Read this article in:
26 September, 2000
Some time ago, the secretary-general of the United Nations launched a new initiative in support of social dialogue. Major transnational companies were invited to discuss with the UN how to implement codes of conduct.
The purpose of this initiative is to get TNCs to agree -- on a voluntary basis -- to accept and implement basic trade union rights. It is a good initiative and has received wide acceptance among the trade unions. But this does not come without some question marks, which have to be addressed and discussed.
The first reservation is that social dialogue is not an exclusivity for companies and cannot be only voluntarily based. The fundamental condition to be fulfilled is recognition of the trade union by the company.
This is far from being the reality among many TNCs.
Many TNCs act differently in different countries. Depending upon where they are operating, their behaviour varies, from a very respectful and union-friendly attitude to that of union-busting. We have many examples of this.
TNCs which are normally known to have excellent relations with the unions at home are doing their best to undermine unions in other countries, especially in the developing world. This is the case with Nordic, American, German, Italian, Japanese, Korean, British, Swiss, Austrian, Australian, French and other TNCs.
We have learned from our own experience that TNCs understand how to implement international standards only after they have met with the trade unions face to face and have had strong pressure put on them. The collective agreement must be the right instrument to make certain that fundamental trade union rights are implemented everywhere. But TNCs are very often trying to hide behind different national laws and practice.
A second question mark which we must put on the UN initiative is the way the UN has organised meetings and invitations to the discussions in New York.
I can understand that the UN secretary-general wants to show results as fast as possible. But social dialogue cannot be a business for only a few. People at UN headquarters must understand that the international trade secretariats - all of them - must be consulted and be present when they discuss transnational companies and their behaviour.
However, the way in which they have organised the discussions so far shows an incredible naivete and lack of experience among the UN's diplomats. The meetings must be prepared in good time and invitations to the ITSs must be sent out well before meeting dates. It is the ITSs, and not the ICFTU (International Confederation of Free Trade Unions), which are dealing with the TNCs.
We do welcome the initiative, which, I am sure, will be useful in other respects, such as for the environment and consumers, but let's not give the TNCs the chance to once again bypass the trade unions.
The purpose of this initiative is to get TNCs to agree -- on a voluntary basis -- to accept and implement basic trade union rights. It is a good initiative and has received wide acceptance among the trade unions. But this does not come without some question marks, which have to be addressed and discussed.
The first reservation is that social dialogue is not an exclusivity for companies and cannot be only voluntarily based. The fundamental condition to be fulfilled is recognition of the trade union by the company.
This is far from being the reality among many TNCs.
Many TNCs act differently in different countries. Depending upon where they are operating, their behaviour varies, from a very respectful and union-friendly attitude to that of union-busting. We have many examples of this.
TNCs which are normally known to have excellent relations with the unions at home are doing their best to undermine unions in other countries, especially in the developing world. This is the case with Nordic, American, German, Italian, Japanese, Korean, British, Swiss, Austrian, Australian, French and other TNCs.
We have learned from our own experience that TNCs understand how to implement international standards only after they have met with the trade unions face to face and have had strong pressure put on them. The collective agreement must be the right instrument to make certain that fundamental trade union rights are implemented everywhere. But TNCs are very often trying to hide behind different national laws and practice.
A second question mark which we must put on the UN initiative is the way the UN has organised meetings and invitations to the discussions in New York.
I can understand that the UN secretary-general wants to show results as fast as possible. But social dialogue cannot be a business for only a few. People at UN headquarters must understand that the international trade secretariats - all of them - must be consulted and be present when they discuss transnational companies and their behaviour.
However, the way in which they have organised the discussions so far shows an incredible naivete and lack of experience among the UN's diplomats. The meetings must be prepared in good time and invitations to the ITSs must be sent out well before meeting dates. It is the ITSs, and not the ICFTU (International Confederation of Free Trade Unions), which are dealing with the TNCs.
We do welcome the initiative, which, I am sure, will be useful in other respects, such as for the environment and consumers, but let's not give the TNCs the chance to once again bypass the trade unions.