Still work to be done - Luc Cortebeeck

Luc Cort eb eeck was for many years the President of the ACV-CSC, the most representative trade union confederation in Belgium. He was also strongly committed to the creation and activities of the International Trade Union Confederation. He is known as a strong negotiator and a bridge builder. He not only left his mark on social dialogue in Belgium, but also weighed in on labour issues around the world through his role at the ILO. This book is his ardent plea for effective international social regulations and a strong ILO as a cornerstone for social progress.

www.lannoo.com

9 789401 469159

STILL WORK TO BE DONE

In Still Work to Be Done, he presents his experiences and insights, which call for reflection and, above all, action. In a far-reaching analysis of labour in today’s world – from forced labour in Asia and the Gulf States through the brutal violence against trade unionists in Latin America to the erosion of social security and the right to strike in industrialised countries – he examines the future of work: how can we eliminate child labour and exploitation? How do we make governments and multinationals respect all workers in supply chains? How do we use the challenges and opportunities of digitisation to tackle inequality? How will we work in the postcoronavirus world, after a pandemic hitting the most vulnerable and the young hardest of all?

Luc Cortebeeck

Luc Cortebeeck has been fighting for social justice for over forty years. From 2011 to 2017, he was Vice-Chairperson of the ILO Governing Body and in 2017-2018 its Chairperson.

The International Labour Organization (ILO) is the UN agency that brings together governments, employers and workers, promotes decent work and social justice, and sets and supervises international labour standards.

Luc Cortebeeck

STILL WORK TO BE DONE The Future of Decent Work in the World

STILL WORK TO BE DONE

Luc Cortebeeck

STILL WORK TO BE DONE The Future of Decent Work in the World

For Myriam, Veerle & Erwin, Koen & VĂŠronique, Geert & Isabel, Nele, Stijn, Lies, Thomas, Hanne, Lotte, Jente, Nanou

Si vis pacem, cole justitiam

Si vis pacem, cole justitiam (If you want peace, cultivate justice).

This phrase was carved in stone during the construction of the first building of the International Labour Organization in Geneva, inaugurated in 1926 (currently the headquarters of the World Trade Organization), as well as in the current building, inaugurated in 1974.

Contents

7

Introduction

part i The diplomacy of work

15

17 The foundations of the International Labour Organization 17 Cold War in Geneva 27 Work in a globalised world 32

1

The history of a centenarian

2

International labour and social regulations show the way

3

The ILO, a unique organisation Standards without supervision are worthless The right to strike under pressure

39 39 53 65

part ii The world of work 4

Slavery: deep-rooted, tenacious, still with us

5 6

Myanmar: genocide and oppression – will it ever end?

Qatar: the hidden side of the Gulf Miracle 40 million modern slaves Child labour: an ineradicable phenomenon?

Domestic workers: the battle for recognition

81 83 84 100 114 117 125

5

131 Bangladesh: a catastrophe as wake-up call 131 8 Freedom of association: slaving away in Latin America 145 Colombia: no country for trade unionists 145 Guatemala: a nightmare without end?

157 Venezuela: the downfall of a land of promise 167 No decent work without freedom of association 178 9 Social protection: the forgotten majority 187 10 The ILO model 207 Due diligence: the labyrinth of supply chains

7

part III The future of work

217

Seven challenges for the world of work

219 219

11

The Global Commission on the Future of Work The world is doing well … and yet there is still turbulence

Ten recommendations for a reinvigorated 12

social contract

221

255 Delivering the social contract: a human-centred agenda 257 Increasing investments in the institutions of work 262 Increasing investment in decent and sustainable work 273 Where do we go from here?

276 From the Commission to the Centenary Declaration 281 The ILO and the future of the United Nations 284

3 1 An uninvited guest unexpectedly shuts down

the world

6

Final remarks Thanks and acknowledgements References

c ontents

287 309 312 314

Introduction

We have a special relationship with work. Some people talk passionately about the job of their dreams, others shrug their shoulders and let out a deep sigh. But whether it’s going well or just so-so, work is always an important topic of conversation. We live with it and by it. Compared to the past, we change jobs more often over the course of our careers, whether by choice or out of necessity. For many people, a career switch is a positive experience, but, unfortunately, I have all too often witnessed the tragedy of people who suddenly lose their jobs with no prospect of an alternative. At the end of the day we all hope to find a satisfying job, with great workmates or colleagues and pleasant conditions, where we feel respected and are challenged to give the best of ourselves.

But the theme is much broader than just our own career. Do we have any notion of work beyond what we do ourselves? We can probably still imagine how people work in other sectors in our own country or in neighbouring countries. And we know that there is a big difference between wages in Eastern and Western Europe, for example. But what is the situation elsewhere in the world? What are the challenges faced by workers on the other side of the planet? What real steps have been taken in recent decades to ensure that more people can work in humane conditions and be paid properly?

For a long time my own knowledge didn’t extend beyond the borders of Europe. But that changed when over the last twenty-five years I became involved first in the activities of the World Confederation of Labour (WCL) and then since 2006 of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) and the International Labour Organization (ILO). This has given me the chance to broaden my horizons, which enables me to look to the future with a wider perspective and a greater

7

knowledge. What will work be like? How will we deal with digitisation, robotization and artificial intelligence? I will take you on a tour of the fascinating world of work.

Ever since my youth, I’ve had a clear goal: I want to help ensure that working people are respected. I was raised in a Christian, socially engaged environment, where I was encouraged to keep an open mind and respect other visions of society. As a young man I met people of my own age who had to start work in factories as young as fourteen. I was lucky enough to be able to continue my studies. The guidance and education I received at the Sociale Hogeschool in Heverlee (now University College Leuven Limburg) equipped me with the knowledge and the skills I needed to face the future.

I was able to pursue my goal in different capacities. I started as an activist of the Young Christian Workers at a local level and in 1972 I became involved in the youth division of the ACV-CSC (Confederation of Christian Trade Unions of Belgium), the most representative trade union confederation in the country. Two years later, taking up a post in the Enterprise Department of that organisation enabled me to learn more about worker involvement and the quality of work. After that I became Secretary of the Mechelen region and later of Flanders. ‘Fighting for the people you represent while still being a bridge-builder and trying to find solutions’ was the mandate I received from the ACV-CSC General Council when I was elected federal President in 1999. And I have always tried to fulfil that mandate.

During my period as National Secretary and Federal President, I also came to understand the international dimension of union work, social dialogue and collective bargaining. On the basis of unwritten longstanding international agreements, when I became ACV-CSC President in 1999 I also became Vice-President of the Trade Union Advisory Committee of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), and through this role became involved in trade union representation to the G20. In 2000, also linked to my role

8

S till work to be done

as ACV-CSC President, I became President and spokesperson of the Workers’ Group of the Committee on the Application of Standards of the ILO. In the committee, governments have to answer for the shortcomings in their application of ILO standards (Conventions and Recommendations).

Most work, with the exception of freelance work, involves an employer and an employee. By definition, the former has more power than the latter. To avoid abuses, labour laws were created to safeguard balanced and fair relations between the two. These are usually worked out on a national level, country by country. Europe sometimes intervenes, as we know. But what fewer people know is that there is such a thing as international labour law. What is it? And how important is it?

At first sight it looks boring and remote until you look a bit more closely. At least that has been my experience with the several thousand students and other interested people at home and abroad to whom I’ve explained workings of the ILO. ‘So, it’s for Europe then,’ I imagine the audience thinking, presuming that Europe is already large and complicated enough. ‘No, it’s for the whole world.’ Understandably, few people are capable grasping what this really means. Those in the know are familiar with my theory that ‘if you can negotiate in Belgium, you can negotiate anywhere in the world.’ But for many people, faith in big institutions appears to be a thing of the past. They seem to them a long way from the realities of everyday life. That is, I believe, a mistake, and in this book I will try to explain why.

There is also another stubborn misconception. The ILO is not a trade union, nor is it an employers’ organisation; rather, it is an agency of the United Nations (UN). What is more, the ILO is the oldest multilateral organisation in the world, established under the Treaty of Versailles in 1919. It is older than the UN itself, which came into being in 1945. This first multilateral organisation was destined from the start to be a very special one. It was composed not only of governments but also – and this was downright revolutionary – of employers and workers. Together they

Introduction

9

would negotiate Conventions and international treaties dealing with labour and social policy issues. Once a member state approves or ratifies these Conventions, they become binding law in that country. But laws without oversight are worth very little, so a supervisory mechanism was also developed. In this regard, the Committee on the Application of Standards plays a crucial role. And when these Conventions are not respected, a delegation made up of a representative of the governments, of the employers and of the workers – in ILO terms, a High Level Tripartite Mission – sometimes visits the country in question.

The negotiators at Versailles wanted to move away from the decades of social unrest before the First World War, which arose as a reaction to the exploitation of labour in the industrial age. The Russian Revolution of October 1917 and the rise of communism were chilling events that demanded a response. One answer was the foundation of the ILO under the guiding principle, still current today: ‘Universal and lasting peace can be established only if it is based upon social justice’. The negotiators not only had a social agenda, they also had an economic one. Enterprises in countries that choose social justice should not suffer from unfair competition from companies in countries that are less concerned with respecting the rights of their workers. So international regulations were necessary.

Despite the good work of trade unions, social dialogue, NGOs and the ILO, inhumane working conditions still exist at distressing levels around the world. It is unfortunate that this often passes unknown, or insufficiently known. At the same time, supranational and multilateral organisations like the ILO and the UN are often underestimated and, increasingly, are even under fire. I want to explain why an organisation like the ILO is indispensable, not only in the past and elsewhere in the world, but also now and in the future and in every country. Moreover, I believe the ILO is the only international organisation capable of guiding us towards organising a future of work that is socially just.

10

S till work to be done

I am able to write this book because I have been able to delve deeply into the world of work, both in Belgium and around the globe through the ILO. What has always appealed to me is the connection between setting and enforcing international regulations and the groundwork at a national level, which is the task of trade unions and NGOs, and then of the employers and governments, supported by the regional and national work of the ILO. I have been a privileged witness to these interactions over the years. Moreover, I have had the advantage of a remarkable overview of international trends and access to a great deal of information thanks to the research work of the ILO. In this book I try to piece together the jigsaw of experience and knowledge. I take you to the ‘ILO crossroads’ where the paths of collective bargaining, social dialogue, geopolitics and international diplomacy meet, with the aim of putting us all on the right road forward.

Under the leadership of Willy Thys, General Secretary of the World Confederation of Labour (WCL), and Guy Ryder, General Secretary of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU), I was deeply involved in the foundation in 2006 and subsequent development of the ITUC, the world’s largest trade union confederation and a much needed answer to globalisation. It was the ITUC that asked me, just before the end of my ACV-CSC presidency, whether I was ready to be nominated as Chairperson of the Workers’ Group of the ILO and thus as Vice-Chair of the Governing Body. I held that function from 2011 to 2017.

Then I was elected Chairperson of the Governing Body for the mandate 2017-2018. In this capacity I was also Ex-officio member of the Global Commission on the Future of Work and was able to think more deeply about the future of work. At the beginning of my career, I couldn’t have imagined any of this. In June 2021 my mandate as member of the Governing Body comes to an end. After my ‘real career’ I will be able to continue exploring my great interest and passion. My motivation has always come from listening to workers talk about their daily reality, about their problems, and also from the courage of people who stand up for others.

Introduction

11

The ILO centenary in 2019 was a fabulous opportunity to look at the past, present and future of work in the world. Let’s start with a bit of history: how has the ILO managed to survive for a hundred years without losing importance or influence in periods of war and peace, growth and recession, globalisation and individualisation? Part of the answer lies in the organisation’s unique structure. I will introduce you to the various building blocks of the ILO and pause to reflect on a crisis in its recent past: the controversy about the right to strike.

After ‘the diplomacy of work’ we leave Geneva and I take you to ‘the world of work’. Building on my experiences during various ILO missions and negotiations, I will discuss a number of abuses that have unfortunately still not been eradicated. I want to immerse you in the reality of millions of workers. I will talk about the practice of modern slavery in Myanmar and Qatar and what is being done about it. About child labour and the phenomenon of domestic workers, who have only been recognized as fully-fledged workers in the last few years. The tragic collapse of the Rana Plaza building in Bangladesh brings us to the complex story of supply chains. Experiences in Colombia, Guatemala and Venezuela teach us that the right of association and trade union freedom are still not unconditionally applied everywhere. Yet, they are crucial conditions for achieving decent work. We then zoom out and look at how social protection, or social security, is faring in the world.

In ‘the future of work’, I look ahead to seven challenges we must address: globalisation and deglobalisation, the climate and ecological transition, inequality, demography and migration, automation and digitisation, new forms of work and new business models. As a member of the Global Commission on the Future of Work, I was given the opportunity to think about and to help formulate ten recommendations that should lead to a renewed and strengthened social contract. They offer an answer to the transitions of our time.

But in our discussions about the future on the occasion of the ILO centenary in 2019, no one could have imagined that a virus – a coronavirus, COVID-19 – could attack our health and our social and economic

12

S till work to be done

fabric so severely worldwide. Since the Second World War, no crisis has struck so deeply and so widely. All at once and almost without warning, our national and international structures were severely tested. What this could mean for the world of work, for workers and for the International Labour Organization, I try, albeit with great modesty, to answer in the last chapter. Yet it is our conviction that no matter how difficult and long the road, decent work and a good life are possible. But: there is still a lot of work to be done.

Introduction  

13

part i

The diplomacy of work

1 The history of a centenarian

The foundations of the International Labour Organization At the end of the eighteenth century, steam engines appeared on the scene. Factories were built around the machines. From then on mass production was possible. Machines could do a lot, but people were still needed for supply and distribution, maintenance and many repetitive tasks. Workers were available everywhere and in great numbers, so pay was low. The scale of exploitation was outrageous. Children also had to work, usually in inhumane conditions and on substandard terms.

Gradually resistance grew. People stood up for their rights but were initially badly organised and consumed by misery and powerlessness. They lacked everything: food, clothing, housing, time to rest, safety at work, access to health care, a living wage. Uprisings were brutally crushed.

While charitable, paternalistic organisations tried to alleviate the most extreme abuses, workers began to organise themselves more effectively in the nineteenth century. This is how the trade unions came into being, first by profession or company, then by sector and only much later through umbrella confederations. Politically, socialism and communism responded to the grievances of the people. Pope Leo XIII responded in 1891 with the encyclical Rerum Novarum, in which

 

17

he stated that labour was not a commodity and workers deserved respect and had rights, including the right to organise.

Around the turn of the century, the first cross-border trade union meetings took place on the fringes of international party meetings, mainly on the socialist side, but also from a Christian perspective.

Employers initially saw less reason to organise. They had economic power and were therefore closer to politics. The threat of Marxism and the social struggles of workers changed this at the end of the nineteenth century when the first employers’ organisations appeared in several countries. Partly under pressure from social reformers and academics, reform-minded politicians sought contact with the new workers’ and employers’ organisations. Around 1900, the first national organisations for labour law also saw the light of day. The International Association for Labour Legislation (IALL), the forerunner of the International Labour Organization, came into being in Basel in 1900.

During the First World War, as men were sent to the front, women took their place in the arms factories. Terms and conditions of employment deteriorated further. This led to protests and strikes, but the weapons industry had to be kept going at all costs. The search for solutions led to rapprochement between governments, employers and workers. It was the beginning of tripartism. During a congress in Leeds in 1916, French workers demanded through their representative Léon Jouhaux (Confédération Générale du Travail – CGT) that workers’ issues be included in the peace talks. The British Government even produced a first draft of a tripartite organisation with the support of both the Trades Union Congress (TUC) and the employers.

The negotiators at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference feared the rise of communism and realised that they could not return to the pre-war situation of exploitation and social unrest. They invited the participation of trade union representatives in recognition of the workers’ commitment to the war effort and the hardships they had suffered

18

The diplomacy of work

during the war. They also wanted to prevent the trade unions from organising their own international peace conference.

The spark of Versailles In Paris, a special Commission on International Labour Legislation was set up in the framework of the Peace Conference. It was made up of representatives of nine countries: Belgium, Cuba, France, Italy, Japan, Poland, the United Kingdom, the United States and Czechoslovakia. The Commission was chaired by the American trade union leader Samuel Gompers, and the aforementioned Léon Jouhaux was also a prominent member; from the British side, Edward Phelan and Minister Georges Barnes played a leading role, having already developed the initial ideas; and UK Minister Arthur Balfour would, to a large extent, write the final version of the principles of labour policies.

Belgium was represented by the socialist minister Emile Vandervelde and the Liège professor of law and labour law Ernest Mahaim, who were at the basis of many a compromise. This Commission wrote Chapter XIII of the Treaty of Versailles, the Constitution of the International Labour Organization. Two citations from the treaty form the philosophical cornerstones of the ILO: ‘Universal and lasting peace can be established only if it is based upon social justice,’ and ‘the failure of any nation to adopt humane conditions of labour is an obstacle in the way of other nations which desire to improve the conditions in their own countries.’ This gave the organisation not only an economic but also a social basis. Countries recognized clearly that they would be increasingly interdependent on matters of economy and trade. They decided that they did not want to compete on the basis of poor working conditions. Today we would call this a level playing field. The ILO started with forty-four member states.

The organisation was set up with a three-part or tripartite structure with employers and workers in addition to governments. After considering Brussels and London, it soon settled in Geneva. The League of Nations, an intergovernmental organisation that aimed to

The history of a centenarian

19

put an end to all wars, also settled in the same city. This organisation, of which the ILO was formally part, was also the fruit of the Versailles Treaty. Its great promotor was the American President Woodrow Wilson. Unfortunately, the League of Nations, the forerunner of the United Nations, did not survive the Second World War. The ILO was created within an existing field of tension. Even today, some people think that the ILO is too soft, while others think that the organisation is too hard; some side more with labour, others more with government and employers. The United States felt that it would be going very far indeed if international treaties were allowed to dictate domestic laws. The fear that the sovereignty of individual countries could be infringed is universal. The United States nonetheless became a member, but only in 1934. The French and the trade unions, on the other hand, regretted that ILO Conventions were not automatically enforceable international laws, but first had to be ratified by each member state.

More than a hundred years ago, it was revolutionary that an organisation could be built on the philosophical ground principles set out above, with a tripartite decision-making structure, and charged with the task of developing international labour and social legislation, in line with the nine basic principles outlined in the list to the right. Almost all of them are still current. In part 3, I will discuss the report of the Global Commission on the Future of Work. In the course of the Commission’s work, the creation of the ILO was called ‘the most ambitious social contract in history’. Now, unfortunately, the nations of the world would no longer be able to produce such an unambiguous vision, either within the narrow spaces of the G7 or G20, or within the broad scope of the United Nations. Luckily, there is the ILO.

20

The diplomacy of work

The 9 special & urgent principles of the ILO

The nine principles of special and urgent importance of the ILO when it was founded in 1919: 1. The guiding principle ‌ that labour should not be regarded merely as a commodity or an article of commerce.

2. The right of association for all lawful purposes by the workers as by the employers.

3. The payment to the employed of a wage adequate to maintain a reasonable standard of life as this is understood in their time and country.

4. The adoption of an eight-hours day or a forty-eight-hours week as the standard to be aimed at where it has not already been attained.

5. The adoption of a weekly rest of at least twenty-four hours, which should include Sunday wherever practicable.

6. The abolition of child labour and the imposition of such limitations on the labour of young persons as shall permit the continuation of their education and assure their proper physical development.

7. The principle that men and women should receive equal remuneration for work of equal value.

8. The standard set by law in each country with respect to the conditions of labour should have due regard to the equitable economic treatment of all lawfully resident therein.

9. Each state should make provision for a system of inspection in which women should take part, in order to ensure the enforcement of the laws and regulations for the protection of the employed.

The result of the establishment of the ILO is a legal and consultative system on three levels that still works today. Of course, its development and its success vary from country to country and over time:

The history of a centenarian  

21

• International: standards (Conventions and Recommendations) negotiated and voted on by the three groups represented.

• National: advice, consultation and social dialogue in National Labour Councils or National Social and Economic Councils composed of employers and workers and/or National Tripartite Social and Economic Councils.

• Sectoral and/or enterprise level: Collective Labour Agreements, Workers’ Councils …

The contours are there. Although the practical implementation is very diverse, the model remains recognisable everywhere. In Latin America, institutions exist, but their success depends very much on the changes of political regimes and on the recognition, or not, of trade unions and sometimes of employers’ organisations. In periods when social dialogue and collective bargaining do not work, workers and their trade unions have little choice but to fall back on the confrontational model. In the United States, union influence is strongly linked to who is in political power. In Africa, institutions exist and do good work. Their main challenge is the predominance of the informal economy and the margin they are allowed by politicians and employers to develop social protection. Several Asian countries navigate between politics, the power of multinationals and local employers in the informal economy. China does not have free trade unions. The task of the recognised workers’ organisation there is to prevent social problems and to channel possible conflicts in order to find a solution to them. There is a wage policy and social security is being developed, all within the lines set out by the authorities in Beijing. The so-called ‘European social model’ also has very different interpretations from one member state to the next and has been on its way back since the financial crisis. Now there is the European Pillar of Social Rights (2017). But however differently they are elaborated, the principles and practices of the ILO, based on its Fundamental Conventions, are and remain the reference (see further ‘Without Conventions and Recommendations there is no ILO’).

22

The diplomacy of work

A flying start In democratic countries, the first steps towards the implementation of the consultative model were taken after the Great Depression of the 1930s. This was the case in France, Sweden and the US with the New Deal. Two more countries stood out in the development of their industrial relations: Denmark and Belgium. Nevertheless, the Belgian social and economic model was only partially established between the two world wars. It only took full form after the Social Pact of 1944, which was negotiated in secret during the German occupation.

The League of Nations, which was founded at the same time as the ILO, crumbled quickly for political and geopolitical reasons. Curiously, the ILO was not sucked into that vortex and managed to stay afloat.

The ILO survived its first crisis and is thus the oldest existing multilateral organisation. In 1945, the League of Nations was succeeded by the United Nations.

In the ILO itself, things were moving forward, sometimes fast, in those early years. The first International Labour Conference took place in Washington in October of the founding year 1919. No fewer than six International Labour Conventions were adopted on themes that were as relevant then as they are now: Convention 1 on working hours in industry, Convention 2 on unemployment (employment agencies and unemployment benefits), Convention 3 on maternity protection, Convention 4 on night work for women, Convention 5 on the minimum working age for young people and Convention 6 on night work for young people. The policies set out in these Conventions were far-reaching for the world of work.

In the summer of 1920, the organisation settled in the headquarters of the International Committee of the Red Cross in Geneva. Thanks in part to the initiative of the first Director-General (DG), the Frenchman Albert Thomas, who took advantage of the early momentum, sixteen Conventions and eighteen Recommendations had already been approved by 1921. Among other things, these included fairly de-

The history of a centenarian  

23

tailed regulations for the maritime sector, most of whose work takes place outside territorial boundaries. Most of these early Conventions have since been replaced by more up-to-date versions, with the exception of maximum working hours and the general ban on forced labour. When the Second World War broke out, there were already sixty-seven Conventions and sixty-six Recommendations. A number of governments complained about the large number of Conventions as well as the sizeable budget and the public criticism of working conditions in their country. We still see the same tensions today. Nonetheless, Albert Thomas was still able to argue successfully before the International Court of Justice that the ILO had been given another competence: working conditions in agriculture.1 Although the organisation originally only focused on manual workers, the diversity of work was gradually recognised. Attention was paid, for example, to what was then called ‘mind work’. In 1927, none other than Albert Einstein took part in a meeting of experts on intellectual work.

From the outset, complaints were received about Member States prohibiting or severely restricting the setting up of free organisations of workers. These complaints were dealt with by the annual International Labour Conference. The principle of freedom of organisation was enshrined in the constitution, but it would take three decades before a Convention on freedom of association was drawn up. Among other things, this had to do with a demand from employers that there should be a right ‘not to organise’. However, a Convention with a balance between the right of association and the right of non-association would have been completely meaningless.

The International Labour Conference was soon unable to cope with the volume of reports on the application of Conventions. So, in 1926, this task was assigned to a separate commission of the Conference. In order to prepare the work, an expert committee was appointed. The Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recom-

24

The diplomacy of work

mendations (CEACR) and the Committee of the Application of Conventions and Recommendations (CAS) of the annual International Labour Conference (that is, the Committee on the Application of Standards) are still at the heart of the ILO’s system of control and supervision.

When Hitler seized power in Germany, he soon dissolved the German trade union organisations. In 1933, he sent the leader of the Deutsches Arbeitsfront to the Conference as delegate of the workers.

The Conference did not accept this manoeuvre and the German delegation walked out of the Conference. Then Nazi Germany left the ILO. It was not until 1951 that the Federal Republic of Germany became a member again.

The international employers’ and workers’ organisations While the Treaty of Versailles already involved trade union leaders with international connections, the foundation of the ILO would give an extra push to the internationalisation of employers’ and workers’ organisations. The International Organisation of Employers (IOE) was created in 1920 through collaboration between the Belgians and the French. Founding father Jules Carlier was a Belgian industrialist from the Walloon steel and mining industry. In Belgium, he was President of the Central Industry Committee, a predecessor of the current Federation of Enterprises Belgium. In the ILO, he was the first Chairman of the Employers’ Group.2 The IOE is an organisation whose work remains closely linked to the ILO. There were more different groups on the trade union side, including the International Federation of Trade Unions (IFTU), which would later split into the communist World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU) and the socialist International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU). Two Belgians played a prominent role in the latter organisation: before the war there was Corneel Mertens, the third Chair of the ILO’s Workers’ Group and successor of the Dutch-

The history of a centenarian

25

man Jan Oudegeest, and the Englishman Edward Poulton; and later Jef Rens, who was to become Deputy Director of the ILO after World War II and whom I subsequently knew as President of the Belgian National Labour Council.

On the Christian side there was the International Federation of Christian Trade Unions (IFCTU), first under Dutch-Swiss leadership (Jos Serrarens and Joseph Scherrer) and later under the leadership of the Belgian Secretary General August Van Istendael. In 1968 the IFCTU was renamed the World Confederation of Labour (WCL). The ICFTU and the WCL, together with some national organisations, formed the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) on 1 November 2006. The creation of the ITUC is an important historical event. It is indisputably the representative voice of the world’s workers. Although the ILO is of great importance for its objectives, the scope of the ITUC’s work is broader than that of the ILO.

Big personalities Gender equality was and still is an important objective for the ILO, yet at the first International Labour Conference there were only 23 women out of 269 participants. All of these women were advisors without voting rights. The first woman with voting rights was the Norwegian labour inspector Betzy Kjelsberg in 1922. The most influential woman during the early years was Frances Perkins of the United States. As a young social activist, she had seen the fire at the New York Triangle Shirtwaist Factory in 1911. One hundred and three workers, mainly young female migrants, died behind locked doors. This catastrophe led to the founding of the International Ladies Garment Workers Union and to new legislation. Perkins participated in Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal and was his Secretary of Labour for twelve years.

At the beginning of the Second World War, the American Director-General of the ILO, John G. Winant, decided to evacuate the organisation to McGill University in Montreal. The Swiss feared that the

26

The diplomacy of work

ILO’s presence in Geneva would harm Swiss neutrality. Forty-four staff members departed from Lisbon by boat for their new home.

The successor of Winant as Director, Edward Phelan, knew that the priority was to keep the organisation alive. In 1941 he organised a special International Labour Conference in New York under the optimistic slogan ‘The ILO and reconstruction’. At the time, the ILO had forty-six member states. Forced labour in Nazi Germany and in the territories occupied by the Nazi regime was heavily criticised. Consideration was also given to the post-war period. The last session of the 1941 Conference took place in the White House. US President Franklin D. Roosevelt brought the Conference members together in the Oval Office and gave a historic speech there: ‘I well remember that in those days the ILO was still a dream. To many it was a wild dream.

Who had ever heard of governments getting together to raise the standards of labour on an international plane? Wilder still was the idea that the people themselves who were directly affected – the workers and the employers of the various countries – should have a hand with government in determining these labour standards.’3 Roosevelt did not say this out of mere political expediency. With his New Deal, he had made labour a federal competence and pulled American society out of the swamp of the Great Depression. In 1941, when he hosted the International Labour Conference. He also agreed with Winston Churchill in the Atlantic Charter that after the war, international labour standards would continue to apply.4

Cold War in Geneva The Second World War did not destroy the ILO. For the second time in its history, the organisation was saved. The post-war period was dominated by the Cold War. The Western model of democracy and the social market economy were closer to the ILO than were the centrally planned economies of the Eastern Bloc. This inevitably led to

The history of a centenarian

27

tensions over the application of standards, first and foremost freedom of association and freedom of collective bargaining. But before the Cold War, there was the Declaration of Philadelphia.

The power of Philadelphia The results of the evacuation of the ILO and Roosevelt’s support were quickly felt. A month before the landing in Normandy in May 1944, the International Labour Conference in Philadelphia was organised.

The Declaration of Philadelphia strengthened the constitution of the ILO and later became part of it. With the end of the war in sight, people were thinking about economic reconstruction, and the three groups were needed for that. Their cooperation emerged stronger than before: greater synergy was created between employment, social policy and macro-economic objectives. The inspiration came from the Atlantic Charter of Roosevelt and Churchill. In 1944, the ILO also adopted Recommendation No. 71 to encourage countries to involve all parties in the reconstruction and economic recovery effect and to provide full employment.

Immediately after the war, a number of major international initiatives were launched, all focusing on peace and reconstruction. With the Bretton Woods Agreement, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank (WB) were created (1944). In 1945 the United Nations was created, and the ILO became its first specialised agency, albeit with its own constitution and its tripartite structure intact. In 1947, the US rolled out the Marshall Plan in support of the countries that had suffered greatly during the war, including Germany. In 1948, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) was founded in Paris.

In the decade after the Second World War, many ILO Conventions were adopted. Fundamental Conventions were negotiated on freedom of association and the right to organise, collective bargaining, equal remuneration without any discrimination on grounds of gender and the right to non-discrimination. Conventions on labour inspection,

28 

The diplomacy of work

employment policy and tripartite consultations addressed the way in which national governments should deal with labour. And there were substantive Conventions on wage protection, social security, equal treatment of migrant workers, labour administration, employment services, etc. They were all influential instruments, from which the European treaties and European legislation, among others, would later draw inspiration.

Forced labour and discrimination Most of the countries that threw off the yoke of colonisation soon joined the ILO. Some drew on the organisation’s assistance to develop their labour codes and laws.

In 1930, the first Convention on forced labour (Convention 29) focused primarily on slave labour and its offshoots in the colonies. But the colonial powers of the time put up resistance, so the original Convention spoke of restricting forced labour, not abolishing it. It was not until 1957 that a new Convention 105 was drawn up, partly in response to what had happened during the war in the German labour camps and Soviet gulags. In 1958, ILO Convention 111 on non-discrimination in employment was adopted, partly in response to the persecution and extermination of Jews and other population groups by Nazi Germany.

My first steps in this strange world

I took my first steps in the ILO in 1977. I had been working for five years when the ACV-CSC sent me to an expert meeting on workers’ participation. There was a great deal of interest in our Belgian Works Councils following the extensive information rights that we had acquired since 1973. I had already attended a number of European meetings, but this was my real baptism on a global level. I didn’t understand anything about the ILO system: there was a sort of nomination system, which proposed a Chair for each group. According to the nominations, they were

The history of a centenarian

29

all supermen. There was also a call for counter nominations.

Eventually the mandates were agreed, and each decision was confirmed with the gavel. Strange little world. I didn’t understand how this process was managed. With all those supermen around me, my self-image had already taken a beating by the time I was allowed to give my presentation. It was on a theme I was familiar with, although a British trade unionist didn’t like all this employee participation stuff. For him, there was only one solution: the nationalisation of all companies, and then the union would designate the shop stewards within the closed shop. It was as simple as that. The Russian representative said that they were solving the problem differently: the government was made up of workers, and the workers in the companies were also in charge. Hence there was no need to have participatory bodies in order for them to have a say. The Burkinese (at that time Upper Volta) and the Pakistani spoke about their subsistence economy, where not much participation was involved. I was now in the thick of what I had previously known only from my studies: the complexity of a world that has never let me go since.

In 1983 I got another invitation for two weeks. This time it was about training worker representatives, another one of my hobbyhorses. Less stressed than the first time, I drove to Geneva. During a preliminary meeting, the permanent representative of the World Confederation of Labour in Geneva, Béatrice Fauchère, told me that someone was going to nominate me as worker Chairperson for that meeting. Someone who didn’t know me from Adam introduced me and spoke of my abilities.

Was this about me? It was unreal. Unfortunately, there was no opposing candidate. Once again, I felt like I’d been tossed into the deep end. Consulting with my own group, that was okay.

But at the end of the day, a report for the Governing Body needed to be prepared. The Chair of the Government Group was a Russian who was surrounded by three people. They rode

30

The diplomacy of work

around in two black Russian limousines. In the eyes of the Russian representative, workers had to be educated to understand the system. Our view, that education should also have an emancipatory effect and incite critical reflection, was irrelevant to him. Nevertheless, we came to an agreement on the final text.

Those who claim things were simpler then than they are now are not always right.

The United States withheld half of its financial contribution to the ILO in July 1970 after a Soviet was named Assistant Director-General. In 1975, when the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) was admitted to the International Labour Conference as an observer, Israel and the US promptly walked out of the conference room. That same year, the US announced that it would suspend its membership, a measure which took effect in 1977, also because it did not accept the absence of truly independent employer and worker representatives from communist countries. In 1980, the US returned to the ILO, mainly because it wanted to be able to weigh in on the escalating Polish question.

From Nobel Prize to oil crisis During the Golden Sixties, economic growth and the development of the social welfare state went hand in hand in many countries. These were indeed golden times, and the icing on the cake was the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1969 to the ILO. It was a powerful acknowledgement of the role that the ILO had played for fifty years in pursuit of peace through social justice.

Shortly afterwards, however, in 1973, the oil crisis pulled the plug on growth. Cyclical unemployment hardened into structural unemployment and many countries had to operate within their means. The world gradually began to see the dark side of globalisation. The ILO reacted in 1977 with its so-called MNE Declaration, a declaration on the behaviour of multinational companies which has been recon-

The history of a centenarian  

31

firmed and updated for the fifth time in 2017. The text calls on these companies to comply with the principles of the ILO Conventions. It is important that the ILO can address international companies and promote their voluntary engagement. But it is not equipped with the competences to monitor companies as it does member states.

Lech Wałęsa launches the end of the Cold War In the summer of 1980, a strike broke out in the Gdańsk shipyards in Poland. Critical intellectuals and the Catholic Church convinced the Polish Government to send the strike and trade union leader Lech Wałęsa to the International Labour Conference in 1981. When he spoke in the UN Assembly Hall in Geneva, it was standing room only.

But the Polish experiment was soon reversed by the communist authorities. A state of siege ensued, and Wałęsa ended up in prison. A delegation of the ILO was able to visit him there. In the meantime, an ILO Commission of Inquiry was denied access to Poland. Testimonies made it clear, however, that freedom of organisation had been violated. In 1984, Poland announced that it would leave the ILO, and the Soviet Union put pressure on other countries to do so as well. In the end it never came to that. ILO Director-General Francis Blanchard was involved in the negotiations that culminated in the democratisation of the country. With the Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev’s perestroika (reform policy) at the end of the 1980s, more than three decades of Cold War came to an end. The ILO had survived its third ordeal.

Work in a globalised world ‘I could hear your voices’ The South African model of segregation, known as apartheid, touched the ILO in the very core of its being. In 1963, the International Labour Conference refused to give the floor to a South African employer.

32

The diplomacy of work

Since there was no procedure for excluding a country, South Africa was asked by resolution to leave the ILO of its own accord. The international pressure – also from the UN – became so great that the country eventually did withdraw. Now that South Africa was no longer a member, other ILO means of action suddenly became possible. The Conference adopted an action plan, and from 1980 a special Conference Committee considered the situation in the country annually.

This resulted in economic sanctions but also technical cooperation with liberation movements representing South African workers.

Through a programme of action, a reporting mechanism, pressure from the three groups, dialogue and technical support, the ILO was able to build momentum. In 1988 South Africa agreed to receive an ILO mediation mission. Nelson Mandela was released in February 1990. He said to the International Labour Conference in June of that year: ‘Despite the thickness of the prison walls, all of us in Robben Island and other jails could hear your voices demanding our release very clearly. We drew inspiration from this. (…) We thank you that you did not tire in your struggle. We thank you for your sense of humanity and your commitment to justice which drove you to reject the very idea that we should be imprisoned and that our people should be in bondage (…) I think we are safe in assuming that the ILO will not fail us’.

Does the ILO have any use after the fall of the wall?

With the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the conflict between the free-market economy and the state-run economy came to an end, opening the way to a world market. Totalitarian states introduced forms of democracy, and one-party states disappeared in Africa. In French-speaking Africa in particular, this also paved the way for trade union pluralism. Negotiations were held on the international stage to set up a strong organisation to coordinate international free trade.

Did the ILO still make sense?

The history of a centenarian

33

A number of employers and governments did not think so. The organisation had partly been created in response to communism, which was now in decline. Moreover, the belief prevailed that free trade would automatically create the necessary balance: everyone – North, South, East and West – would be able to enjoy prosperity. International regulation with labour Conventions and a supervisory mechanism were no longer necessary. Nor did the developing countries necessarily want to follow these rules: they feared that too much regulation would stand in the way of investment in their country. The workers already saw the storm clouds gathering. Their wages would have to compete with those in low-wage countries in the southern hemisphere and Eastern Europe. They watched as the production departments of their companies pulled up sticks and left. But what many policymakers failed to see, blinded as they were by euphoria, was that the old demons hadn’t gone away. Child labour, forced labour, discrimination in the workplace, lack of freedom of association – these all still existed, and so there was still need for international regulations.

Years before the fall of the Berlin Wall, ideas had already been put forward by workers to flank trade agreements with social clauses, fundamental workers’ rights as defined by the main ILO Conventions. When preparing the so-called Uruguay round of talks on international trade arrangements (1986-1994), a number of trade unions and governments began to see the future no longer in the hands of the ILO, but of what became the World Trade Organization (WTO). Trade policy with social clauses would show the way. ILO Director-General, the Belgian Michel Hansenne, felt that he was the leader of an organisation in liquidation.

In 1994, on the occasion of the 75th anniversary of the ILO, Hansenne brought the debate on social clauses to the International Labour Conference. He saw two avenues: a self-evaluation of each country on respecting International Labour Standards within a common action programme, or a new Convention. The reactions were stormy.

Most industrialised countries and workers were in favour of Hansenne’s proposals. Employers were against, apart from the Federation of Enter-

34

The diplomacy of work

prises in Belgium (FEB) and the French employers’ confederation. But the opposition was led by the Southeast Asian member states, with most African countries in their wake. Latin America and the countries of southern Africa were also sceptical, although their reaction was less fierce. Above all, these countries feared that the North would use social clauses to stifle the access of the South to international markets. The discussions did not bring any real meeting of minds.

At the UN World Summit for Social Development in Copenhagen in 1995, the idea gained ground that a number of labour regulations are truly fundamental and should be universally respected, regardless of a country’s level of development. The neo-liberal transformation of the Eastern Bloc was not as successful as expected, and the social dimension of globalisation needed attention. In this context, ILO standards were a more useful reference than was thought a few years earlier.

Although the interaction of trade and labour regulations continued to be a delicate issue and subject of discussion in the following years, the momentum started in Copenhagen was unstoppable. In 1998, the ILO adopted the Declaration of Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work. This made the right of freedom of association (for workers and employers) and collective bargaining (C87 and C98), the elimination of child labour (C138 and C182), the elimination of forced labour (C29 and C105) and non-discrimination (C100 and C111) binding for all member states, even if they had not ratified the Conventions. At the same time, the ILO launched a campaign for the universal ratification of the eight fundamental Conventions. This was a great success: the rate of their ratification is now over 90%, reflecting a doubling of ratifications since 1998. Unfortunately, the United States has not yet ratified six of these Conventions; China, four; and India, two.

None of these countries has officially ratified the freedom of association and collective bargaining Conventions.5 After the fall of the League of Nations, the Second World War and problems in adjusting to decolonisation, the ILO cleared another hurdle after the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union.

The history of a centenarian

35

The voices in favour of abolishing regulation and taking up labour issues were particularly loud in the early 1990s, but fortunately that never happened. Workers would never have been able to secure a fully fledged place in the WTO. Moreover, that organisation is currently very weak, not least because of the isolationist policy of the US under President Trump.

The ILO had conquered existential risks, with another one to follow in 2012 (see chapter 3, ‘The right to strike under pressure’).

Decent work as tool to end poverty Globalisation has met with more and more protests. A demonstration of 40,000 anti-globalists at the WTO summit in Seattle in 1999 resulted in massive disturbances. At that Conference, there was a great divide between industrialised and developing countries, again over the same theme: social clauses in trade agreements. The proposal under consideration was that free trade agreements would be linked to fundamental workers’ rights; if a country did not respect them, it could be sanctioned or even excluded from free trade. The developing countries once again assumed that this would be used against them. The summit was a failure.

Afterwards, the anti-globalists began to call themselves alter-globalists, and from 2001 they organised the annual World Social Forum (WSF) as a counterpart to the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland. The WSF consists of NGOs and trade unions and has as its motto: ‘Another world is possible’.

In 2002, the ILO Director-General Juan Somavia established the World Commission on the Social Dimension of Globalization. In June 2008, the Commission’s report paved the way to the ILO Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalization. This was constructed on the basis of the Decent Work Agenda, pursued since 1999, with its four pillars: productive and freely chosen work, fundamental rights at work, social protection and social dialogue, with gender equality and freedom from discrimination as a cross-cutting theme. Decent Work

36

The diplomacy of work

Country Programmes were set up in developing and emerging countries in order to work specifically on these issues. These are partnerships signed by national governments, trade unions and employers’ organisations and financially supported by donors, such as the European Union and the World Bank.6

The sustainable development goals 2015–2030 It was undoubtedly a breakthrough in the fight against poverty to bring several objectives together in the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). This UN programme, which ran from 2000 to 2015, achieved undeniable results. At the same time, its relative success cried out for a sequel, for more investment in people.

And yet there was something odd about the Millennium Development Goals. The initiators did not even mention having a job as a tool against poverty. Perhaps this was due to limited involvement of the ILO in the preparatory discussions. Both workers and employers were very frustrated with this state of affairs. The ILO was keen to demonstrate the importance of ‘decent work’ from the very first discussions about the 2015-2030 follow-up to the MDGs. UN Deputy Secretary-General Amina Mohammed was given the responsibility of leading the negotiations in New York. For brand new ILO Director-General Guy Ryder, it was a major challenge to have ILO themes included in the new fifteen-year programme. He received the support of the so-called ‘Group of Friends of Decent Work for Sustainable Development’, a group led by Belgium and Angola. I myself had the opportunity to informally assess the situation in New York. It is difficult to imagine just how much work both diplomats and technicians do behind the scenes in this type of multilateral negotiations. Not only the objectives, but also the concrete implementation on the ground and the indicators for measuring impact are hotly discussed.

In September 2015, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development was presented to the world at a historic UN summit. The seventeen Sus-

The history of a centenarian

37

tainable Development Goals (SDGs) were launched on 1 January 2016.

The ILO had succeeded in making ‘decent work’ one of the seventeen goals. Stated more fully, Goal 8 on decent work and economic growth aims to ‘Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all’.

Social protection can be found in various SDGs. A total of seven objectives are linked in one way or another to the work of the ILO. For fourteen indicators, the ILO is referred to as custodian. The ILO must therefore have a very active role in the achievement of these objectives.

38

The diplomacy of work

2 International labour and social regulations show the way

Most Europeans are unaware of the existence of any international labour laws. Although several of our social models have been developed on the basis of ILO principles, we do not know this history. Moreover, we rarely had to have recourse to the ILO: in the event of controversy or conflict, we found solutions ourselves in our consultative and advisory councils, or in negotiations with employers and governments.

We seldom thought of calling in outside help. Since the 2008 financial crisis and a number of measures taken or agreed upon, we have been checking more often to see whether everything complies with ILO regulations. There are some ILO experts in our countries and governments, trade unions, employers’ organisations, human rights and development NGOs, but they usually work with a focus on the South.

The ILO, a unique organisation The ILO is pretty special. Not only is it the oldest multilateral organisation, it is also a real maverick in a number of areas. The United Nations and its agencies and the international financial organisations are governed by its member states. Ministers, ambassadors, diplomats and specialists from the relevant ministries are present at their general meetings. Depending on their responsibilities, they may well have relationships with companies and NGOs, but it is the governments that decide.

 

39

At the OECD there are two officially recognised advisory committees, the Trade Union Advisory Committee (TUAC) and the Business and Industry Advisory Committee (BIAC), now called Business at OECD. I look back with appreciation on the knowledge and experience I was able to gain within the OECD. As Vice-President of TUAC, I was able to participate in many ministerial debates on economic development and was invited to the preparatory meetings and discussions with some G20 heads of state and the leadership of the UN, the IMF and the World Trade Organisation. My first labour G20 was the crisis meeting in Washington DC in 2008, immediately after the outbreak of the financial crisis. This was followed by meetings in London and Pittsburgh in 2009 and in Cannes in 2011.

This type of advisory and lobbying role may be very interesting and useful, but at the ILO in Geneva, employers and workers share their decision-making rights with governments and decide jointly on international labour regulation and social protection. This is the case in the organisation’s two main decision-making organs, the International Labour Conference and the Governing Body of the International Labour Office.

The Governing Body points the way The meetings of the Governing Body are attended by 350 to 400 people.

They take place three times a year at the headquarters of the organisation in Geneva. They last for two weeks in March and November, and one day in June after the International Labour Conference. Nearly every member state is present. However, only the 56 full members (or their substitutes) are entitled to vote: 28 representatives of the governments, 14 of the employers and 14 of the workers. There are also 28 deputy members for governments, 19 for employers and 19 for workers. The members are elected every three years by group (governments, workers, employers) at the International Labour Conference. For governments, only 18 members are elected, because the ten states of chief industrial importance are permanently represented: Brazil, China, France, Ger-

40 

The diplomacy of work

many, India, Italy, Japan, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States. Developing countries have been taking action against this injustice for some time. In 1986, an amendment to the Constitution was adopted that would change this situation, but one condition for it coming into force was that 125 countries, 5 of them from the 10 permanent representatives, would have to ratify it. For the time being, only 110 countries have done so. Of the major industrialised countries, only Italy and India have ratified the amendment. The discussions on the occasion of the centenary celebration in 2019 gave renewed momentum to the issue. It is expected that the 125 ratifications could be reached relatively quickly, and this would greatly increase pressure on the major industrialised countries. Germany and China are reported to be sensitive to the arguments of other member states, while France, for example, is reported to be less receptive.

The meetings of the Governing Body are public. It decides on ILO policy in the various domains, the agenda of the International Labour Conference, the programme and budget (both of which are then submitted to the Conference for approval), and the election of the Director-General. Although the Governing Body makes many decisions, it hardly ever votes. Over the last ten years, there has only been a secret vote for the election of the Director-General as well as a vote by show of hands on sending a High-level Tripartite Mission to Qatar and on the continuation or termination of proceedings against Guatemala.

The Workers’ and Employers’ Groups have a Chairperson with a three-year mandate and during this time, she or he is one of the two Vice-Chairpersons of the Governing Body. A new Chairperson is elected for the Governing Body every year. This is usually an ambassador, a permanent representative of his or her country to the UN in Geneva, or a minister. Very exceptionally, it can also be an employer or a worker. The honour fell to me in 2017-2018. In the ILO’s hundred years of history, this was the fourth time that a member from the Workers’ Group was elected Chair of the Governing Body, with an employer being elected on just one occasion.

International labour and social regulations show the way

41

At the handover of the gavel in June 2017, my predecessor, the German ambassador Dr Ulrich Seidenberger, said in his parting speech that at the beginning of his term of office, he could not have imagined how exciting it would be. According to Seidenberger, the ILO was a reflection of a modern UN organisation, precisely because of the privileged place in the organisation of those directly involved, in this case the workers and employers. Although it was not always easy to find a consensus, he felt that the dynamics between the three groups were extremely enriching.

Since the ILO is the UN agency that deals with labour issues, the Workers’ Group plays a significant role in it. It is well described in Kari Tapiola’s book, to which I refer frequently: The Driving Force – Birth and Evolution of Tripartism – The Role of the ILO Workers’ Group. One can consider it a miracle that people coming from so many different realities are succeeding quite well – be it through consultations or talks and discussions – in elaborating common positions and giving a mandate to the Chair or to the Secretary of their Group. The Workers’ Group represents not only the workers affiliated with ITUC organisations, by far the most numerous group, but also those from the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU), Organization of African Trade Union Unity (OATUU) or from organisations that have no international affiliation, such as the All-China Federation of Trade Unions (ACFTU). It is different for the Employers, who are all affiliated to one and the same organisation, the International Organization of Employers (IOE). The Workers’ Group gets the support of the ITUC staff (Geneva and Brussels). As governments can rely on their diplomats, their ministries of labour or foreign affairs, there was a risk that the workers would suffer disadvantages.

This is why ACTRAV (Bureau for Workers’ Activities) was created at the ILO. Under the leadership of Maria Helena Andre, Director (preceded by Dann Cunniah), and Anna Biondi, Deputy-Director, ACTRAV constantly ensures that the concerns and interests of workers are taken into consideration, both at headquarters and in the

42

The diplomacy of work

field. It gives support to national and international workers’ organizations, and to the Workers’ Group. From their side, Employers get support from ACTEMP (Bureau for Employers’ Activities).

The Officers set the course for the Governing Body The Officers are the Chair of the Governing Body and the two ViceChairs, usually the Chairperson of the Workers’ Group and of the Employers’ Group. My colleagues and I thought it strange to be called ‘Officer’, but that’s what it says in the constitution of the ILO. Together with the Director-General, they take part in the Officers’ meeting, which directs the business of the Governing Body, while the ILO is headed on a permanent and daily basis by the Director-General, elected by the Governing Body, who can serve a maximum of two five-year terms of office. He or she is assisted in a Management Team of three appointed Deputy Director-Generals. It is crucial for the functioning of the Governing Body that the Officers are well aware of what is going on within their respective groups and at the same time open to the opinions of the other groups and the information provided by the DG. The most delicate and politically difficult points are first prepared within the Officers’ meeting before they are submitted to the Governing Body for decision. If the Officers arrive at a jointly supported proposal, the Governing Body will rarely deviate from it.

The three pillars The emblematic colonnade of the ILO building counts twenty beautiful white columns. Their solidity is beyond question. The ILO itself has three: the three groups or constituents carry the organisation.

They have to be able to take a lot of pressure, for they stand in the midst of real life. Yet for a hundred years the organisation has endured numerous storms and earthquakes.

Every day of the Governing Body (GB) begins with an hour and a half of preliminary discussions in each group led by its Chairperson.

International labour and social regulations show the way

43

There is also an hour of pre-meeting every afternoon. During these meetings, an attempt is made to arrive at unanimous points of view within the group, which then serves as the basis for the interventions during the meeting of the GB in tripartite session. The Secretary of the Workers’ Group, together with the Chairperson – or for some themes, other spokespersons – plays a crucial role in the substantive preparations. It is particularly useful for them to know as much as possible about what is going on in the other groups. With networking across the three groups, this is possible, and even fairly spontaneous.

No matter how different employment conditions, working conditions, cultures, consultative or confrontational models, languages and forms of expression might have been, I simply loved being able to work with that diversity of people from different backgrounds. I had already learned a great deal from my experience in the ACV-CSC, but in the ILO, with consultation on a global scale, the diversity was much greater. Above all, as Workers’ Chairperson, I tried always to listen closely and understand what was going on in the field, outside the cocoon of diplomatic dialogue. The ILO missions in which I was able to participate and my visits on location helped me a great deal. On location, in the concrete reality of a situation, you feel much better about what is going on and why.

Among the governments, preparations are a bit more complex. They, too, elect a Chairperson and occasionally meet as the entire Government Group. Sometimes they manage to arrive at a position on behalf of all governments. This usually concerns procedures or safeguarding their interests as a Government Group in regard to the social partners or the ILO office. More often though, they meet in officially recognised regional groups. But there are also informal groupings of countries. In the Governing Body, the recognised regional groups get the floor first, followed by the informal groups and only then the individual governments.

44

The diplomacy of work

Regional and other Government Groups within the ILO

Officially recognized groups: • Africa Group • Americas Group – very rarely acting as a group; North America intervenes via IMEC and Latin America via GRULAC • ASPAG (Asia and the Pacific Group) – in the ILO, this group includes states from the Middle East (unlike other organizations in which the Middle East and Arab Maghreb form a separate regional group) • Western Europe intervenes via IMEC or the European Union • Eastern Europe • IMEC (Industrialized Market Economy Countries – its membership overlaps with ASPAG, Europe and the Americas) Other frequently intervening groups: • GRULAC (Grupo Latinoamericano y del Caribe) – in practice, this group has taken the place of the Americas, as the two members from the Americas not represented in it (US and Canada) express their views through IMEC or in a national capacity.

• Member States of the European Union, mostly speaking together with the countries of the EFTA (European Free Trade Association: Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, Switzerland).

Other groups occasionally intervening: • BRICS (Brazil, Russian Federation, India, China, South Africa) • CPLP (Comunidad de Paises de Lingua Portuguesa) • ASEAN (Association of South-East Asian Countries) • States of the Gulf Cooperation Council • States of the Arab League • Eastern European Countries

International labour and social regulations show the way

45

During the Cold War there were two power blocs and the so-called non-aligned countries that did not want to make a choice between them. Over the past twenty years, power has fragmented and there has been a shift towards a multipolar world. This has also made itself felt in the ILO. Europe has always been a pioneer in the ILO. The basis for this has been the so-called European Social Model. The European countries, together with the US and Canada, are also part of IMEC, in which a more economically oriented approach applies. Generally speaking, IMEC plays a critical but supportive role within the ILO. After the fall of the Berlin Wall and the consequent tsunami of globalisation, social regulation was no longer a primary concern for most governments. Rather, it was perceived as a burden. During the financial crisis from 2008 onwards, social policies were already on the retreat, especially in Europe. But in the meantime, the BRICS countries experienced strong growth. Economically and socially, Latin America was doing better, and the generally social stance taken by the governments concerned had a positive effect on the ILO’s work, and it was a welcome counterweight to the European attitude. The African countries also supported a social approach. The ASPAG countries remained, as ever, socially conservative and somewhat cautious.

Among the BRICS countries, Russia has traditionally played a leading role. In recent years, however, the group has become a little less important within the ILO, partly because Latin American economic growth is slowing down. This is also the case in China and certainly in Russia. The time when the BRICS progressed and moved forward together is over for the time being. As a result of the slowing down of prosperity in Latin America and the political takeover by right-wing politicians in several countries, these are now very critical of the ILO’s supervisory mechanism. The US, whose top civil servants generally play a positive role – they are among the believers in the ILO – has retreated somewhat since President Donald Trump took office, but for the time being it remains supportive. The constituent groups of

46

The diplomacy of work

the Governing Body want to keep it that way: the US provides 22% of the ILO’s general budget and about 40% – recently a little less – of voluntary financing. It is worth noting that English-speaking Africa in particular, under the influence of South Africa under former President Zuma, has put on the brakes somewhat, in several cases citing the consequences and excess of colonialism and increasing the pressure on the former colonial powers. This has already led to tensions with France on several occasions. Much can be resolved with proper preparation and consultation based on full recognition of the countries concerned, as was shown, for example, by the extremely difficult and delicate issue of tobacco, in which the financial support of the tobacco industry in combating child labour was eventually replaced by a different approach and alternative funding.

