of contracts, etc.), growing inequities, as I mentioned earlier, even in the industrialised countries, and a more and more pressing demand for higher skills, resulting in longer unemployment periods for unskilled workers.

L. What has been done for an appropriate response by the International Labor Organisation (ILO) to such panorama?

M.H. We have stepped up three complementary approaches. First, we have tried to allow our members to integrate into the new reality, to take a maximum of profit out of it and to be able to face it. This is what I have called the active partnership policy. When a country gets integrated into the global economy, it must establish a set of tools and equipment and be able to devise its own, appropriate strategies and policies. To this end we have decentralised as much as possible the ILO activities and created multidisciplinary teams to work in the field.

A second approach comes from a question: do we have an adequate control of the economic globalisation? Globalisation and an increased competition among countries may eventually have negative effects on the respect for workers’ rights. This is why we have striven after an agreement on a series of fundamental rules of the social game in a globalised economy. The setting was not an easy one: the ILO action on the matter could be deemed as a mere ersatz, or, on the contrary, as a threat to social clauses. In 1998, we reached at last an agreement on the existence of minimal, universal rules to be observed by all the actors pursuant to their ILO membership, no matter the level of development. The resulting Declaration is most meaningful since it enshrines the freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining as the way to trigger a prospect of more social justice in each and every country.

We also established a follow-up system so as to allow the international community to identify the realities, to see where the hurdles occur and to provide those still struggling with a technical co-operation. The Declaration highlights that the aim is rather to help than to punish. But in order to help, one has to see first. And in a globalised market, the image of a country in relation to its partners is vital.

The third element is aimed to establish partner relations with the G-8 and the Bretton Woods Institutions.

M.H. I’m handing over with the conviction that the ILO is playing the role anyone would expect: to promote social justice in a setting which is far different from the past. In the mid 1990s, some people questioned the ILO’s raison d’être, as an old-fashioned, useless organisation. To these critics I say that the ILO members are more numerous than ever. All the members pay their dues and even a country as reluctant with regard to the ILO as the United States, has now decided to grant additional resources, particularly for the implementation of the Declaration.

M.H. We have assumed the necessary changes so the organisation is relevant in today’s world. Actually the current ILO is not the same as ten years ago, because the world is not the same, neither. We have given the ILO the appropriate tools to become an organisation which the international community can and must account for. The ILO will definitely cross the 21st-century threshold in a pole position. This was not so obvious for such an old lady, linked to the industrial society in the most classical sense of the word. One of the first major mutations was the integration into the UN system and the opening to the Third World. The challenge is now to achieve successfully a second mutation: the ILO’s integration into a globalised economy.

L. What do you think about the concept of "end of labour", much emphasised in the last few years?

M.H. I totally agree with the analysis and reluctance by the Labour Office economists on this concept. In a book I published in 1985 on the various scenarios of labour, I really overestimated the influence of new technologies on employment; my concerns were exaggerated. Today less growth is required to create a job than ten years ago. Rather than on the volume of employment created, we should be more concerned about the way an employment is exercised, and about the employment challenges I mentioned earlier, i.e. the heterogeneous statutes, the inequities and the poor alternatives to unskilled workers. The options of today’s society are no more those of the industrial one, nor those of the 1950s.

L. There is a current trend of decline of unionism. Did you observe, within the tripartite forum of ILO, a sort of weakening of the union partner?

M.H. There is obviously a unionism decline in number — every statistics show this, even though it varies from a region to another. Besides, unionism has changed, too. The main challenge for union organisations, after all, is now to define what is really at stake for today’s workers, and to adapt quickly in order to face it efficiently. Economic globalisation is a fact. Therefore, workers organisations must see how they integrate into it and how they prove workers that they really defend them.

For years on end, trade unionism has been a matter of roots — traditional struggling places were the production units, where workers used to fight for better working conditions and against exploitation at local levels. Then unions joined in umbrella federations in order to participate in major economic debates at the national level: social security, social legislation, consistent policies, etc. However, that kind of trade unionism is in crisis because the welfare state is also in crisis. It is a historic phase that must be overcome — which is being done, by the way. Nowadays, monitoring working conditions in multinational companies can also be performed through label and boycott campaigns. In other words, the worker-producer is handing over to the worker-consumer. Struggling places are moved towards consuming spaces, in an attempt to control the effects of globalisation. Union organisations face the major challenge to convince workers that their protection against the global economy perils calls for an integration into the global game.

