Jump to content

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Right to Work, and Trade Negotiations


Recommended Posts

Article 23.1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (of which Canada is a signatory Member State) states:

(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.

— Universal Declaration of Human Rights, United Nations General Assembly

The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights states in Part III, Article 6:

(1) The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right to work, which includes the right of everyone to the opportunity to gain his living by work which he freely chooses or accepts, and will take appropriate steps to safeguard this right.

(2) The steps to be taken by a State Party to the present Covenant to achieve the full realization of this right shall include technical and vocational guidance and training programmes, policies and techniques to achieve steady economic, social and cultural development and full and productive employment under conditions safeguarding fundamental political and economic freedoms to the individual.

— International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, United Nations General Assembly

How can the Government of Canada try to pressure the US to abrogate its right-to-work laws when Canada itself is a signatory Member State of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights? Not only does Canada fail to live up to its international obligations by lacking right-to-work laws of its own, but it then actively encourages another state  to ignore its international obligations on the matter too. Should any trade deal not be founded on the basic international human-rights documents that Canada itself has signed?

Edited by Machjo
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose Canada could try to pressure the US to improve its universal compulsory education or to provide more trades and professional education for its unemployed, under-employed, and underpaid; but that's not the same as pressuring the US to abrogate a  person's right to work and freedom of association.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎9‎/‎22‎/‎2018 at 9:28 PM, Machjo said:

I suppose Canada could try to pressure the US to improve its universal compulsory education or to provide more trades and professional education for its unemployed, under-employed, and underpaid; but that's not the same as pressuring the US to abrogate a  person's right to work and freedom of association.

WHAT?  "Right to work" legislation has nothing to do with the UN's Declaration.  It's a specific form of legislation in some U.S. states that prevents workers from having to join a union if the majority of workers vote to have a union.  It's primarily about wage and benefit suppression in the name of an idea that doing so will attract more companies to do business.  It has had some success for businesses looking to cut labour costs and workers willing to work for lower wages.  I think you need to delete this thread.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

WHAT?  "Right to work" legislation has nothing to do with the UN's Declaration.  It's a specific form of legislation in some U.S. states that prevents workers from having to join a union if the majority of workers vote to have a union.  It's primarily about wage and benefit suppression in the name of an idea that doing so will attract more companies to do business.  It has had some success for businesses looking to cut labour costs and workers willing to work for lower wages.  I think you need to delete this thread.

Right-to-work legislation does nothing to prevent a union from forming. It just protects a person from being denied employment for choosing to not join said union. And yes, the UN Declaration does guarantee a person's right to work and freedom of association, something labour unions deny by trying to impose closed-shop rules on employers. Right-to-work legislation forces unionized workplaces to remain open-shop to reduce discrimination against non-members.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

It erodes workers’ rights by putting pressure on them not to join a union. Without unions our labor conditions and wages would be far worse.  Be careful what you wish for. 

How does a law that guarantees a worker the freedom to choose put pressure on him? Should conditions worsen, you'd think he'd then change his mind and join the union, no? Am I missing something here?

Edited by Machjo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

It erodes workers’ rights by putting pressure on them not to join a union. Without unions our labor conditions and wages would be far worse.  Be careful what you wish for. 

 

Actually, it increases opportunities for workers and protects their constitutional rights.  They can still join a union if they wish.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

But they dare not due to social and political pressure. 

 

Union membership was declining in the U.S. before RTW legislation, except for government employment, for economic reasons.

Political pressure was brought to bear against unions because they choose to spend member's dues on partisan issues, forcing union members to support views with which they disagreed.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Union membership was declining in the U.S. before RTW legislation, except for government employment, for economic reasons.

Political pressure was brought to bear against unions because they choose to spend member's dues on partisan issues, forcing union members to support views with which they disagreed.

There is truth to what you're saying, but there is a very real risk that we may lose organized labour, which on the whole leads to further shrinkage of the middle class.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/25/2018 at 3:17 PM, Zeitgeist said:

There is truth to what you're saying, but there is a very real risk that we may lose organized labour, which on the whole leads to further shrinkage of the middle class.

Labour unionization, minimum-wage laws, and other such gimmicks to nothing to raise real wages over the long run due to inflation. Only nominal wages increase.

To increase real wages more sustainably requires raising worker' skills. Statistically, around half of Canadians is functionally literate in neither official language. No gimmick will help that person. You want to help that person? The government should send him back to school to raise his skill set so that an employer will want to raise his real wages. That's real help for the poor. Enough with the gimmicks already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Machjo said:

Labour unionization, minimum-wage laws, and other such gimmicks to nothing to raise real wages over the long run due to inflation. Only nominal wages increase.

To increase real wages more sustainably requires raising worker' skills. Statistically, around half of Canadians is functionally literate in neither official language. No gimmick will help that person. You want to help that person? The government should send him back to school to raise his skill set so that an employer will want to raise his real wages. That's real help for the poor. Enough with the gimmicks already.

