Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: : Reply to Peter from David Bacon

[Doug Henwood <dhenwood@xxxxxxxxx>]

J. Barkley Rosser, Jr. wrote:

> Again, Max, who is to decide which of the
> worthy ILO core provisions are going to be the
> ones we (the US?  the WTO?) actually crack
> down and impose trade sanctions over?

Barkley, can you descend from that high horse of yours and read what
the assistant director of public policy for the AFL-CIO has actually
said?

> [Thea] Lee: We've built a very strong consensus among labor unions
> around the world about the importance of incorporating enforceable
> workers' rights into international trade agreements. These include
> the freedom of association, the right to bargain collectively and
> provisions on child labor, forced labor and employment
> discrimination. The question is how international organizations can
> support the goal of observing core labor standards. The IMF and the
> World Bank could include as one of the conditions for loans the
> observance of these standards. By not having any rules on workers'
> rights, the WTO makes it difficult for countries to implement and
> enforce core labor standards. The very absence of rules undermines
> countries' abilities to enforce them. But frankly we're a long way
> from having consensus that this is an issue the countries want to
> discuss. Because the WTO is a multilateral organization, we need to
> start with some more modest goals of opening a dialogue about what
> constructive role it can play in promoting core labor standards. Our
> ultimate goal is to incorporate workers' rights and environmental
> protections into WTO rules. But we can't start with that. In the
> short term we hope to force the WTO to acknowledge that its actions
> have a bearing on labor standards and begin a conversation that will
> one day lead to a change in the rules.

This is pretty weak tea, and bears no resemblance to your fantastic
version of their position, much less the position of the U.S.
government.

Doug