L. But wouldn’t that mean the "end" of the ILO and the worker-employer relations?

M.H. Not at all, since the ILO combines two features which are old, but innovative at the same time: it is a standards organisation, but it is the only one in which the civil society does participate. Both employers’ and workers’ organisations must therefore assume the tremendous responsibility to change the ILO in order to maintain its efficiency. Unionism may be declining, but it is not destined to disappear: old forms die and new ones emerge — as well as a search for new alliances, most probably. Traditional allies of trade unions used to be co-operatives, mutual societies, etc. Today’s allies may be consumers’ associations or other groups. Citizens always strive for new ways of collective action according to the realities they live. Why should one keep always the same ways and means?

See also: M. HANSENNE (1999). Un garde-fou pour la mondialisation. Le BIT dans l’après-guerre froide. Quorum, Brussels & Zoé, Geneva.

77th year, number 1999/1
http://www.cmt-wcl.org/en/pubs/labor99-1.html
info@cmt-wcl.org

1998: a bad year for employment Top

There is no reason to rejoice in the International Labour Office’s World Employment Report 1998-99: unemployment and underemployment have reached unprecedented levels, even though some rare respite may be observed in such a dark setting.

On the six billion inhabitants of the planet, half is considered to be economically active. Around a third of them, i.e. one billion, is either unemployed or underemployed and 150 million are indeed jobless — ie searching for a job and available to work. Some 750 to 900 million people are underemployed or earn less than the minimum to live. Worse: the number of excluded ones from employment is on the increase, to the extent that the ILO magazine Labour has mentioned darker and darker prospects in one of its headlines. The diagnosis is overwhelming and shows that while communism has failed, capitalism is not doing any better.

Southern countries and "transition" ones are those providing the most jobless people.

A discouraging overview

Since the financial breakdown in Asia and even before the Brazilian shaking, the number of unemployed had increased by 10 million — not mentioning all those excluded from statistics but whose incomes eventually shrank (see article on Asia). Even in Japan, the (traditionally low) rates of unemployment have increased dramatically, as a result of the stagnation of the real economy.

The situation in Latin America is rather paradoxical. On the one hand, overall economic indicators are improving, but on the other, employment is lagging behind. Hence the confirmation of what the UNPD called some years ago a "growth with no employment". Even Chile —a model so much trumpeted as a successful one— is affected. The economic growth of the continent reached 5% in 1997, but unemployment hasn’t stopped from rising (see Le Monde, 16 February 1999).

On this respect, the situation in Central and Eastern Europe, and particularly in the Community of Independent States, is even more characteristic: only a few know prosperity, while the majority of the population experiences decreased living standards. In just a few years of time, the unemployment rate —kept artificially at 0% by the communists— soared up to the official, probably underestimated rate of 9%. Besides, the ILO report adds, real wages have decreased and differences in incomes have widened.

The only regions to escape such a dark panorama are the United States, and to a lesser extent Western Europe and Africa. In the United States, the unemployment rate is the lowest since the 1970s, but poverty is on the rise and the gap between the rich and the poor is widening as a result of lower and lower wages. In Western Europe, employment has recovered a little since mid 1998. By reading the statistical data, one could see that the most liberal developed countries (United States, Canada, United Kingdom, etc.) have the highest growth rates. However, statistics say nothing at all on the nature, conditions and wages of the jobs thus created, nor on the growing poverty of the many excluded ones.

Some little improvement in Africa

In Africa, too, the employment improved a little in 1998. According to the last UNCTAD report, however, this may be merely due to a favourable conjuncture: good weather conditions, higher prices of African exports, positive impact of the CFA Franc devaluation, etc. According to the ILO, in a continent bound to account for 8.7 million additional job-seekers each year, the main vectors for improvement remain the family agriculture, in which employment does not depend on productivity, and the informal sector, an unstable and low remunerated sector by nature.

