Establishing Stability through Promoting Fundamental Rights at Work - - PDF document

1

Establishing Stability through Promoting Fundamental Rights at Work and Enhancing Inclusive Social Dialogue By Mr. Mohamed Trabelsi By looking up the meaning of the term ‘stability’ in a dictionary or a glossary, whether in the Arabic, French or English language, it becomes clear that the word ‘stability’ carries three different meanings: 1st Meaning Stability is the state or quality of an object established or placed on a solid base; thus reflecting the ability to resist collapse, deterioration or displacement (e.g. stability of a solid construction) 2nd Meaning Stability is the constancy of a character or purpose; thus reflecting steadfastness, reliability and dependability against potential fluctuations and other variables (e.g. stability of currency). 3rd Meaning Stability is the ability of an object or a character to maintain equilibrium or insurance and to resume its original, upright position (i.e. a stable person). By describing or labelling a society to be ‘stable’, this society should reasonably combine all the characteristics and qualities mentioned above, so as to be able to create a continuous state of steadfastness and equilibrium; thus achieving security and cohesiveness for all, while ensuring full utilization of the potentials and resources at the societal level. Eventually, this will contribute to the progress and prosperity of the society at large. To achieve this end, there is a need to put in place a set of guidelines and rules for community consensus and buy-in. The experiences of the peoples of this region, as well as other regions around the world, provide further affirmations that stability is not synonymous with fait accompli. Stability may not involve any use of force or creation of a culture of fear or intimidation. Rather, stability is at odds with all forms of hegemony, inequity, exclusion and discrimination. Ultimately, stability is an outcome of a social contract between all the societal forces and actors; a contract that is premised on a rights-based, well-balanced framework, to be maintained by specific laws and institutions.

2

In the eighteenth century, both John Locke and Jean Jacques Rousseau, placed an emphasis on the fact that both security and stability will only be achieved if a social contract is established to secure the natural rights of man; including the right to freedom, democracy and collective action for a common good. The human rights framework evolved over time. It has been extended to include all political, social, economic, and cultural rights, which are both inter-dependant and cross-related. Milton Friedman contended that there is a complementary relationship between economic freedoms and political and civil rights. According to Friedman, they should be viewed as complementary rather than competing objectives. The American Economist argues that an expanded and improved access to such freedoms is likely to promote the economic rights, and will eventually ensure further growth. Democracy does not acknowledge or accept any form of exclusion of a certain group of citizens from the market. This will require government intervention, especially to empower the poor and the vulnerable and enable them to survive and live by introducing a solid process for re-distribution of income and wealth, combined with a set

• f fair work-related conditions to be established in well-balanced, widely-accepted

legislation. In this context, the International Labour Standards (ILS) are considered to be the mainstay of the system of social and economic rights and a key driving force in the creation of stable, well-balanced, and cohesive societies. If the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights is a measure

• f social progress and human development, it also serves as an indicator of how far a

society is democratic and of the extent to which a society is engaged in determining the country’s prospects and options and in developing its national development plans. From this premise, the International Labour Organization (ILO) has positioned social dialogue at the centre of its fields of work; as a basis of its mandate and work program; and, a pre-requisite for improving the labour market, in line with the International Labour Organization. There can be no controversy that social dialogue is the cornerstone of the democratic construction process and a substantive indicator to assess and measure the establishment and fulfilment of democratic freedoms in a country. No real social dialogue can be fairly fostered in a dictatorship, where the State dominates and rules

• ver the society and where the state’s practices tend to abusive and oppressive of

human freedoms. Even in such instances where such dialogue exists in some of those countries, it is only a cosmetic dialogue that negates even the least intricate requirements of credibility. A social dialogue is worthless if not properly fostered by and between autonomous and broadly-representative parties; if not properly cherished by enforceable legislation; and if not anchored in democratic institutions and within a context of individual and public freedoms. In rotation, it has been proven true that those countries that can consistently establish a successful social dialogue, within a fully inclusive and institutionalized framework, including the whole range of development issues, have been able to maintain equilibrium and stability of its societies; to surpass the crises it undergoes with the least

3

possible damage; and, to pull the rug out from under the feet of those who advocate extremism and violence. Contrary to certain premature speculations, many researchers and economists, even those known to hold liberal views, as well as several international organizations including the World Bank and the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), have placed an emphasis on the correlation between increased productivity and the application of the International Labour Standards, as well as the extent to which this strong correlative relationship bears positively on the output of both the worker and the institution. This clear correlation can be equally extended to other aspects, such as increased access to freedoms of association, abolition of all forms of forced labour and child labour, and elimination of all forms of discrimination (which constitute the totality of the rights enshrined in the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work; 1998) on one hand, and the increased productivity on the

• ther hand.

The right to freedom of association, established under Convention No. 87, enables workers to get their voices heard and to communicate their opinion about the future of their organization, as well as engage in resolving problems through dialogue and

• negotiation. The presence of labour unions is likely to reduce the high and rapid

turnover among workers and the resultant losses and gains in the labour force, thus exacerbating instability in the labour market. By addressing these adverse trends in the labour market, workers will be enabled to improve their capabilities and skills at work. In addition, this will provide an impetus for investors to increase and expand their long- term investments in labour training and capacity building. As a result to these two combined factors, output per worker is expected to increase. For instance, Zafris Tzannatos, an expert, emphasizes that collective bargaining is an instrument that that helps facilitate the relationship across the various players in a certain production setting. As noted in the reports of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), these countries that have adopted a certain framework of collective bargaining, have successfully achieved further constructive economic outcomes, as opposed to the countries that only adopts such frameworks to a lesser degree or that have failed to adopt any of them altogether. This conclusion is not just a spur of the moment. It is not a brand-new innovation. Levine and D’Andrea Tyson in a book published in 1995, and which compiled 43 research studies on the relationship between increased productivity and engagement of workers, arrived for the most part at a conclusion that attests to the constructive impact