The strong co-chairing of the Global Commission on the Future of Work of the President of South Africa, Cyril Ramaphosa, on the occasion of the centenary of the ILO also gave a boost to the African contribution. After the Barroso period, the European Union fortunately took a positive turn under Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker and EU Commissioner Marianne Thyssen, particularly with the European Social Pillar. In this way, the European Union took up the social thread again. Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Commissioner Nicolas Schmit seem to be continuing this line, including in cooperation with the ILO, and that is encouraging. Neither does Brexit seem to be disrupting the cooperation of the UK in the ILO. For example, the country plays a strong leadership role in the international campaigns against slavery and forced labour.

This sketch is too succinct and deserves more nuance. But it does illustrate how multipolar and fluid the world has become since 1989. It makes political life much less predictable than before and requires that multilateral organisations demonstrate their capacity to adapt to change. Yet this multipolarity also provides everyone with the opportunity to take their full place in the world of work.

International labour and social regulations show the way

47

The special dynamics of meetings and decisions If workers and employers have opposing views, then logically each will try to get governments on their side. But the governments are reluctant to choose between the two groups and so often bounce the ball straight back to them and ask the social partners to reach a compromise. But when, conversely, employers and workers agree swiftly on a decision to be taken, governments do not always accept this easily. In theory, in that case only one government is needed to reach a majority of the Governing Body. But governments obviously don’t like to be put into a corner. So, it is best if a decision gets strong support – that doesn’t have to be unanimous support – from the three groups, but a majority in each of the three groups is the best guarantee of the legitimacy of the decision and for its effective implementation.

Observers often have the wrong idea about the strength of attitudes within a debate. For example, the US and China each have one vote, just like any small country, or a worker or an employer in the Governing Body. But their real influence is of course much greater. The number of interventions is also an insufficient indicator. A country that is under pressure, for example in respect of ILO standards, will call on all friends to intervene in its favour, even though employers, workers, IMEC countries and EU Member States often intervene only once on any issue. At the Chairperson’s table, it is particularly important to keep a close eye on the relationships between those entitled to vote. Sometimes you can tell what is happening by watching the movements and contacts in the room. When ambassadors or ministers are in the room, it means that there is a sensitive issue on which their government has given them clear instructions and that they want to assert their authority. Sometimes it is useful to give a decision some time – at least, if one can reasonably expect ideas to ripen in the minds of those concerned and a consensus is possible. Informal contacts are then used to try to reach a solution.

Sometimes the meeting is also adjourned in order to give the groups the opportunity to discuss matters internally or to consult other groups.

48

The diplomacy of work

As Chairperson, you can only make a decision once you know that there is a majority. Chairpersons with a diplomatic background usually have a hard time gavelling down a decision when the majority is formed by the Employers’ and Workers’ Groups and only supported by a few governments. They only feel comfortable when a majority is also reached in the Government Group, preferably from several regions. This sometimes leads to the decision being delayed. After a counsel from a legal advisor, they still have to follow the rules and gavel the decision. This is the specificity of the ILO; governments do not decide alone. After the decision has been made, the government or governments concerned may register a protest. This will be included in the minutes of the meeting, but it will not change the decision.

Without Conventions and Recommendations, there is no ILO Not all UN organisations have the power to adopt Conventions which have the authority of international treaties. Still fewer have a supervisory mechanism to monitor how those Conventions are transposed into legislation and practice at the national level. Usually such monitoring is limited to an administrative follow-up through reporting, and if it does go further, there are always some governments that cover for others in exchange for support when they run into problems.

Together with its tripartite structure, the standard setting and supervisory mechanism, with the involvement of the three groups, is the defining characteristic of the ILO. ILO jargon refers to labour standards or labour norms. These can be Conventions, Protocols or Recommendations. Over the years, the International Labour Conference has negotiated and voted on 190 Conventions, 78 of which have been brought up to date, and thus adapted to current circumstances. ILO Conventions are international treaties. If a Convention is ratified by a member state, it is legally binding and enforceable in that country. In the event of non-ratification, they can still be a source of inspiration for national legislation and

International labour and social regulations show the way  

49

practice. This also applies to the six so-called Protocols. A case in point is the Protocol which was voted in 2014 to strengthen Convention 29 on forced labour and to tackle the problem of trafficking and modern slavery.

The 206 negotiated and adopted Recommendations (86 are up to date) are not legally binding or enforceable, and mainly act as guidance and advice. Sometimes they complement Conventions: Recommendation R201, for example, deals with the practical implementation of Convention 189 on domestic work. On other occasions they are stand-alone Recommendations in their own right, such as R202 on social protection floors. The Standards Supervisory Mechanisms also cover Recommendations.

There are different types of Conventions. The most important are the fundamental or core Conventions. The ‘Declaration of 1998: The Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work’ was a major breakthrough in this area. Since then, member states have been obliged to respect the eight fundamental Conventions regardless of whether they have ratified them and regardless of their degree of national development. They were already covered in our history chapter 1, but it is worth highlighting them again here: 1. Freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining (C87 and C98) 2. The elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labour (C29 and its Protocol and C105) 3. The effective abolition of child labour: Conventions on minimum age (C138) and the worst forms of child labour (C182) 4. The elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation (C111) and the Convention on equal remuneration between women and men (C100) In addition to the fundamental Conventions, there are also four governance Conventions. These concern labour inspection, labour administration, employment policy and tripartite consultations. Finally,

50

The diplomacy of work

there are technical Conventions covering nearly every thinkable aspect of labour: for example, working time, weekly rest, holidays with pay, unemployment, unemployment benefits and employment, maternity leave and maternity protection, social security, occupational safety and health, wages and minimum wages, migration, employment relationship and labour contracts, equal treatment, labour in rural areas, indigenous and tribal people, sectoral Conventions on port labour, mining, textile, chemical work, building and construction, agriculture and the maritime convention. This last Convention, from 2006, is for seafarers. It is very detailed because of the specificity of the sector: seafarers are usually located outside territorial waters, so they are not protected by national laws.

In general, however, the Conventions are broad enough to reflect the specific national context and level of development of countries.

This is the ILO’s usual way of working: drawing up an international regulatory framework to ensure that it is possible to work according to specific national situations.

The world parliament of labour Every year in June, the International Labour Conference meets in Geneva. The fourteen-day conference brings together more than 5,000 participants from 187 member states. Each country is represented by government, employers and workers. If a government without social partners shows up, it is strongly disapproved. The Conference is held in the meeting rooms of the UN (Palais des Nations) and the ILO. Shuttle services take the participants from one building to another. It is an impressive event.

The Governing Body determines the agenda of the Conference.

The Conference negotiates and votes the new Conventions. This takes place after a rather complicated biennial negotiating procedure. In the first year, the broad outlines are set out, and in the second the precise wording definitions are agreed. The adoption of a Convention or Recommendation is always a highlight and a memorable moment.

International labour and social regulations show the way  

51

Each year, the Conference also discusses progress on one of the four strategic objectives of the Decent Work Agenda: decent and productive employment; social protection; respect for fundamental labour standards; and social dialogue. This is in order to identify the measures to be taken to improve its application. In some cases, general discussions are also organised – for example, in 2018, on ILO development cooperation.

The ILO in round figures

Total staff: 3,200 • Staff assigned to headquarters: 1,100 • Staff assigned to field offices: 2,100 - 5 regional offices - 33 country offices - 13 decent work technical support teams - 19 national coordinators - 1 regional centre (CINTERFOR, Uruguay) 613 Development cooperation programmes • in 131 countries • with a budget of 400 million US dollars International training centre ILO (ITC-ILO) in Turin: • 178 staff • 449 programmes • 12,727 students (face to face) of which in 2019: 57.3 per cent of students are taught in courses in the field • 9,612 distance learners

The Committee on the Application of Standards, one of the most important instruments of the supervisory system of the ILO, is a crucial part of the Conference. This will be explained below.

52

The diplomacy of work

Ratification ILO Conventions are binding as soon as they are ratified by a country.

Ratification is the acceptance by a country of the legal obligations of an international Convention. In many countries, the initiative lies with the Minister of Labour, who starts the procedure by consulting the social partners and then forwards a proposal for ratification to parliament. The ratification document is usually handed over during a brief ceremony in Geneva, or sometimes in the country itself; in any case, in the presence of the authorised minister or ambassador and the Director-General or his/her representative.

Even if the content of a Convention is specified in legislation and observed in practice, ratification is an important safeguard. A new government can always reverse a regulation. In the case of a ratified Convention, this is much more difficult.

Standards without supervision are worthless Standards – Conventions and Recommendations – are at the heart of the ILO; if they get into difficulty, then things go wrong with the organisation as a whole. Consequently, their application must be supervised closely. The supervisory system is regularly criticised and placed under pressure, first and foremost by governments who believe that they are being too frequently targeted.

Permanent monitoring Twenty renowned judges and lawyers from all over the world form the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations (CEACR). They are appointed by the Governing Body on the recommendation of its Officers after an extensive procedure of screenings and interviews. In November – December each year, the committee meets for three weeks to asses and comment on the application of the standards in each country which has ratified them. It

International labour and social regulations show the way

53

does so on the basis of the reports submitted by the governments by the end of August. All standards are dealt with according to an agreed system of rotation, and workers’ and employers’ organisations are also able to submit their comments. In February – March, the Committee of Experts publishes its report for the consideration of the Committee on the Application of Standards (CAS).

This Committee, in full the Committee on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, is the only standing committee of the International Labour Conference; it has an illustrious history: praised by some, despised by others. At the two-week conference, the Committee discusses the application of a standard in 24 countries (24 cases) selected from the experts’ report. Interest in these sessions is always very high, and it is not exceptional to have an audience of four or five hundred.

The Committee is chaired by a government representative, but it is the two Vice-Chairs, those of the employers and the workers, who play the leading role. As a result of agreements reached in the aftermath of the Second World War between the socialist and Christian international trade union movements, now combined in International Trade Union Confederation, the Chair on the workers’ side went to the Belgian ACV-CSC. These were in succession August Cool, Jef Houthuys, Willy Peirens, myself and now Marc Leemans. The job involves a great deal of hard work and a great deal of responsibility. It requires a very strong commitment, both from the organisation and from the Chair himself. The ACV-CSC has in the meantime acquired decades of knowledge and experience, and cooperation with the ITUC team is optimal. All of this means that the designation of the Chair to the ACV-CSC delegate is not today a subject for discussion.

During the twelve years (2000-2011) in which I was Chair and spokesperson of the Workers’ Group of the Committee on the Application of Standards and thus Vice-President of the Committee, I experienced many ups, but also some deep downs. Whenever I was in doubt, the motivation of the colleagues who sometimes run enor-

54

The diplomacy of work

mous risks in their own country boosted my morale again. For them, our work really makes a difference. Some of them know they could end up in prison, or worse. Several trade union leaders and human rights activists from Africa and Latin America have already told me that without the work of the Committee and the ILO, they would no longer be here. That’s how bad it is. But their ideals and their respect for their fellow working human beings mean a great deal to them.

They speak of it openly. I have even seen veiled threats made against workers’ representatives in the Committee, including by government representatives of Myanmar and Zimbabwe. In such cases the government concerned is then reminded of its duties and the need to respect the social partners – if necessary, through an official letter from the Director-General, and this has its effect.

Despite a major modernisation of its working methods over the last twenty years, the Committee on the Application of Standards is under constant pressure, precisely because it is so influential. The same scenario is repeated time and again. New government representatives want more say in the choice of cases and the formulation of decisions; that is until they experience how uncomfortable it is to call other countries – and thus fellow diplomats or members of government – to account. When it comes to countries with which they are in political conflict, however, they have no problem putting them on the list and discussing their case. Ultimately, it is therefore left to the Chairs of the Workers’ and Employers’ Groups to negotiate the compilation of the list of cases for examination. First, they select forty cases on the basis of the report of the experts and discussions with the workers’ and employers’ constituents. This list goes to the member states, which have a month in which to prepare and – as is often the case – lobby to be removed from the final list.

A few days before the start of the Conference, the two Vice-Chairpersons – currently Sonja Regenbogen, a Canadian lawyer for employers, and my successor Marc Leemans for the workers – negotiate a

International labour and social regulations show the way

55

list of twenty-four cases. Some cases are identified by the Committee of Experts as very serious – so serious that they are retained without discussion. Other cases are subject to more discussion: there is, of course, the seriousness of the matter to be taken into account, and worker and employer groups also have their own choices, but the urgency, the type of Conventions (fundamental, technical, governance), the regional distribution, the nature of the experts’ comments, the answers of the governments, and the history and level of development of the country in question are also considered.

The list of 24 cases is then submitted to the full Standards Committee after approval by the Workers’ and Employers’ Groups. After approval, each case is dealt with separately and the discussion is conducted according to a rigorous procedure of argument for and against.

The government must appear and justify itself; the two Vice-Chairpersons make the most important interventions. After that, the other committee members can intervene briefly. After the discussion, the Vice-Chairpersons jointly formulate a proposal for decisions. The Chair of the Committee submits the proposal to the Committee, which approves it. The decisions are subsequently adopted by the Conference as a whole. The most serious cases appear in a very visible, ‘special paragraph’ of the report.

Name and shame The name and shame method, naming the violations and the country involved and making its government feel ashamed of the facts, should not be underestimated. Countries really do not want to appear on the list, and certainly not on the final list of 24 countries put on display in the presence of hundreds of delegates in the Committee. In other words, the pointing finger is real, it is not just an administrative procedure. The damage to the country’s image and the impact on trade relations can be severe.

To avoid being on the list of cases, a country sometimes sends a diplomat in Brussels or Geneva, an ambassador or a minister to ap-

56

The diplomacy of work

proach the Vice-Chairpersons. On two occasions, I myself have even had a President on the line on my mobile phone. The ILO secretariat, especially the management of the standards department but even all the way up to the Director-General, are also regularly confronted with attempts to influence the choice. However, there is no breach of the separation of power and procedures; it is up to the Vice-Chairpersons of the Standards Committee to select cases on the basis of the report of the Committee of Experts while taking the different criteria into account. The Expert Committee and the Committee of Standards form the backbone of the ILO’s monitoring system.

Cases during the Conferences of 2018 and 2019

Bolivia (Convention C138): In Bolivia 850,000 children and young people between the ages of 5 and 17, or 28% of that age group, are working.

New legislation allows it from the age of 10. The government appeals to cultural tradition.

Bolivia (C131): Employers find that they are insufficiently involved in a government decision to raise the minimum wage.

Samoa (C182): Compulsory education does not apply to all children; there is child labour and sexual exploitation of children.

Georgia (C100): Discrimination against women. The legislation on equal remuneration is not in conformity with C100.

Eritrea (C29): Compulsory community service for dissidents; for drug addicts and alcoholics, sentences to forced labour for dissidents.

International labour and social regulations show the way

57

Cambodia (C105): Sentences to forced labour for political dissidents (human rights activists and trade union members) Belarus (C29): There is new legislation replacing open-ended contracts with fixed-term contracts. Workers are not allowed to change employer for a better contract.

People with no income still have to pay social security contributions. If they are unable to do so, they are placed in a centre where they are forced to work for companies.

Haïti (C1, C14, C30, C106): The maximum working hours per day and per week are not determined and this leads to abuse.

Bahrain (C111): Women, migrants and domestic workers are severely discriminated against by restricting their rights.

Tadjikistan (C111): Discrimination against women.

Libye (C111, C122): Discrimination of migrants coming from Sub-Saharan countries. Employment policy is failing. In a context of armed conflict, it increases poverty.

Yemen, Laos, Cabo Verde, Ethiopia, Iraq (C138, C182): Mostly severe forms of child labour.

Malaysia (C19): Migrants who are victims of work-related accidents do not have the same rights and protection as Malaysian nationals.

Brazil (C98): Companies can easily withdraw from collective agreements, leading to real wage cuts and reduction of workers’ rights.

58

The diplomacy of work

Greece (C98):

More than half of negotiations take place with all kinds of groups to marginalise trade unions.

India, Moldova, Ukraine, Serbia (C81, C129): Very weakly developed labour inspection, resulting in abuses and reduction of workers’ rights.

Honduras (C87): Between 2010 and 2016, 14 trade union leaders were murdered, and only one legal prosecution took place.

Algeria, Botswana, Egypt, El Salvador, Philippines, Kazakhstan, Serbia, Myanmar, Nigeria, Japan, Uruguay, Honduras, Turkey, Fiji, Zimbabwe, Mexico (C87, C98, C144): Different degrees of prohibition of free trade unions, prevention of trade union work or restriction of the right to free collective bargaining. No respect of tripartite consultation.

Myanmar (C29): New facts of forced labour imposed by the military on some ethnic minorities.

Nicaragua (C117): Complete failure of social policy.

The cold shower In June 2000, when – after a great deal of trial and error – my team and I had finished my first Conference in the Standards Committee, I had a meeting with Director-General Juan Somavia. He had then been in charge of the ILO for a year. I was expecting some concluding reflections, perhaps a small word of thanks. Instead, my first important contribution to the work of the ILO ended with a cold shower. Somavia launched a frontal attack: ‘What I try to build up in the world with a great deal of diplomacy, you break down brick by brick,’ he reproached me. I had tried to hold my own in my first year in the Com-

International labour and social regulations show the way

59

mittee, so I didn’t feel like I had broken down anything. So, I replied with a list of cases of serious offences and disgraceful practices, such as the murders in Colombia. ‘We couldn’t just let that pass, could we?’

We broke up at odds.

Soon the conversation was the talk of the town, and there was some concern about the incident. Months later, when I met Kari Tapiola, Executive Director and second-in-command, he said that during a visit to the Gulf States, Somavia had been asked whether they could omit certain parts or interpret them differently when ratifying the fundamental Conventions. Somavia replied that Conventions could not be partially ratified, and that management had no authority in the interpretation or assessment of the application of a Convention. That is something for the Committee of Experts and the Committee on the Application of Standards. Since our incident, he had thus adjusted his assessment of the usefulness and operation of both committees. Somewhat later, on an official visit to Belgium, Somavia asked to meet me. He explained his experience with the Gulf States, apologised for his outburst a few months earlier, and we put aside our conflict. From then on, he was very accessible to me, although he never became a great supporter of the Committee of Experts or the Standards Committee. But he took time to listen and we could work together, and that was even more important when I became Vice-Chairperson of the Governing Body.

Looking back, we were both right and wrong. At the time, the Workers’ Group insisted on the toughest conclusions in serious cases.

The more special paragraphs, the greater the success. A special paragraph means that the statement is included with the main conclusions of the Conference. A severe condemnation for the country. But the question was whether this changed anything in reality in the country itself. I also had a point: the cases we talked about usually pointed to serious lack of cooperation on the part of the governments involved and could not be solved with diplomacy.

Not for that reason, but because of lessons learned from experience, we have gradually evolved towards different kinds of decisions in the

60

The diplomacy of work

Committee’s conclusions. Sometimes hard demands have to be made, complemented by concrete follow-up. If there is real political will, technical support can be very useful. Sometimes the Office sends a mission to investigate the situation on the ground and to call for further action.

The strongest message is sending a tripartite mission (workers, employers, governments). Part 2 on ‘The world of work’ discusses some recent examples. In the past few years, the Committee’s conclusions have become a mix of recommendations, research, dialogue, persuasion, guidance, support and pressure. However, when governments fail to get on the right track, the ILO has a number of options.

The complaints system The two committees described above represent the permanent supervisory system. But because the world of work is in constant motion, a complaints system has also been developed. In addition to this formal system, a more informal approach is sometimes also used.

The informal route is usually followed when the Director-General receives letters of complaint, often from or about people imprisoned without much in the way of a trial, about threats or murders in the context of impunity, or about government interference in employers’ or workers’ organisations. In consultation with the Department of Standards, the Director-General can then usually inform the government in question by letter of the importance of freedom of association. There may also be contact between a member of the ILO staff and the permanent representation of the country concerned in Geneva. These interventions are carried out discreetly and with respect for the rules of diplomacy, but they are frequently effective. A first system of formal complaints is the Committee on Freedom of Association of the Governing Body. This is where complaints come in about freedom of association, freedom of collective bargaining, freedom of action and the right to strike.

The meetings are secret and the members, a renowned independent Chairperson and three representatives of each of the three groups,

International labour and social regulations show the way

61

sit in their individual capacity. They are therefore not accountable to anybody, not even their own groups. This system is very similar to our labour courts and tribunals, where a magistrate sits with one judge from the employer’s side and another from the worker’s. The Committee has dealt with more than 4,000 cases in its history. Of particular interest is the consistently updated Compilation of Decisions of the Committee on Freedom of Association.7 It contains a wealth of information on how the scope and limits of the right to strike have been judged. Social partners and politicians at the national level would do well to consult this compilation before making statements or drafting new rules on the right to strike.

A second formal complaints system is for subjects other than freedom of association and operates initially through the three officers of the Governing Body. If they decide that a complaint is admissible and this is confirmed by the GB, it appoints an Ad Hoc Committee of three people, one from each group. These discussions are also confidential, and the conclusions are confirmed by the GB. Thirdly, any member of the International Labour Conference has the right to propose the establishment of a Commission of Inquiry if it considers that a country is in serious breach of a Convention. The GB decides whether or not to establish it. The Commission of Inquiry consists of three jurists, judges or top lawyers appointed by the Governing Body on the advice of the Director-General. It goes on location to investigate the situation closely and to hear witnesses. This procedure is rarely used, as it is very difficult to find a majority for it in the Governing Body. Governments are reluctant to call another country to order, and employers often find it a step too far when it comes to a worker complaint. So far, only thirteen Commissions of Inquiry have been set up in the ILO’s history. Most of them resonate strongly, especially in relation to the history of the countries concerned: Portugal 1962, Liberia 1963, Greece 1968, Chile 1975, Poland 1982, Dominican Republic 1983, Germany 1985, Romania 1989, Nicaragua 1991, Burma/Myanmar 1996, Belarus 2003, Zimbabwe 2010, Venezuela 2018. If no agreement is

62

The diplomacy of work

reached on the establishment of a Commission of Inquiry, other mechanisms, such as a High-Level Tripartite Mission, can be used. This involves a mission lasting maximum a week, while a Commission of Inquiry usually takes months to investigate the situation in depth. In part 2, ‘The world of work’, I go a little deeper into the work of such missions in Myanmar, Qatar, Colombia, Guatemala and Venezuela.

Finally, in very serious cases, the Governing Body can take very severe measures, such as exclusion from all activities of and support from the ILO. When the United Nations agrees, the measures can even extend to trade restrictions. This has happened only once, in 2000 in the case of Myanmar.

International labour and social regulations show the way

63

3 The right to strike under pressure

The ingredients of a crisis As I mentioned already, in 2011, at the request of the ITUC, I became the Chairperson of the Workers’ Group of the Governing Body. I remained in this function until June 2017, when I was elected to Chair the Governing Body, of which I will remain a member until June 2021.

After my twelve-year mandate in the Committee on the Application of Standards, I was intensely involved in the life and governance of the ILO for a further nine years.

In the Committee on the Application of Standards, I was fortunate to be able to work with two extraordinary personalities, Alfred Wisskirchen from the German employers’ organisation BDA, and the American Ed Potter, General HR Manager at Coca-Cola in Atlanta.

Both had practical experience of industrial relations in the field. There were difficult moments, but our discussions were always fair, solution-oriented and conducted with great mutual respect. In 2012, lawyer Chris Syder, representative of the Confederation of British Industry (CBI), took over as the new Chairperson of the Employers’ Group in the Committee. That same year, Marc Leemans succeeded me on the workers’ side. The most important change was at the top of the ILO: just before the International Labour Conference of June 2012, the Briton Guy Ryder, from a trade union background, succeeded the Chilean diplomat Juan Somavia as the tenth Director-General of the ILO. That Conference witnessed positive breakthroughs, including the adoption of a new instrument, the Recommendation on Social Protec-

65

tion Floors and the improved situation in Myanmar with the ending of sanctions against that country. For the first time at an ILO Conference, there was also a healthy debate on the importance of green jobs. But there were also concerns about youth unemployment and the malaise in Greece. I saw how both Greek workers and employers felt pushed away by the European troika; they were under guardianship. However, there was nothing to indicate a clash in the Committee on the Application of Standards. During the preparatory meetings with employers and governments, neither I nor other insiders had any notion of anything lurking in the background. But in 2012, the ILO was facing a new ordeal.

The right to strike had long been a delicate theme. Employers had been formulating reservations since the 1990s. From my predecessor Willy Peirens I had learned that there was an unwritten rule. Problems with the right to strike, often linked to other labour problems, could be discussed in the Committee, but the employers did not want to agree to any decisions about it. For them, this was only possible in the Committee on Freedom of Association, which deals separately with specific problems of freedom of association, including strike cases.

This was difficult for the workers, but at least we knew where to go if ever there were problems with the right to strike.

In 2012, however, a colder wind was blowing through the Employers’ Group. Under the impulse of the influential British CBI, several employers’ representatives formed a front. The European employers’ organisation Business Europe got the American and Latin-American employers on board, which was not so difficult, and even my diplomatic employers’ colleague in the Governing Body, the Argentine Daniel Funes de Rioja, was obliged to adopt a harder tone.

The Employers’ Group felt that the ILO was too heavily dominated by governments and workers. The fact that Guy Ryder, a Director-General with a workers’ background, had been elected, only reinforced that impression. However, his election had been conducted according to all standard procedures and he had won in open competi-

66

The diplomacy of work

tion with eight other candidates. On top of that, the Committee of Experts had just reminded everyone in some detail in its General Survey that the right to strike was inherent to Convention 87 on freedom of association. That was a real challenge for employers. The workers for their part were in a comparatively weak position in that period, as is often the case in times of economic crisis.

The bomb in the Standards Committee The Employers’ Group presented four tough demands. Firstly, they wanted a disclaimer to be printed on the cover of the experts’ report: ‘The experts advise the Committee on Application of Standards (CAS). Only the conclusions agreed by the three groups in the CAS are authoritative as interpretation.’ Secondly, the employers no longer wanted to discuss cases relating to Convention 87 in the CAS. The most fundamental of all labour rights had become taboo. Thirdly, employers no longer wanted consensual conclusions. They wanted the conclusions of each group to be printed side by side. But without joint decisions, the Committee would completely lose its authority with regard to governments that flouted Conventions. Fourthly, the Employers’ Group announced that it would also challenge the interpretation of other Conventions, such as C158 on the termination of employment, C169 on indigenous and tribal people, and C183 on maternity protection. All of this came as a real blow.

The demands were unacceptable, not only for the Workers’ Group, but also for the governments, who didn’t know what had hit them. The discussion in the CAS ground to a halt and no list of cases to be discussed could be compiled. The legal advisor was called in, followed by the Chairs of the three groups in the Governing Body and the Chair of the Conference. My colleague from the Employers’ Group could only repeat that this was now the new approach in his group. The discussions with the Director of the Standards Department, Cleopatria Doumbia-Henry, and the attempt at reconciliation by Director-General Juan Somavia – Guy Ryder had been elected but was not yet in office – were to no avail.

The right to strike under pressure

67

The event caused a shockwave through the Conference. Workers are ‘outraged’, read the headline of the ITUC press release. That outrage was more than justified. Imagine the following. You come from a country where an ILO Convention is consistently flouted; where, for example, freedom of negotiation is violated, trade unions are gagged, colleagues are imprisoned or murdered, child labour is rampant, forced labour thrives, certain groups are severely discriminated against, women are systematically marginalised. In the midst of all this misery, there is a glimmer of hope: the ILO experts recognise the problem and the government can be called to account in Geneva. But once you arrive in Geneva, you’re told that the government doesn’t even have to come and defend itself.

In fact, the stakes were even higher. The very essence and ambition of the International Labour Organization was at stake. It was about the future of the international supervisory mechanism, about the future of international labour standards, about the future of the International Labour Conference and about the future of the ILO as a tripartite consultative and decision-making platform. Everyone who was in Geneva at the time realised this. The employers had thrown a bomb into the Standards Committee and the ILO. The next morning, I chaired the Workers’ Group meeting. There were as many as 900 people in room XIX of the Palais des Nations. The atmosphere in my group was a mix of incomprehension, powerlessness, deep disappointment and anger. Marc Leemans said in his report: ‘The roof collapsed here yesterday. A black day for the International Labour Organization and for workers in particular. The strenuous attempts as in previous years to reach an agreement between workers and employers on a list of twenty-five countries to be dealt with by the Committee on the Application of Standards from today onwards have ended in failure. There will not be a list. Apart from a few formal, mutual statements and the normal routine for approving reports, the Committee’s work is done, and the members can return home empty-handed. Unprecedented. Unheard of.’

68

The diplomacy of work

For me personally, who had always strongly believed in the importance of the Standards Committee, it was a terrible disappointment.

But my role now was to give leadership to my group so that the worker delegates could have confidence and find a coherent way forward. I knew this was an all-time low. For the first time in eighty-six years, one of the three groups had made it impossible to draw up a list of cases to examine. This was no accident. It was part of a strategy.

What was not said in so many words during the Conference suddenly became clear when someone discovered a YouTube video of an interview with CAS Employers’ Chair Chris Syder. Syder’s reasoning was more or less as follows: worldwide, workers have started to organise better, through international trade unions and also thanks to social media. On a national level, they are protesting against austerity programmes, and are increasingly resorting to strikes. He expressed his frustration that former British Prime Minister David Cameron and his government didn’t want to introduce stricter strike legislation, out of fear that the International Labour Conference would give him a rap on the knuckles. That fear was justified. Recently, Greece had been at the forefront because of its violations – under pressure from the Troika – of ILO standards on freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining. But Syder went further, saying that they absolutely had to take care that these international standards on freedom of association, the right to collective bargaining and above all the right to strike were not more than soft law, without any influence on national legislation and jurisprudence. He explained that British employers were in contact with the French, German and Spanish employers, in order to arrive at a common strategy.

The ultimate form of protest If we look at the figures, there were more strikes in Europe in the 1990s than after the turn of the century. In 2010, however, there was a relative peak: per 1000 workers there were 71 strike days per year.8 The

The right to strike under pressure

69

reason for that peak was the austerity measures taken in several countries. But when the financial and debt crisis turned into a full-blown economic crisis, strikes fell because of the enormous insecurity. Nobody could afford to lose their jobs. Socially, strikes are not popular, especially among those who are not directly involved but who still suffer the consequences. This has a lot to do with individualisation and the hectic schedules around which we organise our lives. Moreover, the service sector now forms a much larger part of our economy and strikes there quickly affect people’s everyday life nowadays. So many people are confronted with the consequences of strikes. Trade unions are blamed for their perceived lack of creativity. ‘There really are a lot of other ways besides a strike to express dissatisfaction,’ people seem to say. But recent history shows that even big demonstrations are rapidly forgotten after just a couple of days. That said, the strike is the ultimate means of applying pressure and must be handled with care.

That much is obvious.

The right to strike is included in the constitution of many, though not all countries – not in Belgium, for example – but it is a fundamental right in Europe. Contrary to popular belief, the right to strike is not a collective right, but an individual right of every worker. Strike laws are most common in totalitarian states, and in democratic countries they usually do not have the desired effect. It is better to make agreements between the social partners. In 2002, I was one of the negotiators of the so-called ‘Gentlemen’s Agreement on the Right to Strike’ in Belgium, which laid down a number of principles. Sometimes agreements also exist at the sector or company level. If they respect international regulations and their interpretation, this is the best approach.

The right to strike in international law Since 1951, the Committee on Freedom of Association has taken decisions on many hundreds of strike situations. Acceptable limits on strikes have been identified. As indicated earlier, the Committee has a tripartite composition, its members meet in closed sessions and in

70

The diplomacy of work

a personal capacity and are therefore not accountable to the group that nominated them. For these reasons, the ‘Compilation of Decisions of the Committee on Freedom of Association’ carries a high degree of objectivity.

The foreword to the ILO Constitution sets out a number of fundamental principles, including freedom of organisation. Convention 87 gave substance to that principle in 1948. The right to strike is not included explicitly, but the jurisprudence of the Committee of Experts states that this right does result from the Convention, because it protects the freedom to take action. This was generally accepted from 1952 to 1992. In several earlier resolutions of the International Labour Conference and in other Conventions, the right was recognised by all groups. The Cold War period was highly characteristic in this regard.

Several reports from this period show how employers, governments and workers of Western economies challenged the countries of the Eastern Bloc on issues of workers’ freedoms, freedom of association and to collective bargaining, including the right to strike. At that time, the right to strike even served as an element of propaganda for the social market economy against the communist model of the state-run economy. For forty years, it was not a point of discussion – until 1992, after the fall of the Berlin Wall, when doubts began to arise as to the usefulness of the ILO. By then, however, courts and tribunals all over the world had adopted the Committee of Experts’ interpretations of labour and social issues. This judicial authority is one of the ILO’s most important achievements.

The employers now wanted to put a stop to this. They stated that the right to strike was a national matter, not an international one. This is remarkable, because European Constitution Article II-88, which has embodied many of the ILO’s principles and Conventions, could not be clearer: ‘Workers and employers, or their respective organisations, have, in accordance with Union law and national laws and practices, the right to negotiate and conclude collective agreements at the

The right to strike under pressure

71

appropriate levels and, in cases of conflicts of interest, to take collective action to defend their interests, including strike action.’

It is true, however, that in a few notorious cases, the European Court of Justice has determined that the right to employ workers from other countries – an example of a company’s freedom of establishment – weighed more heavily than workers’ right to strike to protect their interests from being undermined by the hiring of those workers on inferior terms and conditions (the Laval and Viking cases). On the other hand, the European Court of Human Rights and the European Committee of Social Rights of the Council of Europe, reject the weighing of the right to strike against other (commercial) rights.

Searching for a solution How could we save these most crucial aspects of the ILO construction? It was going to be intense. We studied the entire legal and negotiating history. We spoke with and listened to many top lawyers. We argued within our own group. We looked for solutions together with ILO management. We listened and talked to people from the Government Group. We sounded out sympathetic members of that group.

We tried to find out what had moved the employers to take their hard line. And we were looking for employer representatives who might not be so keen on this strategy after all.

First of all, immediately after the Conference, I announced to the Governing Body that as long as the conflict initiated by the employers had not been resolved, my group would no longer participate in the Standard Review Mechanism. The intention of that mechanism was, as had already happened twice in the history of the ILO, to examine which Conventions and Recommendations had become outdated and to identify gaps which still existed. This is a particularly delicate operation. It cannot be the intention that protection be reduced; it has to be adapted to the changing context and times. This review exercise required a high-level of mutual trust between the three groups. However, I informed the Governing Body that I assumed that there was no

72

The diplomacy of work

longer sufficient trust, given the attack on the entire system from the employers’ side. The process was halted, which hurt both the employers’ and the governments’ sides, but nobody dared to claim that my manoeuvre was unfair.

Subsequently, in 2012, the ILO organised two well-documented informal tripartite meetings and the Committee of Experts explained its working method very convincingly, and explained how they consider and weigh their comments, and how they strive for the greatest possible objectivity. From the Workers’ Group, we relied on case law and showed how all constituents used to be on the same wavelength concerning the right to strike, especially during the Cold War, in order to challenge the Eastern Bloc. The employers kept repeating the same arguments. They got the support of an American law firm specialised in union busting – bullying and fighting trade unions, preventing them from organising in enterprises. The employers continued to block the process; the experts were hurt by the lack of respect; the governments kept silent and observed the discussion between the Workers’ and Employers’ Groups as if they were watching a tennis match, with balls lobbed from one side of the court to the other in an endless match with no winner.

The Swiss Government offered its services to initiate mediation between the Employers’ Group and the Workers’ Group, with Director-General Guy Ryder, special advisor Francis Maupain and Chairperson of the Governing Body Gilles de Robien (France) as observers.

The Swiss Ambassador and ILO expert Jean-Jacques Elmiger (who was later, in 2019, the Chair of the Centenary session of the International Labour Conference) and his assistant, now Ambassador Valérie Berset Bircher, first heard the two groups and then convened several meetings. Some governments were not pleased with the initiative because it did not include them. They referred to it pejoratively as the ‘Swiss Chalet Process’. The advantage of the process was that all the pieces of the puzzle were clearly and visibly on the table, from the right to strike to the entire ILO supervisory system. But the proposal

The right to strike under pressure

73

that was eventually put forward would have had major and disruptive consequences for that supervisory system. That was something Raquel Gonzalez, the Workers’ Group Secretary, and I could not accept.

To the International Court of Justice?

Within the ITUC, General Secretary Sharan Burrow had set up a special working group. No time or effort was spared to find a way out of the impasse, with input from a number of international specialists.

The clearer it became that the consultations were leading to nothing, the more convinced we became that a way out could be found in article 37 of the ILO constitution. In the event of unsolvable disputes over the interpretation of an ILO standard, this provides either for an ILO tribunal – which has never been set up – or the involvement of the International Court of Justice in The Hague. Both options were initially received coldly by the Workers’ Group. Until now, we had considered that the Committee of Experts was the only impartial and objective authority. Submitting a dispute to a tribunal or the Court of Justice would impinge on that authority – so reasoned several of my colleagues. The Workers’ Group eventually agreed to explore these options, with a number of conditions attached. It soon became clear that establishing a tribunal would win little support from the governments, who mainly objected to the price tag. The employers wanted a tripartite court in which they could participate, but the other groups did not support that idea.

In the meantime, the Committee of Experts had already been able to remedy part of the problem. It restated its mandate as follows: ‘The Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations is an independent body (…). Its opinions and recommendations are non-binding, being intended to guide the actions of national authorities. They derive their persuasive value from the legitimacy and rationality of the Committee’s work based on its impartiality, experience and expertise. The Committee’s technical role and moral authority is well recognized, particularly as it has been engaged

74

The diplomacy of work

in its supervisory task for 90 years, by virtue of its composition, independence and its working methods (…).’ The Governing Body – and thus also the employers – welcomed this wording. The experts acknowledged that they had no right of decision, but they did have authority. The text was a formal confirmation of what their role had always been; it reassured the employers somewhat, but the problem was only partly solved.

For brand new Director-General Guy Ryder, there was nothing else to do but to get involved with the conflict himself, which was also the desire of the three groups. This was a precarious undertaking. Ryder organised consultations with the three groups separately and came to the Governing Body with the proposal to address a question to the International Court of Justice, ‘to urgently render an advisory opinion on the following questions: 1. Is the right to strike of workers and their organizations protected under the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87)?

2. Was the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations of the ILO competent to: a. Determine that the right to strike derives from the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and b. In examining the application of that Convention, specify certain elements concerning the scope of the right to strike, its limits and the conditions for its legitimate exercise?’9 Ryder also linked this to a possible revision of the Supervisory Mechanism and the relaunching of the Standards’ Review Mechanism.

The Workers’ Group agreed with the proposed package, but the Employers’ Group did not. They did not want to be dependent on a process that was not under their control, in this case a ruling of the International Court of Justice. Europe and GRULAC (Group of Latin American Countries) supported the proposal, but with the workers for

The right to strike under pressure

75

and the employers against, 51% of the governments had to be in favour of it. There was no vote, but there was no majority. After the Governing Body of November 2014, my group left Geneva, completely gutted.

The Bureau then proposed to hold a meeting with specialists on the right to strike in February 2015. The ILO lawyers had had the idea of having a resolution adopted by the Governing Body in March and submitting it to the Conference in June. The content of the resolution would be on the right to strike as part of C87. Together with the leadership of the ITUC, we were not in favour of that proposal. Our fear was that this would immediately plunge us into an ungovernable discussion about the scope and limits of the right to strike, issues on which it would be impossible to reach a full consensus. Moreover, there was a great deal of uncertainty about the legal value of a Conference resolution which would interpret a Convention.

The right to industrial action We decided to change tack. We wanted to go back to the source of the conflict, to the employers, to better understand their motives. Jørgen Rønnest of the Danish employers’ organisation had taken over as Employers’ Chairperson several months before. During the disastrous meeting of the Governing Body in November 2014, he had maintained the hard employers’ line. He even had a high-profile discussion about it with the Italian Chairperson of the Government Group. But I had had good conversations with him in the past. Rønnest had been a very positive voice within Business Europe for many years, when that organisation still stood up for the benefits of social dialogue in the European Union.

The Baltic wind was strong and cold on that December day in Copenhagen in 2014. For the entire day, Jørgen Rønnest and I tried to understand each other, to compare and assess difficulties and possibilities. That’s all it had to be – concrete decisions were not my goal that day. From that contact and several others, I was able to see that the employers were gradually realising that their attack had not so much

76

The diplomacy of work

given them additional influence as isolate them from the other groups in the ILO – the workers and most governments as well as the office.

Meanwhile, the conflict also reached the European Union. The PES, Party of European Socialists, had invited me in my role as Workers’ Chairperson in the ILO to explain the background of the conflict before a plenary session of the European Parliament in Brussels. At the same time, they prepared a parliamentary discussion on the right to strike. Commissioner Marianne Thyssen was to make a supporting intervention in the European Parliament during that session. In February 2015, the Council of Global Unions, the leaders of the ITUC’s sectoral global federations, had a clear message for ITUC General Secretary Sharan Burrow and me: ‘The conflict is obstructing the work of the ILO; try to reach a pragmatic solution with the employers.’

This was important support for the path we were following. That same day, on the eve of the special meeting on the right to strike in the ILO, Sharan Burrow and I sat down with the employers again. I said I didn’t understand how they could just reject the principle of the right to strike. They replied that weren’t against the right to strike per se. And Sharan Burrow, Brent Wilton (Secretary General, of the International Organisation of Employers IOE), Jørgen Rønnest and I began to formulate: ‘The right to take industrial action by workers and employers in support of their legitimate industrial interests is recognised by the constituents of the International Labour Organization.’10 That was the general principle. Then together we accepted the case law. Violations of the right to strike could be further discussed and concluded on a case-by-case basis in the Committee on Freedom of Association. Taking this into account, the right to strike could be part of discussions again in the Committee on the Application of Standards of the Conference, for example in the context of cases about the application of Convention 87 or 98, but no direct reference to that right would be included in the conclusions. We reached an agreement.

There is still a difference of opinion on the source of the right to strike.

Employers derive the right to strike from the general principles de-

The right to strike under pressure

77

scribed in the introduction to the Constitution. Workers agree with that, but they also maintain that the right to strike flowing from Convention 87 is stronger. The text continued with some agreements on the future of the supervisory system, the recognition of the mandate of the Committee of Experts as described above, consensual decision-making in the Standards’ Committee (jointly formulated decisions) and the reopening of the discussion on the Standards’ Review Mechanism, which we had previously blocked.

But that wasn’t the end of it. Over the next few days, we presented the agreement to our respective groups. There were two views in the Workers’ Group, that of the unlimited application of the right to strike, and that of the pragmatic solution. The pragmatists were in the majority. Nor was the discussion among the employers easy, but the pragmatists won the argument there as well.

When my colleague from the Employers’ Group and I informed the governments informally of our agreement, their initial reaction was incomprehension and anger. The governments had brought with them their legal specialists on the right to strike, but now they were presented with this statement. The relationship between the three constituents is particularly interesting. We often find an (unstable) equilibrium. Governments like to claim the final word and position themselves above the social partners. But if there is no solution, they urge the social partners to reach an agreement. That’s what happened now. The governments finally understood that a pragmatic way out had been found, and the only thing to do was to be satisfied with it. At the Governing Body in March 2015, Marilina Armellin, the Italian Chairperson of the Government Group declared on behalf of all governments that she appreciated the efforts and the result achieved by the social partners, and stressed that ‘The Government Group recognizes that the right to strike is linked to freedom of association which is a fundamental principle and right at work of the ILO. The Government Group specifically recognizes that without protecting a right to strike, Freedom of Association, in particular the right to organize ac-

78

The diplomacy of work

tivities for the purpose of promoting and protecting workers’ interests, cannot be fully realized. (…) However, we also note that the right to strike, albeit part of the fundamental principles and rights at work of the ILO, is not an absolute right. The scope and conditions of this right are regulated at the national level. (…)’11 With this statement, the governments went further than the agreement reached with the social partners. That was and still is an important boost for the workers. But without the agreement and the joint statement between workers and employers, the governments would never have reached this position. In my time in the ILO, I was never able to get the entire Government Group to come to such an important substantive statement. Marilina Armellin, who then chaired the Government Group, played an outstanding role. The crisis had been averted. It could just as easily have been fatal for the ILO. At the request of the Governing Body, the Chairpersons of the Committee of Experts (Judge A. G. Koroma) and of the Committee on Freedom of Association (Prof. Paul van der Heijden) conducted and presented a review of the ILO’s Supervisory Mechanism. Together with the Joint Statement of the Employers’ and the Workers’ Group and the Statement of the ILO Government Group (2015), their study formed the basis for discussions in the GB on an update of the supervisory system. The GB took the final decision in March 2019. There were adaptations to the methodology of the system but, after careful consideration, no substantial changes were made to its structures or objectives. This demonstrates that the founders had indeed built a solid, balanced system.

This recent crisis over the right to strike exemplifies the complexity of a large, diverse, influential and ambitious multilateral organisation such as the ILO. Things can get tough. There will always be pressure from some governments; the Employers’ Group is still critical of the institution; in the Workers’ Group, it will probably continue to be a regular source of controversy. And yet the organisation once again

The right to strike under pressure

79

found the strength to climb out of the valley, just as it had in all the previous moments of crisis over the past century. Of course, you don’t just live to be a hundred. You have to be cut from the right cloth.

80 

The diplomacy of work

part ii

The world of work

4 Slavery: deep-rooted, tenacious, still with us

At the screening of his film 12 Years a Slave, the British Director Steve McQueen called the book that inspired him ‘as important as Anne Frank’s diary’. The Oscar-winning film and the 1853 book of the same name by Solomon Northup, a New Yorker who was abducted and sold as a slave to work on the Louisiana plantations in 1841 and only released twelve years later confront us with the inhumane existence of slaves, just as Anne Frank’s diary confronts us with the horror of the persecution of Jews. Bestsellers and successful films like these act as wake-up calls. They activate our built-in moral GPS, a kind of signpost that immediately puts us on the side of the victims and mobilises us against such abuses. But they place the slave trade in the past. Yet slavery has been present at all times, including ours.

In June 2017, the Brussels criminal court sentenced the Arab princess Sheikha Hamda Alnehayan from Abu Dhabi (United Arab Emirates) and seven of her daughters to a suspended sentence of one month’s imprisonment, a fine of more than 1.3 million euros and compensation of 15,000 euros for human trafficking and degrading treatment of 23 maidservants. The women had worked for them as slaves in the former Conrad Hotel in Brussels. In May 2017, the Belgian Canvas TV-programme Terzake gave me the opportunity to place this case – which is exceptional for Belgium – in a broader context. Yes, slavery still exists. Based on the data available at the time in the ILO, I said that there were about 21 million people still in slavery. We now

83

know that there are at least 40 million (including forced labour, modern slavery which includes forced marriage too). Before I turn to this problem on the global scale, I’d like to examine with you the reality of two countries. The first is Myanmar, as Burma was renamed by a military junta in 1989. The second country is Qatar. Both cases are about the most common form of modern slavery: forced labour, and the way in which the ILO deals with it.

Myanmar: genocide and oppression – will it ever end?

For decades, Burmese – or Myanmarese, as they are now known – have been picked up from their villages at random. Soldiers demand that civilians work without pay and in appalling conditions, among other things on public infrastructure projects. Breadwinners are snatched away, and the families and villages left behind end up even deeper in poverty. As part of attempts to end this practice, the ILO had placed a Liaison Officer in Myanmar. I was there on a mission in 2012.

Rangoon (Yangon), 3 May 2012. Even if it is not their nature, these Myanmarese do not hide their enthusiasm for the meeting. They have waited for us long and patiently in a small room. Ten women and fifteen men in their finest longyi, an ankle-length cloth much like a sarong, and a snow-white shirt. Only a year or two earlier, this contact would have been impossible. They would have ended up in prison, or worse. Nobody has complete security, but now we dare to take the risk. At last they can turn up and speak freely.

They are all members of a volunteer network, key figures for the ILO Liaison Office. For years they have been signalling violations of the ILO’s Convention against forced labour, so that the ILO could report on the evolution of the problem.

84

The world of work

During the International Labour Conference in Geneva, a special session of the Committee on the Application of Standards was dedicated to this case of particularly serious violations of international human and workers’ rights every year. As Worker Chairperson and ViceChair of this Committee, I have been confronted with it for twelve years. But gradually, something is beginning to move in this country, as we saw these days through our contacts in the country. This meeting is not only special for the volunteers but also for us. Their stories about facts and developments are important. Moreover, these people make a great concrete contribution to human rights, despite the risk of being arrested, mistreated and sentenced by the police, the military and the courts. They command respect through their simplicity, warmth, commitment and intransigence. Their well-documented testimony is moving and makes us silent and humble. They confirm that the number of workers claimed by soldiers in the villages has been decreasing significantly for some time. Yet this trend is not the same everywhere, and there still are distressing situations. But they are convinced that the recent change goes deeper than surface appearances, and that is even fundamental. This takes me back in my mind to the situation twelve years before.

A striking encounter Geneva, June 2000. On a Sunday afternoon during the International Labour Conference, I get a call from Anna Biondi, Director of the Geneva office of the then International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU). She asks me if I can come by that afternoon to meet an important guest. This is rather inconvenient, because it is my first year as Workers’ Chair of the Committee on the Application of Standards, where governments that don’t take international labour regulations very seriously are called to account. I still have a lot to learn, so I am in the midst of preparing for the days to come. Full of doubts, I accept Anna’s invitation, vaguely hoping that I will be able to learn something from it. When I arrive, the family apartment is already filled

Slavery: deep-rooted, tenacious, still with us

85

with colleagues from the Workers’ Group of the Conference. The main guest turns out to be Maung Maung.

Maung Maung was a mining geologist in Burma. In 1988 he founded the Myanmar Gems Mining Union on the Thai-Burmese border, became President of the umbrella miners’ union of Burma, and had a leading role in pro-democracy civil society organisations. That same year, there were many demonstrations against the totalitarian regime, a military junta that pursued a policy of oppression. Several population groups were severely treated, and the poor were exploited, primarily by the military. There were protests from all segments of society and unrest throughout the country. Students, monks and civil society organisations organised actions. A huge demonstration in Rangoon on 8 August 1988 was brutally put down and ended with a military coup on September 18. There were thousands of deaths. During this period, Aung San Suu Kyi became a national and later an international icon, thanks in part to the 2011 Franco-British biographical film The Lady.

Under strong international pressure, the military junta organised elections in 1990. To the dismay of the military, Suu Kyi’s party, the National League for Democracy, won 80% of the seats. The junta rejected the result and put her under house arrest. Meanwhile Maung Maung had left Burma. On 14 November 1988, he was dismissed by the government from his post as a mining official, and just before the military came to arrest him, he was able to flee to Thailand. His wife and three-year-old child were left behind.

When we first met in Geneva, Maung Maung had been living in asylum for twelve years. In Thailand, together with his friends and fellow sufferers, he had founded the Federation of Trade Unions of Burma (FTUB), the Burmese trade union in exile. Under the aegis of this organisation they sought support and found a response from the international trade union movement and the International Labour Organization. He was now in Geneva with international support, and on the basis of a special procedure he would be able to intervene during the Conference discussion the following day.

86

The world of work

Unwelcome Commission of Inquiry A victim of forced labour is someone who is forced to work for a government or private company with few or no rights, and for little or no pay. Already in 1930, the International Labour Conference adopted Convention 29, the Convention on Forced Labour, which prohibits this form of work. Both the text and its interpretation are clear: a state that encourages, accepts, supports or tolerates forced labour within its borders violates international rules. Any person who violates the prohibition of forced labour is guilty of violating international law and if this is done in a comprehensive and systematic manner, it is a crime against humanity.

By the turn of the century there were an estimated 800,000 victims of forced labour in Burma. Soldiers invaded villages in the states of Arakan, Chin, Kachin, Karen and Shan and deported men, women and children. They were forced to quarry stones and to build roads, stations, bridges and other infrastructure, to keep watch for the military, to carry weapons and other military equipment (often by women and children in the army’s struggle against various ethnic groups), to be human landmine detectors.… The private sector was also involved.

The South Korean company Daewoo exploited natural gas fields. The French company TotalFinaElf and the American company Unocal (subsequently Chevron) had installations and pipelines for drilling natural gas offshore. They supported the regime in exchange for being allowed to construct necessary infrastructure for their operations.

In the ILO, Myanmar received support from China, India and other Asian neighbours. They were on friendly terms with the regime, hoping to grab a share of the country’s rich mineral resources. Thanks to the Workers’ and Employers’ Groups and enough governments, there was a majority in the Governing Body in 1996 for setting up a Commission of Inquiry, a measure provided for in the ILO Constitution. A Commission of Inquiry is composed of three internationally renowned judges or top lawyers. The Government of Myanmar refused to grant the Commission access to its territory, and thus it had

Slavery: deep-rooted, tenacious, still with us

87

to operate from Geneva and countries neighbouring Myanmar, primarily Thailand. In July 1998, the Commission published its report based on information from various organisations and the testimonies of Burmese exiles. This confirmed the many complaints from international trade unions and NGOs. The Commission concluded that Convention 29 was being severely violated, both in law and in practice, and in a systematic and widespread manner. Its voluminous files contained documents and testimonies that provided the necessary evidence. The international community could no longer look away. The Commission insisted that the relevant legislation had to be changed radically and that the country had to respect and apply Convention 29; that the authorities and the army had to abolish forced labour; and that the offenders had to be punished.

The Government of Myanmar hardly reacted. The 1999 International Labour Conference responded with an emergency Resolution on the widespread use of forced labour in Myanmar. The Government of Myanmar was excluded from all technical cooperation (unless it was for the purpose of eradicating forced labour) and from all ILO meetings except the Conference and the Governing Body, where it had to explain its policies.

Tour Total in Paris, La Défense The encounter with Maung Maung that Sunday in June 2000 gave me additional arguments for my intervention, an indictment on behalf of the workers in the Committee on the Application of Standards, which my team and I had worked out together with Phil Fishman of the American trade union centre AFL-CIO. Since the report of the Commission of Inquiry two years earlier, the situation in Myanmar had not improved – quite the contrary. This was also evident from the annual report of the ILO Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations. With our intervention and that of my German colleague from the Employers’ Group, top lawyer Alfred Wisskirchen, we put new facts on the table. Maung Maung was also

88

The world of work

allowed to speak and gave a powerful testimony. Myanmar’s Minister of Labour reacted furiously: he called Maung Maung a terrorist and threatened him, so that I had to ask the Director General for his special protection. Although he had asylum in Thailand, his family was still living in Myanmar and there were fears of reprisals. In endless interventions, the government was supported by its usual allies. Fortunately, we could count on Europe and North America.

A few months later, the Governing Body and the Conference took strong decisions. From 2001 onwards, the Government of Myanmar would have to account for developments at each International Labour Conference during a full day special session of the Committee on the Application of Standards. For the first and only time in the history of the organisation, the toughest article of the Constitution was invoked.

Governments, employers and workers were called upon to assess their relations and to review their trade with Myanmar, taking forced labour into account. The United Nations and other UN agencies were also asked to apply pressure. And this yielded results. Most foreign businesses avoided Myanmar; those businesses already established there felt the heat. Economic and political isolation hurt. In time, the approach proved to work even better than I had initially thought.

Even though some companies did not comply with the boycott, many distanced themselves from the country. Investing in Myanmar had become too big a risk. But the ILO wouldn’t be the ILO if it had limited itself to showing its teeth and didn’t offer a steppingstone towards a solution as well. A high-level team of four eminent independent experts was able to visit the country in 2001. The team came back with the proposal to place a permanent ILO representative in the country.

This was followed by talks with the ambassador of Myanmar in Geneva. They led to an agreement in March 2002 on the appointment of a liaison officer and the setting up of a grievance system.