World statistics register as unemployed some 60 million young people aged 15 to 24. This means 20% of the young population in the OECD countries, supposedly developed. In southern cities, the rate is often higher than 30%. Other victims of unemployment are the long-term unemployed. Their chances of getting a job actually shrink over time.

According to the ILO report, however, the situation of women is not totally negative. On the one hand, it is true that low-paid jobs are increasingly performed by women, but on the other, women also represent a larger proportion of the labour force and get higher-level employment more easily, thanks to a better training. Besides, women are now more numerous to start their own business. Not everything is lost.

77th year, number 1999/1
http://www.cmt-wcl.org/en/pubs/labor99-1.html
info@cmt-wcl.org

In the WCL's opinion the ILO is vital Top

Needless to recall it: in the WCL’s opinion, the International Labor Organisation remains a fundamental, irreplaceable body, bound to be "the international forum against vectors of social regression like the economic globalisation, neo-liberalism, labour flexibility and deregulation, and the degradation of the workers’ situation and the social questions" (WCL, Activities Report 1993-1997). As more and more people claim for an international regulation in order to avoid letting multinationals and speculators total freedom, the opportunity is perfect for using the existent machinery by strengthening the ILO’s action as a tripartite standards body. The ILO should take advantage of its status in order to place the social issue at the core of the economic debates in any forum, whether official or not, wherever they take place.

Therefore the ILO should realign its struggle for social justice towards the workers’ interests, including the non-unionised ones. The growing diversity of employment and the plural union representation forms, up to the international level, should be taken into account. Two approaches can be implemented to this end: to work on the ground, in a relationship of close co-operation with local social agents, and to carry out researches and analyses with a view to devise the ways towards social development, based on the current setting.

Unlike other forums made up of self-appointed agents, the ILO delegations are appointed by governments, workers and employers — a strong advantage to be salvaged. In corollary, and unlike rules unilaterally adopted by management in general (codes of conduct, etc.), the ILO conventions offer the legitimacy of negotiated bargains, reason why they are bound to be inserted into each state’s legislation and thus become compelling after having been ratified.

The WCL expects the ILO to launch an action of voluntarism in promoting a ratification as large as possible of labour standards as the fundament for an international social law. But implementing such standards is also of utmost importance. And here the ILO has a major role to play by helping the actors in implementing the standards (by a legislation, an appropriate machinery, etc.) and by performing a monitoring action and, if necessary, denouncing any violation. The OECD, for instance, controls the conformity of its members’ economic policies to its neo-liberal policies. The ILO should do the same and compare the states’ policies to the requisites of its Conventions — especially the Employment Policy Convention (No. 122).

A partner in its own right

While it is true that today more than in the past, consensus are more difficult to achieve on new labour standards, the WCL is fully confident that the new Director-General shall not give up this option.

But there are also more specific challenges posed to Mr. Somavía. First of all, the WCL wishes the ILO to co-operate more closely with the World Trade Organisation so as to include the issues of labour and working conditions into the debate on commerce. This is not going to be easy because of the strong reluctance within the WTO. Reluctance is also strong within the IMF, since this institution continues to consider economic issues and social problems as separate ones in its structural adjustment programs. The World Bank is also disinclined to include social issues, even though this is not really a competent body for projects of social contents. But once again, the ILO should strive for its recognition as a partner in its own right. The June 1998 Declaration on the fundamental social rights can be the base the approach can be launched from.

A second challenge is to ensure adequate human and material resources for a proper action of the ILO, without surrendering to the intentions and purposes, whether implicit or explicit, of resources providers.

For sure, the WCL shall co-operate frankly to the achievement of these goals.

77th year, number 1999/1
http://www.cmt-wcl.org/en/pubs/labor99-1.html
info@cmt-wcl.org

Juan Somavia: the ILO has to command recognition Top

On 4 March last, the Chilean Juan Somavia took up his first (five-year) term of office as Director-General of the International Labour Office. He had been nominated by the workers’ group, which appreciated his concern about social issues, closely related to economic challenges. The new Director-General had indeed been one of the initiators of the World Summit for Social Development in Copenhagen, in 1995. He chaired the Preparatory Council of that Summit; In addition he was Chairman of the United Nations Economic and Social Council (in 1993 and in 1998) and economic and social adviser to the Chilean Minister of Foreign Affairs.

