Representativity, Civil Society, and the EU Social Dialogue: Lessons from the International Labor Organization

This article addresses representativity questions that arise from the formal insertion of private,functional groups within the European Union (EU) governance via the EU social dialogue. It depicts the representativity debate at the EU social dialogue and suggests that important lessons can be learned through the examination of another institutional context in which similar questions have been raised and addressed: the International Labor Organization (ILO) tripartite structure. In addition, it ascertains that the issue of representativity of the EU social partners would further benefit from viewing it in the broader context of the EU democratic deficit. The article concludes that such an analysis underscores the need to rethink the current understanding of representativity in the EU social dialogue. In particular, it considers the benefits and disadvantages of expanding the notion of representativity to encompass the internal structural mechanisms of the EU social partners. Operationalizing Global Governance, Symposium. Indiana University Maurer School of Law-Bloomington, Indiana, March 19-21, 200

Labor Rights, Associate Duties, and Transnational Production Chains

[Excerpt] In this article we propose to contribute to the philosophical debate on global justice by viewing labor relations as a type of association which implies moral commitments among its participants. We argue that such a view of associative duties justifies a cosmopolitan approach to labor standards, calling for the regulation and enforcement of labor rights beyond the limited borders of the nation-state. Since the 1980s, the debate on global justice has by and large focused on the question of whether the principles of justice should be extended beyond the political boundaries of a sovereign nation-state.[1] Current theories of global justice rely heavily upon abstract normative arguments in support of either cosmopolitan or anti-cosmopolitan approaches and tend to avoid concrete analysis of practical problems stemming from increasing global economic, political, environmental, or legal developments. [2] The field of labor has been either neglected or marginalized in this debate.[3] In this article, we propose to overcome the disciplinary gap between the empirical reality of global labor and the normative discussion of global justice by drawing on a theoretical analysis of associative duties as well as the empirical study of transnational corporations (TNCs) production practices

Shared Responsibility and the International Labour Organization

How should the international labor regime be reformed in order to guarantee all workers around the world minimum labor standards? This is the central question we address in this Article. It has been weighed and discussed by social scientists, legal scholars, and philosophers, who analyze it from various economic, political, and legal perspectives. Yet interestingly, the literature in this field has been, by and large, characterized by a sharp disciplinary divide: on the one hand, labor law scholars typically address the issue of international labor standards from a detailed practical perspective, defining the problems in terms of enforcement, efficacy, or other institutional and procedural obstacles to the effective implementation of existing regulations. In their work, they generally neglect an analysis of the normative aspect of the institutions they discuss. On the other hand, the few philosophers and political theorists who focus on a philosophical analysis of global labor rights often fail to take into account the practical legal details of international labor law. In this Article, we seek to bridge this interdisciplinary gap between the philosophical-normative and empirical-legalistic analytical frameworks of international labor standards. More specifically, this Article proposes a new understanding of responsibility to be adopted by the primary international organization that was established in 1919 for the purpose of promoting labor rights on the global level—the International Labour Organization (ILO). The Article also proposes a set of corresponding reforms that will adapt the ILO to the unique challenges it is facing in the twenty-first century. In contrast to earlier legal studies of the ILO, which have focused on questions of its efficacy, institutional structure, or internal politics, the reforms we suggest in this Article are based on a multidisciplinary approach that draws from a philosophical analysis of theories of global justice

Representativity, Civil Society, and the EU Social Dialogue: Lessons from the International Labor Organization

This article addresses representativity questions that arise from the formal insertion of private,functional groups within the European Union (EU) governance via the EU social dialogue. It depicts the representativity debate at the EU social dialogue and suggests that important lessons can be learned through the examination of another institutional context in which similar questions have been raised and addressed: the International Labor Organization (ILO) tripartite structure. In addition, it ascertains that the issue of representativity of the EU social partners would further benefit from viewing it in the broader context of the EU democratic deficit. The article concludes that such an analysis underscores the need to rethink the current understanding of representativity in the EU social dialogue. In particular, it considers the benefits and disadvantages of expanding the notion of representativity to encompass the internal structural mechanisms of the EU social partners. Operationalizing Global Governance, Symposium. Indiana University Maurer School of Law-Bloomington, Indiana, March 19-21, 200

Shared Responsibility and the International Labour Organization

How should the international labor regime be reformed in order to guarantee all workers around the world minimum labor standards? This is the central question we address in this Article. It has been weighed and discussed by social scientists, legal scholars, and philosophers, who analyze it from various economic, political, and legal perspectives. Yet interestingly, the literature in this field has been, by and large, characterized by a sharp disciplinary divide: on the one hand, labor law scholars typically address the issue of international labor standards from a detailed practical perspective, defining the problems in terms of enforcement, efficacy, or other institutional and procedural obstacles to the effective implementation of existing regulations. In their work, they generally neglect an analysis of the normative aspect of the institutions they discuss. On the other hand, the few philosophers and political theorists who focus on a philosophical analysis of global labor rights often fail to take into account the practical legal details of international labor law. In this Article, we seek to bridge this interdisciplinary gap between the philosophical-normative and empirical-legalistic analytical frameworks of international labor standards. More specifically, this Article proposes a new understanding of responsibility to be adopted by the primary international organization that was established in 1919 for the purpose of promoting labor rights on the global level—the International Labour Organization (ILO). The Article also proposes a set of corresponding reforms that will adapt the ILO to the unique challenges it is facing in the twenty-first century. In contrast to earlier legal studies of the ILO, which have focused on questions of its efficacy, institutional structure, or internal politics, the reforms we suggest in this Article are based on a multidisciplinary approach that draws from a philosophical analysis of theories of global justice