THE KOBE G8 JOBS CONFERENCE 28 - 29 November, 1997 Statement By Bill Jordan ICFTU General Secretary

This is the first time that trade unions and employers have been invited to participate in a G7/8 Employment Summit. The involvement of all the social partners is an historic development. It is a measure taken to match the seriousness of the OECD's unemployment problem. Our host Mr. Bunmei Ibuki in taking this initiative reveals his own determination to get to grips with unemployment, which is the very visible fault line running through the OECD's plan for prosperity. For our part we welcome the opportunity of making a contribution to tackling the social cancer that may prove to be the next century's greatest challenge. The trade union movement comes here, not with simple solutions. There are none! But we do come with a depth and breadth of experience, accumulated in our constant search for secure well paid employment, that you can put to use. While the trend of OECD structural employment seems to have only one direction, the debate on seeking its solution has fully broadened, as shown by both the OECD Ministerial Meetings in October and the Luxembourg Summit of the European Union. The argument is a sterile one between the so-called Anglo-Saxon model on the one hand and the continental European and Japanese systems on the other. Where one side seems to think statistical success is enough, even if it means recruiting a permanent standing army of the working poor, while the other side resists necessary change thinking it the best way to protect the endangered species we call the well-paid full time secure job. There is a growing recognition that such jobs together with the working poor and the outright unemployed are all points on a spectrum. That it makes more sense to adopt policies that deal with the quality of jobs and the creation of jobs together. Individual national policies no matter how appropriate will not nurture and grow jobs unless there is an environment of sustainable growth. The most compelling argument for the G8 existing is that it has the power to co-ordinate macroeconomic policy to provide such growth. Within such a climate, governments, employers and unions must find new means of balancing flexibility and security in employment. In my experience the two are inextricably linked in the policies of world class companies, and have been prominent features in those economies that have not only achieved sustained strength but have managed to share the consequent prosperity more equitably. For working people to join with their employers in adapting the workplace to the demands of increasing competition and technological change, there has to be trust. A trust that is hard to build but easy to destroy. Governments cannot legislate for such trust, but they can legislate to promote the dialogue that has been a proven pathway to that trust. It is good to see that the European Union has moved to strengthen the role of dialogue in their fight against unemployment. The aggressive competitiveness of globalising trade has resulted in an attack on standards we took for granted and has greatly dampened the expectation of millions within the OECD, and that includes trade unions and their members. But our aspirations are as strong as ever. While we have long since recognized the improbability of a future that promises lifetime employment in one job, trade unions nor their members will ever accept lifetime insecurity in every job. I have arrived here from a trade union conference in Moscow on the non-payment of wages. Millions of Russians are clinging even without pay to the hope that their jobs will survive. If I or any trade unionist needed convincing that a new level of co-operation is now required between government, employers and trade unions to tackle the avoidable tragedy unfolding in Russia, that conference provided stark confirmation. We are here today to play our part not only in sharing plans to beat unemployment but to make them work.

THE KOBE G8 JOBS CONFERENCE 28 - 29 November, 1997 Introductory Remarks by Etsuya Washio President of RENGO, Japan

Thank you Mr. Chairman and brother Jordan. At our 1996 ICFTU World Congress, delegate after delegate from over one hundred countries spoke about the fears of working women and men over their jobs, insecurity in employment, worries about pay, increased intensity of work, authoritarian management, union busting, discrimination, children at work when they should be at school, dangerous and unhealthy working conditions, and most of all the difficulty in getting workers' views heard. Although they saw in globalization the potential of expanding markets for reducing unemployment and poverty, what they felt from many of their members was the pressure of increased competition undermining employment stability, working conditions and basic workers' rights. Their answer to these problems was not a reversal of the process of opening up trade and investment, but for stronger rules to ensure that core labour standards are universally observed in the new global economy. Aimed at preventing repression against unions, discrimination in employment, forced and child labour, these core standards are enabling rights defined by the ILO, which all countries regardless of their level of development can and should apply. In fact a majority of countries have ratified these Conventions. With these rights workers have a voice, an opportunity to have their say about their working conditions. Our demand is therefore a simple but powerful one that we believe anybody who professes to believe in democracy and human rights can accept. But these rights are all too often abused, and as a result legitimate grievances and aspirations for a better future are suppressed. I would take one example to explain our position. I am greatly concerned about the social impact of the recent turmoil in Asian financial markets. Just like the Indonesian forests after the drought, we now have a social tinderbox in our region which could burst into flames very easily but we have very few fire fighters. The main scenario for Asia's economic recovery following the financial turmoil is through exports made cheaper by the dramatic and I would say exaggerated currency devaluations. This could produce a reaction in the industrialized countries, who already feel a certain anxiety about competition with Asian countries, with allegations that a small rich elite are making their fortunes through the exploitation of workers, many of whom do not enjoy basic human rights at work. This reaction would be based on the fact that most of Asian countries have not in fact ratified the core labour Conventions of the ILO World trade is a complex chain of inter-woven contracts across national boundaries, but the first link in that chain is the exchange of work for pay. The absence of agreed rules for the full application of core labour standards is a gap that could threaten the whole elaborate edifice of the global market. Without common rules applied by all member states of the WTO, and based on the competence of the ILO, workers can have no confidence that their efforts to meet the challenge of competition will not be unfairly undermined by the pressure for a quick profit. There is an argument that core labour standards have no relation to trade. This is wrong. Labour and Trade Ministers here in this conference are amongst the best placed to ensure that trade questions and labour standards are not artificially separated in the discussion about how to respond to the challenges of globalisation, and that the benefit from global trade will be fairly distributed among all people. I would urge Labour Ministers here in Kobe to renew your support for stronger international action on core labour standards through both the ILO and the WTO. Last but not least, I also strongly advise you to take a close interest in the employment impact of policies on climate change. Next week in Kyoto Environment Ministers, with the best of motives, could take decisions on reducing greenhouse gas emissions which cut right across your efforts to reduce unemployment. I wish you full success of Kobe Employment conference. Thank you very much for your attention.