Canada has one of the world’s most highly skilled and highly educated workforces.  If Canada only had to compete based on the productivity of its manufacturing, we would do exceedingly well.  Our auto plants are among the most productive in North America.  The way that countries like Mexico and to some extent the US are getting around this is through low wages.  Basically race to the bottom and compete on low wages instead of providing more value add in production.  Because the US technocrats know they can’t compete on wages with the likes of Mexico and China, they’re trying tariffs. It’s backfiring because of the counter-tariffs.  In the final analysis, the world suffers because the cost of living rises and productivity suffers.  It’s as retrograde as Trump’s stance on the Paris Climate Ageement, which like the addition of tariffs, other countries will copy.  America and the world have regressed.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Canada has one of the world’s most highly skilled and highly educated workforces.  If Canada only had to compete based on the productivity of its manufacturing, we would do exceedingly well.  Our auto plants are among the most productive in North America.  The way that countries like Mexico and to some extent the US are getting around this is through low wages.  Basically race to the bottom and compete on low wages instead of providing more value add in production.  Because the US technocrats know they can’t compete on wages with the likes of Mexico and China, they’re trying tariffs. It’s backfiring because of the counter-tariffs.  In the final analysis, the world suffers because the cost of living rises and productivity suffers.  It’s as retrograde as Trump’s stance on the Paris Climate Ageement, which like the addition of tariffs, other countries will copy.  America and the world have regressed.  

According to the Conference Board of Canada, around 1/2 of working-age Canadians is functionally literate in neither official language (and no, that 'n' in front or 'either' is not a typo).

With that in mind, when we talk of Canadians being among the most educated in the world, we're clearly talking about the other 50%. Firstly, if around half of our population if among the most skilled in the world while the other 50% if functionally literate in neither official language, that's inevitably going to contribute to a major wage gap between them. While the educated 50% would be unaffected by a rise in the minimum-wage since they're already earning well above it, that minimum-wage will price the other 50% out of the labour market. After all, why would an employer pay more for a functional illiterate except as a last resort?

Even if the functional illiterate half of the population unionized, how effective could it be? Notice how the labour unions with negotiating power usually represent a skilled workforce like pilots for example. How often do cashiers unionize and go on strike? They don't since they know their skills are a dime a dozen and customers could just as easily shop at the shop or the restaurant next door. In that sense, even labour unions can effectively represent only skilled workers (i.e. the 50% that represent the most skilled workers in the world). The other 50% might not even possess the skills to organize a labour union effectively. Worse yet, this also means that skilled workers could push the price of their products and services up to make it more difficult for the poor to afford them and so further expand the wage gap since labour unions benefit primarily skilled workers and not unskilled ones.

That's why I say that if you want to help the poor, the state should invest more on literacy, trades, and profession education for them. Until then, the minimum wage will just price them out of the market, they might not even possess the skills to unionize effectively, and even if they could do that, their skills aren't unique enough to give them enough clout with their employer. Even if they did go on strike, how much money could a labour union collect from minimum-wage workers and how long could they sustain a protracted strike before they run out of money? A big difference exists between a union of tradesmen and professionals and a union of unskilled workers. A union is useless for the latter group in practical terms. They need literacy, trades, and professional education, not gimmicks.

Edited by Machjo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
 
 

Adult literacy rate

Between 2008 and 2014, Canada adult literacy rate remained stable at around 99 %.

The description is composed by Yodatai, our digital data assistant. Have a question? Ask Yodatai ›
99.0
(%)
I realize that industry-related literacy is different from language proficiency.  The question of training, apprenticeships and so forth is a different issue. 
Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

@Zeitgeist Please explain then why most of the countries on this list above Canada are European and developed high-wage countries.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_hour_worked

Most of the lag in Canada's productivity relates to older industries like forestry and mining where productivity, though important, isn't as critical as it is in manufacturing.  On the other hand, some of our industry could come up technologically.  The auto sector isn't one of those industries.  You'll also notice that some countries on that list rank relatively high, such as Trinidad and Barbados.  That doesn't necessarily mean that these countries are as technologically advanced as a country like Israel.  A sweat shop is a highly productive workplace.  You have to dig into the data to discern whether high productivity is the result of technological innovation, hard work, poor labour conditions, or easily grown/manufactured items.  A country with weak labour laws can suck the life out of workers and be quite productive in the process.  I would just be careful not to misinterpret data and remember that productivity alone isn't always an indicator of advancement or high quality of life. 

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.conferenceboard.ca/hcp/provincial/education/adlt-lowlit.aspx

 

'Forty-eight per cent of Canadian adults have inadequate literacy skills—a significant increase from a decade ago.'

Bear in mind that the above refers to functional  literacy which is a higher standard than basic literacy. Also, though that site doesn't say it, I seem to remember reading somewhere that that half-literacy rate refers to literacy in an official language, meaning that some of the 'functional illiterates' might be quite functionally literate but just not in an official language. Given how language laws determine access to Canada's economic resources though, functional literacy in an official language is what counts.

Edited by Machjo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With regard to Canada's productivity challenge, a big problem for us is keeping our start-ups and scaling them up.  We also need to do some deregulation.  The Brookings Institute suggests deregulating finance and telecommunications.  I think we should deregulate the latter for sure.  We should be very careful about deregulating finance, however, because that can lead to bigger problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

With regard to Canada's productivity challenge, a big problem for us is keeping our start-ups and scaling them up.  We also need to do some deregulation.  The Brookings Institute suggests deregulating finance and telecommunications.  I think we should deregulate the latter for sure.  We should be very careful about deregulating finance, however, because that can lead to bigger problems.

I agree with the latter. As for telecommunications, we should definitely eliminate foreign-ownership rules. As for finance, likewise. As for any other deregulation in finance, I'd still maintain strict borrowing limits on how much of a financial institution's assets can be put into debt investments like loans.

None of that changes the fact that however skilled half of Canada's working-age adult population may be, the other half is functionally illiterate at least in an official language. That plays an important role too. Again, I'm not talking about basic literacy or functional literacy in a foreign language but rather functional literacy in an official language.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...