• f workers’ engagement, through their representative body, on their increased output

and productivity. This provides recognition of the need to apply the Collective Bargaining Convention (Convention No. 98), which provides the possibility of fostering communication across the different components of production, while at the same time ensuring that the voices

• f workers get heard. This is in addition to ensuring that workers are provided with an
• pportunity to engage in a constructive dialogue with their employers, whereby they can

provide proposals and solutions to address the problems associated with their

• rganization. Regarding the issue of eliminating all forms of discrimination, as spelled

4

• ut in Convention No (100) and Convention No (111), it is quite evident that

discrimination infringes the right of a person to be placed in the right position. By eliminating discrimination, the economy will certainly become more powerful and employment will be more productive, where work assignments would be based on competency and expertise, and not on race, gender, creed, origins, etc. In terms of the issue of child labour (Convention No. 138 and Convention No. 182) as well as forced labour (Convention No. 29 and Convention No. 105), many researchers and area specialists concurred that although the employment of children or adoption of

• ther forms of forced labour is likely to provide low- or no-cost labour, which will

eventually lead to an overall reduction in wages, this form of employment will cause the businesses to disregard the need to carry out research in the area of technology and science and to leverage the business management functions, with the intention to improve profitability, on account of their over-dependence on low-cost labor; thus imperiling the business competitiveness. Today, our region encounters major challenges that undermine its ability to fulfill the fundamental rights at work, improve the social dialogue, and reduce the growing trends

• f unemployment and vulnerable work. This question of increased stability and

accelerated pace of development, so as to ensure the creation of as many jobs as possible, is closely related to the capacity of socio-economic and political actors in the region, which need to reach a consensus regarding the need to foster a stronger social dialogue and ensure the fundamental rights at work, in both letter and spirit. In Egypt, the Law on the Freedom of Association still travels through the corridors of the Parliament in spite of its emergence from a broad consensus by social actors, along with its overall alignment with the National Labour Standards. We are still hopeful that this draft law will come into force to cope with the new on-ground reality introduced right before the revolution, and began to take roots during and after the revolution. We are still hopeful that this law will make the freedom of association a reality and will ensure the multiplicity of the employers’ and workers’ organizations, in a manner that enriches the social context of Egypt. We also hope that all parties will advocate in recognition of the need to foster a stronger social dialogue, as well as to ensure the adoption of its tools and institutions, especially in such contexts that may require conflict resolution and establishment of stability. In Tunisia, where the policy of contracting has taken roots centuries ago, the social players and actors aspire to conclude a new social contract that takes into account the major transformations and shifts taking place in this country since the outbreak of the

• revolution. This social contract should guide the process towards improving the

legislations and institutions at all levels, including the Social and Economic Council. This will be with the intention of anchoring and institutionalizing a sustainable, effective social dialogue. These endeavors, if undertaken successfully, are likely to trigger a profound impact in achieving stability and accelerating development so as to combat unemployment and social exclusion. As for Morocco, the country cherishes long-standing traditions of social dialogue; a situation that earned the country many gains. Although the Government of Morocco

5

has not ratified Convention No. 87, freedoms of association have become a reality that cannot be denied in the country. Therefore, it is widely held that by ratifying this Convention, this reality will be perpetuated. At the same time, some parties in Morocco demonstrated their earnest interest to introduce a law on the right to strike; thus establishing this right within the framework of freedoms of association, while at the same time structuring and advancing its mechanisms towards dispute prevention and

• reduction. The International Labour Organization is willing to provide assistance and

technical advice in this respect. Today, Libya is in the process of re-drafting its legislation and re-constructing its institutions, while re-shaping its social relations in line with the National Labour

• Standards. There is great prospect that the country will be able enhance the capacity of

the social actors, including workers, employers and employment services, so as to create a formula, whereby both collaboration and social dialogue can be further established, in a manner that will be conducive to active engagement of all social actors throughout the whole process, starting from organizational construction of labour unions and employers’ organizations, through promoting their autonomy and ability to active engage in bargaining and social dialogue, and ending with provision of proposals and alternative options. Algeria currently undergoes a process of significant shift towards additional freedoms and rights by means of improving the existing political and social institutions, as well as re-articulating their mechanisms, tools and laws. On this basis, the social actors encounter a major challenge affecting their ability to actively contribute to this process, in recognition of the interests of its citizens, and in support of the overall framework of socio-economic rights. The successful participation of labour unions and employers’

• rganizations in Algeria in achieving and materializing these transformations will provide

an assurance in terms of the endeavors made to establish stability, based on the values

• f democracy, full respect of fundamental rights at work, and establishment and

institutionalization of effective social dialogue. In summary, it is unfair to think that stabilizing the social structure will be at the expense

• f individual freedoms and their social rights, including the fundamental rights at work,
• r through amplifying the role of executive or security services, or by over-complicating

the bureaucratic procedures with the intention of restricting these rights. This understanding will only lead to lead to the exacerbation of oppression under the pretext

• f maintaining security and stability. The state of security and stability can be only

maintained if this question is perceived from a perspective that stability is as a final

• utcome of the many socio-economic, political, cultural and security pre-conditions,

rather than a result of the use of physical force in confrontation of the people’s aspirations and their basic rights. Mohamed Trabelsi April 2012