TotalFinaElf also felt the pressure and responded by trying to justify its profitable presence in Myanmar. As Chairperson of the Workers’ Group of the Committee on the Application of Standards, I was invit-

Slavery: deep-rooted, tenacious, still with us

89

ed to the top floor of the Tour Total Coupole in La DĂŠfense in Paris.

The Director of international policy admitted that serious mistakes had been made in the past. According to him, there was now permanent consultation with local communities and the company no longer relied on forced labour. I replied that the company still used the infrastructure built by forced labour. He invited me to investigate the situation on location with a delegation and at Total’s expense. Of course, I did not accept his offer; this could only be done within an ILO context and not at the invitation of a company.

Obstacle course When Aung San Suu Kyi was arrested again in 2003 and then placed under house arrest, the radical wing of the junta stepped up the repression against her party even further. This delayed the development of an ILO action plan. After the arrival of the Liaison Officer, steps were nonetheless taken towards establishing a complaint system on forced labour.

One remarkable development in this militarised country was the development of a network of informants, activists from the ranks of civil society. They acted as intermediaries between the frightened citizens and the ILO and provided information: where and when and how many citizens were requisitioned and where were they taken?

In November 2003, nine people were arrested for opposing the government. Three of them were sentenced to death in March 2004 for high treason. The possession of the business card of the ILO Liaison Officer was presented as a piece of evidence at the trial. Under international pressure, the death sentences were commuted to imprisonment with forced labour. The Supreme Court of Myanmar cancelled all death sentences and stated that every citizen had the right to contact the ILO. In 2003 and 2004 the discussion in the Committee on the Application of Standards intensified. Meanwhile, thanks to the Liaison Officer and the volunteer network, we were better informed about the violations, but the Government in Myanmar continued to adopt an unim-

90 

The world of work

aginable stance of denial. The outcome was a call for even stricter application of sanctions: the review of all diplomatic contacts as well as investments and trade relations. The atmosphere did not improve when the Committee on the Application of Standards was informed of the death threats against the ILO Liaison Officer Richard Horsey in 2006. The 2006 Conference stepped in: by July, the contact persons had to be released and the prosecutions suspended, and a complaints procedure had to be accepted and respected by the authorities. If not, the ILO would consider referring the case of Myanmar to the International Court of Justice in The Hague.

The threat worked. After renegotiation, an agreement was signed on 26 February 2007 with a plan that implemented the decisions of the Committee on the Application of Standards and established a stronger complaints system. People were still deeply afraid, but information campaigns in various languages gradually won their confidence and more and more complaints came in. Little by little, the government began to pay heed to the decisions of the ILO. In 2009, the Committee on the Application of Standards decided that the eradication of forced labour could be accelerated by supporting civil society and by recognising trade unions and employers’ organisations. It insisted on freedom of association. This was a giant leap forward in a country where until then, every leader, every activist and even every member of an organisation was persecuted and mercilessly punished.

A number of positive developments were reported to the Governing Body in March 2012. The Villages and Towns Act, a colonial-era law from 1907 which enabled forced labour, was replaced by a new law prohibiting it in accordance with Convention 29. Of the 67 people whose release was demanded by the ILO, 57 had been freed. On 16 March 2012, an agreement in principle, a Memorandum of Understanding, was concluded between the government and the ILO Liaison Officer Steve Marshall. That agreement contained a strategy for abolishing forced labour by 2015. In response to ILO complaints,

Slavery: deep-rooted, tenacious, still with us  

91

27 army officers and 139 other responsible persons were convicted of forced labour offences. In addition, by-elections resulted in success for Aung San Suu Kyi, who was elected as a member of parliament.

The European Union and the United States considered whether the time had come to put an end to the sanctions. Myanmar itself and other South-East Asian countries specifically requested this. On behalf of the workers, I stated that we couldn’t change our position overnight, especially since we still had information about a whole series of recent violations. The employers followed the same line of reasoning, albeit somewhat less explicitly.

Whether or not to discontinue the sanctions would be discussed at the International Labour Conference in June 2012. This would be done on the basis of the findings of a mission – in ILO terms, a High-Level Tripartite Mission – to assess the situation on the ground. This consisted of the Chairperson and Vice-Chairs of the Governing Body: Greg Vines (Australia) for the governments, Brent Wilton (New Zealand) representing the Employers’ Chair and me for the workers. We were supported by a top ILO team: Executive Director Guy Ryder, liaison officer Steve Marshall and his Burmese assistant, Piyamal Pichaiwongse, standards specialist at the Bangkok office, the Belgian Tim De Meyer and lawyer Drazen Petrovic from Geneva headquarters. It was our task to verify whether the changes were real. In order to find out, we would meet both top government officials and civil society organisations.

The breakthrough mission Upon our arrival in Rangoon on 1 May 2012, we learn that the new president, U Thein Sein, had announced a complete end to forced labour in his May Day speech. Violations would be severely punished.

Moreover, associations could be freely established. This was no coincidence and certainly meant as welcome message for our mission. The next morning, we travel early 360 kilometres to the north to the capital Naypyidaw. Because the airline has been categorised as unsafe on the UN list, we each have to agree individually to take the flight. We

92

The world of work

have special company on the plane: after the end of her house arrest, Aung San Suu Kyi is permitted to go to the capital for the first time to be sworn in as a new member of parliament.

The golden Buddhist temple UppÄ tasanti Pagoda, one of the most striking buildings in the capital, is a copy of the Shwedagon Pagoda of the central temple in Yangon. The city of Naipyidaw, built as the new capital in 2005, is surreal. We see immensely wide, empty roads with many lanes, some meant for grand military parades. Giant roundabouts are decorated with works of art and beautiful plants. Large, walled landscaped gardens, monitored by cameras, front huge office buildings, in between which there is mostly emptiness. Naypyidaw was designed to create distance. Uninvited visitors are kept far away.

Military personnel meet us at the roadblocks and accompany our cars to the palaces of the leaders. This exaggerated display of wealth in poverty-stricken Myanmar offends every member of the mission.

Most of our daily contact and negotiations are with Minister of Labour U Aung Kyi. We are also received by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Speaker of Parliament, the chairs of the ruling political party and opposition parties, the official human rights organisation and the public prosecutor. A remarkable belief prevails, even among the opposition, that the events of recent months represent a point of inflexion. Contact with President U Thein Sein, who mainly repeats his First of May message, is interesting. He and a few others bring the impression that there is change in the air.

But the real boss is obviously the commander-in-chief of the army, General Min Aung Hlaing. He says that the army will recruit its own personnel as porters and will therefore no longer requisition children.

Three hundred children under the age of eighteen have already been sent home, and the children who were imprisoned for what they called desertion have been released. Five officers responsible for forced labour have been severely punished and twenty-eight others are no longer entitled to promotion. One hundred forty-two officers

Slavery: deep-rooted, tenacious, still with us  

93

are on trial. The general talks mainly about the reduction of forced labour, not about more democracy.

Our mission hands the political and military leaders a list with the names of ten workers’ representatives who have not yet been released and with a demand for their immediate liberation. We ask that the FTUB be given official recognition and that Maung Maung and his colleagues be allowed to return to the country unconditionally. We also demand a written action plan specifying all necessary further steps to eradicate forced labour, both in law and in practice.

In the final negotiations in the capital, it is clear that the Minister of Labour must have received a mandate from his superiors for the most sensitive points. A tricky issue and important consideration for ending the measures imposed on Myanmar is the status of Maung Maung and the FTUB. We formulate three conditions clearly and unequivocally: Maung Maung and his colleagues must be able to return as free people, without any form of persecution; in the new situation, they must be allowed to undertake trade union work; and the legal provision that labels the FTUB as a terrorist organisation must be repealed. We meet with great reluctance, but as we leave, the government promises to give these points serious consideration.

Meanwhile, we discuss amongst ourselves why the new generation of military and political leaders is making this turn. There are several reasons. The political and economic isolation sinks the country deeper and deeper in poverty. A popular uprising would even escape the control of the military. The new generation of rulers is aware that the country needs economic development and wants to attract important foreign investors. At the same time, their larger neighbours, who had always supported Myanmar, are getting tired of protecting the junta in the face of the ongoing international criticism of its forced labour practices.

On the way back to Yangon we have lunch in a simple roadside restaurant. We are served by children in uniform, whom we are told are in training ‌ In Yangon, we meet with social organisations, nascent

94 

The world of work

trade unions (fifteen of which are recognised at the time) and equally with new employers’ organisations (ten of which are recognised).

They are trying to find their role, and their messages reflect a mix of hope and great concern about problems with forced labour and the renewed persecution of free organisations again.

A window on the future Myanmar has sixty million inhabitants. Around the beginning of recorded history, the Mon came from China and India, then the Pyu and later the Burmese. People and kingdoms displaced each other; every change of power was brutal and accompanied by death and destruction.12 In 1885 the British took over until 1942. Then the Japanese invaded and under their control, thousands of slaves were put to work on the Burma railway under a terrible regime, a tragic story that is told in the film The Bridge over the River Kwai. At the end of the Second World War, in 1945, the Japanese were expelled by the Allies and in 1948 Burma became independent of the British empire. A year before, Aung San, the Burmese revolutionary, nationalist, soldier and politician who stood up for independence, had been murdered. His daughter, Aung San Suu Kyi, was two years old at the time.

On 3 May 2012, she welcomes us warmly at her parents’ wellknown house on the lake, where she had lived under house arrest for years. We talk for more than two hours. Her role in the change of direction in the country was clear. She was awarded the Nobel Prize, but has not yet received it as she is not allowed to leave the country. About the changes she says: ‘This is a window of opportunities. I don’t know if the government will take the new laws seriously. But now that we’ve come this far, the regime can’t go back. I don’t see why we shouldn’t seize this opportunity. We have to take the risk now. The international community must build in conditions for foreign investment; these must benefit the population and not those in power.’ Aung San Suu Kyi fears the invasion of short-term fortune seekers. This fear is certainly not unfounded considering the natural resources the country

Slavery: deep-rooted, tenacious, still with us

95

possesses: fossil fuels, rice, beautiful red rubies, rich blue sapphires, pearls, jade….

‘Now that there seem to be new perspectives from the top, it is necessary for the people at the grassroots level to participate in democracy, protected by sound and enforced legislation,’ says Aung San Suu Kyi during our exchange. ‘It would also benefit the country if the estimated three million Burmese who fled the country could return with their knowledge and experience gained abroad. The FTUB, too, must now return and assume its responsibility.’ In this last remark we note implicit criticism of the departure of the FTUB abroad, when she herself stayed. Finally, on the role of the international community, Aung San Suu Kyi says what she will repeat a month later in Geneva at the International Labour Conference, her first foreign trip in years: ‘I count on the ILO for further technical cooperation and support, especially in the integration of child-soldiers into society.’

In our debriefing, we wonder what would happen if this woman moved on to one of the highest positions in the country. The best freedom fighters do not always become the best heads of state; just think of Lech Wałęsa in Poland or Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua. In recent history, we have seen one extraordinary exception: Nelson Mandela in South Africa. But none of us would have expected to be so disappointed five years later by her approach to one of the Myanmarese peoples, the Rohingya.

The final mission report, signed by the three Governing Body representatives, acknowledged that ‘the Mission was left in no doubt as to the significance and the impact ILO action has had in respect of Myanmar from the time of the Commission of Inquiry’.13 UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon also stressed the special work of the ILO, which was the only UN organisation to gain a real foothold there.

As expected, the discussion in the Workers’ Group about ending the sanctions was not easy. International departments of several trade unions, the ITUC and NGOs had been focusing on the situation in

96

The world of work

Myanmar for years with all kinds of actions. Accepting that a proposed solution is good enough is always difficult. With the mission report and my account of it, with the optimistic words of Maung Maung and with the intervention of Aung San Suu Kyi at the International Labour Conference, it was possible to turn things around. In June 2012, the sanctions were suspended on a trial basis and then ended in 2013.

However, the Governing Body still requests and receives regular reports on the situation. On 4 September 2012, Maung Maung and his colleagues were able to return to their country after twenty-four years, and he was able to see his wife and son, now twenty-seven years old.

A Decent Work Country Programme was finally signed into being in 2018 and includes the employers and workers of Myanmar. The Programme reaffirms the continued fight against forced labour. The activities implemented are producing results. For example, around a thousand children have now been released from the army. The dynamics of worker representation and social consultation operate. The FTUB, since 2014 the Confederation of Trade Unions Myanmar, is represented in the textile and clothing industry (H&M, Adidas and Nike), in construction (the company Cement) and in the agri-food sector (Grey-Wilmar). Maung Maung is President of a very young organisation; he works mainly on the education, training and orientation of new leaders. A great deal has indeed changed.

Allegations of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes For many in Myanmar, all of this gave hope for a better life. But since 2017, the Rohingya crisis has drowned out that progress. The greatly increased tensions in the country were already quite perceptible during the ILO’s negotiations with the Burmese Government to renew the agreement on the programme in the country. This has now been secured. But during the Governing Body of the ILO in March 2019, the country’s ambassador sought support from many, including me.

Slavery: deep-rooted, tenacious, still with us

97

He feared harsh criticism, which his country in fact deserved. I told him that there were again reasons for anxiety, about forced labour and freedom of association, but also about the attitude towards the Rohingya, which were terrible. Then there was silence, as there always is when the Rohingya crisis comes up.

When the British colonised Burma in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, they brought in Bengalis from India and present-day Bangladesh in a divide-and-conquer strategy, especially to Rakhine state. They were an Islamic counterweight to the predominantly Buddhist population. Today as many as 135 population groups are recognised in the country, but not the Rohingya, who are officially labelled illegal migrants and called ‘Bengali’. The army has used every means, including Facebook, to spread fake news and cast the Rohingya in a bad light. The Reuters news agency proved that this information was false.

The two journalists who had published the evidence were sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment by a court in Myanmar. Their conviction was appealed, and after 500 days in prison they were released.

The escalation of violence against the Rohingya was triggered by an attack in August 2017 by the Arakan Rohingya Army (ARSA), a militant organisation that some say is linked to al-Qaeda and Islamic State. But the reaction of the government and army to this attack was to target the entire population and was disproportionate. Their villages were raided, their houses burned down, and people were expelled. The government wanted to get rid of this group and take their land. According to Médecins sans Frontières (MSF) International, 6,700 Rohingya were murdered; some 750,000 have crossed the border to Bangladesh.

Are the military turning away from the fledgling democracy and back to dictatorship now that many foreign investments have been secured and seem almost irreversible? A United Nations Commission of Inquiry advised on 27 August 2018 that the military junta should answer for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes before the International Criminal Court of the UN in The Hague. Of the leaders we met in 2012, one is still in power: General Min Aung Hlaing, then

98

The world of work

the real boss and now accused of war crimes by the UN Commission of Inquiry. As for Nobel Prize winner and government leader Aung San Suu Kyi, the Commission found that she did not use her moral authority to prevent disinformation and war crimes. The political system is clear: the army still has power and Aung San Suu Kyi has little or no room for manoeuvre. The army is not controlled by government or parliament; it’s the other way around. But we also hear that Aung San Suu Kyi doesn’t want to offend her electorate, that she mainly stands up for the Buddhist majority and the Bamar or Burmese.

The UN report must be taken very seriously. In the meantime, the International Criminal Court has opened the case on the basis of a complaint from Gambia supported by fifty-seven countries. In December 2019, Aung San Suu Kyi went to defend her country’s actions in the Hague. She asked the Court not to make the conflict worse by interfering. She did not rule out war crimes committed by the army, but these would be dealt with in Myanmar itself, she claimed. In any case, her attitude is incomprehensible and deeply disappointing, and far removed from the speech she gave on 14 June 2012 before the International Labour Conference: ‘(…)No country can claim genuine development until all its people can enjoy the basic freedoms, freedom from want and freedom from fear(…)’.14 How she can reconcile this with her diplomatic training and experience at the UN in New York at the time of UN Secretary-General U-Thant (a Burmese diplomat) and the commitment she made at several stages in her life is a question only she can answer.15 Undoubtedly, given the nature of the conflict, it is now for the UN and the International Criminal Court to act. Good coordination between the various UN agencies is an absolute necessity. In the meantime, the ILO is trying to maintain and build upon the progress made on both forced labour and freedom of organisation. The Governing Body in November 2019 recognised a little progress: ‘in particular, the new ac-

Slavery: deep-rooted, tenacious, still with us

99

tion plan on forced labour, the passing of the Child Rights Law, and proposals to ratify the Minimum Age Convention (C-138).’ But during the discussions there was also a great deal of disappointment particularly among the workers. A renewed and strengthened National Complaints Mechanism that includes victim protection measures, to address and eliminate forced labour, is an absolute necessity given that the army is still sometimes guilty of forced labour. Although a National Tripartite Dialogue Forum has been set up, the joint development of new labour and social legislation is still proving difficult. In the transition from a dictatorship to a social dialogue model, a huge gap remains to be bridged. Eight trade union leaders have been indicted for their union work. As a result, the Governing Body unanimously decided that the country had to be called to account again at its meetings in 2020. The ILO does not give up.16

Qatar: the hidden side of the Gulf Miracle ‘My name is Jit Bahadur Lungeli and I’m from Sindhuli, Nepal. I am married and we have four children, a son and three daughters. I decided to work in Qatar out of financial necessity and contacted someone who worked for an agency. I gave my passport and paid for the medical examination. But everything was lost in a fire. When I finally had a new passport, I went to another agency. There they kept my passport for six months and asked me to pay 40,000 rupees (312 euros), which I refused.

Again, I had to look for another agent. I had to pay him 35,000 rupees for a visa. Anyway, I wanted to go to Qatar. I no longer had a choice, because I had already spent 70,000 rupees (547 euros).

In Qatar they took me to the company Redco Construction Almana.

The employer immediately took my passport and other documents and presented me with a contract. I asked him what the content of the Arabic text was. He got angry, hit the table with a hammer and shouted that I had to sign. What could I do? In Nepal I was told that I would earn 650

100

The world of work

Qatari rials per month (156 euros). But I only got 350 rials (84 euros).

After many discussions and months later, my employer agreed to a monthly salary of 550 rials (132 euros).

First I worked as a bricklayer on the Unnasathi Villa project, a large villa complex. When this project was finished, we were moved to a wharf on the prestigious site in Doha, The Pearl Qatar. For the construction of the two towers we worked with 12,000 to 15,000 workers of different nationalities: Indians, Egyptians, Filipinos, Burmese, Vietnamese and about 1,600 Nepalese. Nepalese are the cheapest workers. They officially receive 650 rials per month (156 euros), while workers from India are paid 900 rials (216 euros) for the same work.

The labour camp was overcrowded. There were twelve of us in a room for four. There was no food and the cooking facilities were very poor. I got up very early, at 2 o’clock in the morning, to prepare my lunch.

The bus left at 4 o’clock, then two hours’ drive to the building site. We worked until noon. It was very hot then. I ate what I’d prepared at night.

In the afternoon we worked from 1 to 6 pm, and then another two hours’ drive to the work camp. This was my routine throughout the two and a half years I worked in Qatar.

On 10 January 2008 I learned that my eldest son of fourteen had been killed in a bus accident. I cried and begged my employer to let me go back to Nepal. He told me that if I left, I would have to pay back two years’ wages and the cost of the visa. I could not do that. I felt very bad and guilty. It was more than a year later, on 27 March 2009, before I could finally return to Nepal. I lost my son and I still can’t repay my debt.’ 17

Heat threatens the 2022 World Cup in Qatar While the question of how feasible a World Cup football championship is during the hot Qatari summer months is rightly being asked at a very late stage, some two million migrants are working hard on the stadiums and other major construction projects. However the question is seldom asked of how they suffer from the hard work in temper-

Slavery: deep-rooted, tenacious, still with us

101

atures of 40° to 50° C. The International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) has been taking action against forced labour and for decent work in the Gulf States for around a decade now.

The emirate of Qatar, a state on the west coast of the Persian Gulf, is a small peninsula bordering Saudi Arabia to the south and the Gulf of Bahrain to the west. Most of the country is sparsely populated, flat desert. From the plane you can see how the dull, ochre yellow-brown desert contrasts with the beautiful gradations of blue of the Persian Gulf.

Just before landing, the futuristic towers of the rich capital Doha stand out; there is even greenery. The country is under construction and is doing a great deal to attract the world’s attention. Petroleum and gas constitute its wealth, and the gross domestic product is $69,000 per person. This makes Qatar the fourth richest country in the world. It is home to 2.7 million people, but there are less than half a million Qataris. The others come primarily from India (650,000), followed by 350,000 Nepalese. Nationals of Bangladesh, the Philippines and several Arab and African countries are also present.

The country is known for hosting many sporting events and is applauded by the international sports federations, which like to be welcomed by countries with money. In order to organize the 2022 FIFA World Cup, twelve stadiums will be built or rebuilt. There is also need for hotel accommodation, motorways, railways and a metro network.

Foreign workers are being recruited for these gigantic construction projects, which will need to be completed in a relatively short period of time. People who want to escape the poverty of their country are recruited by agencies at home. The lack of enforcement of international rules on labour migration encourages abusive practices. As a result, many migrants gradually become entangled in a web of abuse. They have to pay for their employment contract, medical examination and visa. But they don’t have the money for that. ‘Don’t worry,’ the agencies say, ‘you can take out a loan with us.’ So the workers leave home with heavy debts, which are often exacerbated by usury and hidden

102

The world of work

extra costs. Migrants in Qatar fall under the notorious kafala or sponsorship system, originally intended for the adoption of children, whereby a Qatari citizen vouches for the workers residing in the country under his or her name. It is a kind of personal custody. Once the worker is in Qatar, the employer makes all the decisions. Upon arrival, the employment contract is torn up and unilaterally replaced by a new contract, usually for two to five years, with a lower salary than in the original contract. The sponsor, usually the employer, confiscates all passports. The worker is housed in a compound, a fenced-in area. The quality of life there varies greatly; depending on the employer, it is usually low to substandard. The worker is not allowed to resign, change employer or return to his or her country without the employer’s permission. The high payments for the contract and visa is deducted from meagre wages. Pay is often a problem; there are many complaints about wages being months in arrears. When workers complain or do not adapt to local conditions, they risk being taken to one of the detention centres by the police at the employer’s request. Domestic workers are even more vulnerable; for them, there is no form of protection or regulation.

There are no official figures on accidents at work or occupational diseases. In 2014, based on data from the Indian and Nepalese embassies, the ITUC counted 409 deaths for the year 2013. In particular, there are many falls. Due to the lack of water supply at the workplace, workers often drink too little in the heat, causing an above-average incidence of kidney problems and heart attacks among mostly strong, young men. Based on this and a calculation of probability, the ITUC estimated a possible over-all loss of 4,000 lives during the construction of the infrastructure for the World Cup in 2022.

The kafala system is widespread in the Gulf States. The fact that the ITUC targets primarily Qatar is a logical and strategic choice. Manifest exploitation of the type that occurs under the kafala system can only be tackled with a chance of success if you have the attention of the world’s media. With the World Cup, that attention is guaranteed.

Slavery: deep-rooted, tenacious, still with us

103

If the campaign succeeds, it will serve as an example for other countries and as a reference for the world.

An unprecedented lobbying machine In 2014, François Crépeau, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon’s Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Migrants, presented a particularly well-documented and alarming report on the situation in Qatar, to the UN Human Rights Council. The report confirmed the ITUC analysis. But at the meeting in Geneva, Qatar received support from Arab member states and from states that did not want to lose the migrants’ remittances. Other governments trading with Qatar or involved in major sporting events also felt little incentive to put heavy pressure on the country. As a result, a strong report got no follow-up from the Human Rights Council.

That same year, together with a number of worker delegates to the International Labour Conference, I initiated a process for the Governing Body to establish a Commission of Inquiry on Qatar. This is an exceptional procedure that can be invoked for serious violations of ratified Conventions. The Qatari Government reacted immediately with a heavy lobbying campaign among members of the Governing Body to vote the proposal down. The strategy was the same as Bahrain had followed a few years earlier, and other countries that come into the sights of the ILO supervisory system often follow it. First, they deny or minimise the problem, and should that prove insufficient, they announce new legislation and try to show good will. Those who put the problem on the agenda of the ILO are accused of doing so for political motives or are denounced as proxies for political opponents.

In the last two decades, the word ‘terrorist’ was never very far away. As the ultimate defence, the country concerned denounces alleged interference in domestic affairs and violation of sovereignty.

The Qatari lobbying was not limited to substantive arguments or the classical conversations in the corridors or the Delegates’ Bar. During the

104

The world of work

sessions, Qatari delegates shamelessly summoned individual Governing Body members from the meeting room. They focused primarily on the governments of the home-countries of significant migrant populations. ‘Surely your country doesn’t want to lose the vast remittances sent home by the migrants?’ was their main argument. They also approached carefully selected employer and worker representatives, as well as the many countries who had business interests, perhaps combined with an interest in sports. The unprecedented lobbying campaign succeeded.

The Workers’ Group was unable to get enough governments and employers to support setting up a Commission of Inquiry.

Curiously, a visit to Qatar by the International Organisation of Employers (IOE), complete with official receptions and all the trimmings, changed the employers’ attitudes. A little afterwards, I had an informal conversation with my Danish colleague Jørgen Rønnest, Chairperson of the Employers’ Group and Vice-Chair of the Governing Body. For him, too, the problem was serious, and he was particularly struck by the denigrating way in which powerful Qatari spoke about the migrants working in their country. This lack of respect was too much for the employers. A Commission of Inquiry might have been a bridge too far, but a High-level Tripartite Mission would receive the support of a majority of the Employers’ Group.

The social partners and the ILO make the difference As expected, the discussion in the Governing Body was extremely difficult. But the employers gradually moved towards the direction of the workers’ position: a Tripartite Mission. Nevertheless, observers in the Governing Body Room had the impression that the Government of Qatar was once again winning because of the many supportive interventions of interested governments. We did not see it that way. We mainly focused on the views of the voting member states and did our arithmetic: for a tripartite mission; against; undecided. When some

Slavery: deep-rooted, tenacious, still with us

105

governments close to Qatar went a step further and claimed that a majority of the Governing Body supported Qatar, I asked for a short break to have a meeting with my employer colleague and consultations with my group.

I tested the idea of taking a vote. The Chair of the Employers’ Group confirmed that of the fourteen employer votes, eight would vote in favour of the mission. Together with the fourteen worker votes, and with the information I had from a number of governments, I was fairly certain that if we took a vote, we’d come out on top. The shift among the employers and the coming together of the social partners had not escaped the notice of some governments. It encouraged them to contact their Ministers of Labour and Foreign Affairs for instructions and, if necessary, to adjust their positions. It is not at all usual to vote in the Governing Body, which normally takes decisions on the basis of consensus or when an acceptable majority is established, if possible, with the support of each group. This way of working is also what I prefer. But the seriousness of the problem and the arrogance of the group supporting Qatar called for a firmer approach. I asked for the vote on sending a tripartite mission. The ensuing silence, followed by a considerable murmur, made it clear that this request had generated considerable tension. Again, a large number of governments from Asia and the Arab world intervened to try to avoid the vote. The situation destabilised the Japanese Chair of the Governing Body, Misako Kaji, who asked the Legal Advisor to explain the rules and procedures.

She was not in favour of a vote, but as always, she was fair. After some time, she said: ‘My hands are tied; as Chair, I have to respect the rules.’

We proceeded to vote by show of hands, the simplest and clearest method that forced everyone to show their position. The result was clear: 35 votes in favour, 13 against and 7 abstentions. The 22 votes of the social partners were reinforced by those of the Member States of the European Union, Canada, the United States, Australia and Russia.

Much later, I learned that my request for this vote was considered an unwise move in Belgian diplomatic circles. Nevertheless, what was

106

The world of work

not possible in the Human Rights Council was possible in the ILO due to the dynamics of the tripartite system. Because of the attitude of the social partners, a number of member states could no longer hide and could not afford not to take the side of human rights. In this way, the ILO in general, and the social partners in particular, can and do make a difference in human and workers’ rights cases.

As for the mission now forced on it by the Governing Body, the question was whether the Qatari Government would cooperate, and whether the mission would also be given the necessary freedom of movement. Negotiations on the mission and the programme were not easy. This was undertaken by the Director of the Standards Department in consultation with us, the three Governing Body Officers. On 4 February 2016, the ILO received an invitation for a visit from 1 to 5 March 2016. The three Officers – ambassador Misako Kaji, Jørgen Rønnest and myself – were assisted by Corinne Vargha, Director of the Standards Department, Deepa Rishikesh, the Department’s Head of Child Labour and Forced Labour Unit, and Torsten Schackel, Senior International Labour Standards & Labour Law Specialist at the ILO Regional Office for Arab States in Beirut, Lebanon. Jeroen Beirnaert, ITUC Director Human and Trade Union Rights and Qatar expert, shadowed the mission. We received documentation through the ILO and through the ITUC, which had collected testimonials, and the Belgian NGO WSM (We Social Movements).

‘Are you aware that we supply gas to the LNG terminal in Zeebrugge?’

The delegation was mainly in contact with the Qatari Minister of Labour and his officials, but also with Prime Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Nasser bin Khalifa Al Thani and other members of the government, the Public Prosecutor, The National Human Rights Committee, the Supreme Committee for Delivery & Legacy of the World Cup 2022, the Direction of a Detention Center, the President of the High

Slavery: deep-rooted, tenacious, still with us

107

Court, the Chamber of Commerce and Qatar Petroleum. The Prime Minister gave us a friendly welcome, but he soon turned to Misako Kaji: ‘Madam Ambassador, you do know that the Emir and my government have excellent trade relations with your country, Japan, especially for the supply of natural gas? And Mr Cortebeeck, you do know about our good trade relations with Belgium and that we supply gas to the LNG terminal in Zeebrugge, don’t you?’ The ambassador replied resolutely: ‘Prime Minister, thank you for your hospitality and friendly welcome. I am here not in my capacity as ambassador of my country, but as Chairperson of the Governing Body of the ILO, and Mr Cortebeeck and Mr Rønnest are also here not as representatives of their country, but as Vice-Chairpersons of the ILO. We are here to examine the situation regarding the complaint concerning Convention 29, on forced labour and to evaluate the measures taken or planned.’

With the incident thus closed, our contact was otherwise correct.

Among other things, we visited the Khalifa stadium site and had a good and open discussion with the site management, the Besix group, the largest Belgian international construction group. That visit confirmed what we already knew: well-known European groups have better standards than those generally prevailing in Qatar. The food and respect for the different eating habits of the foreign workers were already telling. But with the imposing Qatar Rail project, we were received with such obvious caution by so many engineers that the delegation members felt uncomfortable. Later we learned that that same day, just before our arrival, a fatal accident had occurred. Another site we visited, that of the Doha Souq Shopping Mall, was also extremely hazardous.

The government tried to convince us of the importance of a future law that would overturn the kafala system, and it also stressed the importance of a recently introduced system for wages to be paid by bank transfer, already in force for a million workers. Such a system had the advantage of allowing monitoring and control of the payment of wages.

108

The world of work

The Minister of Health, herself a doctor, accompanied us during our visit to a gigantic, modern hospital, whose medical and technical facilities were undoubtedly up to standard. She explained the system of rapid and thorough treatment of work-related accidents and occupational diseases. We believed that this could be effective for the workers of bona fide companies.

The government also asserted that the labour inspectorate had been expanded. They were particularly proud of their system for filing complaints. We were shown special computer kiosks that had been set up here and there through which complaints could be submitted in several languages. But the figures for official complaints that we received from the government were much lower than the ones we had at our disposal.

In our conversations with the diplomatic corps, it was particularly striking how much the opinions of foreign diplomats about the kafala system and the work regime varied. However, all ambassadors stressed that the ILO should continue with its strategy of monitoring and exerting pressure.

Colouring outside the lines Experience shows that no mission can entirely avoid the officially prepared programme and presentation. Official information is important, but it is usually very defensive, very rarely self-critical and certainly not always relevant. It is important to be well prepared in order to be able to ask pertinent questions, to know what you want to see, who you want to meet and to insist on doing so. In Qatar it was no different.

Because trade unions for migrant workers are not permitted in Qatar, we looked for our own way of reaching out to these workers. We did this on their only day off: Friday, the day of prayer in the Muslim world. The ITUC knew the communities and the sites where we had to go. This allowed us to meet with the Filipino and Nepalese communities and hear their testimonies. These conversations confirmed the

Slavery: deep-rooted, tenacious, still with us  

109

familiar complaints: the confiscated passports, the shredded contracts, the late or unpaid wages, the ban on leaving the country even after the contract has expired, and so on. According to those we met, the grievance system set up by the government did not give results.

Complaints had to follow a tortuous procedure, and there was no confidence in the independence of the judiciary. Employers retaliated against workers who filed complaints and were forced to rely on the solidarity of their colleagues. Counterclaims from the employer side could land them in the detention centres; court cases were postponed indefinitely because the employer never showed up. Inspections were few and far between, and crimes went unpunished.

It was encounters like these with people who simply related the reality of their work and life that really opened the eyes of the mission members. For the first time they were able to listen and speak freely and at length with the victims of the system. This was an eye-opener.

We visited different types of accommodation. The best was Labour City, planned for 100,000 workers and provisionally ready for 30,000.

It is a large, artificial city in the desert, a mirage of identical sand-coloured blocks, a mosque, a few shops, a teahouse, a medical centre, sports grounds and a cinema. The rooms measure 24 m2 for four people. The kitchens cater for different cultures and eating habits.

It is an artificial environment, but the conditions are decent, at least for a temporary stay. It is in any case better than the fenced compounds for 1,500 people built from containers, with at most a shop, hairdresser, one sports ground and a computer room. These compounds felt like something that belonged in a penal colony, not least because of their isolation, somewhere in the middle of the desert.

‘Yet we’ve only seen the “luxury situations”’, I said to my colleagues.

‘This is not the kind of living accommodation of the large majority of migrants. If we want an objective appreciation, we have to visit them as well.’ My employer colleague agreed and Ambassador Kaji as well, but only if the government agreed. And the government didn’t think it was possible, because, and I quote, ‘it’s too dangerous’. So, the ILO Director

110

The world of work

simply announced that we would visit later, and we left in the evening for the Sailiya Workers’ Accommodation. We drove in the dark on a desert road to the site. The bad condition of the buildings was immediately visible, even under the faint illumination of the weak lights. We visited rooms that were shared by ten to twelve people together with their luggage and their clothes, which were hanging out to dry. We saw filthy kitchens, and I won’t even try to describe the washrooms. The damp heat mingled with human smells was oppressive. The people there immediately wanted to tell their stories, and with the help of ILO colleagues and our ITUC contacts we arranged for interpretation. It was more of the same, distressing situations of people at the end of their tether. It was a second eye-opener for the mission members.

Moments later, the government officials appeared. As expected, we had been followed by security: they addressed me immediately, because they knew who was behind the visit. ‘For your safety, Mr Cortebeeck; we are responsible for you.’ One of the people we met was the twenty-eight-year-old Nepali Ujjal BK, better known as Basanta. After the departure of the mission he was fired and asked to leave the country because he had had contact with the ILO mission. At first, he hid for days. The ILO protected him, and the government was forced to regularise his status. He has now returned to work for a new and better employer and is still active in the support group for Nepalese workers in Qatar.

Pivot to an unexpected opening The mission was able to deliver a thorough and well-considered report to the Governing Body in March 2016 and indicate what needed to change in order to comply with ILO standards. The mission was particularly delicate for Ambassador Misako Kaji. She apologised to me several times for her diplomatic caution. But I was particularly pleased, because she had dared to take the step of meeting migrant communities against the will of the government and to visit the camp.

The Ambassador was deeply affected by what she had seen and did

Slavery: deep-rooted, tenacious, still with us

111

not want to shirk her responsibility. She successfully managed to distinguish her role as Ambassador of Japan from her position as Chairperson of the Governing Body, thus ensuring the necessary objectivity of the mission and the report.

The mission had functioned as a pivot. What was unthinkable before became possible now: ITUC General Secretary Sharan Burrow could start negotiations with the Qatari Government. She was assisted during these negotiations by ILO Director Corinne Vargha and also received the trust and support of the International Organisation of Employers.

Meanwhile, the abuses in Qatar had become widely known through the international media. Football associations from various countries (including Belgium) asked critical questions. The Global Union Building and Woodworker’s International, a sectoral international trade union, successfully negotiated with the Belgian firm Besix, the French Vinci and the Italian Salini Impregilo on the status of their workers in Qatar.

Qatar’s image had been damaged and the European multinationals did not want to share in the blame. Something was moving – although I can’t shake off the idea that geopolitical reasons also played a role. With the escalating conflict with Saudi Arabia, Qatar wanted to be seen as the best pupil in the region and was more ready to act than before.

An agreement was reached in November 2017. It was supported by a $25 million, three-year ILO technical support programme paid for by Qatar itself. From now on, workers can change employers and leave the country; they can no longer be considered the property of the employer. Employment contracts can only be concluded through an official agency; a minimum wage is in place; workers have the right to keep their passports to health care; there will be a transparent mechanism for resolving complaints; worker-elected committees will be set up in large companies. To follow up this complex programme, an ILO office was opened in Doha to maintain contact with migrant groups, the ITUC and the

112

The world of work

Global Unions, the companies and the government. Of course, this is just the beginning. There is not yet freedom of association as we know it, and trade unions and employers’ organisations are not yet permitted.

But the necessary steppingstones have been laid.

On 9 November 2017, in my capacity as Chair of the Governing Body and one of the original complainants, I was able to announce to the international media that ‘The transformation of this complaint into a real commitment by the Government of Qatar to make positive change on the ground for all workers is a very encouraging development. We celebrate this moment for Qatar and its two million migrant workers.’ ILO Director-General Guy Ryder declared: ‘The ILO welcomes the commitment of Qatar to engage in substantive cooperation with the Organization for the promotion and protection of workers’ rights, and looks forward to the successful implementation of the cooperation programme over the next three years’.18 Is the transition guaranteed? No, but the forward path is there. The first evaluation of the programme was held in the Governing Body in November 2019. As of 1 January 2020, the kafala system was replaced by an employment contract system. The government decided to get rid of the exit permits. Migrant workers can now leave without having to obtain permission from their employer. Amendments to labour laws towards a total eradication of the sponsorship system are expected. Mechanisms are being developed to prevent all forms of forced labour and the activities of dishonest employment agencies. The new arrangements also apply to domestic workers. Since 1 January 2020, there is a new, evidence-based minimum wage. Action against late or non-payment of wages has also been launched. A Workers’ Support and Insurance Fund has started to provide redress to some workers who have faced serious obstacles in accessing their wages. Labour inspection will be reinforced by a Strategic Unit and training. A prevention plan for Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) will be set up, with special attention to the prevention of problems associated with heat stress. A procedure has been

Slavery: deep-rooted, tenacious, still with us

113

drawn up for the election of workers’ representatives. The Qatar Foundation has made it a requirement for its subcontractors to establish freely elected joint committees. The ILO office is facilitating the submission of workers’ complaints to the Dispute Settlements Committees. The Ministry has entered into a cooperation with international workers’ organisations as well as employers and other governments. Community liaison officers representing the ITUC, Building and Woodworker’s International (BWI), the International Transport Federation (ITF), UNI Global Union and the International Domestic Workers Federation (IDWFED) are now hosted within the ILO Doha office to promote awareness and provide practical support to workers in accessing the Workers’ Dispute Settlement Committees.

The challenges are still enormous; much remains to be worked out and implemented, and that takes time – think of all the time and energy needed to get all contractors and sub-contractors on the same wavelength. All the problems have certainly not disappeared. But if this programme is realised, it will constitute a true revolution in respect for migrant workers, an example for the region. The enormous progress that has already been made is due to the campaign of the ITUC together with the Global Unions and the Workers’ Group, solid collaboration with the IOE and the Employers’ Group, and the fine work of the ILO, without of course forgetting those individuals within the Government of Qatar who, from a certain point in time, have assumed their responsibilities.19

40 million modern slaves With the formal abolition of slavery and the slave trade in the nineteenth century, the problem did not disappear. The scale has diminished but abuses were never completely eradicated. Whether it is women forced into prostitution, men in agriculture or construction, children in sweatshops (exploitative businesses with slave labour, of-

114

The world of work

ten in textiles) or girls forced into marriage, their lives are controlled by their exploiters. They don’t have a choice. Compared to previous centuries, it is less about people who are owned by others, and more about people who are completely dependent on others, are under their control and have no way of getting out of the situation.

The latest figures are from 2017 and were collected by Alliance 8.7, the global partnership that fights for the elimination of forced labour, modern slavery, human trafficking and child labour. In addition to the ILO, the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) and Walk Free (Foundation against Modern Slavery), among others, are part of Alliance 8.7. The ‘8.7’ refers to the corresponding target in the Sustainable Development Goals of the UN-Agenda 2030. These are essential steps to achieve decent work.

Despite conservative methodology – for example, because forced labour in the Gulf States could not be counted due to a lack of reliable data – this report tells of 40 million ‘modern slaves’ in 2016, including 10 million children. Of those 40 million, an estimated 25 million are victims of forced labour and 15 million of forced marriages. Most modern slaves (71%) are women and girls. Of the almost 25 million people in forced labour, 16 million work in the private economy, 4.1 million are forced to work for the state and 4.8 million are sexually exploited. In the last five years, 89 million people worldwide have been victims of modern slavery, for periods ranging from a few days to five years.

The ILO has calculated that the slave trade brings in about 150 billion dollars a year for the perpetrators. In addition to the untold misery and suffering of the victims, this is also a source of unfair competition for the regular economy and a huge loss of tax revenue for governments.20

A new international treaty against modern slavery The examples of Myanmar and Qatar show how countries are held accountable for forced labour by the ILO. In Myanmar forced labour is

Slavery: deep-rooted, tenacious, still with us

115

mainly organised by the state and the army; in Qatar, it is imposed by the private sector, but within a framework of state-regulation (the kafala system). The figures above give a picture of the extent and seriousness of the phenomenon of modern slavery in the world and how it differs from slavery as we knew it in the past. ILO Convention 29, which dates back to 1930, was the convention that called colonial regimes to order; people were not allowed to own other individuals.

Modern slaves are usually victims of abuses in the private economy and forced labour often goes hand in hand with human trafficking and migration within or across national borders. Workers, employers and governments therefore decided to update and strengthen the existing standard by adding a Protocol (P29) to the old Convention 29. It was adopted by the International Labour Conference in 2014 following negotiations and a vote. The new arrangements oblige each member state to tackle forced labour through prevention. Victims must be protected and supported in order to escape it. The relationship between forced labour and human trafficking must be addressed. Perpetrators and organisers of forced labour must be prosecuted and punished; impunity is unacceptable. A corresponding Recommendation (Recommendation 203) provides member states and social partners with guidelines on how to implement the updated Convention properly.

This Protocol entered officially into force in 2015. On 12 June 2016, the international day against child labour, ILO Director-General Guy Ryder and Nobel laureate Kailash Satyarthi jointly launched the 50 for Freedom Campaign. The goal is the end of modern slavery. The original intention was for fifty member states to ratify the new Protocol by 2019. This goal will be achieved a little later; when this book went to press, there were forty-five. But several governments and parliaments still have to fulfil the commitments they have made. There is support from the European Parliament and a petition with 55,000 signatures calling on member states worldwide to do their job. It needs to be done faster and better.

116 

The world of work

5 Child labour: an ineradicable phenomenon?

The images in Daens, a Belgian film by Stijn Coninx based on an iconic book by author Louis Paul Boon, show children crawling under the looms to pick up loose threads while the shuttle rockets dangerously back and forth and the machine drives inexorably forwards and backwards. Milleke is tired and can no longer keep pace; he is crushed to death. Production took precedence over everything else, including human lives. That was the business model. This situation in the textile industry in the Belgian town of Aalst before 1900 unfortunately differs very little from the living and working situation of millions of children today. Children are still very much in demand for domestic work as well.

Worldwide, 218 million children have some involvement with work.

This does not always have to be a problem. A few generations ago in my country, Belgium, it was normal for children to help out after school or during holidays back home on the farm or in the family’s small business. There was compulsory schooling. Helping in the family business was not considered child labour. So what is the difference? The ILO speaks of child labour when work deprives children of their childhood, affects their dignity and opportunities and thus damages their physical and mental development. When work prevents children from attending school, completing their education or forces them to combine school with long, hard working hours, we speak of child labour.

In Myanmar we were confronted with children who were conscripted as porters by the army. In Africa, too, the use of child soldiers in con-

 

117

flicts is a scourge that is difficult to eradicate. These are extreme forms of child labour, characterised by slavery, separation from the family and exposure to dangerous, degrading and pathogenic situations.

Strict rules with little result ILO Convention 138, which sets the minimum age for work, was adopted in 1973. No work at all is allowed up to the age of twelve. Thirteen- and fourteen-year-olds may only work a limited number of hours of light work per week, and this must not prevent them from attending school. Work is permitted from the age of fifteen but work that would be harmful to safety, health or moral integrity cannot be performed under the age of eighteen. This may involve night work or work with chemical products, for example. These are the minimum rules for countries with a higher degree of development. In other countries, light work is allowed from the age of twelve, and non-hazardous work from the age of fourteen. Helping in the family business and in the family is allowed everywhere.

Before 1998, only forty-six member states had ratified this Convention, despite the fact that it addresses a fundamental social right.

Globally, there was little improvement. What’s more, I heard child labour being defended, not only by government officials and employers, but also by trade union and social leaders – in North Africa, for example. In many countries in the South, parents cannot provide for their families with their wages or incomes. The large number of children is not only the result of a lack of contraception or its rejection on religious or cultural grounds. Rather, it represents the futile hope of escaping poverty through the helping hands of children. Even some social leaders considered actions against child labour counter-productive. They blamed rich countries for a total lack of understanding and respect. In short, the methodology of minimum ages was not working well enough. The convention was dismissed by many as irrelevant, cumbersome and outdated. The ILO itself concluded that this convention alone was not enough.

118 

The world of work

This is why the International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC), a technical cooperation programme to eliminate child labour, was established by the ILO in 1992. The German Minister of Labour Norbert Blüm was at the origin of this initiative, mainly under the impetus of socially aware consumers who feared that the markets thrown open by globalisation would be flooded with products made by children. The technical cooperation approach was not well received by developing countries, nor by the workers. The governments of developing countries were reluctant to cooperate with the ILO. They feared that the reality of child labour would be too visible and that the wealthier countries would therefore impose trade sanctions on them.

These fears were fuelled by proposals made in Europe and North America to ban the import of products made by children. The Workers’ Group of the ILO feared that a technical cooperation programme would reduce the pressure for ratification and implementation of Convention 138. IPEC took an inclusive approach: if parents had a job and an income that the family could live on, it was easier to keep children away from work and in school. Of course, there also had to be enough schools where children could acquire the necessary knowledge and skills to keep them out of the cycle of poverty later in life.

Both governments and workers were wrong. Cooperation with the ILO in fact gave governments an important argument against trade sanctions. The technical cooperation programmes in the countries themselves showed that regulation was necessary. The first project focused on the children who worked at the Smokey Mountain landfill in Manila in the Philippines, then on street children who were commercially and sexually exploited and children who worked in brick kilns, carpet weaving and clothing companies, in fishing and on tobacco plantations. Memoranda of understanding were signed with more than a hundred countries. ILO knowledge and expertise on labour legislation, labour inspection and social dialogue gradually had positive impacts in several countries.

Child labour: an ineradicable phenomenon?

119

The success of the Global March against Child Labour The Global March against Child Labour was impressive and mediagenic. From 17 January to 2 June 1998, former child labourers marched in all parts of the world. A core group of 150 international walkers travelled a total of 80,000 km.

The global organiser was Kailash Satyarthi. This Indian engineer from a high caste background first came up against forced labour in his own country. Children worked to pay off the debts of their farm labourer parents, to landowners. Satyarthi saw that a global approach was needed. I met him several times in Davos and Geneva, among other things in connection with the Nobel Peace Prize he received in 2014. He said, ‘I saw that many children in India had no future and I decided to do something about it. At first, my mother and my family were angry that I was giving up a bright future. The march, which received support from NGOs and trade unions, was a cry for help.’ The march ended on 2 June 1998 in Geneva at the opening of the International Labour Conference. Seven million thumbprints for the abolition of child labour were handed over to the ILO’s Director-General, the Belgian and former Minister of Labour Michel Hansenne. This also marked the start of negotiations between employers, workers and governments on a new convention on the worst forms of child labour.

Initially there were again mixed feelings, especially among the workers: Why only the worst forms of child labour and not all forms?

Wouldn’t that legitimize other forms of child labour? Why take a step back? Compared to the old Convention 138, it could indeed seem like a step backwards, but this is not the case if we take a hard look at reality. On the ground, the convention had achieved too little. After the second round of negotiations at the International Labour Conference in 1999, the discussion ended with extremely rare unanimous approval of the new convention. It was also the first time that NGOs were so closely involved in the ILO decision-making process.

120

The world of work

What are the worst forms of child labour according to the new Convention 182? They are slavery and forced labour, prostitution and pornography, production and trafficking of drugs and other illegal activities, and work that affects the health, safety or moral integrity of the child. The accompanying Recommendation (Recommendation 190) provides concrete guidance on tackling the problem: action programmes should involve NGOs in addition to governments, employers and workers. A record number of 186 of the 187 ILO member states have now ratified the convention. And what no one would have dared hope for: the old Convention 138 – labelled outdated a few years earlier – now has 172 ratifications. To take a step back and then take a big step forward can be useful. Of course, the highly mediatised children’s march and the IPEC programme, which was generously funded for several years, provided a strong push in the right direction.21

100 million victims of child labour, but…

Depending on the source, there were between 250 and 280 million child labourers between the ages of five and seventeen in 2000. Now there are 152 million. There are 88 million boys and 64 million girls. Almost half, 73 million children, do dangerous work. Almost half of these children are found in Africa (72.1 million), followed by Asia (62.1), the American continent (10.7), Europe and Eurasia (5.5) and the Arab States (1.2). In Africa this represents 1 in 5 children. Child labour is 71% in agriculture (fisheries, forestry, animal husbandry and aquaculture), 17% in the service sector and 12% in industry, including mining.22 In just eighteen years, child labour was thus reduced by approximately 100 million. That is a positive result, but there remain 152 million child labourers and that is 152 million too many. The ILO’s experience shows that the best results are achieved when the parents’ income increases. The most comprehensive national action programme was the Bolsa Familia of former Brazilian President Lula da Silva, who was in power between 2003 and 2011. Poor families with children received child benefits on the condition that the children were vaccinat-

Child labour: an ineradicable phenomenon?

121

ed and went to school. The programme reduced poverty by 27.7% and addressed health issues and child labour at the same time. This example shows clearly how strongly reducing child labour is linked to decent work for parents and access to social security.

Sustainable Development Goal 8.7 The ILO plays an important role in the realisation of the UN 2030 agenda and its 17 Sustainable Development Goals. Among other things, Goal 8.7 aims to end all forms of child labour by 2025. This is very ambitious and will require enormous efforts in the coming years.

The ILO programme to support Goal 8.7 is called the IPEC + Flagship Strategy. This focuses not only on the eradication of child labour, but also of forced labour (by 2030). The focus is threefold: the rural and informal economy, global supply chains and crisis situations. The ILO is trying to raise 50 million dollars a year to finance it.

In one example of action, the United Kingdom is supporting a major new programme in South Asia to eliminate child labour, starting with its worst forms. The programme will first make a diagnosis of the problem and then promote the necessary actions, including through legislation, social dialogue and partnerships with the education sector.

Another innovative and particularly interesting initiative is the Clear Cotton project, launched in 2018. This four-year programme focuses on supply chains for the cotton, textile and clothing industries in Burkina Faso, Mali and Pakistan. Textiles and clothing that are too cheap to trade credibly in the wealthy part of the world are made at ridiculously low cost in those countries, often by children and on the basis of forced labour. The project is a collaboration between the ILO, the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and the European Union. Textile companies, brands and textile dealers, consumer organisations, the International Clean Clothes Campaign, trade unions and employers’ organisations are working together on a fair global supply chain or value chain, from the cottonfield to the factory, from producer to consumer. This ambitious programme is in full swing.

122 

The world of work

Uzbekistan is another example where the ILO has been active and successful in addressing Goal 8.7. Child labour and forced labour among the 2.5 million cotton-pickers was a huge problem for many years for which the country has been called to account at the ILO on several occasions. Targeted ILO programmes with financial support from the World Bank and the European Union have been able to eliminate child labour in just a few years and to reduce forced labour by 93%. The ILO is continuing to monitor the question. In April 2019, a further detailed report was published on the basis of 11,000 unannounced and freely conducted interviews. It confirms that the country is in the process of important social reform. At the same time, a lot of work remains to be done. The remaining 170,000 cotton-pickers in forced labour will have to be replaced by voluntary workers, and freedom of organisation, freedom of expression and freedom of the press remain major concerns.23 It will be hard to eliminate the world’s child labour by 2025 and forced labour by 2030. But progress is undeniable. The combination of international regulations, compliance with appropriate national legislation and accompanying technical programmes is bearing fruit. Moreover, the Clear Cotton project is an interesting start for the ILO in coming to grips with multinational enterprises and global supply chains as well. I shall discuss this theme in more detail in chapter 7 of this book.

Child labour: an ineradicable phenomenon?  

123

6 Domestic workers: the battle for recognition

According to the ILO, they number around 67 million, children not included. They’re part of the informal economy. Of the world’s domestic workforce, 80% are female. The male 20% are gardeners, drivers or butlers. The women clean, cook, wash, iron, and take care of children, the elderly, the sick and pets. They work full-time or part-time; sometimes they work for one family, sometimes for several families; they may live in, they may commute. Often, they are also migrants. In Latin America, domestic workers account for 60% of labour migration. One and a half million women from Indonesia, Sri Lanka, the Philippines, Kenya and elsewhere work as domestic workers in Saudi Arabia and other countries in the Gulf region. The problems they face are manifold: non-payment, underpayment, excessively long days, no guaranteed breaks or rest days, mental and sexual abuse, and limited freedom of movement.

Generally, they are not regarded as ‘real workers’ because their employers, usually a family or families, are not regarded as ‘real employers’ either and their workplaces are private homes. This is how they fall between the cracks of labour law and social security.

Jeanne Devos, social pioneer I had been following the work of Sister Jeanne Devos for several years.

I first met her in 2000, when she was awarded her honorary doctorate in Leuven. She was absolutely determined to be present when domestic work was on the agenda of the International Labour Conferences

125

of 1999 and 2000. This was not possible from India where she worked and as a Belgian, she would have to get accreditation through Belgium. I included her in the ACV-CSC delegation and thus in the Belgian Workers’ Group.

As a missionary nun, Sister Jeanne started teaching at the school for the deaf in Chennai (Madras) in 1963. Later she was transferred to Mumbai (Bombay) to work with domestic workers. She soon noticed that children, especially girls, often stayed away from school. And when she looked for them, she found them active as domestic workers. Many of the children did not even exist officially: they did not appear in the register of births; they did not even know the date of their birth. Sister Jeanne told me: ‘Most of them are Dalit, casteless. In addition, quite a few of these workers are from indigenous peoples. Their common characteristic is their powerlessness, which translates into numerous abuses. They really are the poorest of the poorest.’ She began to bring them together, including the young women whose children were refused at school because they did not have a fixed home address. ‘When they joined forces and claimed their children’s right to attend school, they discovered their strength. Because that way it works. Likewise, women discovered their strength when all the domestic workers in an apartment building went on strike after one of them was unjustly fired. There was no more cleaning or cooking.

Soon, in the Indian heat and with countless cockroaches, the building became so unliveable that the woman’s dismissal was withdrawn.’

‘Leadership is crucial to the proper functioning of our movement.