At the latest WCL Congress, in Bangkok, Mr Somavia delivered a much-appreciated speech on the social effects of the globalisation. At the start of his term he told the editor of Labor Magazine how he saw the current challenges in connection with employment worldwide and what he intended to do about them.

Labor: Mr Somavia, what important challenges do you think are in store for you?

Juan Somavia: The goals have not changed since the Social Summit in Copenhagen: eradication of poverty; full employment while enforcing respect for the workers’ rights; strengthening of the workers’ role as actors, which presupposes the freedom of association and speech. As a matter of fact, the three goals emanate from one single conviction: the market, the economy must not work for themselves. They are means to the end, not the end itself. In this respect I have repeatedly phrased my viewpoint as follows: yes to the market economy, no to the market society. Society must not be ruled by the laws of the market, as is now the case in several respects. There is an obvious lack of international governance of a globalisation beyond control. I don’t believe in over-regulation, but under-regulation is very dangerous for the weakest in society.

Q. How do you see the role of the ILO during your term of office?

JS: It is my responsibility to modernise and strengthen the tripartite structure in such a way that the values the ILO protects are taken into consideration in the current globalisation era. There is an international consensus about a wider opening of societies and the economy. This, however, is not feasible unless the ordinary people and their families are part of this opening. The ILO has a full place in the international system. It is the social pillar, indispensable for the balance between three poles: the market as generator of wealth, the population and its social needs, and the state with its democratic regulating role. No pole must neglect the two others. I don’t want the ILO and its values to be left out of the debates anymore. If a problem crops up, people should wonder: "What does the ILO think of this?" This case is not won in advance and depends chiefly on a strong consensus between workers, employers and governments about the Organisation’s strategic goals. They have to express the wish to act jointly and to bring the ILO on the international scene. If tripartism is incapable of acting together on a number of joint goals, it won’t be taken seriously.

Q. Do you want to work on the basis of goals rather than programmes?

JS: I do indeed. If one sets goals and sees that they are achieved, this is, I think, an important source of satisfaction for the staff of the ILO and at the same time a criterion for the assessment of the work done. I’ve suggested four strategic goals to the Governing Body: the application of the principles and core labour rights and the development of standards, which is our legal mandate; the expansion of opportunity to have a job and a decent income, which is our political mandate; the expansion of an efficient social protection for each and everyone, a kind of solidarity mandate; and lastly the strengthening of the social dialogue and of tripartism. The current follow-up and assessment methods will be examined in order to effect that the rights programmes for achieving these goals are developed and the resources are used efficiently. This is a condition for accomplishing that the work of the ILO as an institution — and not only the director-general as a person — is recognised, taken into consideration and integrated into the debates of the international public- and private-sector organisations.

Q. So far so good as far as the ILO in the worldwide context is concerned, but what within the Organisation itself?

JS: If we want to be consistent, we have to begin with ourselves. That’s why I insisted in my speech to the ILO staff, on the occasion of Women’s International Day, on the Office taking the lead in the matter of principles such as equality between men and women. It appears from some indicators that we have fallen behind other international organisations. I will see to it that the opposite becomes true.

77th year, number 1999/1
http://www.cmt-wcl.org/en/pubs/labor99-1.html
info@cmt-wcl.org

Asia: the crisis, seen from below Top

Willy Thys, General Secretary of the World Confederation of Labour, has just conducted a mission in four Asian countries: the Philippines, Indonesia, South Korea and Thailand. He was accompanied by Ramon Jabar, WCL Vice-President in charge of Asia, and Muchtar Pakpahan, Chairman of the Indonesian trade union SBSI. According to Willy Thys, there is no denying that one year and a half after the "crisis" the economic indicators point out a recovery, but the population is paying the highest price for this.

The Asian countries have reached rock bottom and are now slowly pulling out of the economic and financial crisis that hit them. Today, in early 1999, the International Monetary Fund is even optimistic: in a working document for the attention of its Director-General, it affirms that "the worst is over and the conditions are present to tie in again with growth in 1999"1. After a strong decrease in 1998, in almost all countries, the prognoses in connection with the real GNP point to a clear-cut recovery in 1999. In the year 2000, the growth could even go up to 3.5%. Yet, in the same document the IMF admits that "the social repercussions are heavier than expected". This is precisely what the General Secretary of the World Confederation of Labour (WCL), Willy Thys, noted during his mission to the Philippines, Indonesia, South Korea and Thailand.