THE KOBE G8 JOBS CONFERENCE 28 - 29 November, 1997 Statement by John Evans TUAC General Secretary

I would repeat something implicit in Bill Jordan's initial remarks. Populations in the G8 countries want two things: - They want economies which are efficient, that create decent jobs which generate decent and sustainable living standards; - And they want societies which are fair, where there is social cohesion and not a large number of people excluded from prosperity. Over a longer time span neither of these objectives can be achieved without the other. Economies are not efficient if you have to build walls or prisons to confine society's losers, whilst social progress can only be built on economies which work. None of the countries represented around the table today is satisfactorily achieving both objectives - most are failing on both counts; so the task of this conference is vast and important - there can be no room for complacency or cynicism. You have before you a written statement from the trade unions in the G8 countries, which has been drawn up by TUAC and the ICFTU jointly. I would emphasize two points central to your discussion on theme 2 of your conference: the Industrial Implications of Structural Change. Firstly, reconciling efficiency and social cohesion when faced by change starts at the workplace. Both unions and our members are at the sharp end of change - we cannot duck it. Faced by accelerating technological change and globalization we have a new and clear focus on what works and what doesn't. What works is investing in human capital - the worker. That means: - Investment in quality education; - Development of training systems which integrate workplace and classroom learning; - Delivery of recurrent education for workers throughout their lives; and - Recognizing and certifying skills based on experience. In sum it means lifelong learning. What also works is empowering workers. That means: - Ending hierarchical organizations; - Giving workers a voice in the change process; and - Motivating them and giving them a fair share in the benefits of change. What doesn't work, and what will end in social disaster is trying to push change through fear: the deregulation of labour markets, pushing down minimum wages and removing security. If workers don't have security in change then they will seek security by finishing change. Chair, last month our counterpart - Minister Melkert of the Netherlands - Chairing the OECD Labour Ministerial meeting said there was "a remarkable consensus among Ministers" on the need for policies that "stimulate people to accept change without fear". I hope he was right and I hope in your conclusions tomorrow you will be able to very clearly state this philosophy of change. This, I believe is the core of what some of our political leaders have called "the third way". My second point is that workers, labour markets and Labour Ministers cannot solve all the problems thrown up by world financial markets. You must give this message to your colleagues in Finance ministries and central banks. Economic growth is not enough to generate jobs and is still necessary. The current domino effect of financial failures must be brought to a very early halt - growth in the real economy must be supported and protected and the real lessons heeded - avoiding speculative bubbles in the future and building some "fire breaks" in the global financial markets. We make some suggestions in our statement. Chair, a few minutes of financial market trading can wipe out years of difficult progress and real adjustment. We also have to keep a "growth focus" for fiscal and monetary policy: the bond market vigilates frequently are wrong. Chair, our membership will be looking to the message you give tomorrow after your deliberations. I recall that six and a half years ago the London Summit had 72 pages of conclusions and the word unemployment did not appear once. There are now Jobs Summits, Ministerial meetings and conferences in fast succession, I believe we must take this as a sign of progress. Just as I believe the OECD and EU meetings were positive outcomes. But we must now bench mark some clearly recognizable objectives and measure progress by action. Governments cannot do everything on their own - the social partners presence here today is an important signal and we want to work with you and employers to replace cynicism and despair in the public mind with determination and confidence.