No one can and will do it on their own. That was our philosophy from the beginning and will remain so. The National Domestic Workers Movement (NDWM) puts domestic staff on the map wherever it is active. It makes women stand tall, become more self-confident. When you are many, you’re stronger.’ The movement, founded in 1985, now includes 3 to 4 million domestic workers in 17 Indian states. In 2017, the NDWM, now led by Sister Cristin Mary, was visited by the Belgian royal couple Filip and Mathilde in the presence of Sister Jeanne. The

126

The world of work

domestic workers told how their lives had changed since they became involved with the movement. In several states, it managed to secure legal recognition for these workers, but the Indian Government could not have cared less. This made it all the more important that domestic workers be recognised internationally as such.

In 2013, the movement created a union for domestic workers, the National Domestic Workers Federation (NDWF), which unites unions in fourteen states. Its first task is the registration of domestic workers. Most of them live in slums, where they do not have their own address. They are not counted, not even in the poverty figures, and therefore have no right to social security. Registration itself is not an easy job and requires a great deal of effort. A minimum wage has been enforced in about ten states. But to be a truly living wage, it will have to increase considerably. Jeanne Devos: ‘The trade union is mainly concerned with the labour and social rights of domestic workers, while the movement now focuses more on child labour and the trafficking of women and children that is common within domestic labour. They reinforce each other’s work.’24

‘Madame est servie’ Western European literature and films such as Gosford Park or the British series Downton Abbey show how things once were here: one or a few girls from large families ‘were allowed’ to work in the mansion of the local lord. For most of them, this opened up a new life, very different than that on a poor little farm, but one in which submissiveness and obligatory subservience were essential: hence the French expression, still used on fancy occasions, ‘Madame est servie’. This was a phenomenon that was very common throughout Europe until the interwar period, with the accompanying risk of sexual abuse, a shameful secret many took to their graves. Until a few years ago, a number of problems with ‘servants’ had yet to be resolved in Belgium, such as sick pay and availability for work, which was not recognised as work time. Cleaning women and men were also living and working in a grey zone.

Domestic workers: the battle for recognition

127

Demands came from both South and North for the recognition of domestic staff as workers. They came not only from India but also from Latin America and Africa. In 2016, the FNV (Dutch Trade Unions Central Organisation), together with WIEGO (Women in Informal Employment: Globalizing and Organizing) convened an international conference on this topic. A year later, under the coordination of the IUF (Uniting Food, Farm and Hotel Workers Worldwide) the International Domestic Workers’ Network was established. It was the forerunner of the current International Domestic Workers’ Federation. In cooperation with the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), meetings were organised on all continents to share experiences and questions, and then provided the basis for discussions in the ILO Governing Body.

The road to a new Convention on domestic work was not self-evident. Employers’ organisations were not eager to act on behalf of a special group of employers which they did not really represent: wealthy families that called on service personnel. Nor did many governments see how they could regulate these special labour situations in their countries. Several national trade unions had no domestic workers or servants among their members. However, the awareness-raising activities gained a foothold and none of the three groups could remain indifferent. The big breakthrough came when the Governing Body put the question on the agenda at the International Labour Conferences of 2010 and 2011, with the intention of adopting new standards, a Convention and/or a Recommendation.

By June 2010 the time had come. In 2010 and 2011, together we followed the ups and downs of the discussion for two weeks, an experience that is etched in my memory. The little free time we had was completely filled with Jeanne’s stories and her answers to our many questions. She didn’t hide anything about the hard existence of domestic workers; her real-life approach showed immense respect for them. A born storyteller, Jeanne took us through the terrible practic-

128

The world of work

es, but also the inspiring achievements, great and small, that motivated her to continue organizing these workers.

Rights are never given The worldwide recognition of domestic workers through the adoption of the new Convention 189 was a shining moment in the life’s work of Jeanne Devos. The cheering from the public balconies in the Salle des Assemblées (Assembly Hall) of the UN building in Geneva was unforgettable. Domestic workers from all over the world rolled out a big banner to call on governments to ratify and implement the Convention. Afterwards, the poorest of the poor sang and danced in the hall of honour of the United Nations. The extraordinary symbolism of that spontaneous event could not escape me or anybody else who witnessed it. Following Convention 182 on the worst forms of child labour, this was another Convention where NGOs and experts with real practical experience had exerted considerable influence while not belonging to one of the three ILO groups – governments, employers or workers. Lissy from the National Democratic Workers Movement said: ‘We are here with five maids to lobby for the interests of domestic workers and to make their presence felt. Above all, what I will remember from this conference is that rights are never given but claimed through hard work.’25 The presence of people who know, feel and live what is at stake can hardly be underestimated: it ensures their inputs and puts pressure on decision-makers.

In the first place, of course, they depend on the Workers’ Group. Negotiators for the workers have to deal with their colleagues from the Employers’ and Government Groups and, ultimately, compromises have to be made. Those who come to the process with direct experience of the issues start with their strong motivation and commitment and strive for a result that meets 100% of their expectations. This gives rise to discussions between the NGOs and the Workers’ Group, as well as within the Workers’ Group itself. The Workers’ Group Chairperson must not only take but also give in negotiations, must maintain the agreed

Domestic workers: the battle for recognition

129

line but also be realistic and must keep the group together while safeguarding the positive relationship with the NGOs. No matter how difficult it may be, I find this dynamic to be really positive. Convention 189 recognises the important contribution that domestic personnel make to society and the economy. Member states must respect, protect and promote human rights in general and the specific rights of domestic workers. These include the right to organise, to bargain collectively for decent working conditions, to social protection and social security, to minimum wages, to rest and annual leave, protection against all forms of abuse and violence, and to access justice. Sister Jeanne Devos: ‘The Convention gives domestic workers a right to exist; through an employment contract they are recognised as a person.’

The Convention has now been ratified by twenty-nine member states. Even in many Western countries, including Belgium, their labour legislation and social security has had to be adapted in certain respects. These changes took domestic workers out of the grey zone.

Respect for them can still be improved, but the legal basis of protection is there. They also now have their own collective labour agreement in Belgium.

I read the reports of the NDWM/NDWF, now led by Cristy, Jeanne’s successor, with great interest. I see the power of education, the growing self-confidence, the awareness, the political lobbying, the different forms of action … the work and commitment of the movement command great respect. On child labour it succeeded in getting a number of Indian states to take action on the principles of Convention 189, but India itself ratified that Convention only recently and has not yet ratified the one on domestic workers. In the field of child labour, especially in the family context, Indian legislation has even taken a step backwards. India needs social action; workers are still not always respected there. The work is not finished yet, but the NDWM/ NDWF demonstrates brilliantly how local activism can improve the lives of countless people and inspire international regulation.

130

The world of work

7 Due diligence: the labyrinth of supply chains

Bangladesh: a catastrophe as wake-up call Everyone remembers the images from 24 April 2013: collapsed concrete floors still partly hanging from the remains of a ruined building.

The dead numbered 1,138 and 2,000 workers were injured. The day before, the Rana Plaza factory in Savar, Bangladesh, had become structurally unstable and large cracks suddenly appeared in the structure.

The building was completely evacuated. But the next day, under pressure from their bosses and the police, the employees had to resume work, with catastrophic consequences. At the time of the collapse, 5,000 employees were working in the building producing clothes for well-known brands. When it turned out that the building had been approved by inspectors of the Business Social Compliance Initiative not long before, there were only two possible conclusions: either the criteria were wrong, or their inspection was lax, and bribery might have been involved. In any case, the world was appalled, and everyone saw the disaster was a disgrace. Amidst all the horror, the Clean Clothes Campaign, which had been mobilising on the theme for years, pointed to the responsibility of the consumer – our responsibility, that is.

The historic Rana Plaza Accord The Government of Bangladesh understood that the disaster was massively damaging for the country and its clothing industry. Sud-

 

131

denly it was more open to cooperation than ever before: the ambassador in Geneva came to the ILO for help, willing to agree to whatever could get rid of the shame. More importantly, the shock waves created such momentum that, for the first time, retail clothing brands were ready to sit together with the international sectoral trade union federations (GUFs). Because of the negative worldwide publicity, they knew that they had to do something. Together they asked if ILO Director-General Guy Ryder could host a meeting with the relevant GUFs and the International Clean Clothes Campaign. Three weeks after the disaster, the meeting took place. The parties reached an agreement: the so-called Accord on Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh, also known as the Rana Plaza Accord.

The Accord is a legally binding agreement between clothing brands and retailers on the one hand, and international and national trade unions on the other. The International Clean Clothes Campaign co-signed as a witness. The agreement is not a collective bargaining agreement, concluded between employers and workers. It did not involve local employers, but rather brands, and that makes it a historic, innovative and, so far, unique agreement, involving binding conditions in a way which is unprecedented. Clothing brands can even be sanctioned if they source with rogue companies. More than 200 European brands signed up to the Accord, while a number of American brands signed a weaker ‘Alliance for Bangladesh Worker Safety’ agreement, without legally binding conditions and without the involvement of trade unions.

Clothing production in Bangladesh and the Rana Plaza Accord: a few figures

The textile and clothing sector in Bangladesh employs 4 million people and has an annual turnover of USD 29 billion. 64% of production is destined for the European market, 18% for the United States.

132 

The world of work

It is an extremely dangerous sector; building safety in particular often leaves much to be desired. Between 2005 and 2012, 500 people died in fires and building collapses. At the Rana Plaza tragedy, the casualties were 1,138 dead with a further 2,000 injured.

The Rana Plaza Accord has major implications for the sector. The Accord and the Alliance inspects some 2,300 factories in its jurisdiction. The 250 inspectors funded by the Accord have already carried out 25,000 inspections in 1,800 factories employing 2.5 million workers. Some 50,000 safety issues have been resolved; 180 factories refused access to the inspectors, with the result that the clothing buyers cut off business with them. Another 100 factories were suspended and 500 are in a final warning phase. Some 700 factories are monitored by the Alliance and not by the Accord. In addition to the Accord and the Alliance, the ILO covers another 1,500 factories. One multinational paid the Accord $2.3 million as a settlement because the working conditions in 150 factories it sourced from failed to make required improvements. The settlement contained a clause which prevents the disclosure of the company’s name.

Five years after the disaster The Accord was reviewed in 2018. Results had undeniably been achieved in the field of fire and general safety. For example, over the five years, minimum wages rose from 30 euros to 83 euros per month.

But clothing workers demonstrated at the end of 2016 for a wage of 160 euros, while the Asia Floor Wage Alliance, a network of trade unions and NGOs, calculated that a living wage is at least 290 euros.

However, the Government of Bangladesh is putting on the brakes, and the discussions of minimum wages drag on. Workers also complain that employers want to recoup rising safety and wage costs by increasing the pace of work. They would need to produce up to 60% more clothes, including with overtime for which they are paid less.

Due diligence: the labyrinth of supply chains  

133

A Rana Plaza compensation fund was set up for the victims of the tragedy. It took until June 2015 to raise the necessary $30 million. Despite its original commitment, Benetton had to be pressured to participate and other brands were also stinting and ungenerous, including Mango, Inditex (Zara, Bershka and Pull&Bear), Kappa and, not surprisingly, the American chain Walmart. In the end, the thirty million was collected with the help of an anonymous donation of $2.4 million thanks to a personal intervention by German Chancellor Angela Merkel. More than two years after the disaster, the victims finally received compensation according to the relevant international standards. Unfortunately, many of them are incapacitated for life and have high medical expenses, which they are unable to pay even with the sums paid out.

Beyond the momentum… what next?

In 2013 there was scope for discussion of minimum wages and freedom of association because of the spotlight on the many labour problems in Bangladesh. Dialogue would be the future. Both the ILO and the European Union supported the promising openings made by the government and employers. But then progress stalled. For example, applications to register trade unions were rejected or shelved.

Subsequently, the International Labour Conference decided in 2015 to send a High-Level Tripartite Mission to Bangladesh, and the visit took place in April 2016. ACV-CSC President Marc Leemans, as Vice-Chairperson of the Committee on the Application of Standards, together with the other mission members, found that neither the government nor the employers were really willing to take further steps to apply fundamental ILO Conventions, starting with freedom of association. Leemans concluded: ‘In addition, both the leaders and the members of trade unions regularly fall victim to intimidation, discrimination and dismissal. Who wants to join a trade union in such a climate?’

In the Committee on the Application of Standards at the 2016 Conference, the Employers’ Group was also prepared to speak up.

134

The world of work

Conclusions were included in a special paragraph, a clear signal to the international community that the situation was still critical. The government was called upon to implement the recommendations of the High-Level Tripartite Mission.26 But even when clothing brands are willing to open margins for higher wages by paying more for their products, this is not always well received by national employers and governments. In Cambodia and other countries of the region, similar problems have arisen.

The government seeks to wash its hands of the Accord The Accord was initially planned for a period of five years, after which the government would take over responsibility for inspections. But everybody involved knew that they were not ready. After difficult discussions with the Government of Bangladesh, a tentative agreement was reached for a three-year extension. But in May 2018, a court decided otherwise in a verdict handed down on the basis of a complaint from a factory owner. In December 2018, the Accord office in Dhaka was closed for good. From now on, Bangladesh could handle matters itself, the judges found.

‘We are a nation that respects itself and the Accord and the Alliance are no longer necessary,’ wrote Minister of Trade Tofail Ahmed.

This was met with incomprehension in the European Parliament, the ILO, and by international NGOs and clothing companies such as H&M and Esprit, which also urged the government not to expel the Accord Office. Esprit produces a third of its clothing in Bangladesh and wrote to its suppliers that an eviction would undermine the reputation of the industry. The company also announced that it might stop purchasing from 500 factories that were under final warning. After another disastrous factory fire, the Clean Clothes Campaign repeated on 7 March 2019 that the national inspection capacities were not ready. The Supreme Court, where the case of the Accord was being heard on appeal, had given a verdict on the matter on several occa-

Due diligence: the labyrinth of supply chains

135

sions.27 Finally, however, an agreement was reached on the termination of the Accord, which transferred its functions to the Ready-Made Garments Industry Sustainability Council (RSC) in May 2020. This is a national initiative, bringing together the industry, brands and trade unions. In addition to fire safety, this Council will also deal with industrial relations, skill development and environmental standards.

The future will tell whether this system works. But the commitment of the government and employers to accept their responsibility to enforce the fundamental Conventions of the ILO remains in question.

The findings of the High-Level Tripartite Mission were already described above. Non-recognition of trade unions and prosecution of trade union leaders remain the order of the day. Any action for living wages and decent working conditions is often violently suppressed.

Due to the inaction of the Government of Bangladesh, members of the Workers’ Group submitted a complaint at the 2019 International Labour Conference to set up a Commission of Inquiry on violations of the Conventions on Freedom of Association, on the Right to Collective Bargaining and on Labour Inspection.

As if the situation were not difficult enough for the workers in a country like Bangladesh, added to that are the consequences of COVID-19, as in many countries in the South. There is the impact of the virus itself, but there are also the consequences of the lockdown and the closure of shops in the wealthy countries, with a severe drop in orders for clothing as a result, so that most of the 4 million textile workers in Bangladesh are without work, without income and without social protection.

Human and workers’ rights due diligence in global supply chains The Rana Plaza tragedy shows how important global supply chains are for workers’ rights. Often, they exert more power than states. A 2016 ITUC report shows that the fifty largest companies together have a turnover of $3.4 trillion (3,400,000,000,000). Who can even imagine

136

The world of work

such an amount? At least as important is the fact that together they have 116 million workers: workers who are not officially employed by them but who are working for them somewhere in the world, often in the informal economy.28 And here we come up against a major weakness of the ILO. A multilateral organisation such as the ILO can call member states to account, but it does not have that same power with regard to companies.

Multinational companies and supply chains have to respect the law in every country in which they operate, but unfortunately that is not enough. The ILO would be in a stronger position if it could somehow enforce the application of its Conventions by international companies and supply chains, but we haven’t reached that point yet. There are, however, a number of useful – albeit non-binding – international guidelines for company behaviour. I will list the most important ones.

International guidelines for companies: De OECD guidelines for multinational enterprises

The OECD guidelines are a set of recommendations in the fields of labour, human rights, supply chain responsibility, environment, consumer protection and competition. They contain standards for responsible behaviour in accordance with the applicable legislation in each country in which the company operates. Originally adopted in 1976, the OECD guidelines have been endorsed by 48 countries. National Contact Points promote their application and handle complaints of non-application.

The ILO Tripartite Declaration on MNEs and Social Policy

In the words of Guy Ryder, Director-General of the ILO: ‘The Tripartite 1977 MNE Declaration – MNE stands for multinational enterprise – provides clear guidelines on how companies can contribute to the realisation of decent work through their global

Due diligence: the labyrinth of supply chains

137

activities. The recommendations are based on international labour standards reflect good practice for all companies, but they also stress the role of governments in promoting good corporate behaviour, as well as the crucial role of social dialogue.’ UN Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights

According to the Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights of the United Nations, the state must protect individuals against violations of human rights by companies. Companies must respect human rights and victims of human rights violations must be given access to mechanisms that provide remedies for violations. These principles are expressed in 31 coherent guidelines that explicitly refer to the United Nations Charter on Human Rights and the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work. The guiding principles are not legally binding, but UN member states are called upon to incorporate them into their legislation and practice.

Human Rights Due Diligence

Human Rights Due Diligence is a concept at the centre of the UN Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights, which requires that action be taken to ensure that their practices respect human rights, including in their global supply chains.

Due diligence: voluntary or mandatory?

It is interesting that companies are increasingly taking initiatives themselves through social audits or codes of conduct in the context of so-called Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). However, public relations and image building usually weigh more heavily in these initiatives than does real action to promote social responsibility. That is fiercely contested in employer and human resource managerial circles, but the world would undoubtedly be a better place if a larger

138 

The world of work

number of companies were to take their social and climate responsibility more seriously. Hats off to those who do. Unfortunately, they belong to a small minority.

Several countries, including Belgium, are working with a National Action Plan, which aims to raise awareness and help companies to voluntarily engage in due diligence by means of a human rights toolkit. Germany and the Netherlands are experimenting with a mix of voluntary and binding measures. This is done through partnership agreements and sectoral agreements between companies, their federations and civil society. Companies participate voluntarily but still commit to a number of rules. Anyone who fails to meet their provisions is excluded from the agreement. In addition to a number of general obligations, there are differences from sector to sector. Every company is obliged to monitor its supply chain and to develop an action plan to prevent human rights violations in their company(ies) or supply chain. They also have to report on progress made. In this way, a number of enforceable rules apply within a voluntary framework.

This is an interesting steppingstone. Nevertheless, there is a growing and explicit call for a mandatory approach to due diligence. This would include different levels: national, regional and global.

At the national level, France has the most far-reaching legislation, notably the law of 27 March 2017 ‘relative au Devoir de Vigilance des Sociétés Mères et des Entreprises donneuses d’ordre’. This law imposes a duty of vigilance on parent companies and companies awarding contracts. It provides that French companies that have at least 5,000 employees in France or at least 10,000 worldwide for a period of two years are obliged to draw up a due diligence plan in respect of the environment, human rights, safety and health and corruption risks.

They must do this not only for their own activities, but also for those of their subsidiaries, subcontractors and suppliers with whom they have a long-term relationship. This law didn’t just materialise out of thin air. It is the result of a broad coalition of trade unions and NGOs, which are now turning their attention to making the law effective. In Due diligence: the labyrinth of supply chains

139

the Netherlands, Germany, Finland, Austria, Switzerland and Norway, preparatory work or consideration is also being given to regulation. In the Netherlands, for example, a law was already passed in 2019 obliging companies to trace, prevent and tackle child labour in their supply and production chains.

Increasingly, this is giving rise to legal action. In the United Kingdom, in 2019 the British Supreme Court upheld the complaint of four Zambian farming communities concerning poisoning of their water, soil and crops by sulphuric acid and other toxic chemicals caused by the Konkola Copper Mines, owned by the Indian mining giant Vedante, whose headquarters are in London.

In the European Union, more than 100 NGOs and trade unions are calling for European regulation for mandatory due diligence on human, workers’ and climate rights. This is strongly supported by the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC), the European Economic and Social Committee, and the European Parliament also voted in favour of such action. In February 2020, the European Commission published the results of a study that showed that one in three companies reporting on due diligence does so in relation to human and climate rights. Of the 334 companies that replied, 70% felt that European regulations on mandatory due diligence would be not only socially important, but also good for the economy. European Commissioner Didier Reynders stated that this would be taken into account in the approach to the ‘European Green Deal’. Previously, he had also stated to the European Parliament that voluntary commitments by companies are not sufficient and that effective and ambitious proposals should therefore be developed.29

A binding United Nations convention and an ILO convention Globally, the International Trade Union Confederation wants a binding Convention within the framework of the United Nations that addresses supply chain issues. This type of instrument is under consider-

140

The world of work

ation in a UN working group. For companies, due diligence would then become a legal obligation; for victims of human rights violations in supply chains, a procedure and remedy would now have to be provided. All workers in supply chains would have access to the courts in the company’s home country. The ITUC wants human rights to take precedence over trade and investment agreements: the Convention should be aligned with the UN Guiding Principles on Human Rights (see the previous list). Governments agreed in the G20 – the group of 19 ‘important’ countries and the EU – that the undermining of ILO standards for competitive advantage must stop. A UN Convention would certainly be ground-breaking. This idea has already led to vigorous discussion in the UN Human Rights Council. While debate is strongly polarized, there did seem to be significant movement in 2019.

This came particularly from the European Union, which stopped participating in 2015. Even in the absence of a clear mandate from the European Council, minds seem to be opening both in respect of UN action and of a European initiative. The next question with regard to a UN Convention will be how its application will be supervised and what role the ILO will play on labour-related issues.

Within the ILO, the issue of supply chains was discussed at the 2016 International Labour Conference. A resolution was adopted, and an action plan developed, but the ILO’s decisions are too weak. Discussions held in early 2020 once again showed that the issue is difficult.

Citing many specific cases, the Workers’ Group was able to outline the problems and, among other things, indicate the limits of international labour standards when it comes to cross-border situations. For example, when enterprises make workers available to other companies across borders, their rights may not be applied or even subjected to negotiation. The Workers’ Group favours a Convention that requires member states to oblige enterprises to exercise due diligence. Here it might be possible to find a balance with employer objectives in respect of sustainable enterprises.

Due diligence: the labyrinth of supply chains

141

The discussions in 2016, however, were marked by rigidity, as many recent discussions have been. The International Organisation of Employers (IOE/OIE) is proving very difficult when it comes to multinational enterprises and global supply chains. It sees both these discussions and the ILO’s contact with individual companies as threatening.

It is also very difficult to discuss things that are possible in individual multinationals – i.e., in cross-border negotiations between global trade unions and companies for International Framework Agreements – with an organisation which represents national employers’ organisations but not international sectoral employers. Still, a number of multinational enterprises have concluded global framework agreements with Global Union Federations.

Examples include Ability, Accor, Adecco, Aker, Allianz, AngloGold, Antara, Arcelor, Ballast Nedam, Barclays Africa, BMW, Bosch, Brunel, Carrefour, Chiquita, Club Med, DaimlerChrysler, Danone, Danske Bank, EADS, EDF, Elanders, Electrolux, Endesa, Eni, Euradius, Faber-Castell, Falck, Fonterra, Ford, France Telecom, Freudenberg, G4S, GDF SUEZ, GEA, H&M, Hochtief, ICOMON, IKEA, Impregilo, Indesit, Inditex, ISS, Italcementi, Kelly Services, Lafarge, Leoni, Lukoil, MAN, Manpower, Metro, Mizuno, NAG, Nampak, Nordea, Norske Skog, Olympia Flexgroup, OTE, Petrobras, Portugal Telecom, Prym, PSA Peugeot Citroën, Quebecor, RAG, Randstad, Renault, Rheinmetall, Rhodia, Röchling, Royal BAM, SCA, Securitas, Shoprite Checkers, Skandia, Skanska, SKF, Sodexo, Solvay, Stabilo, Staedtler, Statoil, Systema Televisyen Malaysia Berhad, Takashimaya, Telefonica, Umicore, UPU, USG People, Vallourec, Veidekke, VolkerWessels, Volkswagen, Wilkhahn.

142

The world of work

So, on the one hand we see companies that are open to this debate, such as those mentioned above and those that have indicated to the European Commission that they are interested in regulation; on the other hand, there is the refusal of the IOE. This is an incomprehensible gap, but one that the business world itself must bridge. What is certain is that regulation is not only inescapable but will also provide added value for a liveable planet, a just society, sustainable businesses and respect for workers.

Due diligence: the labyrinth of supply chains  

143

8 Freedom of association: slaving away in Latin America

It is a human right. And yet freedom of association is still restricted in many countries. This happens to different degrees and in different ways, from the most subtle harassment to the most brutal murder of social activists and trade union leaders. A number of particularly blatant violations take place in Latin America. In the following sections, I will discuss the situation in Colombia, Guatemala and Venezuela.

Colombia: no country for trade unionists My first ILO High-Level Tripartite Mission in October 2005 was an innovation for the ILO as well as a baptism of fire for me. It was the most turbulent period of my career as ACV-CSC President. Throughout the summer we had been negotiating the so-called Generation Pact (among other things, about retirement age, old age pensions and labour market policy) with the employers and the second Liberal-Socialist coalition government of Guy Verhofstadt. During the final stretch, the government took the decision into its own hands, which was a step too far for the majority of workers. After a series of actions in staggered battle order, the three trade unions’ centres decided to organise a mass demonstration on 28 October 2005.

Because of the situation in Belgium, I had already had to postpone the mission to Colombia a number of times, but another postponement

 

145

was no longer an option for the ILO or for Colombia. The Colombian Government was only prepared to receive the two Vice-Chairpersons of the Committee on the Application of Standards, and thus I could not send a deputy. I left for Bogota in a hurry. During the trip, I worked on the most recent elements in the dossier. What had gone on before was still quite fresh in my memory and I knew several people in the country itself, in the trade unions, among the employers and in government.

Given the complexity of the mission in a country that was quite dangerous at the time, there was some concern at home and at the ACV-CSC.

Violence against trade union leaders and human rights activists Colombian history is to a large extent violent and lacking stability. After the rich pre-Colombian period, the country was colonised from 1500 onwards by the Spanish conquistadors. In 1819 the country won independence and successive wars followed: the thousand-day war (1899-1902), La Violencia (1948-1958) and the Colombian civil war (1964 until the peace agreement of 2016). Left-wing guerrilla movements, the FARC (Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia) and the ELN (Ejército de Liberacion Nacional) took up arms against the government, army and police. Right-wing paramilitary groups fought the left-wing guerrillas. The civil war cost the lives of more than 200,000 people. The FARC financed itself by having people kidnapped and ransomed. One of them was the French-Colombian Íngrid Betancourt, who was held from 2002 to 2008. But most of the profits of the FARC came from drug trafficking.

Colombia was one of the countries that came up regularly in the Committee on the Application of Standards. The lack of trade union freedom there had been a theme for twenty years, but the continuing violence had also been on the agenda for some time. Starting with intimidation and threats, it often ended with kidnapping and murder.

Although violence was widespread in the country, it soon became

146

The world of work

clear that trade union leaders and social workers were being targeted – sometimes because they were considered too left-wing, sometimes because they were not left-wing enough. Colombia was the most dangerous country in the world for trade unionists.

In June 2005, the International Labour Conference decided to send a mission to the country. Two hundred leaders had been murdered in Colombia in 2003, ninety in 2004. The Workers’ Group of the Committee on the Application of Standards was in an uproar; the other groups offered enough support to reach good conclusions. But none of the ILO’s many admonitions had helped; something new was needed. In the office of the Director of the ILO Standards Department, Jean-Claude Javillier, in his presence and that of Karen Curtis, Freedom of Association Chief, my colleague from the Employers’ Group, Ed Potter, and I negotiated with the Colombian Ambassador and Deputy Minister of Labour; they consulted the Vice-President by telephone. This was the way in which the decision about the mission was made. This type of mission, led by the constituents – a representative of the governments, workers and employers – was innovative at the time and would be used again in other serious cases.

However, the Colombian Government deemed a mission imposed from Geneva unacceptable. An agreement was reached only after long negotiations. In order for the government to invite the ILO, the mission was called a ‘visit’. That sounded less threatening than a mission.

We used the same device to make our mission acceptable to the Government of Qatar in 2016. For the rest, there was no difference.

An eventful mission The mission consisted of Dutch professor Paul van der Heijden, Chairperson of the ILO Committee on Freedom of Association, the US employer Ed Potter and myself. The ILO was represented by Karen Curtis and the international lawyer Maria Marta Travieso. I was assisted by Isabelle Hoferlin, standards specialist at our then world organisation, the World Confederation of Labour.

Freedom of association: slaving away in latin america

147

The programme was drawn up following negotiations between the ILO Office and the government. Of course, the government comes prepared. On the first day, we are inundated with statistics and data on how the government is working for the safety of trade union leaders and people who stand up for human rights, the labour inspectorate, and so on. From day one, we demand enough time for contact with the relevant authorities and workers. Each union centre – the CUT, the CGT and the CTC – convenes its people. They come from far away, sometimes after a full day of travelling on a moped or on foot, in rickety vans or on the back of a pick-up truck. They tell the story of their murdered husband, wife, boyfriend, girlfriend, colleague. I still see them before me, with well-prepared dossiers. They substantiate their arguments with detailed evidence. Our official escorts say it will get too late if we wait to hear all these people. But that is exactly what we want; none of the colleagues wants to leave. Three nights in a row, we listen to their testimonies until late at night. It is moving and unforgettable. We cannot bring their loved ones back, but they are incredibly grateful for the fact that we are interested in their stories. The testimonies are meticulously noted and kept up to date. We use them as evidence in our official contacts. That these people speak so openly is very courageous, because we also do not know what our bodyguards might do with what they hear. At the larger meetings in particular they are very tense. When a member of the mission wants to go to the lavatory, everyone else must leave the bathroom and all doors are opened for inspection before they are allowed to enter. We travel in armoured jeeps and under the supervision of heavily armed agents who ride behind us on motorcycles. We always drive from basement garage to basement garage, never getting in or out on the street. We find it a bit over the top. They don’t.

In our contacts with the government and the judiciary, we not only listen, we also point out the responsibility of the various authorities.

Paul van der Heijden takes the lead, as always in an excellent way. We meet Vice-President Santos, who would later negotiate the peace agree-

148

The world of work

ment as President, the Minister of Social Protection, the Minister of Defence, the High Commissioner for Peace, representatives of the Supreme Court, the Chamber of Cassation, the Council of State and Parliament, and the Attorney General, among others. These visits have become standard practice ever since, and they can be very useful. Our presence and meetings were closely followed by the media, as are most missions. In contacts with the media, our protocol is to explain the purpose of our mission, no more, no less. At the end of the mission, we sometimes give a press conference or issue a press communiqué.

At the government’s suggestion, we also visit companies, among other places in Paipa. If we otherwise have a sufficient margin to meet those we want freely, we usually respond positively to government suggestions. We have to get up very early; it is pitch dark when we arrive at the military airfield of Bogota. We are introduced to a commander who leaves with about ten soldiers to pick up the bodies of two of his men, shot down the previous night by the FARC. Of course, governments try to involve mission members in their side of the story.

A little later, we leave in a small army plane. At the back of the plane is a soldier sitting on a machine gun. As we near Paipa, the sun has risen but there are still a lot of clouds. One of the pilots, in the cockpit that is not separated off, says we might have to return to Bogota because they can’t find the landing strip. By chance, through the clouds I glimpse a landing strip and a building with a brass band and children with flags in two rows who are clearly waiting for ‘someone’. I shout that I see the runway. The pilots ask me to sit with them. Banking steeply, we find the opening in the clouds. The schoolchildren and the city council indeed greet us with a warm welcome.

After the welcome, complete with Colombian coffee and local delicacies, we visit two state-owned companies which, according to the government, are an example of good labour relations. The steel company ACERIAS PAZ DEL RIO is an important enterprise with almost 500,000 people depending directly or indirectly on it. Many workers live with their families on the premises and in company homes. The

Freedom of association: slaving away in latin america

149

company has had to endure two crises in a short period of time, according to the Chair of the Board. The workers agreed to accept shares and receive no salary for several months. The trade union Chair confirms the story but expresses concern about the viability of the company and the future of the workers.

At the electricity company GENSA S.A. we meet with the management and trade unions. An agreement was concluded there to save the company from bankruptcy. The workers remain vague about exactly how much they gave up, but in exchange there were no dismissals, and the union was given a number of seats on the Board. Nor do they answer a question about the responsibilities and liabilities of the worker Directors. During a break, two young men are waiting for me. They say that the whole thing was decided under pressure and that the workers had no choice.

The members of the mission expressed serious doubts about these business models, Cooperatives of Associated Work (Cooperativas de Trabajo Asociado-CTA), idealised by the Colombian government. On the return journey, our busy post-mortem in the plane is halted when the military pilots urgently request our attention. Soon we will by flying over FARC-occupied territory. The sky is clear and to stay out of range of guns, we will have to fly very high. Governments that receive us are responsible for our safety, but a military plane or vehicle is always a target in (civil) war zones. To compensate for the lack of oxygen in the cabin, we have to use the oxygen masks. Apart from the noisy engines, nothing else can be heard.

With the president We use the little time left during the mission for discussions among its members about our views and the content of our report. We’re informed that President Alvaro Uribe wants a final meeting. The suggested timing is practically impossible, as I cannot miss my flight back to Brussels in time to address the national demonstration. I am as-

150 

The world of work

sured that everything is in place to catch the plane, but I am far from comfortable with the arrangements. The agreement is that I may address the President first, but of course Uribe starts talking at length about his financial and economic policy, the fight against the FARC and the paramilitaries, corruption, poverty and misery. According to him, the relationship with trade unions should evolve from the conflict model to the participation model. He gives the example of the companies we visited. He admits that there were abuses and that they would be addressed by a new decree. In the meantime I have broken out in a cold sweat. He notices my nervousness and says he wants to give me the full allotted time and not to worry, I will catch my flight.

The mission members talk about the general context, which is stacked against trade unions and social organisations. This is made possible by laws, policies and generally accepted practices of employers and government. Impunity cannot be explained in any other way.

In concrete terms, many factors are behind the particularly low level of trade union membership: restructuring of companies with the aim of making workers’ representatives redundant, temporary employment agencies that replace organised with non-organised workers or subcontracting with the aim of excluding trade union representation, so-called trade union contracts which make the union liable for what could go wrong, the exclusion of social dialogue in the public sector, the non-recognition of trade unions, the legal ban on strikes even in non-essential services. Workers have nowhere to go with their complaints; labour inspection doesn’t work at all. And if, despite all this, people still stand up for their colleagues, they run the risk of being eliminated. The President says he wants to end those murders and that image. We understand that that doesn’t mean he wants to give workers and unions a real place in social dialogue.30 Meanwhile, it seems impossible for me to make my flight. That is out of the President’s hands. The army and police escort is ready to take me to the airport. There is an Air France 747 waiting there, delayed. The security guards will take me to the plane. I hardly dare look

Freedom of association: slaving away in latin america

151

at my fellow passengers, I’m so ashamed. But in this way, on 28 October 2005, I will still be able to address the demonstration in Brussels, the largest ever of its kind, as President of the ACV-CSC.

An agreement in 2006 On the basis of the mission’s report, the ILO continued to work with the Colombian Government. Among other things, the protection of trade union leaders was strengthened; they were given armoured vehicles and armed drivers. On 1 June 2006, at the start of the International Labour Conference in Geneva, the government, the three trade union centres and the employers reached an agreement based on our recommendations. It provides that respect for fundamental workers’ rights should be a priority, as should the physical integrity of trade union leaders, freedom of organisation, freedom of expression and freedom of collective bargaining. This required technical support to labour inspection, the courts and legislation. The government would make investments in these areas, and the ILO also mobilized resources. In the fight against impunity, the Attorney General’s special investigation group would receive extra capacity and follow-up. The National Consultative Commission on Labour and Wages Policies would be made permanent. Our mission had also asked for a permanent presence of the ILO in Colombia. A representative of the Director-General was sent, but apparently, he had difficulty contacting and interacting with the parties involved.31 In the days following the conclusion of the agreement, Colombia was, as at every International Labour Conference, high on the agenda of the Committee on the Application of Standards. At the beginning of the conference, Vice-Chairperson Ed Potter and I were invited by the tripartite Colombian delegation to be informed about the agreement reached. This was good news. Together with Myanmar, Colombia had always been an absolute priority for a number of trade unions around the world, and rightly so. However, I did not like the fact that the Conference Committee focussed so narrowly on a few high-profile cases, while other, equally important cases received far less attention.

152

The world of work

When I informed the Workers’ Group of the developments and about the Colombian request to stop putting the country on the agenda, there was a murmur in the room. Some European organisations and Northand South-American trade unions thought Colombia should be on the list of cases of the Application Committee anyway. This made no sense at all; the Committee’s decisions could never be as strong as the agreement already reached. There was support from some experienced members of the Committee, and eventually a majority. When the case list was approved by the full Committee on the Application of Standards with no mention of Colombia, a number of people from my group left the room with a great deal of demonstration.

There are many problems and situations that affect me. But in situations like this, I can maintain an icy calm – especially when agreed positions are acted on coherently. In this case, there was an agreement between those involved. Who then is in position to claim that they know better than they do? The Committee simply carried on with its work, and those who had left the room returned on tiptoe. Afterwards I no longer paid it any attention.

A year later, in 2007, the ILO leadership paid another visit to Colombia. Constant pressure was still necessary. The Colombian Government complained that workers continued to send complaints about the country to Geneva instead of dealing with them in Colombia. But there was no confidence in the judicial system and impunity had scarcely diminished, and so the complaints kept on coming.

The peace process Three years later, during the June 2010 Labour Conference, the three Colombian trade union centres in the Committee on the Application of Standards asked for a tripartite follow-up mission to be sent to verify the implementation of the 2006 agreement. Yet another forty-eight trade unionists had been murdered. The fact that the government and the Employers’ Group wanted to present the reduction in the number of

Freedom of association: slaving away in latin america

153

murders as progress went down like a lead balloon among the members of the Workers’ Group and the Colombians themselves – and rightly so.

Every murdered colleague was one too many. Moreover, employers and government continued to make life and work difficult for trade unions.

The actions of the police and judicial authorities also remained inadequate. In February 2011 we were again on the spot; this time our delegation was reinforced by the experienced Chair of the Committee on the Application of Standards, Deputy Director-General Guy Ryder (the future Director-General) and the Director of the standards department, Cleopatra Doumbia-Henry. On the employers’ side there was Ed Potter and Dagoberto Lima Godoy (Vice-Chairperson of the IOE) and for the workers the then Workers’ Chair in the Governing Body, Sir Roy Trotman, and myself. I was assisted by the head of the international department of ACV-CSC, Latin America specialist Véronique Rousseau.

Again we listened intensely to the different groups.

With politicians such as President Santos and Vice-President Angelino Garzón we were listened to more attentively than during our previous mission. We reminded them and the judicial authorities of their responsibilities. We did see some progress, such as the reconstruction of Medellin, previously a city of violence and death, terrorized by the drug cartel of Pablo Escobar. Once again, we applied pressure for the full implementation of the 2006 agreement. We were also supported by the countries that were financing the ILO’s assistance programme in Colombia.

The recommendations of the 2011 mission, including freedom of association, collective bargaining and social dialogue, were also part of the national peace process.32 Negotiations with the FARC would lead to the peace agreement signed on 26 September 2016. The atmosphere between the different parties was positive and hopeful, as I was able to observe for myself during a conference in Cartagena in May of the Colombian peace year 2016. When the peace agreement was signed, Guy Ryder, as Director-General, pledged the support of the ILO to the

154

The world of work

post-conflict strategy. Many economic deals were signed as a result of the agreement. As part of them, Colombia pledged to implement a series of human rights, labour and environmental standards. President Juan Manuel Santos, now a Nobel laureate, who had previously stood at the side of President Uribe, was then severely obstructed by his former boss. Opponents of the agreement felt that the FARC came off too well, with only disarmament and alternative community work sanctions, as long as the former combatants reintegrated themselves into society and the economy. They were also troubled by land reform and redistributive policies. The current President, Iván Duque, is from the Uribe stable and follows its line of reasoning. Right-wing paramilitary groups are re-emerging, perhaps encouraged by the drug lords. The FARC has transformed itself into a political party, but some factions have lost confidence and are again taking up arms. Less than a quarter of the social measures agreed upon and supported by the European Union, the US, the OECD and the ILO have been implemented.

Peace at risk Hopes were high, but recent events and trends unfortunately point to new dangers. However, opportunities remain. There are stronger state structures than in other Latin American countries. At the time of and after the peace agreement, efforts were made, successful negotiations took place in the public sector, collective agreements were concluded.

Unfortunately, President Duque’s policy is turning back the clock.

Rosa Flerez Gonzalez, General Secretary of the CTC and member of the ILO Governing Body, says that the trade unions received little in return for the support they gave to the Santos-led peace process. Under the new President, the entrepreneurial and political mentality remains too tolerant of violence against people who stand up for workers. A large number of complaints to the ILO still come from Colombia, reflecting the slowness or total lack of action against the violence.

The ‘collective pacts’ between enterprise leaders and non-organised workers paid for this purpose continue to exclude trade unions. In-

Freedom of association: slaving away in latin america

155

stead of employment contracts, civil law contracts are used that do not offer protection to workers. On the basis of our recommendations in 2005, the government promised to end contracts with hand-picked non-representative trade unions. That happened, but other questionable processes took their place, as confirmed by the ILO Committee of Experts. This has been confirmed by the Experts Committee on the Application of Standards.

The ITUC report ‘Peace at Risk’ of late 2019 summarises the facts. In 2018, another thirty-four trade unionists were murdered, mainly in the education, agriculture and mining sectors. In 2019, the NGO Front Line Defenders counted a total of 109 murdered human rights activists. ‘Threats, violent attacks and even torture contributed to a total of 234 serious violations of trade unionists’ human rights. 95% of crimes linked to serious violations of trade unionists’ human rights are unresolved’.33 This trend has been confirmed in reports from NGOs. Fernando Carillo, supreme magistrate as Inspector General of Colombia, speaks of ‘systematic assassinations of social leaders’. In addition to trade union leaders, journalists, teachers, human rights defenders and leaders of indigenous peoples are also targeted. At the beginning of 2020, the United Nations called on the government to respect the peace agreement and to prosecute and punish those guilty. In addition, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights rightly reprimanded the Colombian Government in no uncertain terms.

With strikes and large demonstrations, trade unions and social organisations are trying to turn the tide. They denounce the broken promises, widespread corruption and economic reforms that have cut tax burdens on companies and the wealthy. They stand up for employment, living wages and a solid social security system.

The UN – along with the donor countries and the ILO – must hold fast and do everything possible so that the country gets back on the

156

The world of work

right track: the 2016 peace agreement and the recommendations of the High-Level Missions of 2005 and 2011.

Guatemala: a nightmare without end?

I had never seen a landscape so extraordinary as that of Guatemala.

The view from the plane was striking: rough black mountains contrasted beautifully with the greenery. The panorama is marked by crevices and volcanic eruptions. The last big earthquake dates from 1976 and cost 22,000 lives.

The country also has a long history of human violence. Archaeologists and historians estimate that the Maya lived here as far back as 3000 BC. They developed a strong culture, practiced science and mathematics and erected magnificent buildings. But they regularly waged war among themselves, often with ownership of land at stake.

The Spanish were able to occupy the entire area fairly quickly in the 16th century. They developed an economy, which went against the interests of the original population. In the 19th century, the Creoles proclaimed independence from the motherland because they no longer wanted to pay taxes. Since then, power has been seized by one dictator after another and the country has gone from one coup to the next. Between 1945 and 1954 there was a brief period of democracy. A social system was introduced, with minimum wages, social security and the involvement of workers in collective bargaining, social dialogue and the like. But this was not to the liking of the United States, which had major interests in fruit cultivation. The government was overthrown with the help of the CIA. In reaction, four guerrilla movements emerged and fought an ongoing civil war between 1960 and 1996. That year, peace agreements were signed but they were only partially respected. Some 100,000 people fled the country, and the conflict claimed 250,000 dead and missing. A truth commission based on the example of South Africa did not succeed in uncovering the whole truth.

Freedom of association: slaving away in latin america  

157

The country is the main transit route for cocaine from Colombia to North America. Corruption and impunity dominate. In 2006, the United Nations, in consultation with the then government, set up a special commission – the Comisión Internacional contra la Impunidad en Guatemala or CICIG – to stand above national interests and blockages with its own investigations and to help the legal system in the fight against corruption and impunity.

The country is still governed by a small minority of descendants of the Spanish, accounting for a few percent of the population. Power coincides with land ownership. There is a large group of campesinos, rural peasants who own next to nothing. The largest part of the population consists of indigenas, descendants of the Maya but mostly mestizos, who are of mixed ethnic origin. Any form of social work, trade union work or human rights action is nipped in the bud by powerful players from business and politics. In addition, the legal system is unreliable.

When killing is allowed I visited Guatemala for the first time in 2009. At that time, the Committee on the Application of Standards opted for a bipartite mission.

Ed Potter and I were in the country from 17 to 21 February. We were assisted by Karen Curtis, Deputy Director of the Standards Department, international lawyer Alberto Odero, from the ILO Office, and Véronique Rousseau, Head of the International Department and Latin America specialist of the ACV-CSC. Here, too, we spent a long time listening to people who had come from far and wide to share their stories. A young woman with two children turned out to be the widow of Willy Morales. Willy was a trade unionist who had been found dead two days earlier. His mangled body had clearly been tortured. There you sit, facing a young woman whose husband had been brutally snatched away. What did they do to deserve this? All you can do is listen and promise that you will do everything you can to stop situations like these, knowing that you are just a small cog in the machinery. Any

158

The world of work

kind of gratitude from the victims made us feel ashamed, because we knew that our resources were modest and because we realised that more victims would follow. In 2007 and 2008 combined, twenty trade union leaders had been murdered.

We also met people – mostly women – who worked in the maquilas, companies located in the free trade zones. There they escape taxes and are permitted to operate with less regulation than elsewhere. Several workers told us that they started their working day at 7 a.m. and were literally locked in until work was finished, often as late as 10 or 11 p.m. When they tried to set up a trade union, so-called security agents invaded their homes in search of membership lists. Often police officers moonlighted as hired security guards. All union members were dismissed. Most of the companies were foreign – from Korea, for example. In order to avoid claims against them, companies simply close down so that all employees are automatically dismissed. A few days later, they reopen in the same place under a new name and with different staff. The former employees are blacklisted and can no longer get hired anywhere.

During our mission, we met with all levels of government and the judiciary. A Supreme Court judge said that freedom of association was destroying the economy. He felt that it should become even easier to dismiss people, even though this was already possible and without limits in Guatemala. In the middle of his disquisition, he received a phone call and was called away. He didn’t come back. Perhaps he was removed at the request of the Minister or Ambassador present, who realised that his views were not those that should be presented to this mission.

At the meeting with the Constitutional Court, we discovered that one of the judges present was a well-known landowner and plantation owner. At every meeting it became clearer: the structures of government and the judiciary were incredibly weak and in the service of those in power. None of the murder cases involving trade union leaders known to the ILO, and which the Expert Committee on the Application

Freedom of association: slaving away in latin america

159

of Standards had requested to be investigated, had yet been acted upon.

This was confirmed to us by the CICIG Office of the United Nations.

The impunity and the general lack of independence of government and judiciary were highlighted in our mission report. They did not even try to hide their reluctance to deal with the problems of freedom of association and impunity.34

A Memorandum of Understanding and a second mission Our call for these problems to be addressed was unsuccessful. Between 2007 and 2012, the number of murders rose to fifty-eight. Together with other workers, I filed a complaint during the 2012 Conference with the proposal to set up a Commission of Inquiry. President Molina of Guatemala replied that there would be a change of policy and Sharan Burrow, General Secretary of the ITUC, started negotiations. On 25 March 2013, I signed a Memorandum of Understanding in Geneva on behalf of the ILO Workers’ Group and together with Minister of Labour Contreras, an agreement witnessed by Director-General Ryder and the Chairperson of the Employers’ Group, Daniel Funes de Rioja. The main elements were independent, judicial investigations into murdered trade union leaders and members; effective protection of trade union leaders who felt threatened; raising awareness of the importance of social dialogue among all actors; and the amendment of legislation to allow freedom of association and collective bargaining. As requested, the ILO Director-General sent a representative to Guatemala, a connoisseur of social dialogue in Latin America. Sergio Paixão Pardo, who had chaired the Committee on the Application of Standards for many years and participated in missions in Colombia, would follow up the implementation of the agreement.

The Governing Body sent a High-Level Tripartite Mission to Guatemala in September 2013 to see on the spot whether the agreement was really being implemented.35 The mission was led by Mr Eduardo Ci-

160

The world of work

fuentes, former President of the Constitutional Court of Colombia.

He was joined by Mr Alberto Echavarría, member of the Employers’ Group of the ILO Governing Body, accompanied by Mr Roberto Suárez, Deputy Secretary-General of the International Organisation of Employers. I represented the workers. Ms Cleopatra DoumbiaHenry, Director of the International Labour Standards Department, represented the ILO-Office and was accompanied by Mr Virgilio Levaggi, Director of the ILO Office for Central America. As expected, nothing had changed for the people in Guatemala. I was then President of the non-governmental development organisation WSM (We Social Movements), which is affiliated with the ACV-CSC and other sister organisations. Together with Bart Verstraeten of WSM, I came to Guatemala a few days early to meet WSM’s partners. During the mission itself I was assisted by Steven Benedict, Director of Human and Trade Union Rights Department of the ITUC. One of our contacts there was the organisation Mojoca, which does impressive work with street children in Guatemala City. The day-to-day work of the organisation is done by people who used to be street children themselves. We also renewed contacts with friends of the trade union centre CGTG (Central General de Trabajadores de Guatemala), which brought people to tell us about their work situation. They had also invited the rural workers’ movement MTC (Movimiento de Trabajadores Campesinos).

We listened to their painful stories. Mariela Miranda worked in Koa Moda, one of the textile factories in the maquilas, free trade zones where regulations are less strictly observed than elsewhere. She was fired along with twelve others for filing a complaint on behalf of the CGTG: the company withheld social security contributions. Management won the lawsuit because of procedural errors. An additional thirty-three trade union members were dismissed.

Marta Lidia and Marcelo defended the workers of the informal economy. They negotiated places for their tents. They were regularly chased away by bribed policemen.

Freedom of association: slaving away in latin america

161

Alfonso and two of his friends had lived with their families for years on the land of the Finca el Desarrollo de la Villa. When a new landowner also forced the women and children to work, they filed a complaint. They were threatened with machetes and had guns held against their heads. Alfonso and his colleagues were fired. The children could no longer attend the Finca’s school, and the families stopped being admitted to the medical centre. Later, they also lost their homes and had to leave.

Walter Lopez of the MTC San Marcos said that the official minimum wages were not paid. The land where they farmed was systematically occupied by miners in search of nickel, gold and silver. The profits went abroad and what remained was polluted groundwater which made the land infertile and poisoned the cattle.

Claudia Paz y Paz removed and Iván Velasquéz Gómez nearly The Minister of Labour announced that a hundred labour inspectors had been appointed in the months leading up to our mission. These inspectors were only allowed to establish facts, not to act – that was constitutionally forbidden. Courts were able to act but they dismissed the inspectors’ reports. Nevertheless, the employers’ organisations acknowledged the problems more readily than before: and they admitted that social consultation was the only way out of labour and social problems.

At the Supreme Court, problems were also more readily acknowledged than during our previous visit. Nevertheless, there was one judge who could not resist claiming that the murder of Pedro Zamora, a well-known dock worker and local union leader, was a crime of passion. His body was found in his pick-up truck, riddled with a hundred or so bullets. He had been campaigning against the construction of a privately owned port that would take the business of the existing one.

Contact with Attorney General Dr Claudia Paz y Paz was a relief.

She was the only person in the judicial space in Guatemala – apart from the CICIG – who has ever been able to convince me of the seri-

162

The world of work

ousness of her approach. In nine cases investigations were underway; in twenty-one cases, investigations were completed; and in twenty-eight cases, legal proceedings had been initiated. She explained to us in detail how she worked with her team. The big challenge was to persuade witnesses who were afraid of retaliation and did not dare to talk. When arrest warrants were issued, the suspects were usually informed in advance and fled the country. A few months after our meeting, the Attorney General was nominated for the Nobel Prize and eight months later, she was dismissed by President Molina. The latter is now in prison for corruption, just like his predecessor President Colom and Vice-President Roxana Baldetti Elias, whom we also met.

Claudia Paz y Paz, like Iván Velasquéz Gómez of CICIG, was ready to go a long way. Velasquéz told us in 2013 that he would re-examine twenty-two of the fifty-eight murders of union leaders. He also presented the evidence against President Molina. Because he got too close to Molina’s successor President Jimmy Morales in his investigation, he was denied access to Guatemala in September 2018. He was eventually able to return under conditions negotiated with the UN. Our other contacts yielded little or nothing more. At a meeting with Ambassadors in Guatemala, the UN’s resident coordinator said: ‘I thought that with my experience in Africa, I had seen everything in terms of the consequences of colonisation, but this really has remained a colonial country. The descendants of the Spanish conquerors own the land and still manage and control it. On the other hand, there is a lack of continuity in government. No government can survive for more than four years. Each time, everything has to start all over again. The workers are really exploited: there is a minimum wage, but it is almost never applied. Seventy percent of the economy is informal.’ Her analysis was completely correct.

The mission was not satisfied with the limited results of the investigation into the fifty-eight murders. It was very positive about the work of the Attorney General and the CICIG. But the Constitution and cer-

Freedom of association: slaving away in latin america

163

tain laws would have to be amended to make the right of free association legally possible. Sentences also had to be handed down. And we asked for an action plan. This was achieved, with the following important action points: the prosecution of murderers and the people who commissioned them; the protection of trade union leaders; and the legal recognition of the right of freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining, or in ILO terms, the application of Conventions 87 and 98.36

The action plan Sergio Paixão Pardo, the Director-General’s representative in Guatemala, was actively involved with the situation on the ground. He organised campaigns for the recognition of social dialogue, and courses were organised for trade union leaders, employers, the Ministry of Labour and the judicial authorities. It was clear that the process needed support from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) and the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) – which it received. In addition, during the meetings of the ILO Governing Body in Geneva, its Chairperson Ulrich Seidenberger and the two Vice-Chairpersons met several times with representatives of the Guatemalan Government, judiciary, employers and workers to encourage them to put the action plan into practice.

That is how the National Tripartite Committee of Labour Relations and Freedom of Association finally got going. In November 2017, an agreement in principle was reached between the social partners on the legal guarantees for the application of Conventions 87 and 98. A third Tripartite Mission to Guatemala in September 2018 had to give the final push towards a new law. Meanwhile, since the signing of the agreement in 2013, we were on our third Minister of Labour. The tripartite mission was composed of Mr Carlos Briceño, Government representative of Peru, Mr Mthunzi Mdwaba, Employer spokesperson and Vice-Chairperson of the Governing Body, accompanied by Mr

164

The world of work

Roberto Suarez Santos, Acting Secretary-General of the IOE and myself, accompanied by Mr Alex Praça from the ITUC. The mission was supported by the Director of the ILO International Labour Standards Department, Ms Corinne Vargha, the Director of the ILO Office for Central America, Haiti, Panama and the Dominican Republic, Ms Carmen Moreno and a team of ILO officials.