The rate of unemployment is or remains high everywhere. In Indonesia, for instance, the official rate at the end of 1998 was 16%, but it is a well-known fact that these rates are usually undervalued in the countries of the South. According to Willy Thys, it is quite possible that 40% of the Indonesians are lacking sufficient employment to survive. Nor can many of them afford rice, the basis and symbol of the local food. On the other hand, taking at its word The Financial Times, as a rule well informed on the business world, Indonesia offers new investors a five-year tax exemption and even more if they create at least two thousand jobs.

In South Korea, which had always been accustomed to full employment, the growing unemployment has led to social and cultural disruption. Fathers who have lost their jobs, refuse to admit this to their families: they leave their houses in the morning, wander through the city the whole day and return home in the evening.

Slight improvement

In Thailand the crisis was "solved" by the massive expulsion of migrants (chiefly Indians) and the return of countless city-dwellers to the rural areas. The rate of the baht is now stable, but the price tag attached to this was a strong social decline. In a recent report the Asian division of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (the ICFTU, the other large international confederation besides the WCL) makes mention of a drop in real income by 21% in 1998 and in real wages by 4% in 1999, despite the budding recovery. In the Philippines, lastly, it is relocation that is making victims. "Our jobs are being exported to other countries, where the labour and production costs are lower", says Benny Carpio, chairman of a company union. This phenomenon can cause some resentment between trade unions from the various countries.

The picture is not exclusively negative, however. The crisis and its in many cases tragic social repercussions have put a number of national unions in such a position that they cannot be by-passed as interlocutors of the public authorities. This is even the case at the level of ASEAN, the association of nations in the region. In the Philippines there is henceforth a germ of social security. In Indonesia the economic crisis went hand in hand with heavy political convulsions resulting in the departure of president Suharto. The situation in the matter of freedoms has improved since, though the Indonesian power structure remains extremely elite-conscious and authoritarian, confronted on top of that with Islamic fundamentalism. Nevertheless Muchtar Pakpahan, chairman of the confederation SBSI, was set free.

Stake: the social dimension

This recognition of the trade unions is not the whole truth: in South Korea nearly 200 trade union activists remain in prison and, in particular, the arrest of the same Muchtar Pakpahan upon his arrival at Seoul airport suggests the existence of a kind of "blacklist" of trade unionists who are undesirable in the country2. Nevertheless, this recognition confronts the organisations involved with the responsibility to develop action strategies in difficult economic circumstances. Willy Thys, who met in Bangkok trade union leaders from the entire continent, could see that everywhere exactly the same is at stake: make admit that the social aspect is part and parcel of the economic aspect, that the reason for the existence of growth is the welfare of the people.

But the General Secretary of the WCL says he also noted that the trade unions from the North pursue different strategies when supporting their Asian counterparts, causing differences among the latter in the process. From Japan emanates a trade union concept that is to some extent attuned to the government policy. In the United States and in the countries within their sphere of influence, on the other hand, the accent is on trade union independence. During its World Congress in Bangkok, in December 1997, the WCL was already confronted with this problem. It declared itself in favour of the Asian trade unions following a course of their own, a course that takes account of cultural differences. For a trade union in a country with a social structure and mentality marked by deficient democracy, it is not a matter of course to resist itself authoritarian temptations and to answer a participation model promoted from abroad.

By way of general conclusion after his stay in Asia, Willy Thys does not necessarily question all measures the International Monetary Fund suggests or imposes; he does maintain, however, that these measures are given little social accompaniment. Structural economic measures have to go hand in hand with structural social measures, so that the world of labour does not become the biggest victim of the hiccups of globalisation. In this respect, the economic expertise of the IMF can very well be completed with the — less manipulated — social expertise of the International Labour Office.

