ILO Complaint Filed by US Union

Here’s a new global labor strategy: US unions filing ILO complaints against the US government for violation of international labor law.

In December, the UE (the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America) and Mexico’s FAT (Authentic Labor Front) “formed part of a delegation of labor leaders from six states and three countries who delivered an ILO complaint to North Carolina Governor Mike Easley.”  The delegation included labor leaders from Quebec, Mexico, and Japan, as well as from North Carolina, Virginia, Iowa, Connecticut, Vermont, and Pennsylvania.  According to the UE International’s Mexican Labor News & Analysis:

“At the heart of the complaint is North Carolina General Statute 95-98, which makes it illegal for the state, counties, cities, or any other political subdivisions of the state to enter into contracts or agreements with any labor union or other bargaining agent. While public-sector workers in North Carolina have technically been free to join labor organizations since 1969, the prohibition of collective bargaining agreements has largely undermined workers' main objective in exercising their freedom to associate in the workplace. UE contends that this violates ILO Conventions 87 (Freedom of Association and the Right to Organize), 98 (the Right to Organize and Bargain Collectively), and 151 (the Right of Public Workers to Organize and Procedures to Determine Conditions of Employment in the Public Sector)…

"International law is clear: workers have a right to organize and to bargain collectively to protect and improve their wages and working conditions," said Robin Alexander, UE Director of International Labor Affairs. "General Statute 95-98 flies in the face of that, specifically denying those basic rights to the people who provide services to North Carolina taxpayers. The governments of the United States and the State of North Carolina owe workers the protections of international law and have failed to deliver. UE wants them to answer for their failures."

Other US labor activists have been discussing similar strategies, including filing an ILO complaint on behalf of US contingent workers. For workers interested in viewing an example of an ILO complaint, a copy of a 1998 Korean Federation of Trade Unions filing against the Korean government on behalf of Hyundia workers is available here.

One final note: the UE’s international innovations didn’t come out of thin air. The UE has been at the forefront of building bridges with their Mexican counterparts for more than a decade.  In the early 1990s, faced with the passage of NAFTA, the UE entered into what it called a “Strategic Organizing Alliance” with the Mexican FAT.  Together the two unions instituted regular worker-to-worker exchanges, published a monthly electronic periodical, built worker centers and joint organizing teams, and regularly informed their members about what they were doing and why it mattered to them.

The UE/FAT alliance has worked to ensure that workers on both sides of the border benefited from coordinated activities.  FAT members, for example, traveled to Milwaukee to provided support for the UE organizing campaign at a local foundry, where they allayed Mexican immigrant workers’ concerns that the UE might be similar to “company” unions they knew all too well in Mexico.  On behalf of FAT members, the UE filed the first complaint under the Mexico-US labor rights “side agreement” that accompanied NAFTA – charging General Electric and Honeywell with labor rights violations.  It has also built a tri-national alliance between unions in the US, Canada, and Mexico to enforce the organizing rights of Mexican workers at the Echlin auto parts company.

Unions need to build more of these long-term strategic alliances.  Why? Because solidarity isn’t built overnight.

Comments

[Kent]

I've been following the UE-FAT alliance for a few years now. It is heartening that at least one US union can cooperate with a union outside the US without being patronizing and domineering. Unfortunately, efforts to "globalize" unions are being hindered by structural problems that hinder working class solidarity. The ICFTU, for example, was set up during the Cold War by anti-communist American unions with US Government encouragement and support as an "alternative" to the ILO. In efect, the ICFTU is part and parcel of the capitalist economic sytem. The ILO, for that matter, is essentially a part of the powerless UN bureaucracy and relies on its association with the UN rather than on rank and file support for its credibility. Whether unions want to reform capitalism or replace it, we need a fresh start with a truly independent, truly inclusive, and truly democratic labor organization. For a start, the ILO should drop its association and dependance on the UN and the ICFTU should merge with the ILO. Then we should have world-wide rank-and-file elections of union officers.