There were two positive developments. The Constitution had been amended so that labour inspectors could impose sanctions on companies. We were also able to see on the spot that there was a dialogue between the government, employers and workers. However, it was still a long way from generating a joint opinion to the Congress on sectoral negotiations and the right to strike. The employers in the umbrella organisation CACIF had not reached an agreement among themselves on these points. Consequently, no consensus could be reached with the workers in the National Tripartite Committee on the implementation of their agreement in principle. However, this did not exempt the government and Congress from complying with their international obligations. But they did not. The judiciary talked about strengthening the special unit for murders of trade union leaders. Seventeen sentences had been passed in ninety criminal cases. Four ended in acquittal, six trials were halted due to the death of the suspects, and so on. Most of the culprits were no longer in the country. Curiously, in none of the cases was a link found with trade union work. In 2018 alone, another six trade union leaders had been murdered. Even then, someone who had asked for protection because he had received threats was killed. The body of Domingo Nach Hernandez was found in June 2018 with signs of torture. In 2017-2018, seven leaders of the banana trade union Sitrabi were murdered in similar circumstances in the space of twelve months. In the municipality of Jalapa, four trade union negotiators were murdered during an industrial dispute; in the municipality of Coatepeque, seven, also during negotiations. The Committee for the protection of union leaders (Standing Trade Union

Freedom of association: slaving away in latin america  

165

Technical Committee on Comprehensive Protection) has not been convened by any of the new Ministers of the Interior since 2017.

It is true that the labour courts were better equipped. Often, employers or powerful municipal councils were even forced by courts to rehire dismissed employees who stood up for colleagues. But in 42% of cases, this obligation was not acted upon without additional follow-up.

Don’t give up Guatemala, September 2018, Tripartite Mission: the position of the employer colleague and the government colleague from Peru, both on mission for the first time, was clearly different from mine. They were content with the ‘good will’ of the government and Congress – but I had already seen what that meant in Guatemala since 2009. Perhaps the one could not be too critical of the government for the sake of good neighbourly relations within the region; perhaps the other could not be too critical of employers. But in this way, we missed the opportunity to support some open-minded and solution-oriented entrepreneurs, something a united mission could have done. This could have worked, particularly since the Guatemalan trade unionists took a very pragmatic attitude towards their situation. After a great deal of discussion we adopted a mission report which merely set out the positions of the different Guatemalan stakeholders, something in no way comparable to the reports of previous missions.37 It was the first time in the nine country missions in which I had participated that the views and positions of all three parties were so different. In all the other missions, we always worked together to achieve the mission’s objective, which is a prerequisite for success. During the Governing Body of November 2018, the Employers’ Group and the Latin American governments, followed by several other governments, took the view that the government and the judiciary in Guatemala had shown enough good will and that the art. 26 complaint could be closed. In my opinion this was completely unjustified, but with just the Workers’ Group, European and a

166

The world of work

few other governments, we were too weak to fight it. This was a great disappointment. We could still insist on an annual evaluation of the situation, but the pressure on the country was greatly reduced. A Guatemalan employer who was in favour of our approach came to me to apologise for this outcome and assured me that he would not give up.

Naturally, the ITUC and the Workers’ Group are keeping the matter under review. The problems are far from resolved and will again be placed on the agenda of the Committee on the Application of Standards and in any case come back to the Governing Body via the annual review. In November 2019, the report of the Tripartite Committee on Freedom of Association to the Governing Body requested that special attention to be paid to the ‘numerous murders and acts of violence against trade union members and flaws in the system that result in criminal and labour-related impunity’.38 The workers in Guatemala deserve much better. They will not give up and need international support, but there is still work to be done – a great deal of work.

Venezuela: the downfall of a land of promise 27 January 2014, Caracas, Venezuela. The Chairperson and Vice-Chairpersons of the Governing Body (ambassador Victoria Marina Velásquez de Avilés of El Salvador, Daniel Funes de Rioja and myself) and the head of the ILO Standards Department (Cleopatra Doumbia-Henry) were starting a delicate mission. I was assisted by the Secretary of the Workers’ Group, Raquel Gonzalez. The Chair was accompanied by Ms Rosibel Menéndez, Minister Counsellor of the Permanent Mission of El Salvador, the Employers’ Chair by Mr Roberto Suárez, Deputy General Secretary of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE). The Director of the ILO Standards Department was accompanied by Mr Horacio Guido, Coordinator for Freedom of Association, and Mr Xavier Beaudonnet, Senior Legal Officer.

Freedom of association: slaving away in latin america

167

On the plane we had already read what the influential magazine The Economist expected of the mission. Usually, complaints about lack of freedom of association come from the union side, but this time it’s the employers who speak of scandal. Already in 2004, they had asked for the strongest possible ILO intervention, a Commission of Inquiry, but there was no majority for it in the Governing Body. In 2006, the ILO office had sent a mission of its own, but it came back empty handed.

And from 2006 to 2010, the government did not respond to the many questions addressed to it by the various ILO bodies.

But on 24 February 2008, an attack was committed on the building of the employers’ organisation Fedecamaras, resulting in one death and several injuries. On 10 November 2010, an armed attack was committed against four office-holders of the same employers’ organisation. One of the victims, Albis Muñoz, was hit by three bullets. She survived the attack but is marked for life. The others were kidnapped and held for a short period of time. Two suspects were officially identified. Albis Muñoz: ‘I saw the face of the gang leader clearly; the image is engraved in my memory.

But he wasn’t among the suspects the police showed me. So he is still at large. They insist that I leave it at that, but I really can’t.’ According to Fedecamaras, there was no serious search for those responsible for the attack. They suspect that the order came from government circles.

Chavism In the 19th and 20th centuries, Venezuela experienced dictatorships and revolutions. In the 1980s, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) practically placed the country under guardianship with structural adjustment programmes. The economy performed badly, much worse than in other South American countries. But in Venezuela the interventions led to a social bloodbath in a country where the gap between the masses and the upper stratum was already particularly large. In 1989, uprisings broke out that were brutally suppressed by President Perez. Around 3,000 people lost their lives. Military commander Hugo Chávez sympathised with the popular movement and led a

168

The world of work

coup d’état in 1992. It failed, but the government allowed him to give a televised speech to ask his followers to withdraw. This gave Chávez the chance to explain the motivation for his attempted coup to the people.

In one fell swoop it made him a popular hero.

Then Chávez decided to pursue his goals, through political means.

He founded a socialist party, the Movimiento Quinta República, the Movement of the Fifth Republic. His great example was Simón Bolívar, the man who fought for the independence of the northern part of Latin America at the beginning of the 19th century. In 1998 Chávez won the elections. During his first period in power, he steered a moderate course and cooperated with the IMF. A system of participatory democracy, self-management and cooperatives was developed. Through his Plan Bolívar, Chávez used the army to repair roads and hospitals.

Social services were improved, and medical care and vaccinations were made free of charge. In exchange for cheap oil, the Castros sent thousands of doctors and paramedics from Cuba. A huge social housing programme was also set up to get people out of the favelas. Poor and minority groups had a better life than before.

But during his next administration, Hugo Chávez became increasingly radical. Utilities were nationalised and the same happened to the large estates and farms, the fincas. A reaction was inevitable. In 2002, the wealthy classes, led by employers’ federation Fedecamaras with the implication of CTV (Confederación de Trabajadores de Venezuela) carried out a coup d’état with the help of the United States. But the success of the putsch was short-lived. Supported by a majority of the people, Chávez came back to power.

Under Chavez, popular democracy was structured in so-called Bolivarian circles, whose task was to develop education, social work and the local economy. Free employers’ organisations and trade unions fitted badly into this model – or not at all. Power was given to the people by the political leadership. In this respect, left- and right-wing authoritarian regimes do not differ much from each other; they want to get civil society institutions out of the way.

Freedom of association: slaving away in latin america

169

Thanks to plentiful petroleum dollars and large loans, underwritten by future petroleum revenues, much was done. But the nationalised fincas were hardly managed, or not at all. They were neglected, leaving the rich land to become overgrown and uncultivated. Rich finca owners were marginalised; they were not needed. Vegetables, fruit and meat were imported – there was plenty of money after all.

In 2014, at the time of our mission, Chávez had been dead for several months. Nicolás Maduro had succeeded him as President. Inflation and unemployment were very high. Petroleum prices had fallen sharply worldwide, and so had the country’s revenues. The loans could not be repaid. Due to the many breakdowns and lack of spare parts for the pumping installations, oil production had decreased by about half.

Even then, I witnessed long queues waiting in front of almost empty shops. It reminded me of the queues I had seen in Moscow and Leningrad (St Petersburg) in the 1980s and 1990s. There was no more money for imports. Rice, milk, butter, flour, corn flour, cooking oil, toilet paper, sanitary towels, nappies … none of this was available any longer.

However, ministers and senior officials denied that there was a crisis.

President Nicolas Maduro, who was visiting the sickbed of Fidel Castro and his brother Raul in Cuba during our mission, had instructed his confidant and Vice Minister Elio Colmenares to accompany the ILO mission. He referred us to the UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) Human Development Report of 2013. This said that Venezuela had scored above average in 2010: poverty had been halved, just as the UN had set out in the Millennium Development Goals.

There was less poverty and less inequality than in other Latin American countries. All this was the result of Chávez’s social programmes.

But we saw the cracks in the system. That this would end badly was already very clear in 2014.

170

The world of work

Fedecamaras with a new vision?

Because the complaint to the ILO came from the employers’ federation Fedecamaras, we spent many hours in its building, the same one that was hit by a bomb attack in 2008. The organisation represented the important sectors of the economy. In our contacts with employers and workers, we had of course refused the presence of government representatives. The trade unions had also informed us that they did not want to meet us in the building made available by the government. This caused great tension with the government. The mediation of the UN resident coordinator was called in. He informed us that the government could not take any risks as far as our safety was concerned. This was a transparent and all too familiar argument. It was finally agreed that the government would provide guidance and security during our movements outside of the buildings where we were but would not enter.

Fedecamaras complained that the economy was not working, that a number of products were hard to find, and even admitted that minimum wages were too low. The inflation increases and exchange rate problems were huge; imports had become virtually impossible. There was no legal way to buy dollars and import the necessary raw materials. Between 2002 and 2014, 1,285 companies were taken over, nationalised, or expropriated. The companies of the leaders of the sectoral employers’ organisations were targeted first. The response of the Ministry of Agriculture and Economy to our question was that the least productive companies had been nationalised first.

We were able to have open discussions with the employers. Everyone agreed that the country had many assets: petroleum, fertile soil, a good climate – enough for all Venezuelans to live well. But it was no accident that Chávez wanted to change the system. Industrialists and finca owners were in control and took care of themselves, not the community. When employers themselves complained that wages were too low, they were right. But when they were the economic and political rulers before the Chávez period, those wages were certainly not better. They didn’t contradict that argument.

Freedom of association: slaving away in latin america

171

This brought up the past. The predecessors of Fedecamaras’ current leaders were the instigators of the coup against Chávez in 2002, and that had not been forgotten in government circles. President Jorge Roig regretted that employers’ representatives were followed and subjected to wiretapping, and that since November 2013 had even been portrayed literally as enemies of the people. The posters with their photos were highly visible, a kind of invitation and exoneration for anyone who acted against them in any way.

Fedecamaras wanted to be recognised as a social partner in order to help build the country’s economy. In doing so, they were ready to accept the constitution as Chávez had drafted it. President Roig’s middle ground was new and important. Expropriations and seizures by the government were not the right path to follow, but neither was leaving all power in the hands of the large landowners.

However, the response of Vice Minister Elio Colmenares to Fedecamaras’ complaints spoke volumes: ‘The current ruling party had to take up arms to defend workers’ rights. Since the tripartite social dialogue did not work, we replaced it with participatory democracy. We have a dialogue with the people, we have improved on the Conventions of the ILO. We are open to organisations that want to participate in our dialogue, but Fedecamaras and some trade unions mainly try to play a political role. They are usually not representative, but they are not discriminated against. The complaint to the ILO is full of lies and Fedecamaras has never apologised for what the organisation did in 2002 (i.e. the failed coup d’état).’

All power to the executive branch As in other Latin American countries, the police and judicial authorities in Venezuela deliberately tried to conceal crimes. They claimed that crime had been reduced by 17%. They considered the attack on the Fedecamaras building and on the four members as matters of common law offences. They knew nothing about a criminal investigation against the current Fedecamaras President – that

172

The world of work

did not exist. In practice, it may have been brought to an end just before our mission.

It was striking that a Minister, i.e., a member of the executive branch, led our discussions with the judiciary and concluded with his reflections. The judiciary clearly had little independence. The same scenario occurred during our visit to the legislative branch, the Congress.

Both the employers and trade unions had filed complaints concerning a new labour law (LOTT, Ley Orgánica del Trabajadores y Trabajadoras). The Committee of Experts on the Application of Standards had already informed the government that this new law did not guarantee freedom of organisation and collective bargaining. According to the speaker of Congress, the law was made on the basis of the will of the people. This was on the basis of direct consultations, what was called ‘inclusive dialogue’. There were 19,295 individual responses from the population. The government had opted for a direct form of democracy and thus eliminated representative organisations. The fact that workers’ and employers’ organisations were considered unrepresentative and were not consulted on a new labour law was diametrically opposed to ILO Convention 144 on tripartite consultation.

In order to discuss the recognition of organisations, we asked for a meeting with the National Electoral Council (Consejo Nacional Electoral), but the government refused. This became another cause of tension between our mission and the government.

Were the workers satisfied?

During ILO missions, we are in the habit of always meeting all the social partners as well as the government. During our mission in Venezuela in 2014, we organised the meetings with trade unions in our hotel, so that the government would stay well out of it.

There were two types of trade unions: the two government unions and the rest, which had united in the Unidad de Acción Sindical. The first group told the government story. Apart from the CTV, the organ-

Freedom of association: slaving away in latin america

173

isation involved in the coup attempt, the second group had previously supported the government, believing in the social programmes and inclusive democracy under ChĂĄvez. That support had weakened, however, and the tide had turned not long before the arrival of the mission. In practice, work had become impossible for independent trade unions: protests were suppressed, leaders were followed, there was government interference in the statutes of the organisations, and they had no say in the new labour legislation.

The Unidad de AcciĂłn Sindical confirmed all the problems concerning wages, inflation and the shortage of consumer goods. After meeting with the trade unions, we received more than thirty well-documented personal testimonies. A nurse filed a complaint about the death of six children in a hospital as a result of inadequate facilities.

That nurse ended up in prison shortly after his testimony. The electricity sector was completely under the control of the army. Collective labour agreements were terminated unilaterally. The medical sector was no longer allowed to conclude such agreements. It had gone so far that Fedecamaras and the main trade unions organised a meeting in neighbouring Colombia, where they were able to conclude an agreement on decent work and social dialogue.39 At the end of the mission, the government promised me that organisations affiliated with ITUC would be recognised; that happened finally in 2020 with ASI (Independent Trade Union Alliance of Venezuela). The report did require some discussion between the mission members, but it was valuable and gave clear conclusions and recommendations.40 Between 2014 and 2017, complaints continued to accumulate. In 2015 and 2016, several meetings took place between the leadership of the ITUC (Sharan Burrow, Raquel Gonzalez), the IOE, the Venezuelan government and myself. We even reached an agreement to start a tripartite dialogue. Every opportunity was taken to remind ministers of the commitments made. Meanwhile, inflation continued to rise.

The government increased minimum wages, but these went up in smoke because of the enormous price increases. At the end of 2017

174 

The world of work

there was inflation of 6,000%, which according to the IMF has now risen to 500,000%.

From cancelled mission to commission of inquiry In November 2017, the Governing Body decided to send a second High-Level Tripartite Mission and asked the government to convene a roundtable with employers and workers. At that time, President Maduro had already established a Constituent Assembly (the Constituyente), with legislative powers and composed entirely of loyalists.

In doing so, he de facto side-lined the Congress, where the opposition had the majority.

As Chairperson of the ILO Governing Body I was assisted in the preparations for the mission by the Vice-Chairpersons, Ambassador De la Puente from Peru and the South African Mthunzi Mdwaba, Chair of the Employers’ Group and Catelene Passchier, Chair of the Workers’ Group. We discussed the programme with the Director General and the Director of the Standards Department, Corinne Vargha. In line with his Government’s established policy, it was impossible for the ambassador to meet the newly founded Constituyente, given the unilateral manner in which it was set up. We made a list of employers’ and workers’ organisations. Because the Bishop’s Conference had undertaken a mediation effort, we also wanted to hear from them, as well as the Association of University Rectors, the Press and Community Institute and the Centre for the Dissemination of Economic Knowledge. It is customary to meet organisations of all kinds, because they can help us to get a complete picture of the situation.

The ILO secretariat received a letter in reply: the government was prepared to organise a roundtable conference during the mission. But concerning the proposed meetings, the government stated that ‘a meeting with these organisations would be an act of interference in Venezuelan domestic affairs.’ During our previous mission in 2014, our meetings with the free trade unions were not curtailed, but now that was what

Freedom of association: slaving away in latin america

175

was happening. The UN Resident Coordinator then proposed that we meet the organisations without mentioning them in the report. But during a teleconference a few hours before departure, we determined that under those conditions, the mission made no sense and so the mission was cancelled. The international media were informed.

During the Governing Body session of March 2018, this led to the decision to proceed with a so-called ‘Commission of Inquiry under Article 26’ of the Constitution. There was no other way out. As Chair, I knew the balance of power in the Governing Body: among the employers, most countries in Latin America, North America and Europe were in favour. In the Workers’ Group, the North and South Americans and a few others had a hard time with the decision to set up a Commission of Inquiry for Venezuela, at a time when this was not being done for countries like Guatemala. I understood their frustration, which was justified, but the procedure followed was logical. Freedom of association applies to workers and employers alike. Moreover, I had already seen during the first mission that in Venezuela, the workers were not allowed to associate freely, nor did they come out as winners from Maduro’s policies.

A country in decline Meanwhile, the situation in Venezuela has become almost unliveable.

According to the UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, 4.6 million Venezuelans have fled to other Latin American countries, including neighbouring countries Colombia, Peru and Ecuador. In Venezuela seven million people, including 3.2 million children, 1.5 million elderly and 2.3 million adults are in need of humanitarian assistance. Electrical supply is regularly cut off, there is a shortage of water and other vital products. Maduro can still count on Russia, China and Turkey. North America, the so-called Lima countries and Europe support the opposition leader, parliamentary President and self-proclaimed interim President Guaido, and Trump has imposed economic sanctions. In February 2019, the UN and the Red Cross distanced themselves from

176

The world of work

the obviously manipulated relief operation led by the so-called interim President. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet, found evidence of human rights violations by the Maduro regime. It is clear that Maduro is a catastrophe for the people but supporting a self-proclaimed President whose intentions are unclear is an equally dangerous and questionable political choice.

The ILO will not determine the political future of the country, but the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry (of 3 October 2019) will be useful for a – hopefully – quick and lasting recovery of the Venezuelan state. ‘(…)The Commission had direct contact with the parties and other involved actors during a visit to Venezuela that included its capital and other cities. It also held numerous videoconferences and hearings in Geneva, in the presence of representatives of the parties and with the participation of witnesses from both public authorities and non-governmental sectors.

The Commission gathered extensive documentation and written information, having received more than two hundred comprehensive written submissions from the Government, the complainants and various social partners in the country, as well as from other persons and institutions with knowledge of the issues raised (…).’

The Commission’s recommendations underline the need to take the necessary steps to ensure a climate free from violence, threats, persecution, stigmatization, intimidation or any other forms of aggression against persons or organizations in connection with the exercise of legitimate employers’ or trade union activities, and the adoption of measures to ensure that such acts are not repeated in the future. Furthermore, it calls for ‘the immediate release of any employer or trade unionist who may be in prison as a result of carrying out the legitimate activities of their workers’ or employers’ organization.’ The Commission sets out conclusions and recommendations that urge ‘respect for freedom of association as the basis of tripartite dialogue for national reconciliation, sustainable economic development and social justice’.41

Freedom of association: slaving away in latin america

177

The importance of continued pressure Latin America is special. At the beginning of this century, we heard mainly positive signals from the continent. Unfortunately, the tide has turned. Rights violations continue to be the order of the day, but at least there is one certainty: the ILO will not give up. It can never take the place of national governments or national employers’ and workers’ organisations. But when necessary, it will provide much-needed support by judging legislation and practice by their conformity with international Conventions and exerting pressure when required. The people I met during my visits to Latin America know this and are very realistic. For them, this permanent monitoring and support is a very important point of reference. A weakening of the ILO would be disastrous for them.

No decent work without freedom of association Even a cursory examination of the state of the world leads to the conclusion that democratic space has been shrinking rather than expanding in recent years. If you look at the reports of the World Movement for Democracy, Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch, you can see that trends aren’t moving in the right direction. Autocratic leaders are coming to power in more and more countries, and even in democratic countries, politicians with authoritarian traits seem to have the wind in their sails. This has real impact on the space accorded to individuals and movements, on freedom of speech and on action for social justice. Of course, the greatest dramas take place in countries with armed conflicts, where there is no rule of law at all.

We cannot ignore the fact that three major countries have still not ratified the Conventions on freedom of organisation (C87) and collective bargaining (C98). Freedom of association, however, is a sine qua non for decent work. The US has traditionally been reluctant to submit to international rules that it has not decided for itself. It has rati-

178

The world of work

fied only fourteen ILO Conventions, and only two of the eight fundamental Conventions. C87 and C98 are not among them. The US has always regulated its labour relations politically, and while a number of companies are unionized, most newer companies are not. Even Democratic governments have failed to ratify Conventions 87 and 98. That said, the US has always strongly supported the functioning of the ILO. China has ratified twenty-six Conventions, more than the US, but it has not ratified those on freedom of association and collective bargaining either. Nor has it ratified the Conventions on forced labour. In China, the ACFTU, the official trade union – whose representative, Jiang Guangping, is an active and constructive member of the Workers’ Group and the Governing Body of the ILO – has a clear mission: to channel dissatisfaction, conflicts and strikes and to avoid them by negotiating agreements. With a view to sustaining economic growth and domestic tranquillity, the Chinese Government reformed labour legislation in 2008 and took major steps forward in social security and wage increases. All this was done in cooperation with the ILO. Western European models served as inspiration in the case of social security. China is not a democracy and neither workers nor employers enjoy the right to free association. It is not the model we like to see. But the reforms did mean a big improvement for millions of workers in the country.

Finally, that other demographic and economic giant – India – has not ratified the Convention on freedom of association and collective bargaining either. The country has ratified forty-seven other Conventions. But in a report published in November 2019, the ITUC indicates how the Modi government is pursuing a good rating on the World Bank’s Doing Business ranking in order to attract investment.

To this end, workers’ rights are being severely undermined. Focusing only on economic growth leads to jobless growth and greater inequality while exposing workers to exploitation. In order to be recognised as a trade union in a company, it must be proven that at least 66% of the workers are affiliated, which is virtually impossible,

Freedom of association: slaving away in latin america

179

especially in such an anti-social climate.42 That there is still a lot of work to be done in India has already been shown in chapter 6 on domestic workers.

Global Rights Index The freedom – or lack thereof – of trade unions and social organisations has been closely monitored for years by the International Trade Union Confederation. The authoritative ITUC Global Rights Index is published annually and can be consulted freely on the ITUC website.43 Publication takes place each year in the margins of the International Labour Conference. I have led this event several times. Once it was together with my colleague Ed Potter, Chairperson of the Employers’ Group in the Committee on the Application of Standards.

Naturally he was familiar with the history of his company and the far-reaching, negative role that Coca-Cola has played in Latin America and elsewhere. Whether the multinational hired him to polish up its standard, I don’t know. In any case, he was a fair partner and consistent when it came to human and workers’ rights. That is why he was invited by the ITUC. He stated: ‘Whenever there are problems anywhere in the world at Coca-Cola, I consult the ITUC index to understand the labour problems on the ground and to know how companies in general and the government concerned deal with them. For me, this is a guideline and an important tool before I get in touch with local management. I also make that clear internally.’

But the Global Rights Index is not only subject to praise. Sharan Burrow, General Secretary of the ITUC is regularly approached by heads of state or government who are reluctant to see their country appear in the index in a negative light. Sometimes this can lead to a real discussion about the realities on the ground, which is a good thing in itself.

There is much more data than can be included in the report. The ITUC keeps meticulous records of all problems, with data that are as detailed as possible. Every year, these are sent to the Committee of Ex-

180

The world of work

perts on the Application of Standards, which in turn includes them by country and by Convention alongside the inputs of governments and of national organisations of employers and workers in its report. On the basis of this analysis, they write their authoritative comments in their annual report to the International Labour Conference.

The ITUC report for 2018, which covers 142 countries, identifies a worldwide trend of restricting freedom of expression, organisation and action. Defenders of workers’ rights are increasingly subject to violence. Decent work and democratic rights are not advancing, and inequality is increasing.

Fundamental workers’ rights under pressure worldwide The ITUC report sets out extremely worrying developments in many countries around the world. The number of countries where people are arbitrarily detained increased from 44 in 2017 to 64 in 2019. Mass arrests of workers have been seen in China, India, Turkey and Vietnam.

In 2018, 53 trade union leaders or members were murdered in 10 countries because they stood up for their colleagues, in: Bangladesh, Brazil, Colombia, Guatemala, Honduras, Italy, Pakistan, the Philippines, Turkey and Zimbabwe. Violence or threats of violence were used against workers in 52 countries.

Three of the most populous countries, China, Indonesia and Brazil, passed laws restricting freedom of expression and association in 2017. In general, freedom of expression was under pressure in 54 countries in 2018, including in Hong Kong, Mauritania, the Philippines and Turkey. The number of countries which exclude certain categories of workers from the right to establish or join a trade union increased from 92 in 2018 to 107 in 2019. Authorities impeded the registration of unions in 59% of countries with state repression of independent union activity: in Argentina, Algeria, Egypt, India, Panama and Paraguay.

MENA – the Middle East and North Africa – remains the world’s worst region when it comes to fundamental rights at work. Egypt dis-

Freedom of association: slaving away in latin america

181

solved all independent trade unions, and Saudi Arabia continues to keep millions of migrant workers trapped in modern slavery.

Each year, on the basis of criteria including freedom of expression, freedom of association and other fundamental workers’ rights, the ITUC draws up a list of the ten worst countries for workers. The reasons for this type of situation are many, but usually have to do with a political regime that does not tolerate opposition or contradiction. In 2018, they were, in alphabetical order and with an indication of what was wrong: • Algeria: fight against free trade unions, to the point of dissolution; dismissal and imprisonment of leaders and trade union members in public enterprises, including Sonelgaz Group.

• Bangladesh: special industrial police repress actions; raiding and destroying trade union premises and theft of membership lists and documents. On 8 January 2019, Sumon Mia, a 22-year- old employee of Anlima Textile in the Kornopara area of Savar, was killed and another 50 injured after police fired rubber bullets and tear gas at around 5,000 protesting workers on the outskirts of Dhaka. They sought the application of the legal minimum wage for textile workers.

• Brazil: the situation of workers dramatically worsened in the last year with the adoption of regressive laws that severely undermined collective bargaining rights. This had a dramatic effect on industrial relations. The number of collective work agreements fell by 45%.

• Colombia: this country is already covered extensively in this book. The scourges of the past have returned: 34 murdered trade union leaders, 234 serious violations of human, workers’ and trade union rights. In particular, recurring impunity and the violation of social provisions of the peace process lead to social conflicts and protests.

182

The world of work

• Guatemala: this country, too, has already been discussed extensively – and with good reason. It is characterised by a climate of impunity. Trade union leaders are still being murdered. Since 2004, there have been 90 murders. This gives companies and municipal councils free rein to exclude trade unions by any means possible. The company Bimbo dismissed 250 trade union members and the judicial rulings requiring reinstatement are not being carried out.

• Kazakhstan: repression against the independent labour movement intensified in here as unions affiliated to the Confederation of Independent Trade Unions of Kazakhstan (CNTUK) were arbitrarily dissolved in 2017. They have become targets of state persecution and brutal physical attacks.

• The Philippines: workers and trade unionists in the Philippines faced violent attacks and intimidation. Protests were brutally repressed by police in an attempt by government forces to suppress political dissent. With martial law in Mindanao extended for the third time until the end of 2019, the threat of an escalation of violence and abuses grows.

• Saudi Arabia: 8.3 million migrants work under a system of forced labour (kafala). In January 2017, 49 former employees of the BinLadin Group were sentenced to 300 lashes and 4 months in prison for protesting against wage arrears.

Vietnamese migrant domestic workers reported being forced to work 18 hours a day. They were also denied food, frequently assaulted by their employers and prevented from returning home.

• Turkey: after the failed coup in July 2016, many democratic freedoms were severely curtailed. Trade unions, their leaders and their members, among others, are systematically targeted under martial law. People are detained with little in the way of a trial. On 14 September 2018, over 10,000 workers went on strike at the construction site of the new Istan-

Freedom of association: slaving away in latin america

183

bul Airport to protest poor health and safety conditions.

The protest was violently dispersed by police and military with teargas. Two days later, the police conducted mass arrests and detained 400 workers. While most were released shortly afterward, 43 workers, including three trade union representatives, were charged with disrupting freedom to work. A total of 31 workers were held in pre-trial detention in Silivri-prison.

• Zimbabwe: Zimbabwe fell into a pattern of violent attacks against workers and trade union members. Protests organized by ZCTU on 14-16 January 2019 against a 150% fuel price hike were repressed by state security forces with live ammunition. Eleven workers were killed and 70 sustained gunshot wounds. In total, over 320 people were injured.

Complaints about failure to respect the right to collective bargaining were received from 80% of countries. Europe, traditionally the mainstay of collective bargaining rights, saw companies seek to undermine or circumvent workers’ rights. In the Netherlands, Estonia and Spain, companies often bypassed collective bargaining with unions and pushed for individual agreements directly with workers. In Norway, after a 35-day strike and the conclusion of a collective agreement, the owners of Norse Production, a salmon farming company, declared it bankrupt and established a new enterprise at the same place and with the same management. None of the unionised workers from Norse Production were hired in the new company and the collective agreement was not renewed. The company was later condemned for union-busting.

In 85% of countries, cases involving violation of the right to strike were identified.

From the ITUC Global Rights Index of 2018, we learn that the influence of certain employers’ organisations on local governments cannot be underestimated – including the American Chamber of Com-

184

The world of work

merce. In 2017, this powerful organisation spent $82 million on lobbying. In Moldova, it managed to push through a new labour law that reduced the protection of workers. The same happened in Montenegro. In Serbia and Romania, local business circles left their mark in new regulations removing workers’ protection. In Romania, the right to collective bargaining was significantly undermined.

In addition, some multinational companies are doing everything they can to eliminate freedom of association and negotiation. Samsung is one of them. That this is a well-thought-out strategy is evident from leaked documents from the company’s South Korean headquarters.

E-commerce giant Amazon also has a long history of suppressing freedom of association: it has hired law firms, fired worker spokespersons and even shut down a call centre to suppress organising efforts.

Amazon workers took action over working conditions and collective bargaining rights, urging customers to boycott Prime Day sales in July 2018. Workers at warehouses in England, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Poland engaged in strike action. Their concerns vary by country and include increased hours of work, lack of health benefits and difficulties in establishing collective bargaining agreements.

Still, there is also good news Fortunately it’s not all bad news. Iceland, which has always scored well on the ITUC index, was the first country to adopt a law for equal pay for women and men. The existing 14% gender gap should be reduced to zero by 2022. Canada finally ratified ILO Convention 98 on collective bargaining. The country also introduced a five-day paid leave entitlement for victims of domestic violence. In New Zealand, restrictive laws were repealed in favour of the right to collective bargaining, and wages for health workers were increased. The situation in Ireland improved as freelance workers, including journalists, actors and musicians, can now be represented by trade unions, which can negotiate on their behalf.

185

Also good news is that the ILO has launched a new ratification campaign on the occasion of its centenary in 2019. All 187 member states received a letter from Director-General Guy Ryder inviting them to participate in the ‘One for All Centenary Ratification Campaign’. They are asked to ratify at least one more Convention. Seventy Conventions were ratified during the year – a nice result.44

186

The world of work

9 Social protection: the forgotten majority

In the international debate, the terms ‘social security’ and ‘social protection’ are increasingly used interchangeably. Both are based on the premise that everyone should be able to rely on full social security or protection because everyone is entitled to a dignified standard of living. In several European countries, we rightly use the term social security, which combines the element of security or insurance with the notion of solidarity. The contribution that you pay as a worker or that your employer pays for you goes to today’s pensioners, the sick and the unemployed. At the same time, this contribution serves as an entry ticket for when you need social security. In Belgium, about 70% of the funding comes from employers and workers; 30% comes from general funds.

Since most of the funding comes from employers and workers, social security is managed jointly by both groups and controlled by the government. Because the latter provides a substantial share of the resources, it has significant influence too. The term social security therefore has a specific meaning. Self-employed persons pay a contribution as well; a large part of their system comes from public resources. The contribution for civil servants is paid by their employer, the government.

The international use of the term social protection has more to do with the large number of people working in the informal economy.

They should also be able to benefit from social protection, but neither they nor their eventual employers have the means to pay contributions.

In these circumstances, social protection is in the first instance paid

187

from public resources. The formalisation of the informal economy is therefore important in order to arrive at mixed systems based on general resources and contributions. Because the term ‘social protection’ is more widely used at a global level, I will generally continue to use it.

However, the first instruments explicitly referred to social security.

What is the importance of these Conventions and Recommendations?

How can social protection be developed? How can it be financed – by contributions from employers/workers and/or taxes? How should it be managed? The ILO left room for manoeuvre for the countries as to how to reach agreed objectives. The result was that different systems were created. The most important are: the Bismarck model in Western Europe and Japan (financing and management by employers and workers and implementation partly by non-profit institutions such as mutual societies, trade unions, and partly by government), the Beveridge model in the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth (financing by public resources and management and implementation by government), and the Communist model in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe (central financing, management and implementation). In 1900 there were 17 countries worldwide with some form of social protection. In 1946 there were already 104. In 1970 there was at least a limited system in 155 countries; in 2015, 187 countries.

Between the establishment of the ILO in 1919 and the beginning of the Second World War, the organisation adopted fifteen Conventions and eleven Recommendations on social security. In response to the horrors of another world war, the international community adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. Since then, social security in case of unemployment, illness, disability, death of a spouse and old age have been recognised as human rights. In 1952, the ILO adopted the all-important Convention 102, which lays down well-defined minimum standards for each branch of social security: medical care, sickness benefits, unemployment, pensions, accidents at work and occupational diseases, family benefits, maternity, invalidity and survivors’ ben-

188

The world of work

efits. All important – but perhaps too good to be true, because of the 187 ILO member States, only 58 have ratified the Convention in the intervening 67 years. The ILO now has sixteen Conventions and Recommendations on social security that are up to date. The organisation can present many success stories, yet what follows will show that there is a deep and wide chasm between what the ILO has in mind and reality.

This is unacceptable from the point of view of human rights.

The world left behind Has the world failed to develop social security and social protection?

Almost all countries have at least some form of minimal social protection. But actual coverage remains low, very low. If we include all of its aspects from birth to old age, only 29% of the world’s population has access to social protection worthy of the name. On the other hand, 4 billion people (55%) are excluded from any form of social protection.

Another glaring fact is that 1.3 billion children (65% of all children in the world) receive no support at all. Only 1.1% of the world’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is invested in them, while they make up 25% of the world’s population. Seven out of ten disabled people have to make do without compensation. Eight out of ten unemployed have no benefits. Africa, Arab states and parts of Asia spend less than 5% of their GDP on social protection measures.

The world’s report card on social protection: ‘we could do much better’:45 a social security system worthy of the name, % of population

World: 29% enjoy access to comprehen sive social security, 71% (5.2 billion people) have little or no social protection 55% (4 billion people) have no social protection

Social protection: the forgotten majority

189

16% (1.2 billion people) have some social protection but far too little social protection coverage per region, % of population

Europe and Central Asia 84% North and South America 68% Asia and the Pacific 39% Africa 18% World 45%

16% is excluded 32% is excluded 61% is excluded 82% is excluded 55% is excluded (4 billion people)

people receiving at least a small contribution, % of population entitled

Pension 68%

Disability benefits 28%

Unemployment benefits 22%

Maternity benefits 41%

Child benefit 35%

Healthcare 62%

190 

The world of work

3 out of 10 older people have no form of pension, in low-income countries it is 8 out of 10 7 out of 10 disabled people do not receive benefits 8 out of 10 unemployed people receive no benefits 6 out of 10 young mothers receive no benefits 6 out of 10 children receive no benefits (1.3 billion children) 4 out of 10 people have no form of health coverage

The lack of social protection has serious consequences at all times. But these become even more distressing in times of crisis. It is the people who do not have a decent job or a good social security system who are hardest hit. Then poverty and even famine threaten. This currently applies to the corona crisis. While extreme poverty in the world has been reduced since 1998, the WIDER research network of the United Nations fears that the number of extreme poor could increase by 85 million as a result of COVID-19.46 Developing countries are hardest hit, but people are also queuing up for food aid in the wealthy countries. In those countries, too, more and more people are falling through the gaps in the social protection net. In the US, the situation is compared to that of the Great Depression of the 1930s. There, the lack of a good social security system, including healthcare, leads to a disastrous situation for many people. In chapter 13, we further discuss the COVID-19 crisis.

A base of social protection for all Around 2010, there was fairly broad agreement that something had to change. The Presidents of the G20, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the UN Development Group, the European Union, Regional Development Banks and the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) supported a new approach.

Michelle Bachelet, then President of Chile and currently UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, led an ILO Advisory Committee (2010-2011), which gave a huge boost to the social protection movement. Her report showed that the extension of social protection, based on social protection floors, can play a crucial role in the fight against poverty and have a positive impact on the economy. At a meeting which I attended, Bachelet said that it was the 2008 crisis that prompted world leaders to take up social protection again.47 Her report found strength in the ĂŠlan and credo of the beginning of the crisis: social justice and the fight against inequality received more attention. In 2008-2009, forty-eight high- and middle-income countries were investing heavily in stimulating the economy, with

Social protection: the forgotten majority  

191

more than a quarter going to social protection benefiting people who had lost their jobs temporarily or permanently because of the financial crisis.

But from 2010 onwards the Euro-debt-crisis set in and governments changed direction. Austerity, austerity, austerity: budget cuts were the order of the day. Savings also affected social security and social protection. One hundred twenty-two governments, of which eighty-two were developing countries, cut social security spending, reformed pensions, reduced the salaries of caregivers and reduced employment in the care sector. Partly as a result of these measures, poverty increased in Europe. In the meantime, it has fallen a little, but there are still 117 million people at high risk of poverty – 23.5% of the European population. Women, children, the elderly and the disabled are most affected.48 Two contrasting movements crossed paths in 2012. Certainly in Europe, austerity set the tone and above all Greek colleagues, both workers and employers, complained of its dramatic consequences. At the same time, fortunately, the line taken by world leaders at the start of the crisis could not be entirely reversed. The Bachelet report formed the basis of Recommendation 202 on ‘Social Protection Floors’, which was adopted by an overwhelming majority at the International Labour Conference in 2012. This social protection floor should provide people with minimum legal protection and income security from birth to old age in every country. That includes access to healthcare and maternity protection income security for children, for people of working age who cannot generate their own income (e.g., due to illness, unemployment, maternity, disability) and for the elderly. Recommendation 202 is the foundation, the base, the steppingstone to national, fully fledged and widely supported social protection in line with Convention 102.

Existing social security arrangements are not reduced to a kind of assistance, supposedly only ‘for the people who really need it.’ On the contrary. Social protection should be an instrument to fight inequality and poverty. Better healthcare makes people stronger so that they can

192

The world of work

play a role in society and contribute to sustainable growth. Social protection strengthens domestic demand. Social protection keeps many people in work. Social protection is not only a social lever, it also drives the economy forward.

Social protection and the Sustainable Development Goals of 2030 In addition to the existence of ILO instruments, including Convention 102 and Recommendation 202, in 2015 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda, with seventeen sustainable development goals. Some of these goals explicitly mention social protection. Goal 1.3 reads as follows: ‘Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all, including floors, and by 2030 achieve substantial coverage of the poor and the vulnerable.’ The ILO is custodian for the follow-up of indicator 1.3.1: ‘The proportion of population covered by social protection floors/systems, by sex, distinguishing children, unemployed persons, older persons, persons with disabilities, pregnant women, new-borns, work-injury victims and the poor and the vulnerable.’

Social protection is also included in other objectives or goals, such as goal 3.8 (universal health coverage), goal 5.4 (recognize and value unpaid care and domestic work), goal 8 (decent work for all) and goal 10.4 (reduce inequality within and among countries, adopt policies, especially fiscal, wage and social protection policies, and progressively achieve greater equality).

Is a social protection floor affordable?

It is often argued that social protection is unaffordable. However, ILO cost simulations and other studies show that it is possible to build floors in all developing countries. Several middle-income and some low-income countries have already proven that the development of sustainable systems is possible. Others have the option of building systems on top of the floor using contributions and/or general funds.

Social protection: the forgotten majority

193

The latest ILO study on the subject was published on the occasion of ILO Global Social Protection Week in November 2019. In ‘Measuring financing gaps in social protection for achieving SDG target 1.3’49, the ILO carried out a global cost analysis based on available data for 134 countries worldwide. In particular, it calculated how much a social protection scheme consisting of benefits for children, maternity, invalidity and old age would cost for the year 2019. Some directly work-related branches of social protection, such as unemployment benefits, accidents at work and occupational diseases, were not included in the calculation. The figures speak for themselves: • The introduction of this floor worldwide would cost US $792.6 billion.

• This total amount represents 2.4% of the GDP of all countries included in the study. Most of it (1.3% of GDP) would go to pensions, with the remainder going to benefits for children, people with disabilities and women on maternity leave.

• The financing gap for the introduction of this floor today (taking into account what is already being invested in social protection) is US $527 billion. This represents 1.6% of the GDP of the countries in the study.

Conclusion: this is feasible for most countries.

The following list shows that many developing countries are now in a better economic and financial situation than Western countries were when they began to construct their social security systems. It is therefore time that they, too, set up national systems as provided for in ILO Recommendation 202 and the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. At the above-mentioned meeting with various stakeholders and social protection partners of the ILO, Michelle Bachelet, a real believer in the ILO’s approach and today UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, said of the overwhelming number of people who have not yet been reached: ‘But, there is an approach that is slowly gaining traction. Through trial and error and lessons learned, we have gained experience in the implementation of social protection systems. Today,

194

The world of work

we have the means to provide access to health and to a basic income, which can provide a minimum level of security. The instruments range from family contributions for each child and disability pensions, to maternal, retirement and unemployment benefits. The issue, and it’s a human rights issue, is how to extend these services and minimum social benefits to a higher number of people. We need universal systems in line with people’s universal rights.’50

Developing countries are now richer than …51

• Botswana, Indonesia and Peru are richer (GDP per capita) than the United Kingdom in 1911 or Australia in 1908, when these countries developed their social security systems and services.

• India, the Philippines, Morocco, Jamaica and Sudan are richer than Denmark in 1892 and richer than France in 1905.

• Cambodia, Congo, Honduras and Mozambique are richer than Italy in 1919.

• Benin, Cameroon, Liberia and Sierra Leone are richer than the Russian Federation in 1922.

• Ghana, Honduras, Laos, Nigeria and Pakistan are richer than Portugal in 1935.

• Egypt, Guatemala and Lebanon are richer than Norway in 1936.

• Peru, Iran and Jordan are richer than the United States in 1935.

Please note: in 2001, the Netherlands officially celebrated 100 years of social security. Actually, it started with the accident law, then slowly branched out. In Belgium, the first discussions about social security were held in 1941 and really started after the Second World War. The dates need to be put in context, because forms of assistance and support were already present in both countries from the end of the nineteenth century.

Social protection: the forgotten majority

195

Time to push forward … and step it up a notch The ILO has contributed to the development of social security and social protection systems in 136 countries over the last decade.52 Twenty-two countries introduced national social protection strategies with the help of the ILO, 20 countries introduced healthcare systems, 30 countries introduced maternity benefits, 22 countries introduced unemployment insurance, 11 countries set up public employment programmes and 66 countries set up pension systems.

ILO-supported policies: some examples from the last 10 years

• Argentina: introduction of general child benefits • Bahrein, Jordan and Saudi Arabia: introduction of unemployment insurance • Cambodia: introduction of a general health insurance scheme • Colombia: development of a national strategy for social protection • Cyprus: reform of the social support mechanism • Dominican Republic: ratification of ILO Convention 102 on social security • India: expansion of national health insurance • Cape Verde: a national pension centre • Kazakhstan: ratification of ILO Convention 183 on maternity protection • Moldova: bilateral agreements with several countries on social security for migrants • Mozambique: development of a social protection strategy • Peru: introduction of a non-contributory pension system • Rwanda: introduction of a maternity leave allowance • Thailand: introduction of a general healthcare system • Timor-Leste: creation of a first contribution-funded social security scheme

196

The world of work

• Togo: introduction of the national health insurance scheme for the private sector • Vietnam: expansion of the coverage of non-contributory pensions • South Africa: strengthening of the public employment programme

The ILO Flagship programme on Social Protection aimed to achieve results in 21 countries between 2016 and 2020. These countries have been chosen carefully. An important factor was the political will and real commitment of the government and social partners to achieve sustainable results. It started with an inventory of what exists and of the gaps in the system.

Seven countries developed a social protection floor and in fourteen countries, the legal framework for a protection floor is or is almost in place. This protects 30 million people who until recently were excluded.

Fifty million people who had partial protection have much better protection and 130 million people have better access to the system. All in all, 210 million people therefore enjoy the results of the actions taken under the ILO flagship programme in the coming years and beyond.

In order to achieve these objectives, various strategies and methodologies are followed step by step, each adapted to the realities on the ground and the type of vulnerabilities in a country. In some countries, specialists with a great deal of knowledge about informal economies or protection systems for children or migrants are called in while in others, the focus is more on recovery from disruption caused by events such as natural disasters or war situations. In Turkey, for example, refugee camps are working on the development of decent work and a social protection system. In each of the countries concerned, a national dialogue with social partners and civil society is organised in order to create sufficient support. Meanwhile the Flagship programme has been extended to 48 countries.

Social protection: the forgotten majority

197

Activities and results of the ILO Flagship programme on Social Protection: some examples

• In Cambodia, healthcare was expanded to 1.4 million employees of large companies and 1.7 million employees of small- and medium-sized enterprises. New social security legislation was approved in November 2019.

• In El Salvador, 2 million people benefit from a general social protection system that significantly reduces poverty.

Special emphasis is given to the protection of children.

• In Indonesia, the government has launched a broad awareness-raising campaign to extend social protection to people in the informal economy and other vulnerable groups.

• In Cameroon, 200,000 fishermen from the informal sector were included in social security and plans have been made to protect more informal workers.

• In Mozambique 540,000 families are being reached and there is stronger government funding.

• In Myanmar, the quality of social security has improved for more than 1 million people.

• In Togo, a National Development Plan 2018-2022 has been drawn up in which specific attention is paid to social protection. By 2022, at least 50,000 people in the informal economy, mainly women, should have access to social insurance.

• In Vietnam, there is a new pension system, both for those who contribute and those who cannot contribute themselves. A general social protection floor is in preparation.

• In Zambia there is national health insurance for the first time.

• The flagship programme is also achieving results in Honduras, India, Indonesia, Cape Verde, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Malawi, Niger, Pakistan, Paraguay, Senegal, Timor-Leste and Zambia.

198

The world of work

How is such an ILO campaign financed?

Everyone supports the idea of a social protection floor but raising the resources for it is not so easy. The programme described above, which runs from 2016 to 2020, costs 65.9 million dollars. However, in times when countries are facing spending constraints, governments are not always ready to make large-scale funding available for international projects. Of course, investments of the countries themselves are also needed. The examples described above make clear that this method can work. Countries are encouraged to show the necessary political will for redistribution. In this respect, social partners and other civil society actors can play an important role. Often, good examples (best practices) from the region concerned are used as well.

For this four-year programme, 14% of funding comes from the regular ILO operating budget and the technical cooperation budget, and 54% comes from voluntary technical cooperation contributions from outside the organisation. According to reports in 2018, $21.1 million still had to be found. At that time, the distribution of funding was as follows: • 59.4% (21.3 million) from ILO member states (Ireland, Luxemburg, Portugal, Japan, South Korea, France, Italy, Sweden, the United Kingdom, China, Algeria, Qatar and Kuwait) • 23.4% (8.4 million) from UN Joint Programmes • 8.6% (3.1 million) from the European Union and the OECD • 6.8% (2.42 million) from the countries concerned • 1.1% (0.4 million) from the World Bank and the African Development Bank • 0.4% (0.15 million) from South-South cooperation • 0.2% (0.06 million) from the private sector.

At the end of 2019, the counter was already at US $84 million that had been collected. In the meantime, a significant part comes from the United Nations Joint Fund, which raises funds for the realisation of Agenda 2030, and thus also for Objective 1.3. With these additional resources, the ILO can now invest in the development of social protection in other countries (in addition to the 21 countries of the Flagship Programme).

Social protection: the forgotten majority

199

The contribution from the UN Joint Programmes also includes money from private funds and companies. In part three of this book, on ‘the future of work’, I write that the member states could finance ILO programmes like this more easily if large multinational companies paid taxes properly. Private financing for public benefit is increasing. At present, too much reliance has to be placed on what funds or companies are willing to donate voluntarily. This has always been the case: even centuries ago, many wonderful projects and realisations were achieved with private sponsorship of this kind, as Luc Sels, rector of KU Leuven (University of Leuven), recently remarked. This is true, but if private funding increases in importance, there are risks involved too. It is not always easy to guarantee independence. Universities have to deal with this delicate issue in trying to ensure that private donations do not undermine the objectivity of scientific research. This is no different for the ILO. What if a company wants to contribute money for a project, but does not comply – or complies insufficiently – with ILO Conventions? After difficult discussions, the Governing Body has set out a number of rules for Public Private Partnership (PPP). Within the ILO, the Director-General has the last word after consultation with the employers and workers. But both groups have doubts about PPPs. In the case of the Workers’ Group, the reasons of principle described above are the main issue, while in the case of the Employers’ Group and the International Organisation of Employers, the question is more about the fear of losing its influence in the ILO if large individual companies enter via sponsorship.

Recently, for example, an agreement was signed with Nestlé. This was done within the framework of the Global Business Network for Social Protection Floors, which in addition to Nestlé also includes companies such as Auchan WDF, Carrefour, El Corte Ingles, ENI, IOKids, Legrand, L’Oréal, PMI, Sonafi, Société Générale, Swiss Life and Geely. Nestlé’s Vice-President said he was ‘proud to be recognised by the ILO as a responsible partner’. The agreement covers all

200

The world of work

workers in the company’s global supply chain, some 300,000 people worldwide. The emphasis lies on maternity protection, a living wage and healthy and safe workplaces. These are good objectives in themselves, but the agreement was not very much to the liking of the International Union of Food Workers (IUF). It pointed to a recent conflict in one of the Nestlé operations. Companies like Nestlé are only too happy to have the recognition of the ILO. The fear is that they would abuse that recognition in the event of a conflict about respect for workers’ rights.

Personally, I do not claim that this partnership should have been rejected, but the tension involved should be acknowledged. This is natural and logical, and was also expressed, for example, when the UN Joint Programme on Youth Employment accepted funding from McDonald’s, which is known for its sub-standard working conditions, and from Microsoft. The ILO makes use of UN Joint Programmes funds, but it has little or no influence on the conditions that are set.

For me, multilateral organisations such as the ILO and the UN are always obliged, out of respect for the values they represent, to subject PPPs to a number of criteria, in which the full respect of human and workers’ rights is paramount.53

The failed privatisation of pensions ILO studies on what works and what doesn’t – for example, in regard to the privatisation of pension systems – are particularly instructive.

Between 1981 and 2014, thirty countries privatised all or part of their pension systems. Fourteen of these countries are in Latin America, fourteen are in Central and Eastern Europe, and two are in Africa.

Most privatisations were recommended or enforced by the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the OECD, USAID and the Asian and Inter-American Development Banks. This always took place against the advice of the ILO.

Social protection: the forgotten majority

201

Privatisation of pension systems

(In chronological order of introduction. In brackets is the approximate year of return to a public system.) latin america: Chile, Peru, Argentina (2008), Colombia, Uruguay, Bolivia (2009), Mexico, Venezuela (2000), El Salvador, Nicaragua (2005), Costa Rica, Ecuador (2002), Dominican Republic and Panama (2008). eastern europe and the former soviet union: Hungary (2010), Kazakhstan (2013), Croatia (2011), Poland (2011), Latvia (2009), Bulgaria (2007), Estonia (2009), Russia (2012), Lithuania (2009), Romania (2017), Slovakia (2008), Macedonia (2011), Czech Republic (2016) and Armenia. africa: Nigeria and Ghana.

The expected results from privatisation did not materialise. Coverage rates stagnated or fell, pension benefits deteriorated and inequality between men and women increased. This made the commercial systems very unpopular. The risks of fluctuations on the financial market were shifted to the individual. Administrative costs rose and pensions were reduced. The high costs of making the transition to commercial systems were often underestimated. Although management was expected to improve, it actually deteriorated. Social partners that had co-managed public systems were side-lined. In many cases, regulation and supervision were developed and implemented by the financial groups managing the pension funds, creating a serious conflict of interest. Meanwhile, insurance companies merged, resulting in concentrations of power. The big winner was the financial sector, the losers were the pensioners and future pensioners. The ILO report cited above clearly reveals how the mechanisms functioned and the gigantic sums that were involved. They are analysed in detail, country by country.54 Eighteen countries turned their backs on commercial pension systems during or after the financial crisis that broke in 2008. By then,

202 

The world of work

the disadvantages had become highly visible. The ILO experts are very clear in their conclusion: the privatisation of pension systems failed; in the countries concerned, the result of three decades of work to build up viable pension systems and a great deal of money were lost.

Of the countries involved, 60% returned to public systems; the demonstrable evidence of the negative social and economic impact of private systems cannot be ignored.

And where can a country go for help in the event of a privatisation failure? Not the IMF or the World Bank, which had insisted on privatisation‌. The ILO has devised a system whereby a country can make the transition back to a public system in a relatively short period of time. The basic philosophy is that the system is returned to those who finance and sustain it: the government, employers and workers. Once again, history teaches us that together, these three partners are the best guarantors of national, fully fledged, widely supported and sustainably financed social protection systems.

The starvation of social security As of 2019, 186 out of 192 countries worldwide have legislated for retirement pensions. Of course, this does not say much about how high those pensions will be, but it does offer a certain guarantee. In 72 countries, employers and workers finance the pensions; in 13 countries, the government does so; and in 101 countries, there is mixed financing by the government and social partners. China is one of the countries that has developed a strong social security system in a short period of time, with 100% pension coverage. It did so using its own resources, after examining various systems. The aim was both social and economic. A good social security system also gives an important boost to domestic consumption and therefore to the economy.

But while a number of countries are developing their systems, others are reducing social security. One example is Romania, where, since 2018, most of the social contributions to be paid have been transferred to

Social protection: the forgotten majority  

203

workers. Employers pay only 2.25% of gross wages, which means that the heaviest burden of pensions and health insurance finance is passed on to workers. After previously swallowing wage cuts, Romanians now have to pay 35% on their gross wages in social contributions. While taxation of companies is being radically reduced, Romanian workers have to take care of their own social security. This is a disastrous intervention.

Less drastic but in the long run particularly negative is what I call the slow starvation of social security. This is taking place in several Western European countries, including Belgium. There are more and more pay and income systems on which social security is no longer paid. Exceptions to the payment of social security contributions are increasingly being allowed. Added to this are the innumerable work platforms that are springing up like mushrooms and pay neither taxes nor social security. As a result, the labour market is becoming more fragmented with more and more ‘little jobs’. The consequences are an increasing number of completely or partially unprotected workers and less income for social security.

