TRADE AND LABOUR STANDARDS
TUAC Briefing Note for OECD Workshop
3 - 4 October, 1996
The OECD was asked to work on trade and labour standards by its Ministerial
Council in 1994. An executive summary of the results of their work as approved
by the OECD Trade and Employment Committees was released at the time of
the May 1996 Ministerial Council. The full OECD Report on which the summary
is based is now being published at the time of the OECD Workshop. The Report's
analysis and findings are mixed, some commentators who are opposed to labour
standards being raised in the World Trade Organisation have said the OECD
Report refutes a linkage between trade and labour standards. This is not
the case and there are important points in the Report that trade unions
in both industrialised and developing countries would support.
For this reason trade unions in the OECD countries gave a cautious welcome
to the OECD report on trade and labour standards when it was discussed
at the OECD Council of Ministers. Speaking at consultations with the OECD
Council of Ministers on 20 May in Paris, the TUAC delegation said that
"the Report makes a significant contribution to the international
debate on the social dimension of the world trading system which will now
intensify in the run up to the World Trade Organisation meeting in Singapore
in December. The multilateral trade and investment system now includes
rules to protect intellectual property and investors rights. Those rules
must be extended to include workers rights."
The Report identifies a set of core labour standards which it says are
"widely recognised to be of particular importance: elimination of
child labour exploitation, prohibition of forced labour, freedom of association,
the right to organise and bargain collectively and non-discrimination in
employment".
Although the Report recognises that these rights "cannot be considered
primarily as a means to improve market efficiency as they are fundamental
rights of workers", it shows that their implementation can also support
economic development providing a closer link between markets and social
development.
The OECD's review of the relationship between the observance of trade
union rights and economic development found that countries which suppressed
these rights did not have better economic performance and concluded that
"concerns expressed by certain developing countries that core standards
would negatively affect their economic performance are unfounded."
Rather, there is a positive two way relationship between trade and labour
standards. The Report also found that with regard to Foreign Direct Investment
"host countries may be able to enforce core standards without risking
negative repercussions on FDI flows. Observance may work as an incentive
to raise productivity through investment in human and physical capital".
However the reality for the international trade union movement is that
in the new "global economy" trade union rights are being violated.
The ICFTU's annual survey of violation of trade union rights has shown
a trend of increasing suppression of trade unions for misguided economic
reasons rather than political or ideological ones. Organising trade unions
in many parts of the world remains a difficult and hazardous process. The
establishment of "free trade" or "export processing zones"
especially in developing countries is further undermining poor labour rights.
The move by some developing countries to respect and enforce core labour
standards is being undermined by negative "policy competition"
between governments who wish to attract foreign investment through the
suppression of labour rights. The Report notes the cases of governments
denying core standards to workers in export processing zones, pointing
out that the advantages would be short lived.
Whilst calling for economic growth and freer trade the Report states
that "there are reasons to doubt that market forces alone will automatically
improve core standards" and therefore calls for "more direct
promotion mechanisms". In reviewing the mechanisms which already exist
it calls on governments to enhance the role of the ILO and points out that
"development cooperation programmes can make a positive contribution
by addressing the underlying causes" and "strengthening capacity
for human rights and good governance".
On the issue of labour standards in the World Trade Organisation, it
notes the current lack of consensus and continuing international debate,
but says that the WTO's Trade Policy Review Mechanism could be extended
to include labour standards without renegotiating or amending WTO articles.
The Report also reviews the experience of promoting labour standards
through other trade measures. It notes that with the regard to the use
of Generalised System of Preferences (GSP) in the United States "conditioning
eligibility for GSP benefits on the respect of core labour standards induced
a positive change in the behaviour of some countries". The European
Union now has similar arrangements. The Report also reviews the NAFTA side
agreements and International Codes of Conduct on Multinational Enterprises.
It goes on to look at "private sector mechanisms" such as consumer
boycotts, social labelling, and codes, but concludes whilst helping in
certain cases "they are unlikely to provide a general solution".
The Report concludes that "all the mechanisms reviewed in the study
can potentially address at least one of the reasons for non-observance
of core labour standards. However, none of them can solve all the problems
at the same time".
Whilst falling short of calling for a "Social Clause" in the
WTO as demanded by the international trade union movement, the Report makes
clear the links between trade and labour standards, whilst pointing out
that the suppression of labour standards does not in the long term yield
trade advantages. This should ease the concerns of some developing countries
who have opposed the discussion of these issues in the WTO. The time is
now ripe for the WTO Ministerial Council meeting in Singapore in December
to discuss trade and labour standards and set up a WTO Working Party on
the issue as called for by many of the parties including the European Commission
and the United States.