Responsible Globalization
Regional Delegates, the people of The Republic of Class Conscious States urges you to approve the proposal titled, "Responsible Globalization". It is imperative that labor and health standards are not ignored as our economies expand, and that no worker is left behind!
everyone who supports thsi bill should also support the fair trade bill, as they both strive for a more equitable world.
http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/page=UN_proposal1/match=responsible
Responsible Globalization
Category: Social Justice; A resolution to reduce income inequality and increase basic welfare.
Strength: Strong
Proposed by: Class Conscious States
Description: In an age where free trade agreements boost the economy of some nations and decimate others, it is imperative that certain health and labor regulations be included in all future trade agreements. When free trade treaties blatantly ignore labor and health standards, the workers in less developed nations suffer grave consequences – they are exposed to toxic chemicals, sexual harrassment, musculoskeletal disorders, and literally have years chipped off of their lives. The workers in developed nations lose jobs overseas to cheaper labor, and the working class becomes divided rather than unified. With respect, we propose that the following be included in all future trade agreements - some of these deal with general standards while others would be implemented at the factory level:
-A minimum living wage of $8.50 per hour, or its equivalent, for nations included in the agreement
-At least fifty percent health care coverage provided by the employer
-Access to workplace parking lots for unions
-Mandatory cardcheck recognition whereby the union provides a majority of signed union cards to the company and is then certified.
-No “protection contracts”, which are created by lawyers and corrupt unions and technically cover basic workplace rights, but are largely ineffective and serve to hamper legitimate unionism.
-In the absence of a union, each employer must have a grievance procedure with no more than 2 levels of bureaucracy.
-A works council, in which worker (not union) elected representatives have veto power concerning layoff and hiring issues.
-Closed ballot works council elections
-The bulk of promotions within each factory must come from the rank and file, with the prospect of moving up the corporate ladder.
Approvals: 15 (Madrigals, Mikes Hope, Londana, Tanah Burung, West - Europa, Tylerville, Corblakystan, Sukalandia, Lord Sky_Elf, KOR3A, Sambonium, Aneatha, Tannemirt, Nano soft, Zigtag)
Status: Lacking Support (requires 119 more approvals)
Voting Ends: Fri Dec 19 2003
Trashed Wasteland
18-12-2003, 05:03
Thank you again, Santin, for posting the resolution at hand.
This resolution seems very large to me at this time, and the fact that it requires so much would hurt the economies of all the nations that are forced to participate in this bill. Some of the demands made in this bill are huge, such as union only parking lots, half covered heathcare, etc. This adds up to serious money that many smaller businesses just dont have.
Regarding the minimum wage:
Free trade agreements largely occur between capitalist nations. In capitalist nations, individual companies pay wages, not the government. The multinational corporations that stand to benefit from free trade agreements are well established and wealthy, and can afford to pay a decent wage.
Regarding health care:
Again, free trade agreements largely occur between capitalist nations. In cases where the government does pay for the bulk of a person's health care, the "50% coverage per employee" rule would not apply. But granted, this should have been made clear in the proposal.
Access to parking lots:
This is not an uncommon request from unions. When unions do have access to parking lots, they have much higher rates of success in organizing members. Yes, this does give a benefit to the union, but that's the point of this proposal - things get so bad for workers in nations covered under free trade agreements that they need some form of representation, but as things stand now, free trade agreements provide for no labor rights.
Mandatory cardcheck:
Another simple way to get more union representation in sweatshops. If this proposal is passed and some nations feel unions have gained too much power, I encourage the capitalists to submit a counter proposal.
Protection Contracts:
PCs often circumvent legitimate unions in sweatshops. A corrupt union or lawyer(s) get to a factory before a legitimate union can and sign a contract with the employer that technically covers workers but provides protections far below acceptable labor and health standards. This proposal asks that such contracts be outlawed.
Absence of a union:
Companies must implement some sort of expedient grievance or arbitration procedure if their workplace has not been organized.
Works Councils:
I know we're supposed to stay away from "real-life" examples, but oh well, here goes anyway. In Germany, works councils that have veto power over hirings and firings are common, and their economy is productive and creative. In Japan, lifetime employment is common in larger corporations, and it will often take bankruptcy for a company to start laying off their employees. Contrary to the belief held in the United States, labor is not the first or only place where costs can be cut - nor should it be. While I'm no proponent of capitalism, there are other forms of capitalism available other than the cutthroat, winner take all, liberal market economy method in the United States.
Closed ballot works council elections:
Pretty self explanatory. We don't want any outside politics getting in the way of our voting, now do we?
Promotions:
What I meant by this was that workers in sweatshops should receive voluntary training and education and the best workers would be promoted. Obviously, this is much different from what I said.
There are a few flaws with this proposal, but I feel that the pros outweigh the cons, and I hope that you agree. I know a lot of what I said may seem convoluted, and if you have gotten to this point, I congratulate you. Please feel free to telegram me with any further questions.
With hope for a better future,
CCS
Responsible Globalization
Category: Social Justice; A resolution to reduce income inequality and increase basic welfare.