On the future of social security Politicians and social partners have a collective responsibility to ensure that social security works for future generations. In this respect, it is important to refer to the ‘Outcome Document’ of the ILO Global Week for Social Protection. This event was organised by the ILO between 25 and 28 November 2019 to look back (on 100 years of building up social security) and to look ahead. Of course this forward-looking approach necessarily includes a clear message to all the actors involved to live up to their commitment to make universal social protection a reality, including for people in the informal economy, and in rural areas, for women, children, young people and for the elderly. In that ‘Outcome Document’, these goals are formulated as follows, echoing what I have argued above: ‘Implementing Universal Social Protection requires inclusive social protection policies based on national dialogues:

204

The world of work

• Make the human right to social security a reality for all by formulating and implementing inclusive social protection policies that leave no one behind, in line with ILO’s Social Protection Floors Recommendation, 2012 (No. 202) as well as SDG target 1.3 of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development; • Duly involve workers’ and employers’ organizations and other stakeholders through effective social dialogue and wider multi-sectoral, multi-stakeholder participation, including through institutionalised participatory processes, in assessing the situation of social protection and in designing, implementing, monitoring, evaluating and continuously improving national social protection policies, inclusive of all and, in particular, persons operating in the informal economy.’

As long as countries only have a social protection floor, it will be up to governments to finance it, if necessary, with the support of the international community. For the further development of social protection, there seems to be little or no viable alternative models than the mix of employer and worker contributions and public resources. Hence the importance of getting the social partners and other social movements involved from the start. They have often been pioneers in the development of social protection systems for their constituencies. Today, they are also developing initiatives to organise social protection for people in the informal economy, in precarious jobs and in rural areas. This experience is crucial to the development of universal systems. In addition, they ensure sustainability, support and good governance.

For the future, measures will have to be taken to oblige companies or global supply chains that develop business models to live up to their responsibilities, such as paying social security contributions and taxes, to fulfil their social duty. What I have presented shows that any government with a sense of social justice can, with a little bit of political will, build an effective system of social protection. It is up to all multilateral actors to contribute to this objective by creating a supportive policy and monitoring its implementation.

Social protection: the forgotten majority

205

10 The ILO model

In an ideal world, every country follows the principles and logic of the ILO. A Convention is ratified, transposed into legislation and correctly applied. Done. If something still goes wrong, the ILO Supervisory System identifies the problem and steers the government concerned towards a solution. But as we have seen in previous chapters, it’s not so simple. ‘You see,’ say the critics, ‘the ILO is a toothless tiger.’

Nowhere is a standard ILO work model prescribed. There is no template, because every situation is different and calls for a specific approach. This requires constant review of what works well and what doesn’t work so well. Nevertheless, a number of practices and patterns are repeated. Of course, strategy and methodology are very often the subject of discussion in the three groups, and certainly in the Workers’ Group. It is also a recurring theme in my conversations with the staff and with Director-General Guy Ryder. In addition, I have often been able to rely on the expertise and experience of Executive Director Kari Tapiola, who personally led several delicate exercises and published the book The Teeth of the ILO in 2018. In his book he describes, among other things, ‘the ILO way’. My observations and analyses are close to those of Tapiola.55 The ILO’s working method is built around four essential elements: the standards and supervisory mechanism, development policy and technical support, classic UN diplomacy, and social dialogue.

On the workers’ side, the consistent application of standards is always highlighted. Governments are reluctant to be supervised and are particularly interested in technical support. Employers stress the impor-

207

tance of supporting companies. ILO staff and governments take the UN dynamic into account. The social partners rely more on social dialogue than governments. I see this above all as a healthy field of tension, a cross-fertilisation that can be productive if, on the one hand, governments and social partners, and on the other the various departments and regional offices of the ILO pursue the objectives that have been set consistently and together. This may sound somewhat abstract, but it becomes clearer when we look at what happens in practice.

Setting, measuring and monitoring realistic goals As much as one might like to in some cases, you do not change a political regime from the outside. That is not the task of the ILO; the United Nations must also respect the sovereignty of nations. However, this does not prevent the ILO from being active in countries to enforce respect for workers’ rights. Sometimes it is better to focus on one particular problem in order to get a foot in the door on other issues. In Myanmar and Qatar, for example, the ILO did not start by addressing the prohibition of freedom of association, a fundamental issue, but the problem of forced labour, because so many people were victims of it. But in Myanmar there is also freedom of association today; in Qatar, the first steps are also being taken to this end. Another example is the scandalous practice of using deliberately malnourished, underweight child jockeys during camel races in the Gulf Countries. The ILO could not let such abuse of children pass, even though there was no right to free association. Meanwhile, child jockeys have been replaced by robots. This is a success, even though the regimes have not changed, and it is regrettable that there is still no freedom of association.

Collecting data, keeping statistics, monitoring the situation in the field – these can be subtle but important ways of applying pressure. In Uzbekistan, employer complaints triggered debate in the Committee on the Application of Standards. In chapter 5, we already discussed the

208 

The world of work

existence of a system of forced labour and child labour during the harvest in the cotton fields in that country. The situation there was distressing, and action had to be taken. Nevertheless, the ILO had to avoid a situation in which children and/or their families were suddenly deprived of income as a result of immediate and stringent measures. In order to combat forced labour and child labour, it is prudent to first address the income situation of the parents and the education system. The data from Uzbekistan was initially so confusing in this respect that it seemed impossible to get to grips with the real problem.

But through proper measurement and subsequent regular monitoring, the ILO was able to identify the worst affected areas, the number of people concerned, their financial situation, and mechanisms and conditions on the ground. Through targeted guidance and support, including the support of the World Bank, the European Union and the United States, promising results have been achieved.

In fact, the ILO’s approach appears to be a steppingstone in the process of democratisation in the country. In the case of child labour in Uzbekistan, the Committee on the Application of Standards set out the principles for action, and then the Office followed a pragmatic but consistent approach which has produced extensive results.

Sustainable results take time Countries where industrial relations are working properly often react quickly when the ILO brings a problem to their attention. But in countries where this is not the case, things do not usually go so smoothly; the problems are more profound, and time is needed. Nelson Mandela said that fundamental change sometimes takes a great deal of time and is often accompanied by a great deal of pain. His personal sacrifice for the end of the apartheid system has been an example to the whole world ever since. Those who find themselves in the most difficult situations understand better than anyone that sustainable solutions do not come overnight. For them, it is important that in the first instance, their problem gets worldwide recognition through

The ilo model  

209

the ILO. This offers activists in the field implicit protection and the knowledge that they are being supported. They are the ones who taught me that good solutions require patience. But concrete, visible steps have to be taken; we can’t just let things take their course and do nothing. In Myanmar, for example, ILO delegations tried to achieve a certain result with every visit to the country: a positive decision, a new decree, the release of an activist worker … Going further would have increased the risk of the ILO being expelled and the process being halted. In such cases, international trade unions, employers’ organisations, human rights organisations and other countries need to keep up the pressure at the same time.

The fact that a patient approach is required to achieve sustainable results has also been demonstrated by the project PRODIAF (Promotion du Dialogue Social en Afrique).56 This Belgian cooperation project with the ILO, later also supported by France, was developed by Jo Walgrave in Dakar (Senegal) in 1996. As a former social mediator, President of the National Labour Council and Chairperson of a number of the first European social agreements, she was the perfect person to relaunch and anchor national social dialogue in the French-speaking African countries. Lieve Verboven, the current Director of the ILO office in Brussels, worked there as Jo Walgrave’s right-hand-woman. When the latter was called to Geneva to head the Department of Social Dialogue, Moussa Oumarou and later Dany Duysens and Ibrahim Barry continued her work.

The project started as a pilot at the request of the Minister of Labour and the social partners of the Ivory Coast, Burkina Faso and Benin. Renewed social dialogue in those countries then led to a cascade of tripartite interest in other French-speaking countries of the region.

PRODIAF expanded to twenty-two countries and to some sub-regional bodies such as the Central African Economic and Monetary Community (CEMAC) and the ‘Union Economique et Monétaire Ouest Africaine’ (UEMOA).

210

The world of work

The project was active both in more stable countries and in countries that were in a post-conflict or post-crisis situation. The key themes were social dialogue, tripartism, conflict prevention, negotiation and mediation. The project proceeded in a very cautious manner. The organisers preferred to respond to requests for support; nothing was ever forced on anyone. There were many conversations and the needs and concerns of each country were of central importance. Through education, training and support for the institutionalisation of social dialogue, important steps were taken, but it was up to those directly involved to draw conclusions and develop the necessary structures to promote decent work. Negotiated tripartite social pacts proved particularly useful to defend and promote rights in post-crisis situations.

In an evaluation report from 2010, there are some strong conclusions about social dialogue and collective bargaining. ‘The real challenge of social dialogue and its development is much more human than technical.’ ‘Support to social dialogue requires political leadership capable of engaging political leaders on fundamental questions.’ ‘There is noone-size-fits-all model of social dialogue.’ ‘Social dialogue is not an end in itself but a means to develop tripartism, to improve governance as well as social and economic development.’ These are definitive conclusions that are universally valid.

A number of the countries concerned have experienced or are still experiencing intense and complex political tensions. Moussa Oumarou, mentioned above, project leader of PRODIAF and current Deputy Director-General of the ILO, told me about the sustainable results of the project, referring among other things to the overview report of the West African Economic and Monetary Union. In most countries there is now a ‘Conseil National du Dialogue Social’, a tripartite national council for social dialogue. They mediate in social conflicts, discuss wages and social contributions, assist in concluding collective agreements with both the government (e.g., education and administration) and the private sector (e.g., bakers, drivers, hotel staff, security services, media, etc.), discuss pensions and social security and or-

The ilo model

211

ganise social elections for workers’ councils in companies. At the regional level, opinions have been issued on gender equality and the transferability of social security rights for migrant workers. Despite the political crises that some countries are still experiencing, social dialogue remains lively. It was initiated by PRODIAF; and member states are maintaining it with the support of the ILO regional office.

Country programmes and active involvement of the social partners The ILO has developed Decent Work Country Programmes (DWCPs) to support countries with their decent work policies. The main objective is the promotion of decent work as a key to the country’s development. Governments, workers and employers are given the necessary support to make decent work the norm. Eighteen country programmes currently operate in Africa, thirteen in Asia and the Pacific, five in Europe and Central Asia, two in Latin America and one in Palestine.

It is part of the broader ILO philosophy that workers’ and employers’ organisations are essential for achieving sustainable change. Kari Tapiola writes about this in The Teeth of the ILO: ‘Preparing a country for change – let alone transition – means having a view of where and what independent employers’ and workers’ organizations should be. The ILO is not neutral on this. The logic of both its constitution and standards is that the preferred option is organizing.’ If workers or employers are poorly organised, the ILO should support them. After all, the three constituents are always part of the joint solution. This is precisely one of the added values of the ILO’s High-Level Tripartite Missions: under the authority of the three constituents, these missions bring together government and social partners. They therefore not only listen to the various parties involved; they also work with them to find the best possible way forward. This sometimes results in a road map, a guide meant to point the way to concrete results. Sometimes this is accompanied by clear target dates. Of course, such a roadmap only has a

212

The world of work

chance of success if there is sufficient support from the national government and social partners.

A broad base of support involving not only the government but also workers and employers as ‘owners’ of the change is crucial if programmes and projects are to survive any successive changes of Government. ILO specialists have an important role as facilitators, but it is the three groups that have to carry the project forward. If they send a joint message to local decision makers, it has much greater authority than if ILO officials do. It is for the same reason that the Committee of Experts on the Application of Standards bases its annual reports on the comments of government, employers and workers, not on comments from ILO staff members.

During its contacts and missions, the ILO often consults with the army, police, inspectorates and the highest judicial authorities of a country. These institutions are of course indispensable for the full application of ILO Conventions, for example, when it comes to bringing to justice those involved in the murder and persecution of trade union and social leaders. The ILO pays particular attention to the role of the public prosecutors. If there is sufficient will and openness, the ILO also organises courses for inspectors, civil servants and the judiciary, either in the country itself or at the ILO’s International Training Centre in Turin. Such training is often part of an action plan or roadmap.

If the ‘owners’ of a process explicitly ask for it, the ILO can also offer support in drafting new legislation.

Programmes in which ownership by many is of exceptional importance are those in situations of conflict. It is little known that the ILO is also active in these cases, but this is not new. Even after the Second World War, the countries involved were already using the guidance in ILO Recommendation R71 ‘Transition from War to Peace’.

This stated that everyone is needed to rebuild countries devastated by war and that everyone should have work, a good wage and social security. In 2017, a new Recommendation was adopted to address the

The ilo model

213

recent crises, war and conflict situations. R205 ‘Employment and Decent Work for Peace and Resilience’ also deals with reconstruction after natural disasters. As the world is struggling to overcome the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is easy to see how R205 can be critical in the reconstruction process that must follow.

One of the conflict areas in which the ILO operates is the region around Syria, where the war rages on unrelentingly. The ILO has a programme in place in the countries neighbouring Syria which is embedded in the UN programme for the region. Financing comes from the European Union, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, the United States and the United Kingdom. The programme focuses on the 5.6 million refugees, in particular in neighbouring Lebanon (1.5 million), Jordan (1.3 million) and Turkey (more than 2.5 million), which is also home to many Afghan, Iraqi and Iranian refugees. In Jordan, both local workers and refugees with a work permit tend farmland and build roads, schools, hospitals and community centres. In this way, the investment benefits the local population as well as providing work for refugees.

There are training courses for workers and small entrepreneurs, and special attention is paid to the role of women. Nobody knows how long the conflict will last, which is why community building is also being done in the host country. When the refugees can return to their homeland after the war, they will take with them the skills and experience necessary to rebuild their country. Similar projects are operating in Turkey. The granting of work permits to migrants was also an important breakthrough in that country. In addition, the ILO is trying to formalise informal labour in order to combat unfair competition and to fight the child labour that always re-emerges in such situations. Former child soldiers receive assistance and rehabilitation. In Lebanon, the ILO has had to be more cautious because of the country’s conflicted history with Syria. Throughout the region, project supervisors emphasize that the local population, refugee communities, political leaders, employers and workers need to have ownership of support programmes. Even in the worst conflict zones, tripartism is a necessary foundation.57

214

The world of work

Fly under the radar and never leave In 2008, the then Minister of Labour of Myanmar told the ILO delegation that he would do everything possible to combat forced labour as long as he had the margin to work within his own powers. In Myanmar this was quite far-reaching, and it led to results. Through his actions, five trade union leaders were released from prison on the basis of a so-called administrative decision.

This is how things often go: in the area of Ministries of Labour and Social Affairs, issues can sometimes be solved smoothly. It becomes more complex when the entire government is involved. That is why it is better to fly under the radar as much as possible in those countries.

Administrations and their civil servants can be of great importance in such situations. In countries with a questionable government, I have met several people of good will, people who hold respect for ILO standards in high esteem. They take great risks by cooperating with the ILO, but they are indispensable. They can sometimes create small openings, cracks in the armour that can later become the foundations for real change.

The ILO does not engage in ostrich politics, either. Once it has determined that something needs to be fixed, it won’t let go. The Committee of Experts on the Application of Standards wants to know what the government is going to do about it; the Committee on the Application of Standards puts the issue on the agenda at the International Labour Conference, repeatedly if necessary. The ILO regional or national office follows the situation closely. If necessary, a mission tries to increase pressure and facilitate consultation between the government and the social partners. This can result in an action plan that is evaluated regularly. It is an entire arsenal of tools with which the ILO often works successfully for the respect of workers’ rights and better working conditions. So, although the ILO does not have a precisely prescribed method of work, there really is such a thing as the ILO way.

The ilo model

215

part ii i

The future of work

11 Seven challenges for the world of work

During the first decades of my professional life, it was the present and future that mattered most. But gradually my interest in the past grew stronger as I tried to understand the present better and to assess the future more accurately – although the latter always seems a bit like tightrope walking. If we assume that the ILO has made a difference over the past century, the question is whether this will also be the case in the future. Has the ILO seen its best days, or are they still ahead? How can we give the ILO a strong future? And above all, what is the future of work?58

The Global Commission on the Future of Work The need for prudence and modesty in future projections quickly became clear during the discussions of the Global Commission on the Future of Work (2017-2019), hereafter referred to as the Commission.

Before its first meeting, governments, employers’ organisations and trade unions of 110 countries had already discussed the future of work.

The reports of these discussions were summarised and formed the initial basis of the Commission’s work, together with documents produced by ILO researchers.

The Commission was co-chaired by Cyril Ramaphosa, President of South Africa, and Stefan Löfvén, prime minister of Sweden. Twen-

219

ty-three of the twenty-seven members of the Commission had no formal connection to the ILO and the Commission was ideologically and politically independent. From all corners of the world, the commissioners were personalities with economic, sociological, legal, political, educational and philosophical knowledge, from UN organisations, NGOs, politics, business and the trade union world. The Director-General, my two fellow Vice-Chairpersons, and me as Chairperson of the Governing Body, were ex officio members.

Between October and January 2019, we met four times, building on researchers’ documents, reports and preliminary drafts of the report. In the period April-May 2018, Commission members discussed five major themes with experts: lifelong learning; the future of work in the rural economy; technologies such as big data, algorithms, artificial intelligence and blockchain; how to measure well-being and the value of work (the gross domestic product only measures economic trends); and finally, inclusive growth and development and the role of the private sector in the UN 2030 Sustainable Development Goals.

The discussions demanded solid preparation. My efforts were amply rewarded by the willingness of the other commissioners to listen and by what I learned thanks to their knowledge and experience. It was striking how the Commission’s vision was systematically given more shape and substance during the discussions and to see how such a diverse group could arrive at such a coherent end result. In terms of content, the human-centred approach of the report is quite different from the current mainstream economic and political discourse. The report provided a good basis for further discussion on the future of work and the ILO, both between governments and social partners in the member states, at the International Labour Conference of June 2019, and beyond. Although in the final report I miss the spice of our discussions here and there, and I would have preferred the new challenges to be a bit more pronounced, it breaks new ground. It was well received, and rightly so. I was able to see that for myself in the many places where I was given the opportunity to present it and was pleased to do so. I still hear positive

220 

The future of work

comments on it from all corners of the world. But before looking at the Commission’s recommendations, we need to get a better picture of the challenges for the future of work. On this subject I go into more detail and depth in this book than the report itself does. The Commission’s discussions and discussion papers form the basis of what follows.

The Commission worked from 2017 to 2019, the year of the ILO Centenary Conference. It discussed the challenges, but it could not foresee the COVID-19 crisis in 2020. In particular, when analysing the crisis and its consequences, we have to note that a number of challenges and proposals made have become even more relevant to the policies to be pursued. This also applies, of course, to the content of the centennial declaration based on the Commission’s report. We make this clear in chapter 13. Despite the crisis, we would first like to look back at the progress that has already been made.

The world is doing well … and yet there is still turbulence ‘The world is doing well,’ wrote the late Swedish physician, statistician and professor of international health Hans Rosling in his book Factfulness: Ten Reasons We’re Wrong About the World – and Why Things Are Better Than You Think.59 Rosling compares two hundred countries over a period of two hundred years and comes to the conclusion that we live longer, are healthier and richer than ever before. Extreme poverty has decreased on every continent. Life expectancy is increasing, especially in developing countries; child mortality has almost halved since 1990. There is less war than before and more and more countries have some form of democracy. There is also more food available in developing countries. More children go to school and child labour is decreasing. Solar energy is becoming cheaper and the internet is becoming more easily accessible, even in remote areas.

Seven challenges for the world of work

221

In its report, the Commission also indicates what has been achieved, although less euphorically than Rosling. The policies which the ILO has been advocating in the member states, to governments, employers and workers for a hundred years ‘has generated unprecedented progress in the world of work. The incidence of child labour has fallen dramatically, rising incomes have lifted millions out of working poverty, women have entered the labour market in greater numbers and annual working hours have been progressively reduced. While few countries had social protection systems a century ago, today most countries have at least basic systems in place. The recognition and respect of rights have given workers a say in their daily working lives.

And by engaging in social dialogue, employers’ and workers’ organizations have increasingly had a seat at the policy table. Importantly, social justice, full employment and decent work now figure expressly in the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.’60 This positive picture is immediately followed in the Commission’s report by the challenges of our time. Progress has been very uneven, and at times the going has been rough. Spectacular progress in the Western world after the Second World War began to falter in the 1980s and slowed even more after the fall of the Berlin Wall. But anyone who takes a step back and looks at the global picture and structural trends can hardly agree with Rosling’s vision of things. Acknowledging that progress has been made and is possible is important. If we only look at the negative developments without putting them next to positive evolutions and achievements, we can become discouraged and immobilised.

It is also important to keep in mind that Rosling mainly talks about social progress. From an environmental perspective, I fear that a historical retrospective would yield different results. But the example of social progress should encourage us as we address the urgently needed ecological and climate transformation. The question is now whether the corona crisis affects human development so deeply that the progress made is crumbling. If the fight against inequality is not

222

The future of work

urgently pursued, the UNDP, the United Nations Development Programme, fears a relapse for the first time in thirty years.

However, the progress recorded is meagre consolation for those who are victims of uneven progress or even regression. Moreover, some will have to shoulder more than a fair share of the negative consequences of the necessary ecological transition. According to the ILO, in 2019, in seven of the worlds’ nine sub-regions there has been a significantly higher level of protest and social unrest. Despite job growth, people from employment-poor households in economically developed countries do not get a decent job: four in ten low-skilled people do not find work. Poverty, especially child poverty, is a growing problem.

For many, anxiety leads to indifference, to distancing themselves from decision-making, politics and institutions. But not everyone.

Workers are once again expressing themselves increasingly through social actions, demonstrations and sometimes strikes. There are marches and widely supported actions under the impulse of young climate activists and civil disobedience is back. The ‘yellow vests’ cry out that they are being left behind socially. They ignore formal structures of representation and opt for an anarchistic approach to mobilising for a better life.

In the last few years, there has also been another relatively new evolution. A significant part of the middle class sees storm clouds gathering as they feel they are coming to ‘the end of the economic boom’. What boom? Not that these families are poverty-stricken, but the costs of housing, energy, water, internet and their children’s education continue to rise. At the end of each month they can only just make ends meet.

This is true for a number of two-income families, but it is even more so for single-parent families and other families with only one breadwinner.

Research shows that major changes – whether in technology, climate or migration – frighten people. This is all the truer for the weakest.

Insecure people are receptive to tweets and all kinds of social media messages that fuel their fears, whoever and wherever they come from. Simplistic discourse, emotion and direct interaction become

Seven challenges for the world of work

223

more important than facts in their real context. Traditional media amplify the themes that are circulating in social media and so reinforce the trend. A clear overview, let alone real insight, becomes virtually impossible. We are moving towards a post-fact society, an alternative fact society – the ideal breeding ground for some groups or politicians to stir up emotions and fear and build a populist policy model.

Fortunately, the Commission did not linger over these symptoms for long. An imbalance has grown in the social debate between factual analysis on the one hand, and the presentation of sustainable solutions on the other. There is often a poverty of ideas behind these instant analyses. The challenges of the future are not only about technological innovation, with a narrow focus on digitisation. They are multifaceted, complex and interactive. This is how it will be with all transitions or transformations. Yet with a bit of good will and some political courage, they can be managed and mastered.

I see seven challenges, which I will discuss one by one below: 1. Globalisation and deglobalisation 2. Ecological and climate transition 3. Inequality 4. Demography and migration 5. Automation and digitisation 6. New ways of working and the quality of work 7. New business models

Challenge 1: Globalisation and deglobalisation Globalisation has brought prosperity to people in China and India, although the situation of the poor in particular in the latter country has not improved. Africa too has experienced and is experiencing growth, with big differences between countries and the problem that income has mostly ended up with the privileged few or flowed abroad. It is not

224 

The future of work

globalisation that is wrong, but the fact that it is not subject to adequate ethical, labour, production and climate rules. The freedom of multinationals and large supply and service chains is paid for dearly by people who see their natural resources plundered and their lands destroyed by mass cultivation, or by those who are at the bottom of global supply chains – the workers in the sweatshops of Bangladesh or the exploited tobacco pickers in Malawi.

The G20 recognises the problem: violations of international labour standards should not be an element in competition. The OECD also says that social dialogue is needed to achieve better work and greater well-being.

At the same time, we see that globalisation goes hand in hand with national calls for deglobalisation. Brexit and the self-centred trade policy of the United States, which is also leaving the Paris climate Agreement and the UN Human Rights Council, but also some of the trade practices of China and Russia, are symptoms of a disastrous policy. Isolationism means an exit from the international legal order, with its human rights, labour rights and migrants’ rights guarantees, and commitments on climate, environment and biodiversity. This is usually missing from what I hear or read about Brexit: that it is a choice for a model that mainly serves the objectives of a handful of capital interests.61 The way out is obvious: both the local and the global have their place. The local organic farm or sheltered workshop has value. But at the same time world trade must be made fair and sustainable, and this requires, among other things, global and objectively enforced social rules in trade agreements. This coherence of local and global is nicely captured in the neologism ‘glocal’.

The corona crisis shed new light on globalisation. Because of our global way of life, the COVID-19 virus spread all over the world in no time. Measures were taken at a tremendous pace that were previously unthinkable; passenger aviation was practically shut down; national borders were closed. The necessary protective equipment had to come from China and arrived only in a trickle. It is clear that these new facts and realities are intensifying and perhaps even changing the debate on

Seven challenges for the world of work

225

globalisation. How, then? We try to answer that question in the chapter on COVID-19 (chapter 13).

Challenge 2: Ecological and climate transition The effects of global warming, the pollution of our environment and dwindling biodiversity are realities. They are largely due to human activities, including human labour. Taking action to combat global warming and the poisoning of our planet is an ethical duty and an urgent priority for humanity. Local initiatives for sustainable economic development are setting the right tone but will not suffice. The more acute the problem, the more change needs to be brought under responsible control. For the world of work, it will be one of the most far-reaching transformations in history. For too long, the protection of the planet has been seen as being in contradiction to economic growth. For too long, economic lobbies have held back the policy transition. The International Trade Union Confederation puts it into words starkly: ‘No jobs on a dead planet.’ Reducing our ecological footprint offers opportunities for development, growth and employment. But the transition is not automatic.

It will cause shock waves and must be planned as much as possible and equitably. This is the concept of just transition, which the international trade union movement has been advocating for many years and which has now been confirmed on several occasions at international climate summits. It is a necessary precondition for raising the level of political ambition.

After all, well-intentioned increases of taxes on diesel fuel affect poor workers who drive old cars to work and impoverished sections of the population in rural regions from which public enterprises, collective and commercial services are increasingly withdrawing. A poorly designed CO2 tax threatens to exacerbate the precariousness of low-income families. Subsidies for home insulation or electric cars are especially good news for the affluent middle class. According to authoritative

226 

The future of work

research, while the implementation of the Paris Climate Agenda would lead to the loss of 6 million jobs, it would at the same time create 24 million jobs worldwide. In September 2019, in the run-up to the Madrid Climate Conference, the ILO calculated that if the temperature were to rise by 1.5°C by the end of this century, 80,000 jobs would already be lost by 2030 due to heat stress. Productivity would drop dramatically, and there would be a loss for the economy of US $2,400 billion.62 The objectives of decent work, sustainable manufacturing and renewable energy can and must be reconciled, but it will require creativity. This is precisely what the ‘Climate Action for Jobs Initiative’ aims to achieve. It was launched during the United Nations Climate Action Summit in New York in September 2019. Forty-six countries made commitments to support a just ecological transition. They would do so by formulating national plans for a just transition through social dialogue, creating decent work as well as green jobs, enabling ambitious climate action that delivers decent jobs and advances social justice. Guy Ryder: ‘The actors in the world of work – governments, employers and workers – have a key role to play in developing the ways of working that safeguard the environment for present and future generations, eradicate poverty and promote social justice by fostering sustainable enterprises and creating decent work for all.’63 Stronger national and international action is needed to avoid more climate catastrophes. Together with wars, demography and poverty, climate disasters such as desertification, hurricanes and rising water levels will trigger large-scale migrations of climate refugees. The Commission clearly agreed that global warming and environmental degradation are the main challenges for our future. This reflects the shift in current debates on so-called disruptive evolutions. Technological alarmism, as my generation experienced in the early 1980s, is giving way to the observation that the ecological transition will shake our economy and society much more fundamentally. We need to be more ambitious. This is also the message of the major climate protests and the actions of young climate activists in many countries, including mine.

Seven challenges for the world of work

227

Challenge 3: Inequality Inequality is a serious threat to peace in the world. Even from the IMF, the World Bank, the OECD and the G20, you can nowadays find declarations on the danger of inequality, although their action on the ground often steers governments in the wrong direction. Sometimes they promote inequality by, for example, dismantling social security systems and social services, or imposing fees for education in exchange for support for the country’s finances. This comes from a widely held idea that inequality could be an important stimulus to progress. ‘You can climb out of the valley as long as you work hard enough. Meritocracy exists; those who earn it can cash in,’ they say.

But the most authoritative studies show that this is only possible within a policy framework which provides for equal access to education, a living minimum wage, a negotiated wage fixing system which allows wages to follow productivity and price increases, a fully-fledged social security system, and decent welfare payments.

The gap deepens

The authoritative annual ‘Davos report’ 2019 by Oxfam64 paints a stark picture: • The fortunes of dollar billionaires increased by 12%, or some $2.5 billion a day, in 2018.

• The 3.8 billion people who make up the poorest half of the world’s population have seen their disposable income fall by 11%.

• The number of billionaires has doubled since the financial crisis.

• In 2017 and 2018, there was one additional billionaire every day.

• In recent decades, the rich and businesses have never paid less tax than they do now.

228

The future of work

• If the richest 1% paid half a percent extra tax, 262 million children would be able to get an education and the lives of 3.3 million people would be saved through better health care.

• In some countries, such as Brazil, the poorest 10% pay a higher percentage of tax on their income than the richest 10%.

• Privatisation of public services often excludes the poorest from access to them. In many countries, education and healthcare are only for the rich.

• Every day, 10,000 people die due to lack of healthcare.

In January 2020, Oxfam once again gave Davos attendees a shot in the arm, focusing on the situation of women in the world: • ‘Economic inequality is out of control: the world’s 2,153 billionaires have more wealth than the 4.6 billion people who make up 60% of the planet’s population.’

• ‘The 22 richest men in the world have more wealth than all the women in Africa.’

• ‘Women and girls put in 12.5 billion hours of unpaid care work each and every day – a contribution to the global economy of at least $10.8 trillion a year, more than three times the size of the global tech industry.’

• ‘Getting the richest one percent to pay just 0.5 percent extra tax on their wealth over the next 10 years would equal the investment needed to create 117 million jobs in sectors such as elderly and childcare, education and health.’

The figures outlined above indicate that the gap between rich and poor in the world is only widening. Winnie Byanyima, then general manager of Oxfam, currently Executive Director of UNAIDS and a fine, committed colleague in the Commission, said: ‘Citizens are angry and frustrated. They are seeing themselves working really hard, but they are seeing that the things that they had expected, a good edu-

Seven challenges for the world of work

229

cation for their children, healthcare when they fall ill, social protection when they get older… are not there for them. At the same time they are seeing a few people running away with wealth and without paying their fair share. Governments must now deliver real change by ensuring corporations and wealthy individuals pay their fair share of tax and investing this money in free healthcare and education that meets the needs of everyone – including women and girls whose needs are so often overlooked.’65 Oxfam convinces not only with figures but also with stories. ‘Anju works sewing clothes in Bangladesh for exports. She often works 12 hours a day, until late at night. She often has to skip meals because she has not earned enough money. She earns just over US $900 a year.’ Or: ‘Lan works in a shoe factory in Vietnam, but a pair of shoes for her son would cost her a full month’s wage’. Most workers in the world are underpaid, especially women. Of the worldwide GDP, income from labour has fallen while income from capital has grown. ‘Governments must create a more equal society by prioritizing ordinary workers and small-scale food producers instead of the rich and powerful’, concludes Oxfam.

ILO research confirms what Oxfam says: it shows that from 2004 to 2017, global labour income fell from 54% to 51% of GDP. On the other side of the balance sheet, income from capital is increasing. One of the reasons is that wages have not been following productivity for many years now. Productivity rose by 2.3% worldwide between 2006 and 2015, while wages only rose by 2.1%. That seemingly small difference represents a considerable amount that went to capital and primarily to those who already are at the top. With the exception of Latin America, already the most unequal continent in the world, inequality has increased in all regions. Whether this positive evolution in Latin America will survive the current political and economic shock waves in that region is highly questionable. Another ILO statistic goes back to 1980. Since then, the income-richest 1% of the world has grown by

230

The future of work

27%; the poorest half of the world’s population has had to make do with just 12%.66 Recent ILO research, also published on the eve of the World Economic Forum in January 2020 in the World Employment Outlook: Trends 2020, went into more depth and uncovered some of the causes of work-related inequalities and working poverty. After nine years of relative stability, the prospect was for an increase of 2.5 million in global unemployment in 2020, mainly as a result of protectionist measures and heightened trade conflicts. A 2.5 million increase in unemployment was feared for 2020 due to protectionism and trade conflicts. Moreover, what had been known for some time but could not be quantified has now been proven. Guy Ryder says: ‘For millions of ordinary people, it’s increasingly difficult to build better lives through work’. Apart from the 188 million unemployed, there is the problem of labour underutilisation. ‘165 million people don’t have enough paid work and 120 million have either given up actively searching for work or otherwise lack access to the labour market. In total, more than 470 million people worldwide are affected.’

The report also looks at labour market inequalities. Using new data and estimates it shows that, at the global level, income inequality is higher than previously thought, especially in developing countries. If all forms of working poverty were added together, it would add up to 630 million workers who have less than US $3.20 a day. That’s 1 in 5 of the working population. This makes it difficult to eliminate poverty by 2030, as Objective 1 of the UN Sustainable Development Agenda prescribes. The report also deals with other types of inequality. For example, there are 267 million young people (15 – 24 years of age) who neither work nor study, a dizzying and alarming number.67 It is not just about the material aspects. Poverty and deprivation also lead to alienation, a sense of not belonging. Contrary to the optimism in progress that has characterised the middle class in established industrial countries for so long, more and more people see neither individually

Seven challenges for the world of work

231

nor collectively the possibility of changing or positively influencing their situation or that of their children. Inequality is a major social risk worldwide. Journalist and opinion maker John Vandaele put it this way: ‘The IMF uses a different rhetoric these days than in the neo-liberal 1980s and 1990s. It recognises that inequality gnaws at economic growth and undermines political stability through the increasing success of populist parties that also question the utility of international organisations…. If capitalism – globalisation – does not become more just, it will destroy itself. This observation has often been made in the past: a world order comes under pressure if it is perceived as unjust. It is reminiscent of the logic applied a hundred years ago to establish the ILO.’68

Challenge 4: Demography and migration The numbers are staggering. While the working-age population (15 64 years old) will fall between now and 2050 everywhere else in the world, and as much as 14% in Europe, it will increase by 12% in Africa; 50.8% of Africans will be between 0 and 24 years old.69 How will we provide enough work and income for all these people? In any case, it will be essential to invest heavily in the transition from the informal to the formal economy, including in Africa. This will improve income distribution, which will not only promote the creation of decent work and fair incomes but is also likely to reduce migratory pressures and have a generally positive effect on social and political stability.

An additional problem arises. On a global scale, the so-called dependency ratio will become an enormous challenge in coming decades.

This is the ratio between the number of people aged over 65 and the number of 15 - 64-year-olds in society. In 2015, globally there were twelve over-65s for every hundred people of working age. In 2030, there will be eighteen. The challenge will be even more acute in developed countries. There, the proportion of older people, the ‘inactive’ population, will rise from twenty-five to no less than thirty-six for every hundred people of working age between 2015 and 2030.

232

The future of work

This says a lot about the quality of health care in developed countries.

People are living longer but at the same time, the figures show the pressure that people of working age will face. Productivity gains are expected to be lower. Pensions, healthcare and care for the elderly will place a greater burden on social security and public finances until 2040, as another baby-boom generation reaches retirement age. Many countries are choosing to raise the retirement age and reduce existing end-of-career measures, but, understandably, this is not without its problems. On the one hand, many people really want a break after a long and arduous career, especially if they started working at a young age. On the other hand, many companies, despite all their lip service, are still not very keen on retaining allegedly ‘expensive and less productive’ over-50s.

It is certainly necessary to increase systematically the number of people who are working, first and foremost by properly identifying why some people cannot find work or why people of working age do not (or cannot) even get into the labour market. And then governments and employers need to be creative in guiding people into the labour market.

Economic migration within the EU or from outside Europe can be a part of that response, even if it alarms people in many Western countries. What people are more open to is managed migration: opening the door to those we need, something that in my country is already largely possible for people with higher qualifications. Few consider the effects on the countries of origin. If all the rich European countries draw the high-potential migrants from developing and emerging countries after having removed their raw materials, then the benefits and costs for those countries will have to be carefully weighed. When I was President of the ACV-CSC, Lech Wałęsa, the founder of the Polish trade union Solidarność, which helped to bring about the fall of the Iron Curtain, told me: ‘Don’t take our nurses away from Poland; we’re going to need them very badly.’

The ILO fears that a number of countries will lose their most skilled labour force through migration, and with them their capacity

Seven challenges for the world of work

233

for growth. The organisation concludes that it is the recipient countries that will benefit. 68% of migrants reside in high-income countries, where they make up 18.5% of the working population. Equally interesting is the fact that the employment rate among migrants is higher than among non-migrants. For male migrants, it is equal to that of non-migrants. Among women, the employment rate of migrants (63%) is much higher than among non-migrants (48.1%).

Migration is a global phenomenon that has been on the rise since the turn of the century. In 2000 there were 173 million migrants worldwide, by 2010 there were already 220 million, and in 2017 there were 258 million. At that time, most migrants were in Asia (80 million), Europe (78 million) and North America (58 million). Nearly two-thirds of migrants either work or are looking for work. There are 164 million working migrants, including 96 million men and 68 million women.

Their median age is 39 years. Worldwide, there are 25.9 million refugees and asylum seekers.70 All studies continue to predict a sharp increase in global migration in the future, although there are large differences between their estimates.

Migrant workers can help meet the needs of our labour market, but labour migration must take place within a broader regulatory framework and contribute to the development of all countries concerned. The transformation from the informal to the formal economy is a necessity if young people in countries of origin are also to have opportunities in the future. The international community can and should contribute to this transition. The Commission says there must be dialogue between the ‘old’ and ‘new’ countries. This is anything but simple – it is not a problem that can be solved with slogans such as ‘in favour’ or ‘against’.

No country can face this challenge alone. Searching for solutions and working together is the aim of the so-called ‘Migration Pact’ – in full, the UN Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration

234

The future of work

(2018). Every word has its meaning: safe, orderly and well-regulated.

No country can control the phenomenon on its own, as some politicians in several countries may claim. International cooperation is necessary. Yet in New York, three EU countries voted against the pact, five abstained, and one did not vote. My country voted in favour, but that positive vote is still not understood by a large part of the population.

Fear must be taken seriously, but not stirred up. But that is what rightwing populist parties do.

Challenge 5: Automation and digitisation In recent decades we have been inundated with new technologies. In just under ten years, our means of communication have changed completely. Thanks to Wi-Fi and 4G (soon to be 5G), the world is coming to us and vice versa. Social media keep us up to date on all kinds of events before the traditional media can do their job: telling what is new and important, checking facts, and providing explanations and clarifications. The news follows the emotions of the day; it is becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish what is important and what is unimportant, or to correctly assess the real scope and meaning of things. We make our reservations, we buy and pay with smartphones. We take photos and videos that we can distribute quickly and store in the cloud just to be on the safe side. Even after working hours or on holiday, we stay connected to work.

New technologies such as artificial intelligence, machine learning and big data have a major impact on our lives and on the world of work. They create opportunities for start-ups and data specialists, software engineers, software architects and full-stack developers who design, develop, test, analyse and install software. They can avoid human error and optimise decision making. Thanks to the new wave of automation, people can leave certain repetitive and dangerous tasks or sub-tasks to machines. The nature of jobs can change totally or partially. We should therefore not focus only on the number of jobs that

Seven challenges for the world of work  

235

will be lost or gained as a result of automation, but above all on the effects it will have on the content and quality of work. They can be positive, but also negative. Just think of insecure gig-work, in which someone is paid per task and is virtually unprotected. In the next section I will list some important concepts in the digitised world of work.

Let us start with the term digitisation itself. The Belgian Supreme Council for Employment defines it as follows: ‘In a broad sense, digitisation can be defined as the adoption and increasing use of information, communication (ICT) and derived technologies (robotics, artificial intelligence, machine learning, the Internet of Things, analysis of big data …) by companies, industries and individuals and its impact on social, economic and societal developments.’71 A number of applications require considerable storage and computing power, and grid computers can help with that. These are interconnected computers that together create tremendous computing capacity.

In Geneva, I have been able to visit the core of the gigantic grid computer of the CERN (European Organization for Nuclear Research), the famous particle accelerator. In order to constantly record the massive quantities of data from the colliding particles and calculate their effects, the researchers opted for linking up geographically dispersed computers, which together form one gigantic computer: the Worldwide Large Hadron Collider Computing Grid. The WLCG links 170 computing centres in 42 countries. Every day, more than two million tasks are performed on the million computer cores. Together they have 1 exabyte of storage (1,000 petabytes or 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 bytes).72 An extension of grid computing is cloud computing, in which data is stored in the cloud, a large, decentralised network of computers.

Much of what follows stems from a combination of digitisation and mobile internet communication. This is the case, for example, with machine learning or automatic learning. We saw an early example of this in 1997, when chess master Kasparov lost a game to an IBM computer programmed by computer scientists and chess players. The human

236

The future of work

brain recognises patterns and relationships between data and knows how to deal with them, and this is the basis for the next step. Now software exists that can similarly identify such patterns and relationships in an infinite mass of data that humans cannot possibly store in their brains. What’s more, that same software can distil rules from this data and use them autonomously without a human having to program them.

Will artificial intelligence leave humanity behind? AI is based on machine learning and can be limited (narrow AI) or broad (general AI). The latter completely replaces human intelligence. The experts at the Centre for the Fourth Industrial Revolution of the World Economic Forum in San Francisco assured the Commissioners that, based on what they know now, general AI is not in sight and probably never will be. But even narrow AI is far-reaching – just think of the navigation system in our smartphones that takes into account the amount of traffic or the obvious value of AI in unravelling our genetic make-up.73 In a television programme of the Flemish broadcaster in Belgium, VRT, pianist and composer Jef Neve was impressed by a composition generated by AI from his three-hour-long, masterly interpretation of Duke Ellington’s jazz classic In a Sentimental Mood.74 But for my part, I didn’t find the inhuman perfection of the music appealing. This example shows that the possibilities of AI are not endless. When it comes to feelings, emotion, creativity, empathy and impulse reactions, AI falls short. Thierry Geerts, CEO of Google Belgium and author of Digitalis: How to Reinvent the World, has found an apt description for the limitations of AI: ‘A smart computer can come up with the best chess moves, but if your house is on fire, it will just keep on playing chess.’75 Geerts is as sceptical as I am. General AI does not and will not reproduce the capacities of the human race. The complexity of human thought and action is not easily equalled. Humankind is special and deserves our utmost respect.

Robotics combines all our scientific insights on AI, mechanics and electronics. In the same VRT report, robots were seen measuring the ripeness of strawberries and planning the harvest. Even though

Seven challenges for the world of work

237

there are still incidents with the testing of self-driving cars, it is clear that they are on their way. And robotic surgery is also a growing specialisation. In the best hospitals it is already an important tool, for example, for performing extremely precise operations. It is clear that artificial intelligence and robot technology are not just things of the future. They are already in operation in many types in companies and service organisations.76 The Internet of Things (IoT): the term sounds futuristic, but the first applications are already familiar to us. These are devices that are connected to the internet and also exchange data, also with each other. It won’t be long before more devices than people use the internet. Already we are kept informed of where the package we ordered online is located and when it will be delivered. Wearables are portable devices with a pedometer, body thermometer, heart rate monitor and a meter for calorie consumption. They are also used to monitor workers.

Smart glasses show us our agenda, messages, the weather forecast and directions to where we need to go. Sensors can constantly measure our blood-sugar level. There are many applications in home automation. The applications, both private and commercial, are inexhaustible. Just think of the data warehouse, which knows where all the products are, can take them out when requested and replenish the stock as needed. The Smart City is another example. The city of Antwerp, together with IMEC (Interuniversity Microelectronics Centre), is experimenting with connection points and sensors that carry out measurements of traffic and air quality. These support policy and may eventually make decisions. We already know drones from the beautiful aerial shots on television, and they are also zooming above our heads at demonstrations nowadays. But they have many other applications, especially in combination with AI. In agriculture, they can help monitor crop growth, water shortage, diseases and pests. In the construction sector, drones are used to safely carry out measurements in places that are difficult to reach. In the healthcare sector, experi-

238 

The future of work

ments are being conducted with the transfer of organs for transplantation. Even relief organisations use drones for the delivery of emergency aid, vaccines and medication.

For the construction sector, Building Information Modelling (BIM) is a game-changer. It is based on a digital model of an existing or projected building. Attached to each component is the necessary information, immediately usable for architects and construction companies. There is also a great deal of experimentation with 3D printing.

A 3D printer makes three-dimensional objects based on digital drawings. The object is built up layer by layer, usually using plastic, ceramic or metal powder. The making of individualised prostheses in this way has already been possible for some time. In China, the United States and Russia, houses are now being built using 3D printers, with a mixture of cement and construction waste. But for the time being, the predicted revolution is not going as fast as was expected ten years ago.

The same may be said for blockchain technology. A block is a transaction and a blockchain is a chain of transactions. Blockchain is often compared to an accounting ledger in which all transactions are recorded, but digitally and centralised. It is a very transparent system: each transaction or block is automatically verified by all participants and then recorded. From that moment on, the note can no longer be adjusted without it being noticed. Fraud is therefore virtually impossible. Thanks to this system, people and parties who do not know each other can still trust each other.

Virtual coins or cryptocurrencies are based on blockchain technology. Examples include bitcoin and etherium. The former is mainly known from its highs and lows on the stock market. The system works like this: when you transfer money and send the transaction to the bitcoin network, the operations are brought together in a cryptographically protected block. The system ensures that no one can spend someone else’s money and prevents the same money from being spent twice. Blockchain technology can also be useful when concluding contracts. Experts indicated during discussions with the Commission

Seven challenges for the world of work  

239

that this technology could be used to monitor the personal acquisition of social security entitlements.

If I use my car less often, I can make it available to my neighbours in exchange for some of their homegrown vegetables. And I would be happy to take care of the children down the street every now and then in return for having some chores done around the house. The sharing economy is a beautiful, social idea. Sailing along on the wave of the digital revolution, trend-setters have seen money to be made with apps or internet platforms on which people can offer services and other people can buy them. But this has little to do with the social function of the sharing economy just described. You can rent out part of your home through Airbnb. For a cheap ride, call an Uber driver. No time to cook? A student or other individual working for Deliveroo, Ubereats or Takeaway.com will arrive by bicycle with a large thermal box on their back. It all seems nice, but often these people work in conditions that are sub-standard at all levels, not to mention their social security (or lack thereof). In Belgium, the government has contributed to the situation by allowing these people to work under provisions of ‘untaxed extra earnings’ (up to €6,250 per year).

And this brings us to new forms of employment mediation. There are different platforms for services and tasks; together they form a new labour market. Mechanical Turk is Amazon’s digital platform that brings together those wanting tasks done and those ready to do them.

Workana focuses on Latin America. TaskRabbit is about chores and odd jobs. These platforms do not take any responsibility for the people who do jobs via their platform. They work without an employment contract between employer and employee. This is what is known as the gig-economy, after the English word gig – a short or quick assignment, not gig as in gigabyte.

There are also service platforms or crowdworking platforms such as Upwork, which offer less tangible tasks such as translation, writing articles, correcting computer programmes, layout, elements of ac-

240

The future of work

counting, etc. The tasks are sometimes auctioned off, piece by piece – piecework is back. Whoever works cheapest gets the job. Workers from all over the world compete with each other. The client can then give an assessment of performance that is accessible to everyone and cannot be disputed.77 But the traditional public and private employment agencies have to deal even more with digital competitors such as Google for Jobs and Facebook, and to a lesser extent LinkedIn and Twitter. In Belgium, the traditional agencies are still doing twice as well as in other countries because they were quick to offer digitised services. Both public and private agencies are regulated by ILO Conventions and therefore also by national legislation. The newcomers are not. This poses problems in terms of the protection of workers and unfair competition.78 Along with Uber and Airbnb, e-commerce has been well established for several years. Small vans deliver products ordered online to homes or pick-up points. Amazon, Coolblue, bol.com and Zalando are specialists in this system, but traditional chain stores have also jumped on the wagon. Smaller shops, too, are trying to join in. But small shopkeepers find it difficult to compete against the prices and enormous choice of e-commerce. Nevertheless, this sector is also pushing against the limits of its growth. Ruthless price competition and ‘free’ delivery and returns weigh heavily on profit margins. This increases pressure on workers, who already work very flexibly at a hectic pace and for low wages. On top of that, they are also the victims of fierce wage and cost competition between countries, even between neighbouring countries such as Belgium and the Netherlands. The latter has a very large number of self-employed people, effectively freelancers, many of whom should in reality have employee status.

The key question in all this is what effects the digital revolution will have on the labour market. To answer this question, we first examine the situation of the labour market in the world, starting with some statistics which can be enlightening.

Seven challenges for the world of work

241

Work in the world, in figures79

• • • •

Out of 7.6 billion people in the world, 3.3 billion are employed.

2 billion workers (61%) are in informal work.

174 million people are unemployed.

More than one fifth of those under 25 (or 65 million) are neither in work nor education.

• Only 48% of women are employed, compared to 75% of men.

• 700 million people live in poverty even though they work.

They have to make do with less than $3.20 per person, per day.

• 516 million additional jobs will be needed by 2030, including 174 million for the currently unemployed.

The data relied on by the Commission, which are presented and commented on here, could not yet take into account the employment effects of COVID-19. These will follow in chapter 13. In addition to the impact on employment, a number of mechanisms – for example, those resulting from digitisation – are likely to apply when the labour market recovers.

Unemployment has been falling in developed countries in recent years. However, there is a relatively high rate of underemployment: people’s capacities are underutilised, and they are unable to work enough hours. In rich countries, there are many complaints about involuntary part-time work. Emerging countries such as Russia and Brazil have been struggling with growing unemployment since 2014. This is mainly due to the collapse of raw material prices. Unemployment is rising in developing countries. Both developing and emerging countries are confronted with declining quality of work. This is the main finding of both the ILO’s World Employment Social Outlook 2019 and a joint study by Eurofound and the ILO, Working conditions in a global perspective.80 Globally, only 48% of women are employed compared to 75% of men. The problem of gender inequality is most acute in North Africa, the Arab countries and South Asia. Of the economically active wom-

242

The future of work

en in Africa, 68% work in agriculture, but this work often brings them little benefit. And their poorly paid work generally comes on top of heavy family duties (see Oxfam 2000).

In general, more than one in five young people (65 million) under the age of 25 are not in a job or in education. In Africa, 30% of the youth population of working age is unemployed. Gender discrimination is also very marked in this group. These figures show that unemployment and informal work affect different parts of the world in different ways. However, having a job is the basic condition for people of working age to be able to participate in society with dignity.

By 2030, 516 million additional jobs will be needed, taking population trends into account. The ILO report quoted above calls into question whether this is still feasible by 2030. However, decent work for all is the crucial Objective 8 of the UN Agenda 2030. This does not necessarily have much to do with automation and digitisation, which many say are actually labour-intensive. This problem has occupied academics, social partners and governments for many years. In the 1980s, I followed the theme of the third industrial revolution from the perspective of the ACV-CSC. It was no different then. So far, each technological revolution has created more and more jobs and increased productivity. Will things be different now?

What do we actually know about the expected relationship between the new technologies and employment? Another set of figures sheds light on the subject.

Automation: A threat to the labour market?

• Worldwide, less than 5% of jobs can be fully automated, but 60% of all jobs can be automated for at least 30% of the tasks involved (source: 2017 McKinsey Global Institute).81 • Although the situation may vary from country to country, in OECD countries an average of 14% of jobs run a high risk of being automated, whether in manufacturing, services or

Seven challenges for the world of work

243

agriculture, 32% are likely to undergo significant changes (source: 2018 OECD).82 • A doomsday forecast is that 47% of workers in the US are at high risk of being replaced by automated processes (source: 2015 Frey and Osborne).83

Even though it is only of national scope, a Belgian study by the sectoral employers’ organisation Agoria in 2018 provides interesting figures.84 It published Shaping the Future of Work in cooperation with the official employment agencies. The Global Consultancy Roland Berger surveyed sixty experts and analysts on their view about the most important trends on the Belgian labour market. Among other things, the study provides a well-documented overview of the impact of digitisation on the number of jobs in the country. The most striking prognosis is that for every job that is lost as a result of digitisation, 3.7 new ones will be created. Demand for labour will therefore increase by 629,000 jobs by 2030. From 2021 until at least 2030, labour demand will exceed supply. Newcomers to the labour market from education and through migration will not suffice: 584,000 vacancies will not be filled if no additional measures are taken.

Of course, the content of many jobs will change dramatically. Agoria also looked at the changes that will take place on the labour market: ‘Work for unskilled manual labourers, cashiers, counter clerks and administrative clerks is decreasing. Work for sales representatives, shop assistants and production operators will change. Work for nursing and care staff, digital experts, scientists and engineers will increase. Work for mobility planners, consumer coaches and information filterers, processors and protectors will be new.’

Agoria concludes with some policy recommendations. Among other things, it says that the knowledge, skills and abilities of 4.5 million workers will need to be strengthened on a regular basis. 310,000 workers and job-seekers will have to retrain for a new, sustainable job.

244

The future of work

The figures in the Agoria study are quite optimistic but seem to be well substantiated. The study crosses sector boundaries and covers the entire economy and healthcare sector. The absolute figures are less important than the trends indicated by the study, about which the OECD also has a positive perspective. The OECD, moreover, wants to get away from the doom and gloom of analysts like Frey and Osborne. The digital revolution offers new opportunities and will create new jobs, even though the transition will be tough. According to the OECD, routine jobs that require little training and are usually low-paid run the highest risk of disappearing. The lowest risk is for jobs that are complex and unstructured and require choices and decisions, as well as jobs that require creativity and original ideas. Almost no risk is run in jobs that require social intelligence, the assessment of people’s reactions, social relationships or guiding and caring for people.

The Global Commission on the Future of Work builds on existing study material and concludes that additional jobs are possible. However, it warns that the impact of transitions should not be underestimated. The Commission therefore believes – quite rightly in my view – that full employment should remain the guiding objective. In doing so, it remains consistent with the UN Sustainable Development Objective 8: ‘Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all’.

Work will always be important: ‘Work sustains us. It is how we meet our material needs, escape poverty and build decent lives. Beyond our material needs work can give us a sense of identity, belonging and purpose. (…) Work also holds collective significance by providing the network of connections and interactions that forge social cohesion.

The way in which we organize work and labour markets plays a major role in determining the degree of equality our societies achieve.’ With these statements, among others, the Commission confirms some basic principles and values of the ILO Constitution and the Declaration of Philadelphia (1944).85

Seven challenges for the world of work

245

Tracking trends and formulating policy objectives are necessary and very useful, but in the meantime, we may not lose sight of the current reality. Companies choose ‘cost optimisation’, in which to take one example 1,900 so called ‘outdated’ workers have to make way for 1,250 newly trained, digitally minded people. So the transition is in full swing. Where can the ‘outdated’ workers go? Do they really have the opportunity to move on to something new? Many run a high risk of ending up in unemployment. Company and public policy places too much of the burden of transition on individual workers. It is up to governments and employers to take their responsibility, together with trade unions, to avoid these shock effects by preparing transitions well, so that people are not simply left behind.

