Abstract:The signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1993 led to the formation of a social and economic area characterized by marked asymmetry between its members: the USA, Mexico and Canada. Seven years later the results in terms of salaries, employment and labor standards are not very positive, although they have not produced the catastrophic results foreseen by some. In Mexico several hundred thousand jobs were created, especially in the maquiladora export industry, but this has been associated… Show more
“…The main impact has been the 'shaming' of some companies (Hualde and Ramirez, 2001). In particular, the public submission procedure of NAALC was used to get the American govern-ment directly involved in the way in which public authorities enforced core labour standards in Mexico.…”
Section: Action Under Naalcmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…But it would be naïve to make extravagant claims about the impact of NAALC: no systemic change has been triggered to labour market governance in Mexico due to NAALC-related activity. The main impact has been the 'shaming' of some companies (Hualde and Ramirez, 2001).…”
A BST RA C T This paper examines the labour standard-setting capacities of the EU and NAFTA. The social dimension to the EU is depicted as being organised along the principles of deliberative supranationalism. The North American Agreement on Labour Cooperation (NAALC), sometimes referred to as the Labour Side Accord, which is the labour standard-setting arrangement for NAFTA, is regarded as a tri-national institutional arrangement which grafts formal international procedures onto domestic labour market regimes. The paper seeks to describe and explain how the different types of activities in which the two social dimensions are engaged can be traced back to their overall institutional design. The paper argues that EU social policy is the stronger of the two arrangements and that NAALC has significant shortcomings. Yet it also argues that NAALC holds out interesting lessons for other regional trading blocs and other global experiments in labour market standard setting as its decentralised and 'horizontal' character is more in keeping with the broad institutional design of these arrangements.The International Labour Organisation has been the main institution outside the nation state for the setting of labour standards. Formed in 1918 as part of the Versailles Treaty, the ILO has the ability to set Conventions and Recommendations. Conventions are binding on the member countries which adopt them, while Recommendations add up to little more than moral exhortation. Even though the organisation has passed a battery of Conventions, international relations scholars, particularly of a 'realist' orientation, remain sceptical that the ILO can set effective global labour standards as it does not have a credible apparatus of enforcement and sanctions. A further obstacle standing in the way of building international labour standards is the almost universal opposition of developing countries to such arrangements. The common view of the poorer nations is that strong global labour rules are an ill-disguised attempt by richer countries at economic protection-
“…The main impact has been the 'shaming' of some companies (Hualde and Ramirez, 2001). In particular, the public submission procedure of NAALC was used to get the American govern-ment directly involved in the way in which public authorities enforced core labour standards in Mexico.…”
Section: Action Under Naalcmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…But it would be naïve to make extravagant claims about the impact of NAALC: no systemic change has been triggered to labour market governance in Mexico due to NAALC-related activity. The main impact has been the 'shaming' of some companies (Hualde and Ramirez, 2001).…”
A BST RA C T This paper examines the labour standard-setting capacities of the EU and NAFTA. The social dimension to the EU is depicted as being organised along the principles of deliberative supranationalism. The North American Agreement on Labour Cooperation (NAALC), sometimes referred to as the Labour Side Accord, which is the labour standard-setting arrangement for NAFTA, is regarded as a tri-national institutional arrangement which grafts formal international procedures onto domestic labour market regimes. The paper seeks to describe and explain how the different types of activities in which the two social dimensions are engaged can be traced back to their overall institutional design. The paper argues that EU social policy is the stronger of the two arrangements and that NAALC has significant shortcomings. Yet it also argues that NAALC holds out interesting lessons for other regional trading blocs and other global experiments in labour market standard setting as its decentralised and 'horizontal' character is more in keeping with the broad institutional design of these arrangements.The International Labour Organisation has been the main institution outside the nation state for the setting of labour standards. Formed in 1918 as part of the Versailles Treaty, the ILO has the ability to set Conventions and Recommendations. Conventions are binding on the member countries which adopt them, while Recommendations add up to little more than moral exhortation. Even though the organisation has passed a battery of Conventions, international relations scholars, particularly of a 'realist' orientation, remain sceptical that the ILO can set effective global labour standards as it does not have a credible apparatus of enforcement and sanctions. A further obstacle standing in the way of building international labour standards is the almost universal opposition of developing countries to such arrangements. The common view of the poorer nations is that strong global labour rules are an ill-disguised attempt by richer countries at economic protection-
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.