DON'T GIVE IN TO THE DARK SIDE
Last fall's protests at the World Trade Organization talks in Seattle made it clear that trade policy is no longer the exclusive domain of sheltered elites and corporate interests. Following the example of big business, unions are now going global -- backed by a growing worldwide consensus that freer trade must also protect human rights, the environment, and decent working conditions. The international ups strike in 1997 showed just how effective this new strategy can be.
To the Editor:
Jay Mazur systematically distorts economic facts. Despite his self-professed "internationalism," he speaks primarily for workers in rich countries. Mazur argues that wages in less-developed nations "are artificially suppressed to about one-tenth of those in the industry's organized sectors in the North." To the contrary, American textile workers' wages are kept artificially high because poor-country textile workers are denied the right to sell in America. With a surplus of labor in developing nations, South Carolina textile workers could not succeed in a free competition. The dirty little secret of rich-world protectionism is that it is directed squarely at the have-nots. For example, WTO Director-General Mike Moore notes, "Average duties applied by rich countries to products from the poorest are higher than the levies on products from other rich countries. In the U.S. and Canada, average duties are about twice as high on poor-country products than on those from developed countries."
Mazur similarly ignores the role productivity plays in wage-setting. Employers cannot pay poor-country workers 60 cents per hour if their productivity merits $8 per hour. High-productivity workers could simply walk across the street to employers offering higher wages.
Mazur is correct that rights to organize, bargain collectively, and strike need to be included in the new trade agreement. But his professed internationalism is greatly at odds with the desires of workers in the poorest nations to sell their products in rich-nation markets. His call to outlaw child labor could paradoxically hurt the very children he aims to help.
Two ideas to bridge this problem are aid programs aimed at making more years of schooling economically possible for impoverished children and laws against the export of products produced by children (as opposed to employment for exclusively domestic purposes).
Thomas O'Brien
Director of Research, Horizon Institute for Policy Solutions
Related
Multinational corporations are using cheap Third World labor to avoid the high labor standards of developed nations. The time is ripe for a global New Deal that protects the rights of all workers.
The disappearance of work and widespread dislocation in Europe and the United States pose once again the nineteenth-century "Social Question": how to secure economic progress in light of the political and moral threat posed by the condition of the working class? The solution then was state action, which, contrary to today's neoliberal orthodoxy, fostered economic growth. The state cannot be abandoned now; Europeans won't go for it. It is the only protection from global market forces and the only forum for politics. But the left must stop protecting the status quo and give up unaffordable policies if it is to bring in the excluded and avert extremism.
Last fall's protests at the World Trade Organization talks in Seattle made it clear that trade policy is no longer the exclusive domain of sheltered elites and corporate interests. Following the example of big business, unions are now going global -- backed by a growing worldwide consensus that freer trade must also protect human rights, the environment, and decent working conditions. The international ups strike in 1997 showed just how effective this new strategy can be.