Strength: Strong
Proposed by: Class Conscious States
Description: In an age where free trade agreements boost the economy of some nations and decimate others, it is imperative that certain health and labor regulations be included in all future trade agreements. When free trade treaties blatantly ignore labor and health standards, the workers in less developed nations suffer grave consequences – they are exposed to toxic chemicals, sexual harrassment, musculoskeletal disorders, and literally have years chipped off of their lives.
The implication that only "less developed nations" suffer grave consequences is patronizing and completely untrue. It's not as if workers in developed countries aren't exposed to these things.
The workers in developed nations lose jobs overseas to cheaper labor,
-A minimum living wage of $8.50 per hour, or its equivalent, for nations included in the agreement
This is why they can't compete. One can't just have an artificial 'living wage'.. it will have to depend on many factors.. the economy, the industry etc. Suppose a company can't pay minimum wage.. what can they do ? they have to save money.. so they lower quality.. or dump workers. So pushing for a minimum wage will hurt businesses and people in the long run.
-At least fifty percent health care coverage provided by the employer
We'd want full healthcare for minor ailments, and 50% for major. But healthcare should not be a government concern.
-Access to workplace parking lots for unions
-Mandatory cardcheck recognition whereby the union provides a majority of signed union cards to the company and is then certified.
-No “protection contracts”, which are created by lawyers and corrupt unions and technically cover basic workplace rights, but are largely ineffective and serve to hamper legitimate unionism.
-In the absence of a union, each employer must have a grievance procedure with no more than 2 levels of bureaucracy.
-A works council, in which worker (not union) elected representatives have veto power concerning layoff and hiring issues.
-Closed ballot works council elections
-The bulk of promotions within each factory must come from the rank and file, with the prospect of moving up the corporate ladder.
This is way too much government interference. Did you really want the UN to decide on parking lots ? :) We can't support this.. governments should not be making decisions that companies themselves should be deciding on.
Wouldn't this be a domestic issue?
Unemployment always rises with minimum wage. Remember that.
I always love how some people think that living wage is the same throughout the entire world. No price on anything ever changes, even slightly, by region, culture, or over time, they always say.
-At least fifty percent health care coverage provided by the employer
What if I have two jobs? Does that mean I get free healthcare, since each employer has to pay half of my costs? What about small companies that hire two workers for twelve hours a week, why should they have to provide these huge benefits? A few glaring holes, there.
-Mandatory cardcheck recognition whereby the union provides a majority of signed union cards to the company and is then certified.
I'm not sure I follow what that means. I guess it's saying that a union will need the approval of the workers to be established? If that's what it is, I probably like that idea.
-No “protection contracts”, which are created by lawyers and corrupt unions and technically cover basic workplace rights, but are largely ineffective and serve to hamper legitimate unionism.
How do we differentiate between corrupt and helpful unions?
-A works council, in which worker (not union) elected representatives have veto power concerning layoff and hiring issues.
So... lemme get this straight... employees should be able to determine whether or not they're hired and fired? Yeah, that's not a conflict of interest or a blatant violation of a person's right to control their own money.
What if the employer wants to fire someone on the works council? That occurence will definitely come up sooner or later, and there needs to be some procedure to deal with it that doesn't blatantly favor either side.
How big is the works council? Can it be one person? Can it be everyone?
-Closed ballot works council elections
Who gets to vote? The employers or the workers? I suppose we're just supposed to infer that you mean the workers will elect their representatives, but clarity is generally considered a plus when drafting international legislation.
While secrecy may be good for some security, it also allows for trickery -- when ballots are secret, only the person counting the votes has to be swayed. An open ballot is an honest ballot.
Of course, employers may take advantage of an open ballot and punish those who vote against them. Since this proposal includes the works council, however, I'm not sure that this particular threat would be major.
-The bulk of promotions within each factory must come from the rank and file, with the prospect of moving up the corporate ladder.
Welcome to Unclear City. The Resulting Loophole Motel is the fourth building on your right.
And, of course, it makes perfect sense for employees to elevate people trained to operate heavy machinery to management positions instead of those people trained in management, right?
Contrary to the belief held in the United States, labor is not the first or only place where costs can be cut - nor should it be.
That belief is held in the US? Sure, labor cuts happen, but usually because of things like "Well, this factory isn't building anything we can sell at a profit anymore. Whatever it is building isn't being bought. I suppose that simple logic might indicate that we should consider closing it."
While I'm no proponent of capitalism, there are other forms of capitalism available other than the cutthroat, winner take all, liberal market economy method in the United States.
Yes, Europe is so much better than the US, with their skyrocketing unemployment, near freezes on hiring, blindingly high tax rates and receding economies. There are certainly methods other than those found in the United States -- but it is important to note that none of them have had as much success.
Legislating economy on this scale is a very dangerous business. It's impossible to take all of the diverse needs of the many nations into account, and so a broad, highly restricting measure like this is never likely to gain my support.
EDITED for a broken quote tag. Oops.
Wouldn't this be a domestic issue?
Unemployment always rises with minimum wage. Remember that.
I always love how some people think that living wage is the same throughout the entire world. No price on anything ever changes, even slightly, by region, culture, or over time, they always say.
Incredible, isn't it ? it's like their world ends at their country's borders.