![]() |
|||||
SECTION 10: STRATEGIES AND TOOLS - REGIONAL LEVEL |
|||||
Module 10 (continued)The Right to Work and Rights at WorkUSING
MODULE 10 IN A TRAINING PROGRAM
|
|||||
Rights at Work or Labor RightsClosely related to the right to work are rights at work or labor rights. This is the set of rights that protects the person who sells his or her labor. These rights include:
There is a close relationship between labor rights and trade union rights. Wage work emerged with the advent of the industrial revolution. Initially, there were no laws to protect the health of wage earners, no limits on the workday and no paid holidays, nor was there a right to organize on behalf of the common good. At first, the organizing of wage earners suffered harsh repression, and later it was merely tolerated. Ultimately, the contemporary regimes protecting labor rights were instituted. Thanks to their exercise of the right to organize trade unions, workers have won and maintained many work-related rights. Labor rights include the right to freedom of association, collective bargaining and the right to strike. The right to dignified working conditionsThe preamble of the 1944 International Labour Organization Constitution, which the ILO and its oversight organs have acknowledged to have the force of law and to be legally binding on member states, is the touchstone in international law for the right to dignified working conditions. In effect, the preamble proclaims the urgency of improving conditions of injustice, misery, and privation. It notes that "the failure of any nation to adopt humane conditions of labor is an obstacle in the way of other nations wishing to improve the lot of workers in their own countries."
The right to dignified working conditions is closely linked to the prohibition against slavery, servitude and forced labor. Even though most states today recognize the right to dignified working conditions, numerous forms of work persist in the world that are at odds with the right to dignity; these especially affect women and children. In some countries debt servitude exists, and, in others, domestic servitude is practiced, with the employer having complete control over all aspects of the workers lives. In other countries, problems have been identified that entail the exploitation of children in prostitution and pornography. In many cases, there is national legislation outlawing such practices, but it is never fully enforced. Such situations clearly pose challenges to human rights activists, particularly activists organizing around ESC rights. Prohibition of forced laborForced labor is defined as labor required under the threat of punishment, whatever it may be, and for which the individual has not offered himself or herself voluntarily. While most states have ratified the pertinent international instruments and proclaim the freedom to work in various forums, to consider forced labor a thing of the past would be a glaring mistake. In reality, the forms of forced labor that affect the freedom to accept work often go unnoticed, and on occasion enjoy some social support. In several countries, prisoners are required to perform forced labor beyond the terms allowed in ILO Conventions 29 and 105.6 In other countries, persons are prevented from resigning from certain posts; other countries impose criminal sanctions for participation in strikes; and in others, persons rendering obligatory military service are forced to perform activities beyond those strictly military in nature. Right to a minimum level of remunerationArticle 7(a)(ii) of the ICESCR guarantees the right to remuneration that provides for dignified living conditions for workers and their families. A similar provision appears in article 23 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The ILO has adopted conventions that regulate the setting of minimum wage.7 The main problems posed to the recognition and enjoyment of this right relate to the methods used to determine minimum wage. Many governments often unilaterally determine it. The minimum hourly wage should be fixed in a way that allows a person working the normal number of hours per week to enjoy a decent and adequate standard of living for his or her family. Minimum wage legislation (already existing in many countries) is often severely affected by the fact that workers are threatened with a lack of employment if they insist on a minimum wage. Another problem is the failure to adjust wages to the real cost of an adequate standard of living. Right to a limited workdayConvention No. 1 of the ILO limits the work day in industry,8 while Convention No. 30 does so for commerce and offices.9 Although only fifty-two countries have ratified Convention No. 1, and only thirty have ratified Convention No. 30, this is widely acknowledged to be an important right. In some countries greater limitations on the workday have been adopted. In others, in contrast, there is more open-ended authorization for supplementary work or overtime, in practice restricting the scope of the right to a limited workday.