André Linard

1 Economic and Financial Situation in Asia: Latest Developments, IMF, Background Paper, 16 January 1999
2 Pakpahan was released the following day. Also on the occasion of the WCL delegation’s stay in Seoul, the General Secretary of the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions was set free, after having served a seven-month prison sentence

77th year, number 1999/1
http://www.cmt-wcl.org/en/pubs/labor99-1.html
info@cmt-wcl.org

Debate: why do companies die? Top

Close-downs are the workers’ nightmare. But why do some companies live long, in some cases more than a century, whereas others disappear rapidly? This is the question a former manager of Shell, Arie de Geurs, asks in a book that appeared in 1998, The Living Company, and in the article entitled Planning for Learning, published by The Harvard Business Review. The author is not everybody: besides an experienced executive, he is also a visiting lecturer at the renowned Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Boston, at the London School of Economics, etc. At first sight, his reflection seems to be meant for managers only. But it is good to know what they think.

De Geurs starts with an observation: the average lifetime of a company, all categories mixed, is fifteen to twenty years; the largest ones live forty to fifty years, but some of them are over one century old. He explains this by a simple reasoning: companies last if they develop a strong, almost ritual culture. To put it more precisely: "Companies die quickly if their managers fixate on the economic activity (…) and forget that the true nature of their organisation is to be a working community, composed of human beings." Or in still other terms: "In long living companies profit is a result of good health, not a reason for being (…); one cannot do without, but it is no aim of life."

"Community": this is the key word to Arie de Geurs, who conveys the impression he valorises the workers; does he not affirm that "the true capital is the one that leaves at 5.30 pm"? He criticises also companies "managed like profit machines which give people the sack at the first set-back." Whereas, in his opinion, a company is a living community in which the training of people is important. As a matter of fact, he gives the example of Shell, which employs nearly 100,000 workers worldwide and reserves ten days per person/year on average for training.

Feeling of uneasiness

The author’s criticism of the American and English models, in which the shareholder is all-powerful, may seem nice.

Yet, there is a feeling of uneasiness. These workers, this "true capital", are rarely recognised as actors. Are they not mere stooges of capital? In order to affirm their importance, de Geurs indicates, for instance, that replacing a productive employee is expensive; but is he really interested in the workers as human beings or rather as a production cost?

The former manager of Shell is not the only one who presents the company as a community. This is a growing trend, as illustrates the recent statement of a French manager, François Michelin, that capital and labour are no opposite interests.

If it is a matter of affirming that the workers are part and parcel of their companies, that the managers cannot remain indifferent to the human aspect and that profit is not a fetish, one can only be glad. If, however, such "community speak" serves to conceal the persistent - despite everything - conflicts between the respective interests of the employers and the workers, we are facing a trap that risks leading to fatalism.

And the weight of today’s concepts on tomorrow’s attitudes is so high that it is indicated to keep one’s eyes wide open.

This text has been drawn up on the basis of an interview with Arie de Geurs in NRC Handelsblad (Holland)

1 Arie de Geurs : The Living Company, Breadley Publishing , Great-Britain, 1998.
2 François Michelin : Et pourquoi pas ?, Edit. Grasset, Paris, 1998.

77th year, number 1999/1
http://www.cmt-wcl.org/en/pubs/labor99-1.html
info@cmt-wcl.org

In the sectors: We're already eating GMOs Top

The World Federation of Agriculture, Food, Hotel and Allied Workers (WFAFW) has published a paper on genetically modified organisms, abbr. GMOs. An opportunity for us to deal with food developments and to see how the world of labour is involved. GMOs, an opportunity or a threat ? Six questions that will shed light on this matter.

What are genes ?

The term genetically modified organisms was first used by outsiders a little less than five years ago. GMOs are the result of recent developments in the field of knowledge of the functioning of genes in living organisms.

Everybody knows already for a long time that the body of each living being is made up of cells. Each cell encloses a nucleus that contains the rules for the structure of the body: the number of fingers, the size of the nose, .... or the colour of a root e.g.. There are two kinds of rules: rules that apply to the entire species ( the genome) and rules that apply to the individual within the species (the genotype). Together they form the DNA.