Challenge 6: New ways of working and the quality of work The quality of work and well-being are not easy to define. They are broad, all-embracing concepts that are difficult to express in figures except when it is about safety at work (or lack thereof). And those figures are truly staggering. As a result 2.78 million workers die every year of 320 million known accidents at work and occupational diseases. That is more than 7,600 deaths per day.86 By way of comparison: in 2017 alone, 91,902 people died as a result of wars and terrorism.87 I cannot emphasise enough that every year there are thirty times as many fatal casualties of work as there are casualties of war. Not to mention the many who are disabled for life as a result of an occupational accident or illness.

Technology often helps to eliminate or reduce occupational risks, but technology can also create new risks. Just think of new chemicals or radiation whose effects are unknown. Unemployment and precarious work as well as the hectic, continuous intensity of work can lead to psycho-social problems. Teleworking and ICT-mobile work can increase such work intensity and pressure. New forms of communica-

246

The future of work

tion technology are blurring the boundaries between working time and leisure; we are always accessible and can work from anywhere. In France, the process was deemed serious enough for the adoption of a law on ‘the right to disconnect’ in 2017. This gives workers the right, within an agreed framework, to switch off their smartphones and thus disconnect from their work.88 The increase in burn-outs is the canary in the coal mine: it indicates that the new ways of working are taking their toll. The #MeToo movement shows how the working environment also suffers from abuse of power, violence and sexual harassment. The ILO has been working on these issues for some time. The adoption of the Violence and Harassment Convention (C190) at the Centenary Conference in June 2019 was the culmination of that work and an important victory because it provides a clear guide for the world and an important tool to fight a major scourge.

A great deal has already been achieved in respect of job quality in recent decades, often through mutual agreements. People who are able to work autonomously and creatively love their work, and that is the goal to be pursued. Digitisation can also help to develop interesting jobs that can promote workers’ self-development. New forms of work are emerging and are known as ‘non-standard forms of work or atypical forms of work’ in ILO terminology. These are all forms of work that deviate from the idea of a full-time job for an entire career, or at least for important parts of it. Some of them do not always have a positive effect – sometimes the effects are indeed quite negative. If we were to describe the normal form of employment as an employment contract for an indefinite period of time, 74% of the work in the world is atypical. That figure is a bit scary because it means that only 26% of workers have a full employment contract.

But there is more: in these atypical forms of work, there are many excesses, including unregulated agency work, involuntary part-time or

Seven challenges for the world of work

247

involuntary short-term work, unregulated or insufficiently regulated forms of platform work (such as Uber and Deliveroo), independent working (e.g., as a bogus self-employed person) or work at home, work as a slasher (a person who combines several small jobs), many forms of extremely flexible work, such as on-call contracts, zero-hour contracts, hourly or daily contracts and so on.

To what extent are non-standard forms of work present on the labour market? Even in well-developed countries, it is virtually impossible to get an accurate picture. In early 2017, I was a guest at the first day of the Social Academy of the Federations of Enterprises in Belgium (FEB). The first guest speaker was Denis Pennel of the World Employment Confederation. He came to announce ‘la fin du salariat’, the end of the category of salaried employees. He analysed new work models in this way: they are fragile; the distinction between work and private life blurs; the work is digital; the job mediator is a platform; the salaried employee is supplanted by the freelance; it is a hybrid of salaried and freelance work; employees opt for work content and less for status or function; the work is on demand and we go back to piecework.

The audience that day consisted of business leaders and especially HR managers. Some of what was described was recognisable, but most did not believe that the end of the payroll and the employment relationship had arrived. Companies do call on all kinds of people for specific and/or temporary assignments, but there remains a strong need for a core group of permanent employees. They build up experience, which is necessary for continuity within the company. But workers who remain with the same company throughout their careers are becoming scarcer.

In his book Travail, la soif de liberté (Work, the Thirst for Freedom), Pennel goes one step further and states that ‘after slavery, serfdom, crafts and wage labour, work is finally entering a new era, that of freedom.’89 Is it any coincidence that the ManpowerGroup, an agency that sets itself up as a world leader in ‘contemporary work’, is on the same wavelength?

From a survey in which it interviewed 9,500 employees from 12 coun-

248

The future of work

tries, Manpower concluded ‘that the new generation of work forms is no longer taboo in the minds of employees in 2017. On the contrary, no less than 87% of the sample found the new forms of work to be a valuable option … Not only the companies are looking for new forms of work; the workers also want to work differently. The “one-size-fits-all” model has to make way for the “one-size-fits-one-concept.”’ I think that is a remarkably high percentage. According to Manpower, the new forms of work take root best in countries where there are many millennials and where labour legislation is less strict. In India and Mexico, 97% want to go to such a new form of work; in the US, 94%; and in the UK 90%. Globally, 95% of millennials express interest in new forms of work.

For Belgium, the study states that the employment contract of indefinite duration remains the target. People over 50 see it as a way to organise the end of their career in complete freedom.90 It is fair to recall that 88% of employees in India work in the informal economy, 53.4% in Mexico, 18.6% in the US and 13.6% in the UK.91 If the economy is largely or to a relatively large extent informal, many people have no choice but to hunt for any job to earn an income. In Belgium, too, for several reasons, young people are looking for a job that would give them more freedom and independence, but ultimately, they, too, want more security and protection in the long run. To suggest that everyone would benefit if only so-called ‘rigidities’ could be eliminated – i.e., protective collective agreements and labour legislation – is madness. It resembles the discourse of those who defended unbridled globalisation. Both Pennel and Manpower sell a business model.

Catelene Passchier of the Dutch Trade Union Federation (FNV), my successor as Workers’ Chairperson of the ILO Governing Body, calls it ‘the mystery of the lost employer’.92 Passchier sees three strategies that entrepreneurs use with respect to workers to elude their responsibilities as employers: • ‘You are not an employee’ but a freelancer, a self-employed person…

Seven challenges for the world of work

249

• ‘You are not my employee’ but a sub-contractor, an outsourced worker…

• ‘You are my employee, but with limited rights’, with a part-time or temporary contract, an on-call contract, a zero-hour contract…

The platform economy is likely to continue to grow, although it is difficult to predict how far this growth will take us. We need to start by finding a clear definition. Analysts do not agree on this, so estimates vary widely. In any case, the essential point is that the client and the platform worker are brought together by an online intermediary. They are presented as equals: one wants to have an assignment carried out, the other is free to accept or refuse that assignment. For the following data, I rely on Stijn Broecke, Senior Economist at the OECD. Some sources indicate higher percentages but then they seem to include occasional or additional jobs. Broecke concludes that growth will not be as fast as expected. This is certainly the case for mature economies, but according to indications from emerging economies, the importance of the gig-economy there is rising very sharply. Some sources even quote a figure of 30% to 40%. Reliable data is not yet available, but we can assume that this is the trend.

Platform economy in figures93

• 0.5% of all workers in the US provide their services through online intermediaries.94 • 1% of US adults earned income in any given month between October 2012 and September 2015 from services offered through a platform.95 • 3% of those 15 or older in the UK have already tried gig work.96 • 5% in the Netherlands, Sweden and the United Kingdom do crowdwork on a weekly basis (chores via platform).97

250

The future of work

The HIVA (Hoger Instituut van de Arbeid at KU Leuven, Higher Institute of Labour Studies of the Catholic University of Leuven) aptly summarises the main risks of platform work.

Risks for the platform worker:98

• When it concerns non-material services provision, such as translation, accounting, making e-mail addresses from which ‘likes’ can be sent, etc., work can be done from anywhere in the world, even from ‘cheap countries’, which greatly reduces the level of pay.

• Platform users pull the work to pieces, fragmenting it so that it can be done by many different people in many different places without much prior training.

• Algorithms regulate the link between supply and demand so that - prices can be raised if there is high demand (think of the price of an Uber ride, for example); - a distinction can be made between platform workers by giving the job to those who are most easily and quickly accessible; - platform workers can be monitored and assessed through ratings (reviews and ratings like Booking.com or Airbnb). These ratings are public. Platform workers can be disciplined in this way but have no input or possibility of contesting them.

• There is no employment contract, only terms and conditions. For the rest, it is very easy to get in and out of the relationship. This is attractive but at the same time, workers have to take care of their own workplace equipment, a PC, insurance and social security. There is no replacement income in case of illness or accident.

Seven challenges for the world of work

251

• The platform worker is completely dependent on the person using their services. What happens in case of non-payment, or if intellectual property rights (photos, layout, design) are not respected? In some cases, users can also be disciplined.

• Some platforms and users impose online monitoring through keyboard registration, screenshots or webcams.

• Someone who provides services at home for a platform and undertakes another assignment outside this arrangement can be sanctioned.

In theory, the client and the platform worker are in positions of equality. In practice, the client has a markedly dominant position, as does the platform manager through algorithmic control. Examples presented to the Commission showed that some platforms work with algorithms that contain built-in gender biases. I know that there are exceptions to the rule, rare platforms that do provide adequate protection. But in general it can be said that without labour law and social regulation, platform work is a system of exploitation based on the nineteenth-century model. It is striking that judicial cases in several countries are gradually moving towards the recognition of platform workers as employees.

Challenge 7: New business models An important aspect of globalisation is the increasing ‘financialization’ of companies, with the focus on short-term financial returns. In 2015, portfolio investments and financial derivatives accounted for about 70% of global financial flows, while only 30% were stable direct investments. This phenomenon may encourage companies to adopt more short-term and risky strategies and to move away from productive investment and favour income from capital to the detriment of labour. This is one of the main causes of increasing inequality.

252

The future of work

The so-called shareholder value model, which is primarily aimed at short-term returns, is causing problems for many companies. They are encouraged to buy back their shares or take other measures to increase the short-term value of the company rather than investing in the longer term, which is important for the sustainability of the company and for employment. Governments should consider what measures can be taken in combination with corporate tax reform to discourage the buying back of shares on the open market.

Major fiscal policy reforms are needed to safeguard public finances.

This requires greater efforts to reduce tax avoidance and evasion through international cooperation and increase transparency. The creation of a ‘Global Financial Register’ that records financial asset owners around the world could help to achieve this.

During the World Economic Forum in Davos in January 2019, the Dutch historian and opinion maker Rutger Bregman sternly addressed a room full of billionaires: ‘1,500 private planes flew here to hear Sir David Attenborough talk about how we are destroying our planet. But nobody talks about what it’s really about: rich people who don’t pay a fair tax contribution. It’s like I’m at a meeting of firefighters and no one’s allowed to talk about water … Stop talking about charity and start talking about taxes.’ Bregman thinks it’s nonsense that higher taxes on big capital wouldn’t work. In the 1950s, marginal income tax in the US peaked at 91% for the super-rich. Bregman’s inspiring intervention went around the world: it was viewed millions of times online and received congratulations from the American Democratic politician Bernie Sanders and many others.99 I couldn’t have put it better. I already noted in part 2 about ‘the world of work’ that, in the past, the programmes of the United Nations, including the ILO, were funded to a greater extent by member states. That support is decreasing, and now more and more appeals are being made to the charity funds of big companies, for example, to finance the 17 Sustainable Development Goals for 2030. Often these are

Seven challenges for the world of work

253

companies that do not respect workers’ rights, such as McDonalds.

For them, these funds make up a fraction of their profits, but they benefit by buying the legitimacy of the UN. Anand Giridharas, author of Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World, denounces companies like IT giant Dell that do not want to pay higher taxes but pick good causes to support: ‘It is a group of people who have been dodging taxes on an unprecedented scale for years, successfully lobbying governments for deregulation that is good for them, but bad for the rest … The idea of “doing good” has become a kind of lubricant to make it easier to do evil.’100 This is the world upside down, but apparently the multilateral organisations and charities cannot fight against it. What’s more, the companies are warmly welcomed in the UN headquarters in New York, because for the time being there is no alternative. It is up to world leaders and the international financial institutions to put things in order. Paul Scheffer, professor of European studies and NRC columnist, sums it up aptly: ‘Social cohesion – say civilisation – is built on just taxes.’101 New rules are needed for the digital economy, for example, replacing taxation based on physical presence by taxation at the source of profits. Taxes on financial transactions can increase much-needed revenue while discouraging undesirable business practices. To meet the urgent need for public funds for infrastructure and public services, world leaders and national politicians need to be bolder.

254

The future of work

12 Ten recommendations for a reinvigorated social contract

We have outlined seven disruptive trends which are complex, diverse and yet interconnected. Together, these challenges also generate momentum, a moment with many opportunities that we have to seize.

The social contract as key This is not the first time that fundamental disruption in the world of work has called for a global response. This was also the case in 1919, when the ILO came into being. This was explicitly stated by several Commission members: ‘The foundation of the ILO was the most ambitious social contract ever.’ The founders established the ILO to draw up policies and standards to make working conditions humane. They started from the basic principle that labour is not a commodity and that people have the right to pursue material prosperity and self-development in freedom and dignity, under conditions of economic security and equal opportunities. The Commission was convinced that these principles continue to be valid and relevant to navigate the current transitions successfully.

Applying the international principles of the ILO, a wide range of programmes and interventions has been developed in many countries and regions at different levels of development. These national or regional social contracts have had a strong impact on the relationship between government and citizens, social groups, workers and businesses. They have helped ensure that workers receive a fair share of the

 

255

fruits of progress in return for their contribution to growth and prosperity, with respect for their rights. They have also had to protect them from the sharp edges and excesses of the market economy.

The strength of these social contracts has always been linked to the quality of social dialogue between the three main actors. This dialogue remains the best guarantee for fair and sustainable solutions to the most difficult problems in the world of work. At the same time, the Commission was aware of the continuing unacceptable inequalities between and within communities and between and across generations.

Because the Commission’s report, ‘Work for a brighter future’, lays out fundamentally important recommendations, I have given a great deal of attention to it in this book. In it the Commission says that there is no need for a new social contract, but that the existing one needs to be revised and strengthened through new approaches. It must become a powerful lever.

The term ‘new social contract’ is sometimes also used by those who are seeking to revise a number of earlier institutions and agreements and the rules and rights that followed from them, to replace them with a new framework that would be less of a hindrance to the free pursuit of profit. So it is significant that the diverse and authoritative Commission has reconfirmed the value of these earlier basic institutions and agreements, which have been built on the ILO’s fundamental values.

I am convinced, together with the ITUC, that ILO standards, Conventions and Recommendations are absolutely indispensable, but they still do not prevent certain countries and companies from flouting internationally recognised workers’ rights. More faith, more political will and more decisiveness are therefore needed. Only in this way can we strengthen the quality of the fabric of our societies and offer a dignified place to the millions of people who have been left behind.

A strengthened social contract requires a new approach, one that places people and their work at the heart of social and economic poli-

256

The future of work

cy and of business. In short, we need a people-centred investment agenda. One that makes work dignified, formalises informal work, puts an end to in-work poverty, increases productivity and reinforces investment in the real economy and innovation. To achieve this, the Commission sees three areas of action: investing in people’s opportunities and capacities, investing in the institutions of work, and investing in decent and sustainable work.

Delivering the social contract: a human-centred agenda Investing in people is the cornerstone of an enhanced social contract.

A proactive policy means using new technologies to serve people and society and not the other way around. Workers need to be equipped to navigate transitions, to strengthen their adaptability and to cope with the risks they run. But it must not be a one-way street: technology can and must also be adapted to people.

Within this first area of action, the Commission identifies four concrete key issues or recommendations: a universal right to lifelong learning, support for transitions, a measurable programme for gender equality and universal, guaranteed and lifelong social protection. For each recommendation, I first quote the Commission’s strong appeal, and I then briefly explain what is involved.

Recommendation 1: lifelong learning for all ‘We call for formal recognition of a universal entitlement to lifelong learning and the establishment of an effective lifelong learning system.’

The universal or global right to education should be extended to a universal right to lifelong learning for every worker. This right will need to be realised at the national level, perhaps through national leg-

Ten recommendations for a reinvigorated social contract

257

islation and/or collective agreements. The realisation of the right to learning requires a concerted approach by governments, employers and workers as well as educational institutions, for example, through special funds or social insurance. Adequate education presupposes the anticipation of future transformations. People must be able to adapt their abilities and skills in function of the concrete new job opportunities that emerge. But lifelong learning is about more than just the knowledge, skills and abilities needed for work. It must also contribute to people’s self-development so that they have a place in society and can continue to participate meaningfully in it.

Recommendation 2: supporting people through transitions ‘We call for more investment in the institutions, policies and strategies that will support people through future of work transitions.’

It is important that we leave no one behind as transformative changes impact the world of work. Young people – young workers and young entrepreneurs – are the future. If they cannot connect with working life, then there is a big problem, for them and for society. Unemployed young people deserve extra guidance and personalised training combined with work. The principle of equal pay for work of equal value should apply to young people in employment. In many countries this is politically sensitive. The reasoning is that minimum wages for young people should be lowered in order to promote their recruitment, but this differs from the Commission’s view.

We must also focus on interaction and cooperation between regions and countries with an ageing population, such as Europe, and those with a young population, such as Africa. This can benefit the labour market and the development of both and be a part of good demographic and migration policy. This is also the intention of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration, a pact that sets out the guidelines which can really make migration safe, orderly

258

The future of work

and regular. The ILO has developed the employment section of this migration pact. The aim is to improve the situation, both in countries of origin and in receiving countries. No one denies that finding the best possible balance in migration policy is immensely difficult and delicate, but there is no other choice.

Older people, with their immense experience, are also extremely valuable to the world of work. The Commission advocates an active society in which people of all ages play their part. Anyone who wants to remain economically active in old age must be able to do so. Adapted and reduced working time arrangements, teleworking, the combination of work and retirement can make this possible. But the right to a pension from a given age should never be called into question. The Commission did not want to say what that age should be.

In my opinion, the Commission links the term long-life active society a little too loosely to this question. I have pointed out to my fellow Commissioners that they are a bit too quick to take their own situation as a starting point. Unfortunately, the luxury of choosing what to do as long as you feel like it and your state of health allows it is not the reality for most people. Many are confronted with the accumulated burden of a life in work and the resulting physical and mental conditions that result from it. Working under management and supervision for many years going through various far-reaching transitions during the course of a career, feeling dependent – these things impose their limits.

Public employment agencies play a crucial role in guiding people through transitions. Digitisation of some of their services can be very useful, but personal advice and guidance continue to be necessary. It is not only public employment agencies that need to reorient themselves; dialogue with the private employment agencies about their role is also necessary. Earlier in this book, I indicated that digital employment platforms (such as Google for Jobs and LinkedIn) now play an important role as intermediaries in job searches. Contrary to the agencies, their work is not regulated. Experience has shown that such regulation is necessary.

Ten recommendations for a reinvigorated social contract  

259

Following on from its first recommendation on lifelong learning, the Commission advocates social insurance providing paid working time for education and training to help workers strengthen their employability. All this should be part of a strategy agreed upon by governments together with the social partners. Transition agreements between employers’ and workers’ organisations at the sectoral level are also strongly recommended.

Recommendation 3: a transformative agenda for gender equality ‘We call for a transformative and measurable agenda for gender equality for the future.’

Gender equality requires a policy agenda with measurable impacts.

Progress towards gender equality has been going on for decades but it is far too slow. Gender equality is not only a human right; it is also a precondition for a balanced society and economy. Where women participate fully in policy and decision-making, economies are stronger and more productive.

Women still do 75% of unpaid care and housework. This distribution needs to be more even, and this can be achieved by focusing on policy initiatives concerning childcare, care facilities, support for care at home, forms of time credit … not only men, but also the community and more specifically, governments must assume a greater share of the care burden.

Measuring is knowing and what is measured counts. Unpaid work must be made visible and quantified. Wage transparency is also an important means of highlighting and eliminating gender pay inequality. Moreover, research shows that algorithms used in employment decisions often have built-in bias against women. This is of course unacceptable.

We need to develop clear means of action and equality plans with defined objectives and then monitor and regularly review them. It goes

260

The future of work

without saying that women have a crucially important role to play in this. They must participate actively in the decision-making of policy institutions, governments, employers’ organisations and trade unions.

Women are the most frequent victims of violence and harassment at work. The recent adoption of ILO Convention 190 on Violation and Harassment is an important achievement, and not only for women.

Recommendation 4: strengthening social protection ‘We call for guaranteed universal social protection from birth to old age.’

Social protection – and preferably social security – is a human right and essential to enable workers and their families to navigate transitions.

These can be transitions to other companies and/or sectors, to other work status (e.g., from employee to self-employed status or vice versa), to other regions or countries. Severance arrangements and social security benefits must build bridges; social security entitlements must be portable across borders, including for digital platform workers. Strong social protection, starting with so-called social protection floors, is also an important element of the UN 2030 Sustainable Development Goals.

Social protection should be available to workers in all forms of work, including atypical ones and those working on a self-employed basis.

This approach is reflected in the new European Directive on Transparent and Predictable working conditions, which aims at providing adequate social protection for atypical contracts and the self-employed, on the initiative of former European Commissioner Marianne Thyssen. Social protection also has to be provided for workers in the informal economy.

The Commission advocates strong social protection based on principles of solidarity and risk-sharing to meet people’s needs and aspirations throughout the life cycle. A major concern is of course the sus-

Ten recommendations for a reinvigorated social contract

261

tainability – i.e., the affordability – of social protection systems, which are now under pressure from demographic trends, declining returns on pension investments, and declining tax revenues. However, individual insurance is insufficient, and systems based on employers’ and workers’ social security contributions also need to be complemented by tax in most cases.

If more people remain active for longer in a manner which is respectful of their capacities, preferences and needs, this pressure can be reduced. On the revenue side, the reallocation of public expenditure and/or the increase of some taxes and/or social security contributions can be considered. Making sufficient resources available is obviously crucial. As the financial situation of each country is very different, the Commission speaks in general terms and does not make specific recommendations. However, it is clear about the approach to be taken to the high-tech giants who largely escape paying social security contributions and taxes. This is dealt with in recommendation 10 below.

Increasing investments in the institutions of work Investing in people is not enough. There must also be stronger commitment to the institutions and regulation of work. The Commission says: labour is not a commodity to be traded on the market like a raw material or a product. Workers are people and people have rights, needs and ambitions. International, European, national and regional regulations must correct the imbalance between capital and labour and ensure fair labour relations. The building blocks of a just society include laws, regulations, employment contracts, employers’ and workers’ organisations, collective agreements, labour administrations and labour inspectorates. On these institutions depend the chances of success of the social contract.

Transformations in the world of work require a revitalisation and strengthening of institutions through a universal labour guarantee,

262

The future of work

collective representation of interests, and harnessing technology for the cause of decent work. Action in these three areas is necessary to formalise the informal economy, to reduce inequality and working poverty, and to give work dignity.

Recommendation 5: establishing a universal labour guarantee ‘We call for a Universal Labour Guarantee including fundamental workers’ rights, an ‘adequate living wage’, limits on hours of work and ensuring safe and healthy workplaces.’

As work becomes more diversified, new ways must be found to provide at least basic protection for all workers. For the Commission, it is clear that the employment relationship remains the centrepiece of labour protection. New forms of work call for efforts to review and, if necessary, clarify and adapt the scope of laws and regulations in order to provide effective protection for all. The Commission therefore does not advocate the creation of new work categories. Indeed, that would lead to the ineffective and confusing multiplication of legal concepts.

In any case, every worker, with or without a formal contract or regardless of their status, must be protected. Companies, entrepreneurs, subcontractors and intermediaries must respect this minimum level of employment protection in order to safeguard against unfair competition and guarantee a level playing field for all companies. This is not new. In the Treaty of Versailles, the founders of the ILO did not want to leave any workers behind. At the time, they provided as follows: ‘… improvement of those conditions…’ of all workers ‘…is urgently required: as, for example by the regulation of the hours of work, including the establishment of an maximum working day and week, the regulation of the labour supply, the prevention of unemployment, the provision of an adequate living wage, the protection of the worker against sickness, disease and injury arising out of his employment, the protection of children, young persons and women, provision for old

Ten recommendations for a reinvigorated social contract

263

age and injury, protection of the interest of workers when employed in countries other than their own, recognition of the principle of freedom of association, the organisation of vocational and technical education and other measures.’ It was important then, and it still is today.

At a time when socioeconomic futurologists and gurus are announcing the end of the salaried work and the employment contract, the Commission calls for the employment relationship to remain the centrepiece of labour protection. This is one of the gems of the report.

A second gem is the Universal Labour Guarantee. In the ILO, four rights have already been recognised as automatically and universally binding – regardless of whether they have been ratified nationally – the 8 ILO fundamental labour Conventions on freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining; freedom from forced labour and freedom from discrimination, as well as the elimination of child labour. The Commission now wants to add a set of basic working conditions: an adequate living wage, maximum limits on hours of work, and safe and healthy workplaces. The Commission’s recommendation is therefore a strong call to broaden the existing base to include the right to health and safety, limits on working time and hours, and decent pay.

All elements of the Universal Labour Guarantee somehow provide answers to key current and future challenges. They are interconnected and mutually reinforce each other. Think, for example, of the nearly three million deaths a year as a result of occupational accident or diseases. Not only better safety protection, but also limiting the number of working hours has a positive effect on safety and health. An adequate living wage helps to combat child labour and forced labour, which are often the result of working poverty.

This base can be built upon nationally through collective agreements concluded following negotiations, or legal provisions agreed through tripartite discussions and consultations. In this way, uncertainty and inequality are reduced. Industrial relations are strength-

264

The future of work

ened and the scope of employment protection broadened. This ensures that all workers – whether they work part-time or full-time, on a temporary or permanent contract, on call or occasionally, hired via a temporary employment agency or a digital platform – enjoy at least the same minimum level of protection. For many workers, this can offer a pathway to making the transition from informal to formal work.

In combination with the ‘social protection floor’, it would also be a powerful tool in the fight against poverty.

Recommendation 6: expanding time sovereignty ‘We call for measures that create working time autonomy that meets the needs of both workers and enterprises’ The reduction of working time has always been linked to increasing productivity. It will be no different in the future. New technologies offer the possibility to do work anywhere and at any time. But they make the boundary between work and private time wafer-thin, and this can actually lead to an increase in working time. Governments, workers and employers will have to find new ways to set limits, for example, following the French example and guaranteeing the right to disconnect digitally.

Too many workers (36.1%) work an excessive number of hours. For the Commission, this is more than 48 hours per week, which reflects the provisions of the very first Convention adopted by the ILO. In practice, excessive working hours are first and foremost a problem for women, who are still the main caregivers. Many workers have no choice and have to work many hours just to make ends meet. At the other end of the spectrum, there are many people with too few hours; they want to work more to earn enough. For another group of workers, working hours are extremely variable and unpredictable, with no guarantee of sufficient paid hours. Working time problems are therefore highly diverse.

Ten recommendations for a reinvigorated social contract

265

Workers need more time sovereignty in order to have a healthy balance in their lives. This term came to us in the 1980s from Germany (Zeitsouveränität). The then future President of the European Commission, Jacques Delors, started a similar debate in France with his report ‘Le temps choisi’. My organisation, the ACV-CSC, built on it, with the best result being the introduction of the right to time credit in Belgium. The Commission calls on governments, employers and workers to develop working time arrangements that extend the options available to workers. This will enable them to better reconcile their work and private lives while also meeting the companies’ needs for flexibility.

In developing countries, governments and social partners need to increase productivity in order to improve both income and working time. Urgent action is needed to restore the dignity of workers with ‘oncall’ contracts. The Commission proposes to guarantee them a predictable minimum number of working hours. Measures are also needed to compensate for variable hours through premium pay for work that is not guaranteed and for stand-by periods, when workers are required to be available for urgent maintenance or other interventions.

Recommendation 7: revitalizing collective representation ‘We call for public policies that promote collective representation and social dialogue.’

Governments, employers and trade unions are the actors of the social contract and operate through work institutions and social dialogue. Social dialogue is a building block for democracy at work and in society. Negotiations make it possible to adapt employment protection to the specificities of sectors and companies. This is the vision of the Commission.

The members of the Commission are particularly well aware that social dialogue does not exist everywhere, primarily because in a number of countries genuine freedom of association does not exist, or be-

266

The future of work

cause the right to negotiate is not respected. This is the main reason why in a number of countries, social dialogue hardly works, or does not work at all. Even in the industrialised countries where consultation has played a strong role, it has been reduced in many cases. Trade unions have always had to fight for their existence, but they were once stronger. Under the leadership of JosĂŠ Manuel Barroso, the European Commission and many EU Member States reacted to the long crisis of 2008 keeping workers quiet and limiting the role of trade unions. Fortunately, this policy has been reversed to some extent under the Juncker Commission, and we hope that this will continue with the Von der Leyen Commission. But social dialogue is like democracy: it is the most difficult method of work.

Trade unions are also finding things more difficult because of the rise of new forms of work. People who work all hours of the day, at different locations, are more difficult to reach than employees who work in the same space within a certain time frame. It is part of the business models of internet platforms to appeal to young people on the grounds of the independence and so-called freedom of choice on offer and which makes them flexibly deployable. Many young people believe that they have sufficient strength to look after themselves on their own. But as we have seen, these platforms escape all obligations of an employer: they do not pay taxes or social security. And who suffers as a result?

Trade unions have existed in all eras; they already existed in the Roman Empire. In spite of all the obstacles, they keep coming back, sometimes in different forms. If trade unions are pushed down now, new corporatist organisations will emerge of workers who are not satisfied with how they are being treated.

But despite all the adverse pressure, the work of trade unions is still strong. The International Trade Union Confederation represents 207 million members from 331 national organisations in 163 countries.

7% of all workers in the world are members of a trade union. That may not seem like much, but there is no organisation, no NGO for any

Ten recommendations for a reinvigorated social contract  

267

purpose that is stronger. The ITUC is the legitimate representative of workers worldwide.

Several recent high-profile trade union and workers’ actions in the world:

• On 1 November 2018, 20,000 Google employees from more than 40 different offices walked out to protest against the company’s handling of complaints of sexual abuse. The facts were hushed up and the male perpetrators were paid millions in farewell bonuses. The Google staff demanded social dialogue.

• When poor working conditions and lack of respect from company management became too much for the workers at Ryanair, they went to the trade union movement and a successful European strike was organised.

• Deliveroo’s young workers have already made themselves heard in several countries, including Belgium.

• The e-commerce giant Amazon has experienced strikes in several of its European operations because of work pressure and working conditions.

The majority of Commission members did not have direct experience with trade unions, but they were familiar with the world of work. The members were aware of the fact that reducing employees to individual representatives of their own labour situation and interests is not a real option, unless individual arrangements are concluded within a collectively negotiated legal framework or a collective labour agreement.

The Commission rightly states that the effective implementation of the social contract requires a revitalisation of social dialogue. The concentration of economic power and decline in the coverage and effectiveness of collective bargaining have contributed to increasing in-

268

The future of work

equality within countries. Changes in the economy and in legislation, combined with increasingly diverse forms of work and the informalisation of work, make it more difficult to represent workers, as the Commission also acknowledges.

The Commission gave advice to trade unions. Workers’ organisations need to strengthen their representativeness. Governments must support them in this, but they themselves must also use innovative organising techniques – including digital technology – and devise strategies to reach out to the different types of workers, including those in the informal economy, and include them in their structures. They should enter into alliances with other civil society organisations in order to have better insights into the complexity of society. But NGOs are not a substitute for representative organisations, says the Commission. It also sees that there is no quick fix for organising workers in digital platforms, women in the informal economy or homeworkers.

The Commission also refers to micro and small enterprises in the informal economy, which are usually not represented by employers’ organisations. Large enterprises, multinationals and internet giants who can directly influence public policy find little added value in the collective representation of their interests by national employers’ organisations. So, employers’ organisations may need to adapt their services to new types of enterprises and their changing needs.

To deliver the social contract, the Commission sees merit in works councils, information and consultation arrangements, and other forms of worker representation. It also mentions the representation of workers on company boards. It avoids referring explicitly to individual countries, but it is clear that this is linked to the German system of Mitbestimmung, or co-determination.

‘Collective bargaining is a fundamental right and a powerful tool for economic success and social equity, not least in times of transformational change. Tripartite social dialogue allows opportunity for the partners to the social contract to consider the broader societal issues that change brings and to guide policy responses’, says the Commis-

Ten recommendations for a reinvigorated social contract

269

sion. Member states, regional government groupings (such as the EU or the African Union) and multinational enterprises, international trade union organisations and employers’ organisations are called upon to follow this path.

Another strong recommendation concerns freely negotiated pay: ‘Low productivity, stagnant wage growth and rising inequality demand an investment in wage-setting institutions where current policies have fallen short. Wage policies need to be revitalized through an appropriate application of statutory minimum and collectively bargained wages.’ The Commission also sees merit in negotiating wages in the informal sector.

This requires that the conditions for free collective bargaining are met, with representative actors and with a government that guarantees their freedom and independence. To this end, fundamental ILO Conventions must be universally ratified and applied.

However, there is one point in the report that I find too weak.

There is little in the text about multinational companies’ respect for workers’ rights and ILO standards. Yet this hot, topical and extremely urgent issue has been discussed in the ILO in recent years again. In 2017, the four-decades-old Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy was updated.

And at the 2016 International Labour Conference, a roadmap was drawn up for dealing with labour problems in global supply chains.

This discussion has not yet been concluded, but it is positive that there are already a few hundred examples of cross-border social negotiations that have led to international framework agreements. This theme was discussed at length in chapter 7.

Recommendation 8: technology for decent work ‘We call for the use of technology in support of decent work and a “human-in-command” approach to technology.’

270

The future of work

Technology, artificial intelligence and robotics offer endless possibilities to improve work: think of job placement, inspection and administration. Blockchain technology can be used to ensure the payment of wages and the ‘portability’ of social security rights for migrants, or to track the payment of social security contributions for the crowdworkers of digital platforms.

At the invitation of the Social and Economic Council of Flanders and the Flemish Government in Belgium, I had the opportunity to speak with Louis Roy, CEO of the Canadian OPTEL Group. His company has developed technology that can be used to develop a multi-purpose tracking system via satellite imagery, data, blockchain and artificial intelligence. He gives the example of the preservation of the world’s forest and woods, the extraction of raw materials, and the progress of products along the supply chain. But this technology can just as easily be used to check whether children are working, how long employees work, whether and how much they are paid, what is wasted, a company’s ecological footprint, you name it. So the technology to monitor even working conditions within international supply chains already exists.102 New technologies generate and collect a mass of data. The example above shows that this can definitely be positive. But caution is called for. Whether or not technology is enriching for people depends on fundamental choices about the design and layout of the workstation and the way in which workers are involved or not. The Commission endorses the human in command approach, the human-led artificial intelligence that ensures that final decisions are made by humans rather than algorithms. Algorithmic management and monitoring and control by sensors must be regulated and restricted to protect the dignity of workers. Unfortunately, some algorithms discriminate, for example in recruitment or promotion processes. Therefore, there must be accountability standards. These must make transparent the hypotheses and choices made by the designers of the algorithms, put

Ten recommendations for a reinvigorated social contract

271

them in context and adjust them if necessary. When we think of privacy risks, we generally think of consumers, but the risk to workers is even greater. Workers need to know what kind of monitoring takes place, and they must have access to their own data and the right to report problems to regulatory authorities.

It cannot be said too often: workers are neither commodities nor robots. We saw just how far some employers are ready to go for more and better in 2016, in the case of the company Newfusion in Mechelen (a town in Flanders, Belgium), which now has an American majority shareholder. The Commission was shocked when I told it that this company had had a chip implanted in its employees – albeit on a formally voluntary basis – which is a technology used to identify dogs and cats. Apart from the fact that, from a legal perspective, this is in conflict with the right to physical integrity, such a practice is ethically completely unacceptable. It turns the worker into the property of the company, and we all know what that practice is called.

The debate on technology is too often limited to a discussion of the number of jobs created and destroyed and the need for retraining. The people-centred agenda as seen by the Commission is also about the wider role of technology. Technology can free workers from onerous or hazardous work, from dirty or mind-numbing work. But technologydriven processes can also alienate workers from their jobs. Automation can reduce human control, autonomy and work content, leading to a reduction in job satisfaction and even to a reduction in the workers’ own capacities.

Similarly, digital work platforms can provide opportunities for workers. But it is highly problematic that platform jobs are now mostly low paid and that there are no mechanisms to tackle unfair treatment. There is still much to be done by the social partners and public authorities to develop the necessary regulations.

For its part, the ILO should not only develop principles for data protection and decent work, but also draw up rules specific to digital

272

The future of work

platforms. To this end, the ILO Maritime Labour Convention could be used as a model: it is able to operate far beyond national borders. A Convention on work platforms would be a major breakthrough.

Increasing investment in decent and sustainable work In the third area of action of the people-centred agenda, the Commission points to how transitions can be translated into decent and sustainable work.

Recommendation 9: transforming economies to promote decent and sustainable work ‘We call for incentives to promote investments in key areas that promote decent and sustainable work’.

The 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda of the United Nations advocates full employment and decent work for all. So does the Commission. And the good news is that today’s challenges and those of the future offer real employment opportunities. The health sector is one of the most obvious areas for major investment programmes. According to calculations by the ILO and the international financial institutions, the revaluation and formalisation of care would create 475 million jobs by 2030. The multiplier effect of public spending on healthcare activities, education and other social services is particularly high. It creates three times more jobs than comparable spending in construction, a sector known for its stimulus effect on the economy and employment.

The green economy also offers many opportunities for job creation. Implementing the Paris Climate Agenda would mean a loss of 6 million lasting jobs on the one hand but would also create 24 million new jobs on the other. Investments in renewable energy and sustaina-

Ten recommendations for a reinvigorated social contract

273

ble construction are not only good for large companies; climate and energy transitions also encourage SMEs to innovate and apply more efficient technologies.

The rural economy is a third key sector crying out for investment.

40% of all workers worldwide work in this sector, mostly informally.

Sustainable agriculture requires targeted policies that encourage farmers to produce a mix of food and other crops, which is good for food security and a decent livelihood. This requires a transformation to agro-ecological production techniques.

Investments in physical, digital and social infrastructure are a final example. Transport networks, housing, schools, basic utilities such as water, energy, sanitation … To finance investments on this scale, the private sector can and must also play its part as well, together with the public sector. Governments need to control the accumulation of public debt and their spending must be transparent. Developing countries can rely on regional development banks and international financial institutions.

Recommendation 10: shifting incentives: towards a human-centred business and economic model ‘We call for the reshaping of business incentive structures and for supplementary indicators of progress towards well-being, environmental sustainability and equality’.

Through their policies and regulations, governments need to encourage long-term investment. The private sector also has an essential role to play in the people-centred agenda, but under pressure from the financial markets it is often more focused on short-term financial objectives. The Commission encourages private companies to opt for long-term policies and financial goals. It makes two proposals. On the one hand, it advocates close involvement of stakeholders and other interested parties. Companies should, among other things, be accounta-

274

The future of work

ble for the effects of their policies on the community, for example, through advisory boards of stakeholders. On the other hand, longterm success should take precedence over short-term profit. This can be achieved, for example, by abolishing financial reporting on a quarterly basis, and by developing incentives that can encourage shareholders to invest in the long term. Pension funds can also play a role in this by adopting long-term investment strategies.

An effective, fair fiscal policy is indispensable for the financing of decent and sustainable work. Combating tax evasion, in particular by international tech companies, is essential. Apple, Amazon, Alibaba, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Weibo, Huawei and others must be forced to pay taxes on the profits they make from the extraction, processing and sale of data, which are the new raw materials of the global economy. It is up to the G20, the international financial institutions, the OECD and the European Union to take up the gauntlet and develop new, efficient systems. Meanwhile, 127 countries have agreed on the need to tax companies around the world differently. This is a breakthrough. The results of the ongoing discussions are also going to the G20. France, despite the threat of US sanctions, has been the first to take up the challenge by introducing the Gafa tax in its own country and so set an example. (Gafa is an acronym for Google, Apple, Facebook and Amazon.) France is also increasing pressure within the EU.103 Interestingly, the European Commissioner for Competition Policy, Denmark’s Margrethe Vestager, had this to say on the subject of her former jurisdiction: ‘If we do not adapt business tax as we developed it centuries ago to the way we create value today, we will lose business tax as a source of state income. Because everything is being digitised. Traditional sectors such as agriculture will also create a large part of their value through data. This industrial revolution is not over: artificial intelligence is upon us. It is an obligation for Europe to ensure that technology remains at the service of society and mankind.

Europe must also proclaim ethical guidelines to accomplish this.’ As it

Ten recommendations for a reinvigorated social contract

275

is still difficult to find a European solution, Vestager believes that there is justification for individual Member States to tax digital companies in order to put pressure on Europe and the world.104 GDP is too limited a benchmark for assessing a country’s economic performance. There is also need to take account of welfare, working conditions, environment, climate and income distribution. Economic performance should be assessed on the basis of the shared improvement in living standards for all parts of the population. Better measurement is therefore a precondition for socially responsible and distributive policy. The Commission recommends the elaboration of a measuring instrument with three indicators: • an indicator for unpaid work in the service of families and communities. This can encourage governments to adopt more social policies; • an indicator measuring the effects of economic activity, in particular on the environment and on health; • an indicator measuring the redistributive and equitable aspects of economic growth, including household income growth, access to education, health and housing.

One final caveat: I want to make clear that simply measuring and knowing more is not enough. For that, however, it is necessary to convince the member states not to be hypnotised by the single reference point of GDP as the dominant indicator, but rather to draw inspiration from new indicators in their social and policy decisions.

Where do we go from here?

Taking responsibility There is a big gap between the impact of the transitions which are transforming the world of work formations and the degree to which

276

The future of work

we are prepared for them. If we don’t act, there is a high risk that this imbalance and uncertainty will become even greater and that the tension between a small group of winners and a large group of losers will continue to grow. The Commission calls on all countries to develop a national strategy for the Future of Work in dialogue with the social partners and on the basis of its recommendations.

With the UN 2030 agenda, the international community has already taken important steps. It is a very good roadmap. The Commission believes that the recommendations it has presented can make an important contribution to the realisation of that agenda, first and foremost Objective 8, on decent and productive work for all.

The Commission also sees a number of responsibilities for the ILO. It must: • Ensure that it is the international reference point for policy analysis on the people-centred agenda and its 10 recommendations; • Act on the universality of its mandate, to further address the situation of informal workers; • Review ILO standards (the Conventions and Recommendations) to assess their relevance, whether they are up to date and whether their application is properly supervised (in this respect the difficult and delicate process of the Standard Review Mechanism is already underway); • Take a strategic international role in assessing the impact of digitisation, automation and new technologies. More specifically, to this end, an innovation laboratory should be set up to prepare governments, employers and workers for what is to come. On this basis an expert monitoring group could then provide policy advice.

• Develop coherent financial, economic and trade policies through better cooperation with the World Trade Organization (WTO), the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank (WB).

Ten recommendations for a reinvigorated social contract

277

On this last point, I think the report could be a bit more explicit. International trade agreements sometimes already contain fundamental labour rights provisions, but it is necessary to generalise this practice, to add climate, environmental rights and product quality and safety, and provide for an objective and effective system of enforcement.

Finally, the Commission also expresses its views on what the UN should do. It should work actively with the employment-related provisions of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration and Refugees (2018). In addition, there is the challenge of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, which were adopted in 2011 to combat human rights violations in the production chain. This is a joint responsibility of governments and companies.

Companies that commit themselves to the principles systematically investigate where problems may arise in their company operations or supply chain. Human Rights Due Diligence, in UN jargon. It applies to the entire supply chain, up to and including the workers in the workshops of Bangladesh. So far, however, it remains a solemn declaration and statement of principles. That’s not enough. The ITUC rightly calls for it to be made binding, in the form of an international treaty.

But a great deal can also be done on a national level. In some countries, this is already happening (see chapter 7).

The ten recommendations of the World Commission on the Future of Work summarised A human-centred agenda Increasing investment in people’s capabilities

1. Recognize a universal entitlement to lifelong learning and establish an effective lifelong learning system that enables people to acquire skills, upskill and reskill throughout their life course.

278 

The future of work

2. Step up investments in the institutions, policies and strategies that will support people through future of work transitions, building pathways for youth into labour markets, expanding choices for older workers to remain economically active and proactively preparing workers for labour market transitions.

3. Implement a transformative and measurable agenda for gender equality by making care an equal responsibility of men and women, ensuring accountability for progress, strengthening the collective representation of women, eliminating gender-based discrimination and ending violence and harassment at work.

4. Strengthen social protection systems to guarantee universal coverage of social protection from birth to old age to workers in all forms of work, including self-employment, based on sustainable financing and the principles of solidarity and risk sharing.

Increasing investment in the institutions of work

5. Establish a Universal Labour Guarantee that provides a labour protection floor for all workers, which includes fundamental workers’ rights, an ‘adequate living wage’, limits on hours of work and safe and healthy workplaces.

6. Expand time sovereignty by crafting working-time arrangements that give workers greater choice over scheduling and working hours so that they can balance work and private life, subject to the company’s needs for greater flexibility, as well as guaranteed minimum hours.

7. Actively promote collective representation of workers and employers and social dialogue through public policies.

8. Harness and manage technology in support of decent work and adopt a ‘human-in-command’ approach to technology.

Ten recommendations for a reinvigorated social contract

279

Increasing investment in decent and sustainable work

9. Create incentives to promote investments in key areas for decent and sustainable work.

10. Reshape business incentive structures to encourage long-term investments in the real economy and develop supplementary indicators of progress towards well-being, environmental sustainability and equality.105

Three lessons Policy must have a broader scope than just digitisation

Change never occurs in a vacuum. Digitisation and the other technological transitions are an important new fact, but we should not treat them in isolation. It is linked to globalisation, climate, inequality, demography, migration, and the need for more and quality work. And even if there is not always a direct link, there are a multitude of transitions that go together and that we have to address and scope together.

This should encourage policymakers at all levels (international, regional, national, sectoral and company) to work on an overall social project, which the Commission terms: ‘A reinvigorated Social Contract’.

People in control, not robots

Technology doesn’t control and direct us. People who use technology badly or well do. And it is people who design technology. The platform economy is a business model developed by people to earn a lot without having to take responsibility. It is successful because it is a low-cost business model, often even a convenient form of undeclared work much more than a technological tour de force. We must not allow ourselves to be dominated; we must use technology in a people-oriented way. Policymakers who try to convince us about the supremacy of new technologies and our necessary submission to it prefer a model that shifts responsibilities and consequences to each individual, to each worker, while keeping (their) real responsibilities out of sight.

280

The future of work

Trade unions, employers, social and climate organisations, and politicians all have their part to play

The World Commission encourages governments to support representative organisations of workers and employers as well as civil society organisations to tackle the transitions together. For everything related to labour, it explicitly opts for the model of social dialogue. This is only possible if trade unions and employers’ organisations are equally respected politically. This model of social dialogue needs to be reactivated.

From the Commission to the Centenary Declaration The Commission’s report set the scene.106 It was a great honour to participate in the presentation of ‘Work for a brighter future’ on 22 January 2019. My employer colleague Mthunzi Mdwaba immediately expressed reservations on the employers’ side about the Universal Employment Guarantee and working time sovereignty. This came as no surprise to the members of the Commission. He had already taken care of this at the last meeting of the Commission. It has not prevented President Ramaphosa, Prime Minister Löfvén and the other Commission members from continuing. Technically, his position was not a problem since he was an ex-officio member. But it foreshadowed the difficulties of the discussions in June 2019.

The Commission report was intended to inspire the International Labour Conference, where the constituents – governments, employers and workers – were to adopt a ‘Centenary Declaration’. Catelene Passchier and the team that led the Workers’ Group faced an immensely difficult task. The Employers’ Group was extremely obstinate, and not only on the points on which Mdwaba had expressed reservations. Apparently, the group also wanted to reject many of the ideas and concepts used by the Commission. The Employers’ Group tried to reduce the challenges of the

Ten recommendations for a reinvigorated social contract

281

transitions at work to a problem of skills, training and education of the workers. It took a great deal of creativity and perseverance from the other groups to get past these objections. Nevertheless, they succeeded: the Centenary Declaration on the Future of Work is a reality, and the recommendations set out by the Commission are recognisable in it.

The Centenary Declaration on the Future of Work, most important elements:

• The recognition of the challenges of today’s world of work (chapter 11) and the urgency of finding responses to them.

• The ILO’s founding principles in its Constitution and the Declaration of Philadelphia remain as relevant as ever.

• The human-centred agenda.

• A just transition to environmental sustainability and concrete measures and investments in specific sectors (care, green, rural economy) and the transition from the informal to the formal economy.

• The use of technology to make work more dignified, and to promote a sustainable economy with room for self-realisation.

• Promoting the acquisition of skills, competencies and qualifications is a joint responsibility of governments, employers and workers; and promotion of lifelong learning, although the Declaration does not mention it as a universal right, as does the Commission’s report.

• The overall aim of policy is full, productive and freely chosen employment and decent opportunities for all.

• Improving the quality of work, including for older workers.

• Respecting workers’ rights, particularly freedom of association and collective bargaining.

• Gender equality: equal opportunities, treatment, pay, sharing of family responsibilities, work-life balance, working time, and investment in care. A measurable gender agenda is not mentioned.

282

The future of work

• Equal opportunities for people with disabilities: stronger than in the Commission’s report.

• The emphasis on the role of private companies and supply chains is considerable. On the other hand, I don’t see anything about the problems that certain business models and global supply chains create and what can be done about them.

• There must be social protection, but currently it is not formulated as a universal and lifelong right.

• The ILO must include labour migration as a challenge and as an opportunity.

• The continued relevance of the employment relationship as a means of providing security and legal protection to workers is strongly emphasised. Workers without a recognized employment status must still be adequately protected.

• Of the three elements of the Universal Labour Guarantee proposed by the Commission, Occupational Security and Health was sent to the Governing Body for further consideration.

The importance of a living wage and balanced working time is referred to, but not as part of a Universal Labour Guarantee.

• Member states’ support for trade unions and employers’ organisations requested in the report is less explicit in the Declaration.

• The new indicators for social well-being (beyond GDP) are not included.

• The ILO’s laboratory role to inform constituents in good time of new elements and trends in the world of work has been included in much softer language.

• As already mentioned in chapter 2, the Declaration also argues for a democratisation of the ILO through a revised composition of the Governing Body.

Ten recommendations for a reinvigorated social contract

283

The report of the Global Commission on the Future of Work should serve as an important guide for the ILO in the future. Its legitimacy lies in the composition: people from all regions of the world, people from various backgrounds, perspectives and concerns, and in its sound working methods. The report goes further than the Centenary Declaration; and that could not be otherwise. The Declaration is a document negotiated between the constituents, who have the ownership of it; they guide the ILO, and they provide a balance that is difficult to achieve but which therefore is valuable. But the report gives the Declaration perspective. Ownership and perspective are thus both necessary for the future of the ILO, for the values and mission it stands for.

The ILO and the future of the United Nations At the time of the ILO centenary and the quest for the future of work and the ILO, the future of the United Nations was also the subject of intense debate in both New York and Geneva. In June 2017 Secretary-General AntĂłnio Guterres tried to respond to harsh criticism of his organisation with thirty-eight actions and ideas. Member states emphasise more and more that they are the boss in their own country, and they see the UN increasingly as a source of interference. These countries place their own sovereignty high on the agenda. Critics look at the conflicts in Syria, Yemen and Iraq and blame the UN for not providing a solution. Cynics add that the only real defenders of multilateralism are those who live off it, the many diplomats. This may be populist talk, but it is streamed around the world without hesitation.

And not everything is nonsense; no one can deny that the UN has become a cluttered institution. But a hugely ambitious programme such as the seventeen sustainable development goals of the UN 2030 agenda has little chance of success if UN agencies stay within their silos and do their own thing. This results in member states being confronted with many agencies at the national and regional level, each with its

284 

The future of work

own specific perspective and priorities. And then there is the argument that always carries weight, that of excessive costs – there is no member state that does not go along on this point.

This whole discussion reached a peak during my presidency of the ILO Governing Body. Together with Chairpersons of other UN agencies, I was invited to a meeting in November 2017 with UN Deputy Secretary-General Amina J. Mohammed, who is leading the UN reform. I was the odd man out – the other participants were Ambassadors. Ms Mohammed got right to the point: ‘The United Nations must first and foremost support the priorities of governments, otherwise we will lose them. In the future, the National Resident Coordinators of the UN will be the essential link between the member state and headquarters and will lead the activities of all agencies on the ground’. My thesis was that the UN agenda does indeed need close cooperation and coordination, but at the same time there is a need for recognition of the ILO as a sui generis organisation, one of a kind. The ILO Constitution has clear objectives; the tripartite structure is essential and existential for the organisation and so are its Conventions and its supervisory system, which are the heart of the ILO. It is good to support governments, but only if they respect human rights and workers’ rights.

This contact with the UN agency Chairpersons was of course just one link in the chain; it was Director-General Guy Ryder who had the most important discussions. In agreement with him, I invited Amina Mohammed to a meeting of the Governing Body, an invitation she immediately accepted. At that Governing Body in March 2018, as expected, the UN reform received the full support of the governments, albeit with some questions about the place of the ILO. The Employers’ and Workers’ Groups came up with more pointed questions and concerns, in line with the issues I had already expressed to Ms Mohammed. Questions also arose as to the possible place of the Decent Work Country Programmes – in which national trade unions and employers’ organisations are fully involved – in the new development framework drawn up

Ten recommendations for a reinvigorated social contract

285

by the UN. What about dual reporting to the UN and the ILO? What about special approaches to member states that do not respect ILO standards? Would it be possible to reconcile necessary criticisms with the cooperative relationship with governments? Amina Mohammed answered reassuringly, saying that, precisely because of its specificity, the support and contribution of the ILO was essential. This did not allay the concerns of the social partners. In my written report of the discussion to the chairs of the ECOSOC (Economic and Social Council of the UN) and the UN General Assembly, I reiterated these concerns. At the same time, I indicated that the ILO was working faithfully towards the common objectives of the reform in the conviction that the specificity of the organisation would be respected.

The design and implementation of the reform is in full swing, and discussions on its further development appear in general to be difficult. As member states do not want to increase their funding, which was originally the idea, all agencies will have to contribute to the financing of the UN Development System. The ILO Governing Body has loyally – albeit with many questions and doubts – complied with this request.

UN reform is both an opportunity and a risk. It is an opportunity for the UN family as a whole to achieve the seventeen sustainable development goals. It is a risk if the specificity of the ILO comes under pressure. The ILO cannot be reduced to being just one more part of the UN development programme; the organisation has many more purposes than that. The Centenary of the ILO, the report of the Commission on the Future of Work and the Centenary Declaration are now recognised within the UN as milestones, which is already a positive signal. With real insight into and understanding of the world’s problems and sufficient political will, the right balance can be found.

286

The future of work

13 An uninvited guest unexpectedly shuts down the world

In the spring of 2020, the world was rocked by COVID-19, a novel virus that in no time had everyone from China to Ecuador in its grip.

What started as a health crisis soon led to an economic and social state of emergency. In May 2020, Director-General Guy Ryder said: ‘This pandemic has laid bare in the cruellest way, the extraordinary precariousness and injustices of our world of work. It is the decimation of livelihoods in the informal economy – where six out of ten workers make a living – which has ignited the warnings from our colleagues in the World Food Programme, of the coming pandemic of hunger. It is the gaping holes in the social protection systems of even the richest countries, which have left millions in situations of deprivation. (…) In medical terms, the virus does not discriminate between its victims; in its social and economic impact, it discriminates brutally against the poorest and the powerless.’107 Over the last few decades, the conviction has grown that we could control the world. We were convinced that, thanks to the level of scientific insight we had reached, we could undoubtedly cope with any problems and shocks. Add to this the fact that people and goods could reach ‘the four corners of the world’ quickly and relatively cheaply.

The world lay at our feet. COVID-19 brought that illusion down with a crash. Our pride took a heavy blow.