Right to form trade unions and join themThis right is recognized and guaranteed not only in the main human rights instruments but also in ILO Conventions Nos. 87 and 98.10 The latter are the most important elaboration of the mandate in the preamble to the ILO Constitution relating to the freedom of association. Convention No. 87 has 121 ratifications, while Convention No. 98 has 137. Despite this large number of ratifications, workers in many countries still face severe problems in exercising these rights. Difficulties range from violence against trade unionists and union leaders, to provisions that allow for the involvement of the administrative authorities in the work of the trade union, to provisions that restrict the enjoyment of this right to certain categories of workers. The establishment of free trade zones (FTZs), while providing jobs that might not otherwise be available, has also had a significant impact on the rights of those specific sectors of workers-in large part because worker protections are usually eased and trade union activities restricted in FTZs.
|
Rights at Work for Women-Preventing Sexual Harassment in the Work PlaceThe question of sexual harassment faced by women in the work place is very often ignored in discussions of labor rights. Very few countries have laws and mechanisms to deal with the problem. A 1997 judgment by the Indian Supreme Court set norms for preventing sexual harassment in the work place. The court stated that it is the duty of the employer or other responsible persons in the work place or in other institutions to prevent or deter the commission of acts of sexual harassment and to provide procedures for the resolution, settlement or prosecution of acts of sexual harassment by taking all steps required. Sexual harassment includes such unwelcome behavior (whether directly or by implication) as:
Where any of these act is committed, it constitutes an act of sexual harassment in circumstances in which the victim has a reasonable apprehension that in relation to the victim's employment or work, whether in government, public or private enterprises, such conduct can be humiliating and may constitute a health and safety problem. An act would be considered discriminatory when the woman has reasonable grounds to believe that her objection to such advances would put her at a disadvantage in connection with her employment or work, including in regard to recruitment or promotion, or when the conduct creates a hostile work environment, or the victim has sufficient reason to believe that adverse consequences might follow if she raises any objection to such advances. The court said that all employers or
persons in charge of work places, whether
in the public or private sector, should
take appropriate steps to prevent sexual
harassment. Where sexual harassment takes
place as a result of an act or omission
by any third party or outsider, the employer
and the person in charge must take all
steps necessary to assist the affected
person in terms of support and preventive
action. |
In addition to minorities and woman who face discrimination, others who face discrimination are those who hold certain political opinions or religious convictions, those of certain social origins, and trade union activists. The same person may suffer discrimination for several reasons, and discriminatory acts may not be expressed openly, making it difficult to show evidence regarding discrimination. The same can be said of legislation that allows the employer to inquire into prospective employees political, religious or cultural views, even in the case of issues not related to the employment functions in question.
Trade union autonomy is a fundamental element of the freedom of association. This presupposes not only that the state and employers refrain from engaging in acts that interfere with trade unions, but also that trade unions be able to adopt bylaws and a program of action, and have the ability to join together in trade union federations nationally and internationally. These rights, which are expressions of the right to trade union autonomy, often go unrecognized in the law and in practice in many countries.
In some states, authorities still have the power to dissolve unions. In others, authorities have been vested with the power to bring an action before the courts seeking dissolution of workers organizations, or to impose administrative sanctions on trade unions, which may go as far as controlling the organizations economic resources. In some states, there is a prohibition on forming more than one trade union per company or institution. Other states have adopted detailed rules governing the election of union officials, even setting forth requirements for becoming union representatives, thereby depriving the organizations of the possibility of regulating these matters in their bylaws.
The ILO has developed extensive doctrine on the scope and contents of the rights regulated by its conventions. National legal systems have assimilated these principles. States have established judicial and administrative systems for dealing with labor-related rights.
Human rights activists and labor rights defenders should make regular use not only of the national courts, but also of the mechanisms of the international community. In particular, they should
support the trade unions of the respective country to make comments on the reports that the governments must submit periodically to the International Labour Office;
include comments and information on labor-related rights in the alternative reports submitted to the CESCR; and
establish mechanisms with the trade unions to advise them on the documentation and submission of claims to domestic courts, the ILO and other international oversight organs.
The need for cheap labor as fuel for the economic expansion of rich countries, and the problems of unemployment and poverty in poorer countries, have contributed to increased migration of people. Most developing countries use export of labor for securing badly needed foreign exchange.
Migrant workers are subject to exploitation and denial of human rights. Migrant workers do not generally enjoy the same political or ESC rights as citizens of host countries do. Legal protection is generally unavailable. Undocumented workers are particularly vulnerable, since they have neither legal protection nor the possibility of seeking help because they fear imprisonment and/or deportation by the host country authorities.
