Human Rights Watch Seeks Global Governance of Labor Relations
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
In the United States of America, if a business violates existing state or federal laws relating to the manner in which it conducts labor relations, injured parties can hold the business accountable, both in a court of law and in the court of public opinion. For Human Rights Watch, this is not enough, especially in regards to the U.S.-based operations of European companies that are subject to, or voluntarily subscribe to, higher labor relations standards that exist in their home nations or that are contained in international human rights declarations, covenants, guidelines, or other documents.
In short, Human Rights Watch (“HRW”) believes that transnational businesses should be prohibited from engaging in different labor relations policies and practices as they may vary in accordance with the domestic laws of the countries in which they conduct business operations. Instead, HRW believes that transnational businesses should universally adhere to the most employee-friendly labor laws and standards to which they are subject in any specific national jurisdication.
HRW’s belief in the universal application of international labor laws and standards to multinational businesses is evidenced by the recent publication of its report, A Strange Case: Violations of Workers’ Freedom of Association in the United States by European Multinational Corporations (the “Report”). In the Report, HRW acknowledges that European companies have a choice as to how they will conduct labor relations policy in the United States. They can implement their home-based values and practices of respect for workers’ organizing rights and acceptance of collective bargaining as a normal way of engaging with employees in their U.S. operations, or in the words of HRW, “they can convert to forms of management interference with workers’ organizing and bargaining efforts that are all too common in the United States but almost unheard of in Europe.”
In the Report, HRW explains, and provides alledged examples of, how European companies “exploit the loopholes and shortcomings in U.S. labor law that violate international human rights standards or violate U.S. law that comports with international standards to frustrate workers’ exercise of their right to freedom of association.”
The Report emphasizes the role and applicaton of international labor standards adopted by the International Labour Organization (“ILO”), a specialized agency of the United Nations that deals with labour issues and that is based in Geneva, Switzerland. One of the principal functions of the ILO is setting international labor standards through the adoption of conventions and recommendations covering a broad spectrum of labour- related subjects and which, together, are sometimes referred to as the International Labour Code. The topics covered include a wide range of issues, from freedom of association to health and safety at work, working conditions in the maritime sector, night work, discrimination, child labour, and forced labour.
In presenting its case for the universal application of labor relations policies and practices, HRW cites ILO Convention 87, which provides workers with the right to establish and join labor organizations and ILO Convention 98, which provides that workers should be protected against acts of anti-union discrimination in respect of their employment. HRW’s case is complicated by the fact that the United States has not ratified either of these core ILO conventions. The Report also explains how the UN Global Compact, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (“OECD”) Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, UN resolutions on business and human rights, and many companies’ own codes of behavior incorporate, directly or indirectly, ILO standards on freedom of association. A previous article appearing on the Global Governance Watch website detailes how the UN Global Compact is partnering with the Global Reporting Initiative to develop environmental, social, and governance standards, including labour standards, with which transnational businesses should conform all of their business operations, regardless of applicable domestic laws.
At the end of the Report, HRW offers recommendations to European companies to improve their monitoring of U.S. operations to ensure respect for labor rights, to European governments and institutions to improve their oversight of European company labor practices in the United States, and to U.S. lawmakers to bring U.S. law into closer conformity with international freedom of association standards.
The HRW report constitutes another step toward the UN global governance of transnational businesses and unprecedented interference with national sovereignty. No doubt, HRW’s global governance ambitions will be greatly facilitated by the pledge of international financier George Soros to donate $10 million per year to HRW in each of the next ten years.
Jim Kelly is the President of Solidarity Center for Law and Justice, P.C., a public interest civil and human rights law firm based in Atlanta, Georgia. The opinions expressed herein are his own.
A JOINT PROGRAM OF