Each nucleus contains chromosomes. The human body, for instance, is made up of 23 chromosome pairs which again are divided in genes. A nucleus is comparable with a chest of drawers. Within one and the same species the chest is identical and the drawers (e.g. the drawer "colour of the eyes", "blood type"...) have the same place. The content of the drawers, however, differs from one person to another.

GMOs: why now ?

A novelty is that scientists are now able to alter the genes of a specific species without having to bother about the freaks of nature. Crossbreeds between families of a specific species (plants, animals ...) may be nothing new but did not always succeed. You had to be lucky. New, however, is that man gained control of genes : they can be copied and pasted and they will be automatically transferred to later generations. A new drawer is thus added to the chest.

Let us take a plant like maize for instance. Its genes do not contain a natural defence against the larvae of insect X. So there is a real chance that the maize will be affected. It is known, however, that one of the genes of a certain bacteria Y is a natural producer of an adequate insecticide. By extracting this gene from the bacteria and inserting it into the DNA of the maize, the maize becomes resistant against this type of larvae.

A "problem of the rich" ?

Yes, according to the simplistic line of thought that the rich are concerned about their quality of life. For the others (countries or social circles) it is a matter of survival. The rich care about food quality, the others only about having at least something to eat. But that’s putting it rather naively. In our age of economic globalisation we are all concerned with agricultural products. Everybody in the world eats soya, maize, potatoes, rice. So why should we not know what we are eating !

But this is probably not enough. The high-income social sectors have a choice, poor countries do not. At least as long as GMOs do not take over the entire market and provided that the producers provide information on the contents of the products.

A health hazard ?

An example: to obtain red petunias researchers inserted a gene of coloured maize into the genetic patrimony of petunias. The result was a surprise: the petunias remained white but showed unexpected transformations during lab experiments. Imagine such a thing would happen with foodstuffs !

We cannot say that GMOs are a danger to human health but we can neither be sure that they are not hazardous. Doubts remain and questions remain unanswered, particularly after a few "unfortunate" experiments. What can we do ? Do we have to wait for watertight guarantees to accept GMOs ? Should we tolerate them as long as it remains unproved that they are not hazardous ? Or should we accept their use provided that consumers will be well informed ? This is an ethical question !

Who benefits ?

Multinational enterprises do not wait for an answer to market genetically modified foods. GMOs are already present in maize, crisps, meats: so-called transgenetic foods. The economic impact is enormous. Genetic manipulation enables enterprises to step up production and to lower costs. Genetic manipulation also reduces the risk of freaks of nature (diseases) which are always present in agriculture. Genetic alterations have indeed mainly economic importance. Their impact on food is considered less important.

Six multinational enterprises are ready to throw transgenetic products on the world market. Best-known are Monsanto and Novartis, the others are AgroEvo, DuPont, Zenca and Dow, according to The Guardian. The size of these enterprises enables them to invest enormous amounts in research (630 million US$ a year for Monsanto) and to rule out competitors that do not dispose of such means. Sometimes they apply for patents for products which are cultivated in the South but which are legally not protected (e.g. basmati rice). The WFAFW paper points to the global danger of "keeping the South out of it" by moving an important part of agricultural production to the North.

In what way is the trade union movement involved ?

Since workers are also consumers they are involved because of what is on their plate. But the people working in agriculture are most endangered, in the first place in the South where particular productions will suffer. How can the 75,000 Madagascan vanilla producers compete against the production of transgenetic vanilla in Germany and Japan ? And that is just one example.

The agricultural sector of the North too is endangered. These products are the ruin of a rural development model centred on people living on the fruits of the earth. This model is replaced by an industrialised view on agriculture in which the product is the only thing that matters. This view inevitably leads to a concentration of agricultural activities in the hands of a few large producers at the expense of the small ones. To conclude there is danger that food security in the world will soon depend on a handful of managers. This is neither democratic nor reassuring.

A.L. 

All these questions are dealt with in the document prepared by the WFAFW for its members (on floppy and on paper). It is a compilation of newspaper cuttings and articles from the international press or from associations which tackle the issue from a pedagogical perspective.

77th year, number 1999/1
http://www.cmt-wcl.org/en/pubs/labor99-1.html
info@cmt-wcl.org

In brief Top

Le canard tamed the lion

Trade unions that carry on campaigns or take stands would like to see them being reflected in the press. When falling victim to repression they count on it being denounced by the media. That is why the freedom of the press is sometimes qualified as «basic freedom»: a freedom which makes the exercise of other freedoms possible.