Migrant workers usually work in dirty, difficult and dangerous jobs. Women migrant workers are even more vulnerable than men. Women work as housemaids, entertainers, bartenders and workers in the sex industry. They often face the problem of sexual harassment, including rape. Their vulnerability is heightened by the fact that they are often drawn into and used for criminal activities such as drug trafficking, prostitution and smuggling of prohibited articles. Job offers in foreign countries are sometimes used as a pretext for tricking poor women and thereby trafficking them.
The ILO was the first to enact standards for the protection of the rights of migrant workers. The ILO's two major conventions on the subject are the Migration for Employment Convention (Revised No. 97) of 1949 and the Migrant Workers (Supplementary Provisions) Convention (No. 143) of 1975. Convention No. 97 requires that ratifying states treat legal migrant workers on the same footing as their own nationals. Convention No. 143 provides that states must respect the basic human rights of migrant workers. They should take steps to prevent clandestine migration and stop manpower trafficking activities.
The
UN has been concerned since the 1970s with the
problem of migrant workers. In 1978, the first
World Conference to Combat Racism and Racial
Discrimination recommended that the UN draft
a convention on the protection of rights of
migrant workers. In the same year, the General
Assembly made a similar recommendation. Subsequently,
in 1980, a working group open to all member
states was established by the General Assembly
to draft a convention on the subject. In 1990,
the working group completed the task of drafting
an International Convention on the Protection
of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members
of Their Families. The convention is yet to
become operational.
Article 2 of the UN convention defines migrant worker as "a person who is to be engaged, is engaged or has been engaged in a remunerated activity in a State of which he or she is not a national."
The convention is path-breaking in including under its scope previously neglected categories of migrant workers. Migrant workers identified by the convention are:
Articles 8 to 32 under part III of the convention deal with the human rights of migrant workers and their families. The rights include: the right to life, prohibition against torture, prohibition against slavery or servitude, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, freedom to manifest ones religion or belief, freedom of expression, prohibition against arbitrary arrest, unlawful interference with his or her privacy, prohibition against arbitrary deprivation of property, protection against violence, right to fair trial, prohibition against retroactive application of criminal laws, prohibition against confiscation or destruction of identity documents, prohibition against collective expulsion, right to take part in trade union activities, same treatment as that of nationals with regard to social security, right to receive medical care, right of a child of a migrant worker to name and nationality, right of a child of a migrant worker for access to education, respect for cultural identity of migrant workers and the right to transfer their belongings and savings upon termination of their employment.
Articles 36 to 56 under part IV of the convention deal with other rights of migrant workers and members of their families. Articles 57 to 64 under part V deal with particular categories of migrant workers and their families. These provisions provide necessary modifications for provisions under part III and part IV of the convention.
Article 72 of the convention provides for the establishment of a committee to review the implementation of the convention by state parties. Initially, after ratification by twenty states, the committee will consist of ten independent members. It will be increased to fourteen members when forty-one ratifications have been made.
All states parties to the convention are obligated to report to the committee within a year of entry into force of the convention. Afterwards, they must submit a report every five years. The report should deal with the legislative, judicial, administrative and other measures they have taken to protect the rights enshrined in the convention.
The convention also contains provision for the committee to receive communications (complaints) from one state party against another and complaints from individuals of a state claiming violation of rights enshrined under the convention. However, the committee can receive complaints against a state only when that state party accepts the jurisdiction of the committee to receive such complaints.
