The continuous challenge of labour rights

Fifty years ago, the International Labour Organization received the Nobel Peace Prize. In the lecture delivered on that occasion, the Director-General at the time, David Morse, concluded that the goal of social justice, established by the founders of the ILO in 1919, was a dynamic concept. “As soon as one problem has been successfully tackled, new and unforeseen problems arise which present a major challenge to the social conscience of mankind.”

Labour rights are a moving target because technology, production and distribution processes, public and private services and the formal and informal economy are continuously on the move. David Morse spoke at a time marked by Cold War divisions and the growing development needs of people in former colonies which had gained their independence.

Today, we strive to manage a universal market economy, with entirely different political divisions. Privileges have shifted between groups of employers and workers. Divisions which half a century ago were between countries have invaded them. Secure islands of prosperity exist in the middle of growing uncertainty and poverty.

In fact, there is little new in this – except for the scale. What earlier was true of different parts of a country or society, or parts of the world, has become universal. What remains at this universal scale is that people continue to be concerned about their employment, their incomes, and their security not only during but before and after working life.

This is why the discussion on the future of work invariably leads back to the need for a Universal Labour Guarantee. This was underlined in a report of a high-level Commission on the Future of Work, which was published on the occasion of the beginning of the Centennial year events of the International Labour Organization.

Such a Guarantee is fully in line with the principles which led to the setting up of the ILO a hundred years ago as an instrument of labour market governance, run jointly by governments and employers’ and workers’ organizations. The issues of today prove how valid that approach remains.

The two basic foundations needed are international social and labour standards and tripartite cooperation.

Details of standards – and the detail in which they need to be expressed – vary. The ILO has over a century adopted 189 Conventions and over 200 Recommendations. Not all of them are up to date. In fact, some of the earlier Conventions on maritime labour were addressed to categories of workers which no longer exist. But some 60-70 Conventions form a reasonably up to date basis, which has inspired much of labour legislation throughout the world.

There is a strong consensus on the fundamental rights of freedom of association and right to collective bargaining as well as the need to abolish child and forced labour and discrimination at work. Since 1919, the ILO’s Constitution has also contained the pledge to sufficient income, safety, the right to safe workplace, a social security floor, and decent working hours.

There are many urgent issues left. Yet, contrary to what one might think, these do not arise from technological progress and knowledge, rather despite them. Examples are child labour, trafficking, domestic work and violence at work. These certainly are not high-tech questions. They are issues of basic dignity and decency.

Then there is the issue of how universally accepted principles are implemented in practice.

There is nothing in different cultures or levels of development that impedes the respect of human dignity. Every human being has the right to aspirations and need for sufficient individual and collective security. Most people exercise this through their work or through organizing the work of others.

The frameworks in which this takes place vary from highly structured to decentralized and formal to informal. The details of how to do this cannot be dictated from the outside. This is, for instance, where technological developments bring us to the limits of detailed regulation. Yet the tripartite model of the ILO offers the entirely feasible option of implementation through negotiations, cooperation, at the workplaces, in the industries and offices, delivery centres, transportation, and society as a whole. The regulation will have to be achieved to a great extent by those who are directly concerned.

This is where the clarity of universal principles has to meet with the flexibility of their implementation. But it also calls for accepting a significant level of solidarity, so that this flexibility does not turn into anarchy. Flexibility is not a competitive tool – it is an instrument of cohesion, but for that, the basic rules of the game have to be accepted by all.

The experience of the ILO over the last hundred years points out to the need of continuously combining standards with social dialogue. This is the way in which a Universal Labour Guarantee can become a reality in all the different conditions in which people work and gain their living.

Kari Tapiola
Special Adviser to the Director-General of the ILO, former Deputy Director-General