However, we knew what worked and what did not in the world; the seven challenges, set out in the eleventh chapter of this book, were

287

written long before the outbreak of the corona crisis on the basis of generally shared knowledge. But even those who were open to the world’s problems – myself included – could never have imagined that we could be so quickly, so widely and so deeply affected by a virus that would indiscriminately drive kings, emperors, presidents and every one of us back into ‘our hut’ for a considerable period of time. Or at least those who have a place to live. This does not apply to the 150 million people without a home and the 1.6 billion people who live in great poverty and unhealthily. It soon became clear that not everyone can protect themselves equally well. I shall come back to that. No political or economic ruler would ever have been able to push the world pause button like COVID-19 did. The whole world was put on hold.

Even the heat waves, the vast and inextinguishable forest fires, the floods and the ruthless cyclones, all consequences of global warming, have never ‘caught’ the entire world population at the same time and so hard. When reading The Plague by Albert Camus (1947) or A Journal of the Plague Year by Daniel Defoe (1722), who could have imagined that we would one day find ourselves in a similar situation? A crash so severe that not only the economy, but also education and public life were brought to a standstill. A crash so severe that we have accepted quite fundamental restrictions on our freedom without much resistance. This was unprecedented and unheard of.

It is now clear that the scare of the century is not artificial intelligence (AI). The pseudo-scientists who wanted to make us subservient and fearful of the disruptive properties and effects of AI have already been dismissed in chapter 12 as sellers of lucrative business models.

People should not allow themselves to be dominated by technology; that technology must be used for the benefit of people. Global warming is more disruptive than AI, and so is COVID-19. How do we deal with this uninvited, invisible and hostile guest? Governments have tried to more or less absorb the first shock wave by trial-and-error. Yet human loss and suffering are heavy. As long as we do not find a vaccine that is used worldwide without exclusion, we will not be rid of

288

The future of work

this invisible enemy. What policy should be pursued during the prolonged exit process, which will likely entail renewed outbreaks of the virus or its variants? And what about the post-corona period?

Apocalyptic The term ‘lockdown’ already sounded a bit ‘familiar’ to us since the terrorist attacks of the Islamic State (IS). But the Al Qaeda attack of 11 September 2001, and the many other attacks launched by Al Qaeda or IS in the following two decades – no matter how apocalyptic they were, and despite the many casualties and the fear they caused – cannot be compared to the human havoc COVID-19 is wreaking.

Never before has our generation been so severely affected by a major epidemic or pandemic. We already referred to the outbreaks of the plague, but that took place a very long time ago. We have been vaccinated against measles and other childhood diseases, and vaccines are provided annually against influenza. Even when we travel, we are vaccinated against health risks in the country of destination. We hardly know anything about the Spanish flu anymore, although it resulted in more casualties than the First World War that immediately preceded it. Most of us have little sense of just how many people died from HIV/ AIDS, which fortunately is slowly being brought under control. But the combination of speed, spread and seriousness makes the COVID-19 damage unprecedented.

A few examples of epidemics or pandemics since the last century

• Spanish flu (1918-1920): depending on the source, 20 to 50 million dead and some sources even report 80 to 100 million. In any case, it claimed more victims than the First World War: +/- 18 to 20 million.

• SARS, coming from southern China in 2002-2003: 774 fatalities.

An uninvited guest unexpectedly shuts down the world

289

• Mexican flu in 2009-2011: 17,500 confirmed deaths.

• In West and Central Africa, while the Ebola virus is almost under control today, it has killed about 12,000 people since 2014.

• The Zika virus in Brazil and Latin America in 2015 was particularly threatening to the unborn.

• HIV/AIDS: 36 million deaths (worldwide epidemic since the 1970s).

These figures can be found on Wikipedia, at the World Health Organization and various other sources. They are not unambiguous and above all make clear that they are mostly rough estimates. The current crisis only confirms that correct and comparable figures are not easy to come by.

COVID-19. World Health Organization: provisional figures (24 May 2020)108

• Number of confirmed cases 5,165,481 • Deaths: 336,430 • Number of confirmed cases: - Europe: 1,987,657 - Americas: 2,338,124 - Eastern Mediterranean: 402,919 - Western Asia (Pacific): 173,621 - Southeast Asia: 185,153 - Africa: 77,295

However impressive, statistics and diagrams obscure completely the real fear, suffering and death of people, usually in solitude, despite the superhuman commitment and sincere involvement of doctors, nurses and care providers. The virologist and international authority Dr Peter Piot says that mortality rates have been seriously underestimated.

290

The future of work

The more they discover about the virus, the more virologists and doctors of internal medicine become convinced that COVID-19 not only causes extensive lung damage but can also affect almost all organs and tissues. ‘Many people will be left with chronic kidney and heart problems. Even their neurology can be disrupted. There will be hundreds of thousands of people world-wide, possibly more, who will need treatments such as kidney dialysis for the rest of their lives. The more we learn about coronavirus, the more questions arise,’ says Piot.109

Worst crisis since the Second World War The corona health crisis is also causing a social and economic crisis.

COVID-19 is sometimes compared with the Great Depression in the 1930s and sometimes with the Second World War. Whichever point of reference you choose, this crisis is particularly deep and broad. This is evident both from the World Health Organization’s COVID-19 dashboard and the ILO monitor: COVID-19 and the world of work.110 The latter measures the impact of the crisis on employment, income and social protection. The consequences are heavy, much heavier than even the specialists could have imagined. Some 1.6 billion of the 2 billion workers in the informal economy are at great risk of losing their livelihoods. This is nearly half of the total working population of the world (3.3 billion). Overall, the number of working hours has fallen by 10.5%, which equals the loss of 305 million full-time jobs. The ILO is particularly concerned about the situation and prospects of young people. More than one in six young people have stopped working, due to COVID-19, while those who remain employed have seen their working hours cut by 23%. 436 million large and small enterprises, particularly in the most affected sectors, are at risk of bankruptcy because they have very little oxygen left in the form of liquidity.

It is much clearer than ever that workers in the informal economy, even in the wealthier countries, are the primary victims. The new forms of informality, the so-called non-standard forms of work promoted by the gurus of the future of work, are also falling through the

An uninvited guest unexpectedly shuts down the world

291

cracks. These are workers who usually lack even basic protections, such as wage, income or social protection (social security). They have little or no access to healthcare and have no replacement income in case of illness or lockdown. Most of them are also unable to work from home. Moreover, the ILO knows that only 18% of workers are in a position to undertake telework. For those who cannot, being forced to stay at home means being unable to work, and without their wages they risk poverty and hunger even in the richest countries.

The social and economic consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic (ILO Monitor: 29 April 2020)

In the second quarter of 2020, the ILO counted: • Decrease in the number of working hours compared to the period before the crisis: 10.5% (48-hour work week).

• This equals the loss of 305 million full-time jobs worldwide: - Europe and Central Asia - 11.8% - Americas

- 12.4% - Arab states

- 10.3% - Asia (Pacific) - 10.0% - Africa - 9.6% • 436 million companies in high-risk sectors: - 47 million employers (54% of employers) - 389 million self-employed • Most affected sectors: - 232 million enterprises in wholesale and retail trade - 111 million in manufacturing - 51 million in hospitality and equipment - 42 million in real estate and other business and commercial activities • High risks to employment due to fragility: - Self-employed and SMEs account for 70% of retail employment.

- Self-employed and SMEs account for 60% of employment in hospitality and equipment.

292

The future of work

• 1.6 billion (76%) of 2 billion workers in the informal economy have been severely hit by lockdown measures or by very weakened sectors: - 60% loss of income (measured in the first month of the crisis) for informal workers worldwide: » 81% in Africa and Latin America » 76% in higher-income countries - Women are over-represented in high-risk sectors: » 74% of workers in the informal economy work in high-risk sectors. » Of these, 42% are women.

Front line From the beginning, we used the vocabulary of war to describe the coronavirus – an enemy that is difficult to know. No matter how invisible the enemy is, we recognise and know the people who are in the front line.

They are celebrated, serenaded and applauded. These are the virologists, physicians, doctors, nurses and carers who are in and around the corona departments, but also the people who clean and disinfect these places, who transport people and goods, who provide food and supplies, reliable information, and respectful funerals for the deceased, who ensure the collection and destruction of household and medical waste….

Alberta Delle Grazie is head nurse in the intensive care unit of a hospital in Vicenza, northern Italy. She puts in long days and works many night shifts. After weeks of living in a state of emergency, she said: ‘It was already difficult before, but right now, after three weeks of the COVID-19 emergency, we are exhausted, worried and emotionally drained. Many of us have been infected, some have died.’ She only sees her three young children in the evening, after work, and that too is difficult. ‘It is an excruciating agony to put the body of a person in a bag and then go home and pretend all is fine.’111 This is just one example of what many people in the care sector are going through. We now show

An uninvited guest unexpectedly shuts down the world

293

them the respect, gratitude and appreciation they would have deserved already in the past but never received. Each time, so-called economic and financial arguments turned out to diminish the value of health and the people who care for us. Will this be different from now on?

There are 136 million health workers in the world, and 70% of them are women. That brings us to the gender aspect of this crisis. According to virologists, women enjoy a biological advantage in their defence against COVID-19. They more than deserve it. Because, socially, women are the hardest hit on all fronts, I was able to explain to foreign affairs journalist Inge Vrancken at VRT NWS: ‘There is no doubt that the starting position of women is basically worse, and that the pandemic hits them harder. Women earn less, therefore save less, have the most insecure jobs and most often live in poverty. It is mostly women who are in the front line. Women worldwide are also most likely to work in the informal economy (60% of the 2 billion) and are therefore not protected.

Take the women in Bangladesh: 4 million of them work in the garment industry there, but it is almost at a standstill. For those women there is no work, no income and no safety net. 71% of the world has no, or at most very weak, social security. Women also do most unpaid care work at home (an average of 4.5 hours a day compared to 1 hour a day for men) and they suffer from the gender pay gap everywhere around the world.’112 During a virtual meeting of the ILO Workers’ Group (5 May 2020), several colleagues expressed their concern about increasing domestic violence during lockdown. Single mothers have always had a harder time, and now their burden has only grown.

Another type of front line is that of university laboratories and the pharmaceutical sector in their search for vaccines. From what the virologists tell us, the virus will clearly stay with us as long as there is no commonly available vaccine that is administered to everyone. Why hasn’t work been done on vaccines based on previous outbreaks of variants of the current coronavirus? Even though those involved are reluctant to share a lot of information on the subject, it is obvious that considerations of profitability have been decisive. Now, fortunately, it is ‘all hands on deck’; there is talk of consultation and cooperation.

294

The future of work

Solidarity funds, both state and private, such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, are offering financing. Earlier in this book, I have pointed out the risks of depending on private funding for causes of general public interest, but we are also realistic enough to know that for the time being, it is difficult to do otherwise. I also have to admit that this kind of financing sometimes succeeds, such as in the fight against HIV/AIDS. This is what Dr Peter Piot wanted to show me in Davos during the World Economic Forum of 2009. He had just left as Executive Director of UNAIDS and now represents the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. At his invitation, I was able to participate in a closed meeting with the leaders of the large pharmaceutical companies. They were all there. Johnson & Johnson was represented by its Company Group Chairman, R&D, the Belgian Dr Paul Stoffels. He was then very active in the search for a vaccine and medicine against UNAIDS and today continues to take a leading role in the search for a COVID-19 vaccine.

It was an eye-opener for me. I found the exchange of information about the progress of their research, their expectations, their doubts and the agreements reached particularly interesting. The fight against HIV/ AIDS benefited greatly from this collaboration. We can only hope that it works as well now, and that the sector, and all these actors together with the World Health Organization, also invest proactively in preventing further tragedies like this. Those who initiate such joint projects also deserve our support now, because they, too, have to work with the tools at hand. They have to take into account two structural faults: dependence on the goodwill of the super-rich and dependence on the goodwill of the pharmaceutical giants.

Corona diplomacy That the fight against this pandemic is not exactly a paragon of international cooperation is an understatement. The United States has proved to be anything but united and, moreover, has suspended its financial contribution to the World Health Organization. Nor has the European Union been an example of unity. Each country has secretly

An uninvited guest unexpectedly shuts down the world  

295

hoped to escape the pandemic. At first, it was hoped that the virus would remain in China, then in northern Italy. But more than 4 billion air travellers per year bring more than just their luggage…

When it became clear that the number of infections and deaths could no longer be controlled, and that Donald Trump’s ‘alternative truths’ and medically dangerous nonsense no longer worked, it became a geopolitical problem while multilateralism was already so fragile. Had the World Health Organization allowed itself to be taken in by China? Did the virus escape from a laboratory in Wuhan? But indignation has risen in Europe as well. Where were the real figures for Russia and Turkey? Are our European neighbours transparent?

Are they publishing the real figures? Who was best and fastest at getting masks and protective equipment from China? How was it possible that we didn’t produce these things ourselves? China made a virtue of necessity and started practicing ‘corona diplomacy’ by handing out a few things here and there. The Chinese planes were awaited and welcomed by politicians and the media.

As shown above, putting the economy on hold brought enormous difficulties to masses of individuals and families through job and income loss. Businesses entered the danger zone. Governments in many countries took exceptional measures to limit the consequences. Remarkably, social dialogue was again seen as a useful mechanism. Not only employers’ organisations but also trade unions were again involved in decision-making in several countries. Prime Ministers and Ministers once again used words like ‘social dialogue’ and ‘trade unions’. Moreover, it was the countries with a well-developed social protection system, with adequate social benefits and quality health care and a tradition of social dialogue that were best placed to respond to the crisis. By paying temporary unemployment benefits to workers, a large part of companies’ wage burden was lifted, and redundancies avoided. Companies and families were granted deferrals of the payment of loans, social security contributions and taxes. The self-employed received a bridging grant. In this way, governments tried to

296

The future of work

prevent the economy from grinding to a halt due to a lack of consumption and businesses from going under due to liquidity or solvency problems. But it has not been all roses and moonlight. Even though these measures alleviated the greatest needs, they did not prevent poverty from rising sharply even in the wealthier countries. Food banks saw people they had never seen before. The mesh of the social protection safety net had widened. This was partly due to austerity measures taken after the 2008-2010 crisis. But also, to a large extent, by what I described earlier in the book – the growth over the past decade of a colourful range of precarious forms of work, the common characteristic of which is the lack of employment protection and social security.

An extreme example of this is working on demand via digital platforms. It is in this way that many people slipped through the cracks.

Since education and public life were also shut down, employees became home workers via teleworking, but at the same time they were babysitters, teachers, and children’s entertainers within their own four walls, in the best cases with a garden as well but sometimes without even a balcony. Even though the efforts and creativity shown by the education sector were particularly impressive, combining these different roles for weeks on end was difficult for many, leading to domestic tensions and in some cases even violence, as I have mentioned earlier.

In wealthy countries without comprehensive social protection, such as the United States, misery and poverty hit hard. In emerging and developing countries, the seriousness of the situation, as previously shown, depended mainly on the degree of informality of the economy and on the existence or non-existence of a social protection floor. The poor feared a new pandemic, that of hunger.

Although social dialogue is valued in some countries, there are others where the state of emergency is used to put it aside as a waste of time or even to restrict freedom of expression and freedom of organisation. The International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) scrupulously maintains a list of these infringements. They will end up in the ILO’s system of control and supervision of labour standards. Because

An uninvited guest unexpectedly shuts down the world

297

of the crisis affecting their members, a number of trade unions and even employers’ organisations are also experiencing financial difficulties due to unpaid membership fees.

The ILO and the corona crisis The ILO headquarters in Geneva was immediately involved. The alert from the neighbours on Avenue Appia, the World Health Organization, quickly made it clear that the ILO and the entire United Nations network had to take action. At the same time, the lockdown and social distancing measures in Switzerland and the canton of Geneva had to be respected. There was a strong emphasis on teleworking and teleconferencing, including with the regional offices, between the agencies and with the UN in New York. First a decision had to be taken on the Governing Body session in March 2020 and the International Labour Conference in June. After consultation with the members of the Governing Body, these were cancelled. It was a painful but necessary decision, unheard of since the Second World War. The most urgent decisions for the functioning of the organisation were taken by the management and the Chairperson and the Vice-Chairpersons of the Governing Body, who had received a mandate from their members.

Nevertheless, it was inevitable that a large part of the ILO’s workings described in this book, the negotiations and adoption of Conventions and Recommendations, and the organisation’s supervisory mechanism, were partially put on hold. At the same time, however, preparations were made for the next working year.

What is the role of the ILO in times of crisis? As Kari Tapiola writes, ‘The general conclusion from a hundred years of practice is that the ILO’s crisis response typically is reconstruction oriented, with the aim of not only restoring the earlier state of affairs but improving on it. It relies on public authorities and their cooperation with the employers’ and workers’ representatives.’113 Logically, in the UN’s approach to COVID-19, the ILO was given the role of monitoring the place of decent work and the social security

298

The future of work

aspects and assisting member states and social partners in mitigating the negative impact of the crisis. The rich arsenal of Conventions and Recommendations contains much of relevance to our current problems. Couple this with experience and collected good practices, and it allows governments, workers and employers to go a long way. On this basis, the ILO has worked out a plan that promotes workers’ rights and boosts the economy with an emphasis on employment, income and protection. On the basis of existing instruments, the ILO sees four main lines of action: boosting the economy and employment; supporting businesses, jobs and incomes; protecting workers at work; and reliance on social dialogue.

On the basis of its Conventions and Recommendations, the ILO sets out four policy lines.114

• Stimulating the economy and employment: - through active fiscal policy; - through accommodating monetary policy; - through financial support to specific sectors, including the health sector.

• Supporting businesses, jobs and incomes: - extending social protection for all; - measures to maintain employment; - providing financial and fiscal relief to enterprises.

• Protecting workers at work: - adapted and strengthened health and safety measures; - adapting work arrangements (including teleworking); - preventing discrimination and exclusion; - access to healthcare for all; - extending forms of paid absence.

• Relying on social dialogue for solutions: - strengthening the capacity and resilience of trade unions and employers’ organisations;

An uninvited guest unexpectedly shuts down the world

299

- strengthening the capacity of governments; - strengthening social dialogue, collective bargaining and institutions and processes of industrial relations and processes.

As an ‘institution’, the ILO did what it had to do. These policy points have been further fleshed out and concretised by the various departments, with specific regional and sectoral approaches added.

But what has been the role of the three groups? The Chairperson of the Workers’ Group, Catelene Passchier, was right to propose that a joint statement be drawn up by the officers. This could be done successfully between Catelene Passchier and the Employers’ Chairperson, Mthunzi Mdwaba. But there was insufficient unity in the government group, and its chairperson, Ambassador Refiloe Litjobe of Lesotho, bowed out. This is about more than symbolism. Especially during a crisis, the three pillars of the ILO – governments, employers and workers – must be aware of their responsibilities. Each group has already experienced periods of weakness, but this time the governments have shown their weak side. It is typical of our time that there is little mutual trust between member states. That is why the declaration had to be between the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) and the International Employers’ Organisation (IOE) only.

In the meantime, talks have been set up within the Workers’ Group. Director-General Guy Ryder and his management team have also organised successful virtual conversations with each group. In all, 165 governments and 65 workers’ representatives from all corners of the world have taken part, and there has also been a great deal of interest from employers. Although there was no International Labour Conference in June 2020, a special three-day virtual meeting with world leaders and representatives of governments, employers and workers was organised: the World of Work COVID-19 Summit.

300

The future of work

The new normal, pre- and post-corona: a new social contract?

We speak of the period before and after the First World War, and of the period before and after the Second World War, as if they marked the beginning of a new era. We can continue in the same vein: before and after the fall of the Berlin Wall, before and after 9/11 (the attack on the World Trade Center towers in New York), before and after the financial crisis of 2008. And this time there is also talk of ‘the new normal’. Calls for ‘a new social contract’ are also raining down from all sides. Depending on their origin, such calls or appeals contain different messages. There is heavy lobbying to push forward implementation of the Paris Climate Agreement. There are calls to perform unpaid hours of work or to be even more flexible in order to save the economy. Calls for a new social contract with less protection are not a new phenomenon; I have heard them several times in the course of my career.

Yet it is still possible to speak of another landmark, with a pre-corona and a post-corona era. We know from previous crises that these kinds of events can partly change history, and this will also be the case today. But we have also learned that crises do not take away the problems of the past. This is no different now. The seven challenges (outlined in chapter 11) are still there, and some have been highlighted even more clearly by the crisis.

Wat does the crisis show? Some elements:

• That health and solidarity are essential values.

• That the economy should serve the people and not the other way around.

• That the market should focus on the needs of humanity (vaccines, healthy food, safe, high-quality products) and not on what yields most profit in the short term.

• That disinvestment in healthcare and social security makes people even more vulnerable in the event of a major crisis of any kind.

An uninvited guest unexpectedly shuts down the world

301

• That this deterioration has gone hand in hand with a decline in social protection through the excesses of atypical forms of employment and business models that have adopted them.

• That long production and supply chains do not work in extreme emergencies, particularly when it comes to protective equipment.

• That challenges such as globalisation, climate, inequality and demography are not gone; on the contrary, they are interconnected in a way which has produced the effects of COVID-19.

• That the cry of alarm about the collapse of biodiversity (the disappearance of species, of fauna and flora) must be taken seriously.

• That governments, pushed to the margins by those in positions of economic power, have had to take on the role of rescuing companies and the economy, including companies that have heavily remunerated their shareholders and companies that never paid their rightful share of taxes, for the second time since 2008.

• But at the same time, digitisation has also given us unprecedented opportunities to continue communicating from our homes and to keep part of the economy afloat. People and companies who had less experience with IT have had to start using it en masse, among other things for the organisation of telework and teleconferences.

The essence of these findings is not new. The analysis of the Global Commission on the Future of Work was not far off the mark. Moreover, the Commission was not composed of dreamers. Their ten recommendations were well received and much appreciated. The COVID-19 crisis only reinforced their importance.

302

The future of work

Recommendations of the Global Commission on the Future of Work, ready for post-corona times:

• If there were a measurable programme for gender equality by making men and women equally responsible for care … the heaviest burden of this crisis would not have fallen mainly on women.

• If there were a guarantee of universal social protection from birth to old age and for workers in all forms of employment, including self-employment, based on sustainable financing and on principles of solidarity and risk sharing … workers from the informal economy and the periphery of the labour market would not be plunged into poverty and famine, and this would also benefit the economies of these countries.

• If there were a universal labour guarantee which, in addition to the existing fundamental workers’ rights, would guarantee a living wage, limits on maximum working time and safe and healthy jobs … then many workers would not have to fear contamination when they return from lockdown, and they would be valued for their contribution to the economy and society.

• If collective representation and social dialogue were to be reassessed and encouraged … then all the above protection could be given a concrete form by means of consultation at the national, sectoral and company level.

• If technology were developed and used for and by people … then research into vaccines and drugs could respond much more rapidly to outbreaks of viruses and prevent so much suffering, with greater guarantees that the results would be widely available at affordable prices.

• Investing in key sectors such as healthcare and care in general, in a climate-friendly economy and a healthy rural economy … will create new employment opportunities and really address some of the fundamental challenges.

An uninvited guest unexpectedly shuts down the world

303

• If the economy would opt for long-term investments in social needs and in the real economy ‌ value and supply chains would become more environmentally friendly. The informal economy could then be formalised and produce by and for people with decent wages and proper protection.

These must be the marching orders for the new normal, for post-corona, for a new social contract. Not business as usual.

Towards less globalisation?

The first of the seven challenges in chapter 11 was about globalisation and deglobalisation. The COVID-19 crisis will undoubtedly have consequences for the way we think about and deal with globalisation. Now that we feel less safe about what comes to us from outside, there are several perspectives on how to deal with globalisation. Isolationists and nationalists would like nothing better than to withdraw economically and politically behind their own borders. For other reasons, some longstanding anti-globalists might feel good about pulling back to what is closer to us. From the point of view of climate, it sounds positive if fewer people and goods have to be flown around the world. Investors and entrepreneurs can also see opportunities here, in bringing production back to our own territory, automated and cheap. It would be easy to turn this into a political and economic narrative that would sell like hotcakes.

Are we really moving toward protectionism, toward fencing off our own markets and countries? Towards dismantling multilateralism, the only effective protection for human rights? And meanwhile the technological and digital giants will continue to encompass the world and be in an even better position to play states against each other and pay even less taxes. At the same time, this will become a serious problem for those countries where production is now located, albeit mostly under disgraceful conditions. The little they have would also be taken away from them.

304 

The future of work

The truth may lie somewhere in the middle. We called it ‘glocalisation’ in chapter 11. David Criekemans, Professor of International Politics (Antwerp, Leuven, Middelburg, Geneva) calls it ‘re-globalisation from the bottom up’.115 Perhaps we should shorten long supply chains for essential goods such as protective materials for care and food and bring production back closer to us. But how far should we go with other products? Elsewhere in this book, we talk about the regulation of supply chains, which would make it possible for the informal economy to be formalised and for workers’ rights to be respected everywhere. But we must not, under the guise of ‘fear of anything that comes from the outside’, allow our connection with the world to diminish. This may have to be organised differently, with less travelling and better use of communications technology. But what is certain is that today’s challenges cannot be solved within borders alone. They need both a national and an international, multilateral approach.116

Who will pay the bill?

Conclusions were drawn after the First and the Second World Wars.

This will have to happen now as well. Thought will have to be given to how employment protection, health care and social security should look in the future. How to build a climate-friendly and sustainable economy. The role of the government will also be seen in a different perspective.

I have seldom seen certain economists stumble and hesitate in interviews like they are today. I remember the difference in their statements before 2008 and after. They may also remember this and have become much more cautious now. COVID-19 already seems to have had a greater influence on them than the financial crisis. That may be a positive evolution. After all, what happened then cannot be repeated.

From 2008 to 2010, there were many fine words about investing more in people and in social protection. This was not only good from a social point of view, but also good for the economy, it was said. Afterwards, the financial sector had to be rescued by the authorities, and the costs

An uninvited guest unexpectedly shuts down the world

305

were in a large measure passed on to the population. When the economy subsequently picked up, the situation of a few people improved, but the middle class and the welfare state were pushed down. Even two-income families had to work hard to pay mortgage loans for their homes, their energy and their water, and student jobs became necessary to help pay for their children’s studies. People felt humiliated and misunderstood, materially and socially. Poverty widened in many countries and deepened in almost all. At the same time, there was hardly any limit for high earners. Shareholders benefited handsomely. Remuneration increased for capital and decreased for labour. This had a knockon effect on society; the ‘acidity level’ rose. This was ammunition for populists and nationalists, who added to the malaise. In particular, it nurtured a new generation of right-wing populists. In Trump ’s United States, Bolsonaro’s Brazil, we have seen the unbearable lightness with which they have tackled management of the coronavirus.

In many countries, measures to support the economy and businesses were designed faster than ever in the corona period, and that is good.

There are also benefits for workers and the general population in the form of temporary technical unemployment and other measures. That too is good. But this is the second time in a decade that companies and the economy have had to be rescued by the governments that their CEOs and well-heeled shareholders have so heartily disparaged. Once again, the market economy cannot cope with this crisis on its own. It would be unthinkable for the bill to be presented to the ordinary man or woman again, as it was after the financial crisis. The reactions and disastrous political consequences, both nationally – first and foremost for democracies – and internationally, are hard to estimate.

Gradually, there is movement in the economic rationale concerning fiscal deficits and debts. Europe has discovered an article in its Constitution to support Member States in case of extraordinary events beyond their control. The European Central Bank and the European Union work with various support measures that would have been out of the question for the monetary orthodoxies of the past. Ursula von

306

The future of work

der Leyen advocates a new Marshall Plan. Among others, Professor Paul De Grauwe, professor of economics at the London School of Economics, says that in cases of emergency the usual rules do not apply.

He considers that in such circumstances a balanced budget is not a reasonable rule, and that debt is defensible for investments, but not for current expenditure. In the event of an emergency – as is the case now – he thinks that monetary financing could be conducted in a more nuanced way. However, the condition for all of this depends on the economy rebounding as quickly and as strongly as possible and inflation being kept in check.117 At the IMF, Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva said that ‘a global crisis like no other needs a global response like no other’. She also has asked that other challenges, such as climate and inequality, should be taken into account in the development of recovery policies.118 The IMF has cancelled the debt of 25 developing countries. But I can already hear the fear among the countries that have to comply with IMF conditions, as they are the conditions that usually intervene strongly in the social fabric. Thus it remains to be seen whether the IMF will really change anything. If the resources available to the World Bank were used for the ideas developed by the Global Commission on the Future of Work and allocated in line with the ILO Centenary Declaration, the world would move a lot further forward.

The G20, the 20 largest economies, have alleviated the debts of 77 developing countries.119 But on closer inspection, this is mainly a different representation of accounting, a fake operation. This shows again what we saw earlier: the crisis comes at a time of great mutual distrust between countries. The international void created by the United States is being filled by China; trade tensions are being stepped up. The fact that COVID-19 originated in China is being abused by Trump. Russia is suffering from low petroleum prices and the question is: How will Europe position itself in this panorama?

Even after previous severe crises, there has been a great deal of international confusion. But the economy had to be rebuilt. Governments as

An uninvited guest unexpectedly shuts down the world

307

well as employers and workers played an indispensable role in this process. The commitment and productivity of the workers were matched by a good wage policy and the development of social security. Social partners were fully involved. The reconstruction and strengthening of the economy were supported by the resources of the Marshall Plan. In 1945, the International Labour Conference adopted Recommendation 71, which was a reconstruction guide. The ILO reviewed it only recently, in the aftermath of the tsunami of 26 December 2004 in Southeast Asia and in response to the many new hotbeds of conflict around the world.

It led to the new Recommendation 205 adopted by the International Labour Conference in 2017. It is a modernisation of the old Recommendation and concerns not only reconstruction after wars, but also after other disasters that may befall societies and humankind. It is as if the ILO had seen the COVID-19 pandemic coming, and for which it now provides a guide to recovery, perfectly suited to what we are experiencing now. The ILO has already provided the tools to put governments and social partners on the right path.

308 

The future of work

Final remarks

Setting and respecting rules The number of people who work for others in one way or another, whether in the family or beyond, is impressive. This is the case in my country, and it is no different in the rest of the world. Even in the toughest and hardest environments, individuals, groups and organisations stand up to improve the lives of their fellow human beings. They are the ones who strengthen our faith in people and make us look to the future with hope. They are irreplaceable beacons which guide us.

But we are distracted, because after all we’re only human. We are not always driven by wisdom, justice, self-control, courage, faith, hope and love. On social media we do not show only the best side of society; we also shoot off cold, sour, bitter and even hateful messages at each other.

The general sentiment, the famous gut feeling of society that is so often referred to, is not always a good guide for collective action and policy making. Sometimes, we need to do better. That is why the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was proclaimed in 1948, and why the Conventions on universal workers’ rights were adopted. They are rules that should keep countries and communities on the right track in what they do. Individually and collectively we rightly cherish our freedom and democracy. But only by respecting universal human rights can we make that freedom possible for others. It is the only conceivable foundation for a peaceful society. Political leaders are not the only ones who have a responsibility in this regard; for some years now, we have also been asking multinational companies to work within these parameters, but there remains a great deal of work to be done on this score.

The United Nations and the International Labour Organisation promote respect for the rules set. Times change, methods must be reg-

 

309

ularly adjusted to have their full effect, but the fundamental values and objectives always remain the same. After a hundred years, the ILO, the oldest multilateral organisation, is still the absolute beacon for decent work. Thanks to a great deal of creativity and political will on the part of the leaders of the three groups, as well as the mediation and determination of the office leadership and staff members, the organisation has always found a way. This will also be the key to making the future of work promote the cause of social justice.

Seeing challenges as opportunities Economists and politicians used the fall of the Berlin Wall as a springboard for their vision of ‘freedom and happiness’. They tried to get rid of annoying regulation, those rules that are so important if we are to advance as a society. Even the Rhineland model of the social market had to contend with this. Social rules were and still are being pushed back. People followed meekly, because they would be better off. But the growing inequality in large parts of the world shows that dogma does not work that way, or hardly ever does. Many went backwards.

The lesson of globalisation is that it can be good in itself; we as a society can benefit from it, but it has to be managed properly. It is no different with the technological revolution. It does not have to be at the expense of the workers and society in general.

New efforts and new initiatives are needed. There are still too many excesses in the world, from modern slavery and child labour to violence against human rights activists and non-existent social protection. The renewed and strengthened social contract will come about if we turn today’s challenges into human-centred opportunities. We must go beyond our limits to build opportunities for all. In this way, we will build the future of the world’s children and grandchildren.

Ambitions for the next century The ILO needs the three groups – governments, employers and workers – to achieve its objectives. This makes the organisation both strong

310

Still work to be done

and fragile. Strong, because its chances of success are much greater with such a broad support base. Fragile, because one group is enough to crack the system. The future will depend on the positive dynamics of the tripartite structure. The three groups must show that they believe in the organisation. The quality of the future of the ILO will be directly proportional to the strength and quality of their commitment.

But each group separately also faces major challenges. Trade unions will have to organise the new workforce and those of the rural and informal economies. Employers’ organisations will have to represent large companies, supply chains and small businesses in the informal economy. Governments will have to nurture and support tripartism both domestically and internationally.

The fourth partner, the ILO Office and staff, is also indispensable.

Without their research, this book would have many blank pages; thanks to them, we can constantly monitor the state of work in the world. Their work is as varied as it is necessary: researching and preparing documents for the Governing Body and the Conference; working in the regions and in member States; following up on implementation of decisions; implementing campaigns for the ratification of Conventions; supporting governments and the social partners, etc. These are all necessary for the success of the organisation. Management and staff must not be neutral; they work for social justice and thus for full compliance with ILO Conventions.

The renewed and strengthened social contract is more necessary than ever in post-corona times. This can become a reality when the three groups and the International Labour Office – separately, but above all together – believe in themselves and show ambition. For human and workers’ rights it is essential how the ILO, in the framework of UN reform, can on the one hand play its role in the realisation of the UN Agenda 2030, and on the other hand, ensure that its specificity is fully recognised.

Final remarks

311

Thanks and acknowledgements

The ILO, ACTRAV led by Director Maria Helena Andre and DeputyDirector Anna Biondi, for making the English edition of this book possible, with the support of communications officer Mamadou Kaba Souare.

Publishers Laura Lannoo and Maarten Van Steenbergen, editor Pieter De Messemaeker and marketing manager Stefanie De Craemer of Lannoo Publishers.

Irene Schaudies for the English translation.

Jeroen Beirnaert, Sharan Burrow, Lieve Callaert, Rudi Delarue, Jeanne Devos, Dany Duysens, Myriam Eeraerts, Raquel Gonzalez, Rosa Flerez Gonzalez, Deborah Greenfield, Julie Hendrickx, James Howard, Ruba Jaradat, Heinz Koller, Marc Leemans, Juan Llobera, Moussa Oumarou, Vinicius Pinheiro, VĂŠronique Rousseau, Guy Ryder, Chris Serroyen, Stijn Sintubin, Kari Tapiola, Corinne Vargha, Bart Verstraeten, Piet Van den Bergh, Lieve Verboven, Yves Veyrier, Greg Vines, and others for the conversations, provision of documents, the search for or critical reading of parts of this book.

The staff and directors of the ILO departments and regional or national offices, the directorates of the Department of Standards, ACTRAV and ACTEMP, the Deputy Director-Generals, the Belgians in ILO, the Directors-General Juan Somavia and Guy Ryder.

Special thanks to Director-General Guy Ryder and Kari Tapiola, Special Advisor to the Director-General and former Deputy Director-General and Executive Director.

312 

The leadership and colleagues of the former World Confederation of Labour (WCL), the former International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) and the current International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) led by Sharan Burrow. The leadership and colleagues of the Global Union Federations (GUFs).

All colleagues who were part of the ACV-CSC, WCL, ICFTU and ITUC workers’ teams at the International Labour Conference.

My ‘right hand’, Véronique Rousseau, for the splendid support. The members of the Workers’ Group and the Secretary of the Workers’ Group Raquel Gonzalez for her strong work and the extraordinary support and cooperation, the late Esther Busser, a special personality who has left us far too soon. My predecessor as Chair of the Workers’ Group Sir Roy Trotman and my successor Catelene Passchier.

The Chairpersons, colleagues and members of the Employers’ Group, the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) and the Government Group.

The Ambassadors, diplomats and staff of the Belgian and European Permanent Representations to the United Nations in Geneva, the delegations of the Belgian Regional Governments and other representations we cooperated with.

Béatrice Fauchère for her support in my first steps in the ILO. Coen and Martine Damen-Callebaut for showing me the way in the early years, to them and to Dany and An Duysens-Albrecht for their friendly hospitality.

ACV-CSC: President Marc Leemans, General secretary Marie-Hélène Ska and the Board for their support in the mission at the ILO.

Thanks and acknowledgements

313

References

1 2 3

4

5 6

7 8

9

10 11 12 13 14

FOD Sociale Zekerheid (2012). De Internationale Arbeidsorganisatie en de Sociale Zekerheid, pp. 5-7, Brussels: FOD SZ. Mdwaba, Mthunzi (2019). Speech launch centenary ILO, Geneva: IOE. Tapiola, Kari (2018). Achieving Social Justice, The International Labour Organization and a Century of Tripartism and Social Dialogue. Unpublished manuscript, Geneva.

Tapiola, Kari (2018). The teeth of the ILO, The impact of the 1998 ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, Geneva: ILO; Van Goethem, Geert (2019), 100 jaar geleden: Vredesconferentie bereikt akkoord over oprichting Internationale Arbeidsorganisatie, www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/ 2019/04/07/de-internationale-arbeidsorganisatie-100-jaar-geleden-opgericht.

Hansenne, Michel (1999). Mondialisation et Justice Sociale: Le Rôle de l’OIT, Brussels: Institut Royal des Relations Internationales.

Rodgers, Gerry; Lee, Eddy; Swepston, Lee; Van Daele, Jasmien (2009). The ILO and the quest for social justice 1919-2009, Geneva: ILO; Maul, Daniel (2019). The International Labour Organization – 100 years of global social policy, Geneva: ILO; Tapiola, Kari (2019). The driving force, Birth and evolution of tripartism – Role of the ILO Workers’ Group, Geneva: ILO. Tapiola, Kari (2018). Achieving Social Justice, The International Labour Organization and a Century of Tripartism and Social Dialogue. Unpublished manuscript, Geneva. Delarue, Rudi (2012). De rol van de Internationale Arbeidsorganisatie in de 21ste eeuw, Brussels: ILO Benelux office.

ILO (2018). Freedom of Association – Compilation of decisions of the Committee on Freedom of Association, Geneva: ILO. Vandaele, Kurt (2018). Strikes in Europe, Brussels: ETUI. ILO (2014). GB322/INS/5. The Standards Initiative, Appendix I. Geneva: ILO. ILO (2015). GB323/INS/5. The Standards Initiative, Appendix I. Annex I. Geneva: ILO. ILO (2015). GB 323/INS/5. The Standards Initiative, Appendix II. Annex II. Geneva: ILO. Thant, Myint-U (2007). The River of Lost Footsteps, A Personal History of Burma, New York: Farrar.

ILO (2012). ILC 101. Provisional Record 2-2 (Add). Report of the Officers of the Governing Body, Geneva: ILO. Kyi, Aung San Suu (2012). Statement at the 101st International Labour Conference, Geneva: ILO.

314

15 16

17 18 19

20 21 22 23 24 25

26 27

28 29

30 31

Thant, Myint-U (2007). The River of Lost Footsteps, A Personal History of Burma, New York: Farrar.

ILO (2019). GB 337/INS/9. Decision concerning the progress report on the follow-up to the resolution concerning remaining measures on the subject of Myanmar, Geneva: ILO. Sanyoto, Bismo (2015). I, Testimony. Collection of Testimonies from Returnee Migrant Workers from India & Nepal to Qatar, Brussels: WSM. ILO (2017). ILO Governing Body welcomes Qatar’s commitment to bolster migrant worker rights. Press release 8 November 2017, Geneva: ILO. ILO (2019), GB 337/INS/5. Annual progress report on the technical cooperation programme agreed between the Government of Qatar and the ILO. Geneva: ILO; Speaking Notes Workers’ Spokesperson Catelene Passchier, Geneva: Workers’ Group ILO. Alliance 8.7 (2017), Global Estimates of Modern Slavery, Forced Labour and Forced Marriage, Geneva: ILO and Walk Free Foundation.

Tapiola, Kari (2018). The teeth of the ILO, The impact of the 1998 ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, pp. 14-18, Geneva: ILO. ILO (2017). Global Estimates of Child Labour: Results and trends, 2012-2016, Geneva: ILO. ILO (2019). Third party monitoring of child labour and forced labour during the 2018 cotton harvest in Uzbekistan, Geneva: ILO. Hendrickx, Julie (2019). Alsof de Weg ons zocht. Jeanne Devos en haar strijd voor de dienstmeisjes in India, Tielt: Lannoo.

Joseph, Lissy (2011). Rechten worden nooit gegeven maar eerder opgeëist door hard te vechten, www.mo.be/wereldblog/ilo-conferentie-2011/ rechten-worden-nooit-gegeven-maar-eerder-opgeeist-door-hard-te-vecht.

Ceustermans, Sara (2016). Nooit meer Rana Plaza, www.mo.be/ wereldblog/ nooit-meer-rana-plaza.

Vandoorne, Sarah (2018). Overmorgen is misschien de laatste dag dat Bengalese kledingfabrieken veilig zijn, www.mo.be/analyse/overmorgen-misschien- delaatste-dag-dat-bengalese-kledingfabrieken-veilig-zijn; Elferink, Eva Oude (2018). Het werk is allerminst klaar, toch wil Dhaka van textieltoezicht af , www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2018/12/03/dhaka-wil-textieltoezicht-kwijt-a3008116.

ITUC (2016). Scandal inside the global supply chains of 50 companies, Brussels: ITUC. Huyse, Huib en Boris Verbrugge (2018). Belgium and the sustainable supply chain agenda: leader or laggard? Review of Human Right Due Diligence initiatives in the Netherlands, Germany, France and EU, and implications for policy work by Belgian Civil Society, Leuven: HIVA-KU Leuven.

ILO (2006). Mission report Colombia (24-29 October 2005), Report Committee Freedom of Association, GB295/8/1, Appendix 5, Geneva: ILO. ILO (2006). Tripartite Agreement on Freedom of Association and Democracy, GB297/TC/5/2 Appendix II, Geneva: ILO.

References

315

32

ILO (2011). Conclusions of the High-level Tripartite Mission to Colombia, Geneva: ILO. 33 ITUC (2019). Colombia: Peace at Risk, Brussels, ITUC. 34 Cortebeeck, Luc (2009). Blog IAO-missie in Guatemala, DeWereldMorgen.

35 ILO (2013). Memorandum of Understanding, Geneva: ILO. 36 Cortebeeck, Luc (2013). Blog Guatemala, September-October 2013, MO*.

37 ILO (2018). GB334/INS/9(Rev.) Report of the tripartite mission to Guatemala, Geneva: ILO. 38 ILO (2019). GB337/INS/10. 391st Report of the Committee on Freedom of Association, Case N° 2609 (Guatemala): Interim report, Geneva: ILO. 39 Cortebeeck, Luc (2014). Blog Venezuela, MO*.

40 ILO (2014). GB320/INS/8. Report of the high-level tripartite mission to the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Geneva: ILO. 41 ILO (2019). ILO Commission of Inquiry issues report on complaint against the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Press release, Geneva: ILO. 42 ITUC (2019). Labour Law Deregulation in India, Brussels: ITUC. 43 ITUC (2018) (2019). Global Rights Index, The World’s Worst Countries for Workers, Brussels: ITUC. 44 ILO (2019). Centenary Ratification Campaign, Geneva: ILO. 45 ILO (2017). World Social Protection Report 2017-2019: Universal social protection to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals, Geneva: ILO. 46 Mooijman, Ruben (2020). Niet ziek, wel zwaar getroffen. Brussels: De Standaard.

47 Bachelet, Michelle (2018). Statement Social Protection, Geneva: ILO. 48 UNDP (2018). Global Multidimensional poverty index, New York: UNDP. 49 ILO (2019). Measuring financing gaps in social protection for achieving SDG target 1.3, Geneva: ILO. 50 Bachelet, Michelle (2018). Statement Social Protection, Geneva: ILO. 51 Ortiz, Isabel, Valérie Schmitt and Loveleen De (2018). 100 years of social protection: the road to universal social protection systems and floors. Introduction, Geneva: ILO. 52 Ibidem, Part I, Geneva: ILO. 53 ILO (2018). Building Social Protection Floors for All. ILO Flagship Programme 2018, Annual Report, Geneva: ILO. 54 Ortiz, Isabel, Fabio Durán-Valverde, Stefan Urban and Veronika Wodsak (2018).

Reversing pension privatizations. Rebuilding Public Pension Systems in Eastern Europe and Latin America, Geneva: ILO. 55 Tapiola, Kari (2018). The teeth of the ILO, The impact of the 1998 ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, Geneva: ILO. 56 BIT (2018). Liste des Institutions Nationales du Dialogue Social en Afrique Francophone, internal note, Geneva: BIT; BIT (2008). Quels étaient les buts du programme PRODIAF lors de sa création en 1998?, Geneva: BIT; ILO (2010).

Promotion of a social dialogue programme in Africa, PRODIAF III. Evaluation Summaries, Geneva: ILO; Birane, Thiame (2018). Rapport sur l’évolution du

316

Still work to be done

Dialogue Social dans les Pays Membres de l’Union économique et monétaire Ouest Africaine, Ouagadougou: UEMOA; UEMOA (2018). Avis Nr. 007 Sur la Portabilité des Droits des Travailleurs migrants à la Sécurité Sociale au sein des huit pays membres de l’Union Economique et Monétaire Ouest Africaine, Ouagadougou: UEMOA; UEMOA (2018). Avis Nr. 008 Sur l’Egalité de chance et de Traitement entre les Hommes et les Femmes en milieu professionnel, Ouagadougou: UEMOA. 57 Interview with Ruba Jaradat (2019), Geneva: ILO. 58 The fact that the ILO took up those questions and that challenge at the centenary of the organisation’s existence (2019) was undoubtedly the merit of DirectorGeneral Guy Ryder.

59 Rosling, Hans and Ola Rosling (2018). Factfulness: Ten reasons we’re wrong about the world – and why things are better than you think, London: Hodder & Stoughton.

60 Ramaphosa, Cyril, Stefan Löfven et al. (2019). Work for a brighter future, Global Commission on the Future of Work, p. 23, Geneva: ILO. 61 Criekemans, David (2019). De wereld van Criekemans: het donkere geld achter Brexit en het gevaar op een ‘Singapore – UK’. London: YouTube.

62 ILO (2019). Working on a warmer planet – The impact of heat stress on labour productivity and decent work. Geneva: ILO. 63 ILO (2019). Climate Action for Jobs Initiative. Geneva: ILO. 64 Oxfam (2019). Public Good or Private Wealth, Oxford: Oxfam. Oxfam (2020).

Time to care. Oxford: Oxfam.

65 Idem.

66 Oxfam (2018). Reward work, not wealth, p. 2, 8, Oxford: Oxfam.

67 ILO (2017). Inception Report for the Global Commission on the Future of Work, p. 2, Genève: ILO. 68 Vandaele, John (2019). De plek waar alle arbeidswetten geboren worden, MO*.

69 UN (2017). International Migration Report 2017, New York: UN. 70 ILO (2018). Global Estimates on International Migrant Workers, Results and Methodology, Geneva: ILO. 71 Hoge Raad voor de Werkgelegenheid (2016), Verslag 2016 Digitale economie en arbeidsmarkt, p. 103, Brussels: FOD Werkgelegenheid, Arbeid en Sociaal Overleg.

72 CERN (2019). Worldwide LHC Computing Grid, Geneva: CERN. 73 Geerts, Thierry (2018). Digitalis, How to reinvent the world, Tielt: Lannoo.

74 Pano broadcast ‘Uw job overgenomen door artificiële intelligentie’, VRT, 2018.

75 Geerts, Thierry (2018). Digitalis, p. 50, Tielt: Lannoo.

76 ILO (2018). Leveraging big data, artificial intelligence and machine learning for decent work, Policy Dialogue, Summary report #3, San Francisco, ILO Global Commission on the FOW, Geneva: ILO. 77 ACV (2019). #arbeidmorgen. Werkdocument en eerste ontwerp van krachtlijnen, Brussel: ACV Vakbeweging.

References

317

78 79

80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87

88

89

90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97

98

99

Grommen,Stefan (2019). Lekker traditioneel, maar met een digitaal randje: zo vindt u vandaag een job. Brussels: VRT. ILO (2019). World Employment Social Outlook, Trends 2019, Geneva: ILO. Aleksynska, Mariya, Janine Berg, e.a. (2019). Working conditions in a global perspective, Luxemburg: Eurofound & ILO. McKinsey (2017). A Future that works: automation, employment, and productivity. Executive summary, San Francisco: McKinsey.

OECD (2018). Policy brief on the Future of Work. Putting faces to the jobs at risk of automation, Paris: OECD. Frey, Carl Benedikt and Michael A. Osborne (2015). Deloitte analysis, London: Deloitte.

Agoria (2018). Digitalisering en de Belgische Arbeidsmarkt, Shaping the future of work, Brussels: Agoria.

Ramaphosa, Cyril, Stefan Löfven et al. (2019). Work for a brighter future, p. 23, 46, 18, Geneva: ILO. Idem. p. 20.

Website Uppsala Conflict Data Program: ucdp.uu.se.

ILO (2017). Inception Report, Geneva: ILO. Pennel, Denis (2017). Travail, la soif de liberté, Paris: Librairies Eyrolles.

Manpower (2017). #GigResponsibility, The Rise of NextGen Work, Milwaukee: Manpower Group.

ILO (2018). Informality and non-standard forms of employment, document prepared for G20 Employment Working Group meeting, Buenos Aires: ILO. Passchier, Catelene (2018). De verknipte economie, presentation, Amsterdam: FNV. Broecke, Stijn (2018). The platform economy may be growing fast (but remains small), presentation. Paris: OECD. Katz & Krueger (2016). The rise and Nature of Alternative Work Arrangements in the US 1995-2015, Harvard University and Princeton University.

JPMorgan Chase (2016). The Online Platform Economy – Has Growth Peaked?, New York: JPMorgan Chase Institute.

Balaram, B., J. Warden and F. Wallace-Stephens (2017). Good Gigs: A fairer future for the UK’s gig economy, London: RSA. UNI (2016). Crowd Work in Europe, Brussels: UNI Europe.

Ramioul, Monique and Yennef Vereycken (2019). De verdwenen organisatie?

Werken in de platformeconomie, in De Gids op Maatschappelijk Gebied, Beweging.net.

Nederlands historicus zet miljardairs stevig op hun nummer in Davos, in Het Laatste Nieuws, 30 January 2019, www.hln.be/nieuws/ buitenland/-rijken-moeten-stoppen-met-belastingen-te-ontwijken-al-de-restis-bullsh-t-nederlands-historicus-zet-miljardairs-stevig-op-hun-nummer-indavos~a641db84.

318

Still work to be done

100 Van Noort, Wouter. Davos 2019 had afgelast moeten worden, in NRC, www.nrc.

nl/nieuws/2019/01/18/davos-is-reunie-van-mensen-die-alle-problemen-hebbengecreeerd-a3650914.

101 Scheffer, Paul. Het fiscale gespijbel van Davosgangers, in NRC, 6 February 2019, www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2019/02/06/het-fiscale-gespijbel-van-davosgangersa3653006.

102 Roy, Louis (2018). Transparantie in de toeleveringsketen via innovatieve technologieën, Brussels: SERV. 103 Mooijman, Ruben. Google-taks gaat wereldwijd, in De Standaard, 1 February 2019, www.standaard.be/cnt/dmf20190131_04144666.

104 Beirlant, Bart. De Spitzenkandidaten – Ook techreuzen moeten belastingen betalen, in De Standaard, 8 May 2019, www.standaard.be/cnt/ dmf20190507_04381982.

105 Ramaphosa, Cyril, Stefan Löfven et al. (2019). Work for a brighter future, p. 51, Geneva: ILO. 106 ILO (2019). ILO Centenary Declaration for the Future of Work, Geneva: ILO. 107 Ryder, Guy (2020). New normal? Better normal, Geneva: ILO. 108 WHO (2020). Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Dashboard, Geneva: WHO. 109 Draulans, Dirk (2020). Vlaamse topviroloog Peter Piot zelf coronapatiënt: ‘Eindelijk heeft een virus me te pakken’, Brussels: Knack.

110 ILO (2020). ILO Monitor: COVID-19 and the world of work. 3rd Edition, Geneva: ILO. 111 Pozzan, Emanuela, Cattaneo, Umberto (2020). Women health workers: Working relentlessly in hospitals and at home, Geneva: ILO. 112 Vrancken, Inge, Bal, Geertje (2020). De coronacrisis treft mannen en vrouwen op een andere manier: hoe COVID-19 niet genderneutraal is, in VRT NWS, 18 April 2020, www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2020/04/17/ het-coronavirus-treft-mannen-en-vrouwen-op-een-andere-manier-of.

113 Tapiola, Kari (2020). Crisis management and the ILO. Unpublished manuscript, Geneva: ILO. 114 ILO (2020). Country policy responses, Geneva: ILO. 115 Criekemans, David (2020). Coronacrisis: katalysator voor herglobalisering van onderaf, Den Haag: Clingendael Spectator.

116 Serroyen, Chris (2020). Coronawerven, Brussels: unpublished note.

117 Mooijman, Ruben (2020). Virus vreet economische dogma’s aan, Brussels: De Standaard.

118 Georgieva, Kristalina (2020). A global crisis like no other needs a global response like no other, Washington: IMFBlog.

119 Mooijman, Ruben (2020). G20 verlicht schuldenlast van armste landen, Brussels: De Standaard.

References

319

www.lannoo.com Register on our website to regularly receive a newsletter with information about new books and interesting exclusive offers.

Cover: Studio Lannoo Layout: Studio Lannoo in collaboration with Keppie & Keppie Author’s photo: © ILO Photo - Marcel Crozet Translated from Dutch by Irene Schaudies © Lannoo Publishers nv, Tielt, 2020 and Luc Cortebeeck d/2020/45/450 – isbn 978 90 014 6915 9 – nur 697/740 All rights reserved. Nothing of this publication may be reproduced, stored in an automated database and/or made public in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher.

Luc Cort eb eeck was for many years the President of the ACV-CSC, the most representative trade union confederation in Belgium. He was also strongly committed to the creation and activities of the International Trade Union Confederation. He is known as a strong negotiator and a bridge builder. He not only left his mark on social dialogue in Belgium, but also weighed in on labour issues around the world through his role at the ILO. This book is his ardent plea for effective international social regulations and a strong ILO as a cornerstone for social progress.

www.lannoo.com

9 789401 469159

STILL WORK TO BE DONE

In Still Work to Be Done, he presents his experiences and insights, which call for reflection and, above all, action. In a far-reaching analysis of labour in today’s world – from forced labour in Asia and the Gulf States through the brutal violence against trade unionists in Latin America to the erosion of social security and the right to strike in industrialised countries – he examines the future of work: how can we eliminate child labour and exploitation? How do we make governments and multinationals respect all workers in supply chains? How do we use the challenges and opportunities of digitisation to tackle inequality? How will we work in the postcoronavirus world, after a pandemic hitting the most vulnerable and the young hardest of all?

Luc Cortebeeck

Luc Cortebeeck has been fighting for social justice for over forty years. From 2011 to 2017, he was Vice-Chairperson of the ILO Governing Body and in 2017-2018 its Chairperson.

The International Labour Organization (ILO) is the UN agency that brings together governments, employers and workers, promotes decent work and social justice, and sets and supervises international labour standards.

Luc Cortebeeck

STILL WORK TO BE DONE The Future of Decent Work in the World