Filipino Migrant Workers: The Steven Johnson Syndrome CasesBetween July and December 1996, forty-nine Filipino workers, most of them female, became seriously ill in the course of their employment with Philips Electronic Industries in Taiwan. Six eventually died. All of them had been cleared as having good health and fit for work prior leaving for Taiwan. Within two to three weeks of their arrival in Taiwan, they had experienced fever, general weakness of the body, and skin rashes that eventually turned to blisters. Their skin became black and sensitive to touch. Initial medical examination findings in Taiwan ranged from simple survey to viral infection. When their condition became serious, most opted to return home. Further diagnosis in the Philippines indicated that they had contracted Steven Johnson Syndrome"(SJS), a severe form of allergic reaction which may be caused by drugs, chemicals, infection and other factors. The next batch of workers who went to work in the same company were not informed about the incidence of "mysterious" illness in the workplace. In 1997, the Filipino government imposed a ban on sending workers to the workplace, and sent a Technical Working Group to ascertain the cause of illness. The group concluded that the disease was probably due to occupational exposure to chemicals such as formaldehyde, trichlorethylene and copper sulfate. On the other hand, Taiwanese doctors stated that the disease was not due to occupational exposure to chemicals, but was caused by a mycoplasma-like organism in association with HLA-B62, a genetic trait singular to Filipino migrant workers. In 1998, the Filipino government sent another mission, which, without getting into the cause of illness, concluded that it was satisfied with the measures taken by the company to control the recurrence of the illness. Based on this report, the government lifted the ban and allowed workers to be deployed in the company. The lifting of the ban was mainly based on economic calculations, not the health and safety of workers. The case shows the vulnerability of migrant
workers and the lack of institutions to
ensure their rights. Even with the intervention
of the Filipino government, workers were
not able to get proper diagnosis or compensation
for their sufferings, and now the Filipino
government is deregulating the recruitment
of workers by foreign companies. Consequently,
the government will have no future role
in this arena, and the migration of workers
will become strictly a matter between
the worker and his or her foreign employer.
The government is thus abandoning its
regulatory functions to safeguard the
rights of its citizens. |
Another group that is vulnerable, exploited and denied rights at work are child workers working in difficult or hazardous conditions. These young workers, in addition to facing immediate health and other hazards, suffer the potential for long-term physical, intellectual and emotional distress. Working children potentially face an adulthood of illiteracy and unemployment. Despite a range of problems, child labor is widely practiced.
Article 32 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child recognizes that a child has the right to be protected from work that is hazardous, that interferes with the childs education, or is harmful to the childs health, or physical, mental, spiritual, moral or social development. It requests states to provide for rules related to the minimum age of employment and to regulate hours of work and conditions of employment.
The ILO has adopted several conventions concerning child labor. The most recent and far-reaching is Convention No. 182 Concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour. Adopted in 1999, the convention has yet to come into force. It obligates states that ratify it to take immediate and effective measures to secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labor as a matter of urgency. Under article 3, the worst forms of child labor comprise:
(a) all forms of slavery or practices similar to slavery, such as the sale and trafficking of children, debt bondage and serfdom and forced or compulsory labor, including forced or compulsory recruitment of children for use in armed conflict;
(b) the use, procuring or offering of a child for prostitution, for the production of pornography or for pornographic performances;
(c) the use, procuring or offering of a child for illicit activities, in particular for the production and trafficking of drugs; and
(d) work which, by its nature or the circumstances in which it is carried out, is likely to harm the health, safety or morals of children.
Article 3(d) includes among other forms of work:
During the 1980s new forms of the organization of production and new global patterns of investment have emerged. These have changed the pattern and meaning of work. In the last two decades, the majority of new jobs in the developed countries have been of a "casualized" nature, which is a shift from regulated and unionized work. Most governments of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) have pushed for deregulation as well as privatization of the social means of production. This has led to increased reliance on subcontractors by private and public sector corporations. Workers in the subcontracted units enjoy far fewer legal rights and benefits.
Does the introduction of such flexibility mean an alternative to bureaucratic planning and the possibility of greater democratic control over work and consumption? Or is it simply a device for extracting more labor from a low-paid, vulnerable workforce? There is also considerable disagreement about even how to define these shifts in investment, production, technology, distribution and the location of industry. Is there a decisive move away from "Fordist" mass production to a new economic order? Are we in the era of "post-Fordism" or "flexible specialisation", in which specialised products utilising new technology are to be made by decentralised workers? Or are we in fact seeing a more confused pattern, a new combination of employment structures in which employers favour flexibility or regulation depending on the nature of what is being produced? In the midst of an unresolved debate it is clear that a break can be observed in the pattern of organisation of work in many of the richer countries and that similar trends are emerging in the newly industrialised world.14
Workers in the unregulated sectors are called invisible workers since they work in isolation in scattered sweatshops and home-based units. They do not benefit from labor laws. Without a collective identity, they cannot receive much protection, even if laws are enacted in their favor. Some countries have enacted laws related to homeworkers, and in 1990 the ILO published a conditions of work digest on homework.15 It provides in-formation on relevant, varied legislation enacted in various countries. In Peru, for example, the wage rate for homeworkers cannot be less than that paid for the same work in a factory or workshop. In the Dominican Republic, homeworkers wage is based on the rates payable for the task. In India, the Insurance Act is not applicable to homeworkers. Laws for protection of homeworkers need to be harmonized. However, such laws will not be implemented until workers organize to ensure the enforcement of laws. Normally, the organization of "casualized" labor or homeworkers takes the form of cooperatives or self-help organizations.
