Labor is Not a Commodity

China's New Arbitration Law

By Manfred Elfstrom, ILRF

At around the time of the child trafficking investigations in Dongguan City that I reported on in my last post, China began implementing its new “Labor Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Law” (LDMAL or simply “The Arbitration Law”). The legislation, which went into effect on May 1, has attracted little attention abroad, aside from a good piece at the Global Labor Strategies blog in October 2007. Nonetheless, LDMAL is a significant, if incomplete, step forward.

The Arbitration Law was bound to pale in comparison with the drama that accompanied the recent drafting, passage and implementation of the “Employment Contracts Law” (ECL, also called the “Labor Contract Law”): debates between foreign businesses and labor groups, an unprecedented outpouring of public comment—over 190,000 responses in only a month—criticisms by entrepreneur-delegates to the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Committee, and continued scandals involving companies trying to shirk their new responsibilities to workers (see here, here, here, here and here).

Another World is Possible!

In response to the call for a global week of action during the week of January 21-26, 2008 initiated by the World Social Forum, the Labor is Not a Commodity blog will feature articles throughout the week related to the theme: "Another World is Possible: International Labor Solidarity Success Stories."

We will be sharing stories about when people around the world came together to support workers' rights and how different individuals and organizations are successfully protecting labor rights globally.  Keep checking throughout the week for inspiring updates.

We also want to hear your stories!  You can contribute blog entries about successful labor campaigns by sending your stories to Tim at tim.newman[at]ilrf.org -- the sooner the better!

Haga clic abajo para espanol.

China's Real Toy Story

Tim Newman, Campaigns Assistant, International Labor Rights Forum

Have you been following the recalls of toys produced in China?  So have we!  Unfortunately, much of the media coverage does not address the effect these products are having on the health of workers who produce them.  Also, what about the retailers (for example, Wal-Mart) who put so much pressure on suppliers to produce cheap goods that health, environmental and labor protections get brushed aside?

For a different perspective on this hot topic, check out the testimony given by ILRF Executive Director, Bama Athreya, before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation today.  The hearing focused on "Sweatshop Conditions in the Chinese Toy Industry."

Policy Contrast: Lead Paint vs. Child Labor

By Robert Senser (reposted from Human Rights for Workers blog)

"The discovery of lead paint in a wide range of Chinese goods exported to the U.S. (from toys to jewelry) raises difficult public policy questions," Economist Dani Rodrik writes in the September 11 entry on his blog.  He goes on to think about the policy positions taken toward two different issues: unsafe imports vs. imports made in sweatshops --"issues which seem quite distinct, but are actually quite analogous in many respects."  Among the similarities in characteristics shared by the two kinds of imports:

• In both cases, exporting countries have domestic regulations and standards which on paper are sometimes stronger than those in the U.S., but enforcement is weak. 
• Both types of substandard production make goods cheaper and create a competitive advantage.
  
• The final consumer in the U.S. cannot tell whether the toy contains lead paint or has been manufactured using, say, child labor under exploitative conditions.
  
• We are less likely to buy the product, all else being equal, if we know it contains lead paint or has been made by children.

In view of such parallels, "we might think that the policy response to the problems in these two areas would be similar," Rodrik speculates. But it is not.

Changing the World, One Chocolate Bar at a Time

Reflections on ILRF's 20th Anniversary/Halloween Party

Bama Athreya, Executive Director, International Labor Rights Fund

Last Thursday, October 26 ILRF invited friends from far and wide to join us for a special evening to celebrate a very important moment both for reflection and for looking forward.  Twenty years ago (in November, 1986), our founding Executive Director Pharis Harvey and two of his associates filed the original documents of incorporation for the International Labor Rights Fund (in those days, as some of our old friends will remember, the "International Labor Rights Education and Research Fund").  Pharis was with us for our celebration last Thursday evening, and shared with all of us his memories of how the original vision for the ILRF had come to him while he lay in a hospital bed, recuperating from a broken leg!  Who could have foreseen what the next twenty years would bring?