The European Court of Human Rights has just taken a decision regarding the press which is also encouraging for trade unions. Basing itself on a specific case the Court affirms that journalists may publish information even if they did not receive the pieces of evidence through regular channels.

Let us freshen up our memory. In 1989 the 150,000 Peugeot workers in France were on strike for 1.5% more pay but the management of the company (which logo is a lion) rejected the claim. The magazine Le Canard enchaîné published copies of three tax declarations of the company’s managing director which showed that he had granted himself a rise in salary of 45.9% over two years.

It is not known how the documents got into the hands of Le Canard but fact is that a tax official had breached his professional secrecy. Criminal proceedings were brought against the magazine for having accepted stolen documents. The company was put in the right twice by the French court. These judgements have now been overruled by the European Court. Le Canard enchaîné would have had the right to publish the documents because of their authenticity and significance at the time (strike). The consequences for the press are important. Journalists are no longer caught in the firing line: should they publish the information without giving prove and run the risk of being accused of libel; or should they publish the pieces of evidence and be convicted for acceptance of documents? Too bad for people who want a docile press; is it not often so that good information is information which journalists managed to obtain but were not supposed to get?

Although the decision theoretically only applies to member countries of the Council of Europe it is also expected to be applied elsewhere since press legislation in the South is to a large extent based on French or English models.

However, not all the news about the press is positive. The International Federation of Journalists has published its annual list of journalists killed while working. According to its report, 31 journalists were killed in 1998. 19 others cases are still under investigation. And still worse: the IFJ found that many murders remain unpunished. Journalists in Latin America, particularly Columbia, Mexico and Brazil, run the greatest risk. Then comes Russia. The last victim of the year was Norbert Zongo, an internationally renowned journalist from Burkina Faso, who died in a very suspicious car accident.

Blunder of the day

Food for thought: the lawyer of the victims of the Swissair 111 crash in 1998 said the following: «The Swissair trial will be more important than the Lockerbie one because of the social position of the passengers. The Lockerbie tragedy involved many children, the Swissair crash many businessmen, scientists and high income people.»

Comment of the journalist of Echo Magazine (Geneva): «it is much more preferable to be responsible for the death of a group of children from the Third World than for the death of some sixty-year old American businessmen - financially speaking of course.» All depends on whether you are rich or poor...

Puerto Rico: enterprise ordered to pay damages

A female judge of the San Juan Supreme Court (Puerto Rico)convicted the richest state enterprise in the country to pay $900,000 dollar to a female worker as damages for having been sexually harassed and raped by a high executive. The verdict, which fell in November 1998, criticises the «patriarchal attitude» of the executive in question who justified his deed by invoking common practice. It was the first time that such high damages were demanded in a case like this. Important in the verdict is not the conviction of the man but the fact that the company (the Puerto Rican telephone company) was held responsible for the director’s behaviour. The Court reproached the company for not having sanctioned the offender. On the contrary, the victim was moved to a lower position. It rejected the argument that the female employee had hesitated to denounce the facts and to lodge an internal complaint against the company. The judge believes that a hostile climate will drive employees to fear for reprisals, for example career brakes.

Source: Centro de Información sobre la Mujer Asociación Civil (CIMAC), Mexico.

France: CGT comes into action

The communist trade union CGT (Confédération générale du Travail) has decided to promote co-operation with trade unions in France and Europe. This appeared clearly at the 46th CGT Congress early February in Strasbourg. In their addresses the delegates and particularly the new secretary-general, Bernard, Thibault, stressed the necessity of unity in a trade union movement which is not in a position of power. «If trade union leaders cannot shake hands anymore, employers will rub theirs.» An allusion to the situation in France that goes, however, for elsewhere too.

The CGT also decided to join the European Confederation of Trade Unions. CGT infused new and female blood into its structures and will guarantee henceforth parity between men and women within its Executive Committee. The organisation will not refrain from criticising the economic system in which capital remuneration is excessive and not labour cost.

Back to Labor Magazine Issues