Authors: The authors of this module are Rolf Künnemann on the right to work, and Alberto Gómez on rights at work (labor rights).
The Dinesh Bidi Cooperative"The Dinesh Bidi (bidi is a cigarette rolled in hand) Cooperative started in 1968, in the state of Kerala, India, when the private commercial entrepreneurs left the district in response to the 1966 Bidi and Cigar Workers' Act. The Act gave bidi homeworkers employment rights on a par with factory workers. The cost of hiring homeworkers rose, and private employers left the business, heralding unemployment for 12,000 home-based workers. The state government responded to that situation by organising workers in a series of producers' cooperatives and giving loans to workers to buy shares and raw materials. The cooperatives started with 3,000 members in 1968; by 1983, the membership had grown to 30,000. In the cooperatives, workers received fair wages maternity leave, group insurance and retirement benefits. All in all, they proved an immense success and were viewed as worthy of replication in several parts of India. "The replication, initiated by governments,
however, proved far more difficult. Besides
the local characteristics of the workers
and the market, the secret of success
of the Dinesh bidi cooperatives lay in
the strong trade union movement of Kerala.
The strict monitoring of the implementation
of the Bidi and Cigar Workers' Act by
unions encouraged the private manufacturers
to desert the area, leaving the market
entirely to the workers. In the non-unionised
regions, in contrast, the private sector
still functioned, relying on clandestine
labour; and thereby undercutting the cooperatives
who paid fair wages and the taxes."
16 |
USING MODULE 10 IN A TRAINING PROGRAM
5. Kathyayini Chamraj, "A Campaign against Oppression," The Hindu, 19 October 1997.
6. International Labour Organization, Convention concerning Forced or Compulsory Labour (ILO No. 29), 39 UNTS 55, entered into force 1 May 1932; International Labour Organization, Abolition of Forced Labour Convention (ILO No. 105), 320 UNTS 291, entered into force 17 Jan. 1959.
7. See International Labour Organization, Minimum Wage Fixing Convention (ILO No. 1131), entered into force 29 April 1972; International Labour Organization, Minimum Wage Fixing Machinery (Agriculture) Convention (ILO No. 99), entered into force 23 Aug. 1953.
8. International Labour Organization, Hours of Work (Industry) Convention (ILO No. 1), entered into force 13 June 1921.
9. International Labour Organization, Hours of Work (Commerce and Offices) Convention (ILO No. 30), entered into force 29 Aug. 1933.
10. International Labour Organization, Freedom of Association and Protection of the Rights to Organise Convention (ILO No. 87), 68 UNTS 17, entered into force 4 July 1950; International Labour Organization, Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention (ILO No. 98), 96 UNTS 257, entered into force 18 July 1951.
11. International Labour Organization, Equal Remuneration Convention (ILO No. 100), 165 UNTS 303, entered into force 23 May 1953.
12. International Labour Organization, Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention (ILO No. 111), 362 UNTS 31, entered into force 25 June 1958.
13. International Labour Organization, Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention (ILO No. 190) adopted 17 June 1999 (not yet in force).
14. Sheila Rowbotham and Swasti Mitter, Dignity and Daily Bread: New forms of economic organising among poor women in the Third World and the First (New York: Routledge, 1994), 14.
15. International Labour Organization, Conditions of Work Programme, Conditions of Work: Homework (Geneva, 1990).
16. Swasti Mitter, "On Organising Women in Casualised Work: A global overview," in Rowbotham and Mitter, op.cit., 32.