New global realities demand a new kindof unionism
At a Forum for Responsible Globalisation in Lyons this week, trade unions, alongside others, are presenting their views on what is wrong with the phenomenon and what can be done about it. This is not exactly headline news, with at first sight little prospect of more than a ritual moan about the ways of the world. However, from Lyons, the world's trade unions will go on to Vienna to found the International Trade Union Confederation - the most representative and united trade union international in history. Many of globalisation's problems have their roots in the world of work. So it is reasonable to expect that some of the answers will come from there too.
This comes at a time when even the most ardent cheerleaders of globalisation are asking themselves whether all is well on its uneven playing field. Those unmoved by the flagrant social injustices of the global economy can still be concerned that the collateral damage it inflicts may bring with it the seeds of global insecurity. Or that the large numbers excluded from benefits accruing to the better off might decide to use their democratic prerogatives to blow the whistle and bring the game to an end - or at least to rewrite its rules.
ADVERTISEMENT
The shift in income away from labour towards capital is widely felt. Workers feel it in stagnant or falling wages, with half of those employed around the world living in poverty. Meanwhile, businesses enjoy record profits. Governments pay more attention to those who tell them to be unobtrusive than to their citizens, who demand that they fulfil their obligations of provision and protection.
It is encouraging that the globalisation debate is no longer a "knock 'em over, carry 'em out" confrontation between globophiles and globophobes. The International Confederation of Free Trade Unions and World Confederation of Labour have never belonged to either camp. People can only benefit from a climate in which it is no longer taboo to talk about regulation of global markets, nor de rigueur to disqualify those who do as outmoded defenders of special interests. We are more closely in touch with people's needs.
However, a credible political project for change is still a long way off. While the effects of globalisation are the bread and butter of national politics - jobs, income, migration - the policies needed to change them often lie in the international domain, beyond the scope of democratic processes. When was international development aid an election winner? Or one's negotiating position at the World Trade Organisation? The result is that when globalisation gets a look in at the polls it is often courtesy of populists and xenophobes.
Another obstacle is that we all have difficulty in distinguishing between what can and should be changed in globalisation and what cannot or should not. It is argued that the doubling of the global labour force with the entry of Chinese, Russian and Indian workers has changed the labour-capital ratio to the disadvantage of wage levels. Trade unions do not want anyone excluded from the global economy nor believe they can be. But they do want it subjected to reasonable regulation applicable to all countries, along with respect for workers' rights. Similarly, capital will continue to be internationally mobile and the world division of labour will evolve accordingly. Here, too, it is possible to subject investment decisions to basic regulation and to mitigate adverse employment effects. But international institutions have shown little interest or capacity to do so. Each seems intent on pursuing its own agenda in isolation from the others. Governments, to their discredit, have been ready to preside over this policy incoherence.
Unionists can do better, too. While we proclaim our commitment to changing the world, we sometimes have trouble changing ourselves. This is where the ITUC comes in. With some 400 affiliates in more than 150 countries, it is a chance to make history. We must use this opportunity to ensure that trade unions effectively represent working people in the global economy. The ITUC can become the instrument of a new trade union internationalism equal to the challenges and circumstances of globalisation.
This will not happen just because of increased numbers. We have some difficult decisions to make if our internationalism is to go beyond the episodic provision of solidarity when it is needed and placed centre-stage of the organising and bargaining agenda, as globalisation demands.
Guy Ryder is general secretary of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions. Willy Thys is general secretary of the World Confederation of Labour
工会也要全球化
在
上周于法国里昂举行的“负责任的全球化论坛”(Forum for Responsible Globalisation)上，工会组织将和其他人一道陈述自己观点，阐述全球化现象的弊端及可以采取的相应措施。这不是什么大新闻，因为乍看之下，这只不过是对世界运作方式的例行抱怨。不过，离开里昂后，全球的工会组织将前往维也纳，成立国际工会联盟(International Trade Union Confederation)――历史上最具代表性、最团结的国际工会组织。许多全球化问题的根源，都在于工作领域。因此，期望从那里找到一些答案是合理的。
该论坛举办之时，即便是最热心支持全球化的人士也在扪心自问，在这一不平坦的竞技场上，是否一切运行良好。那些对全球经济中明显的社会不公正现象无动于衷的人，可能还是会担忧，全球化造成的间接伤害可能会埋下全球不安全的种子。抑或，大量被排斥在富有成果之外的人，也许会决定运用其民主权利，吹响口哨，叫停比赛――或至少是改写规则。
人们普遍感受到了收入从劳动向资本的转移。工人们从工资的滞涨或下降中感受到这点，全球有半数工人处于贫困状态。与此同时，企业享受着创纪录的利润。政府更加关注那些告诉它们要“事不关已、高高挂起”的人，而非那些要求他们履行提供及保护义务的公民。
令人鼓舞的是，有关全球化的辩论不再是倡导者与反对者之间“你死我活”的对抗。国际自由工会联盟(International Confederation of Free Trade Unions)和世界劳工联合会(World Confederation of Labour)从不属于上述两个阵营中的任何一个。若能营造一种环境，对全球市场监管的讨论不再是禁区，也不再自动把讨论市场监管的人士称为特定利益的过时捍卫者，人们只会受益。我们更加贴近民众的需要。
不过，要启动一个可信的政治改革工程，仍然任重而道远。尽管全球化的影响与国家政治（就业、收入和移民）息息相关，但改变它们所需的政策往往属于国际范畴，超出了民主进程的范围。国际发展何曾帮助过选举获胜者？或者某个国家在世界贸易组织(WTO)的谈判立场？结果是，如果在选举中偶尔也会关注一下全球化，这往往是出于民粹主义者和仇外者的“恩惠”。
另一个障碍是，在全球化进程中，我们都很难区分什么是能够和应该改变的，什么是不能或不应该的。有人认为，随着中国、俄罗斯和印度工人的进入，全球劳动力数量翻了一番，造成劳动/资本比率朝着对薪资水平不利的方向转变。工会不希望，也不相信，任何人会被排除在全球经济之外。但他们确实希望这一切受到适用于所有国家的合理监管，尊重工人的权利。与此类似，资本继续享有国际流动性，世界劳动力分工也将相应得到发展。在此，让投资决定受到基本监管，减轻对就业的负面作用，同样也是有可能的。但国际机构对此兴趣索然，也几乎没有能力做到这点。每家机构似乎都打算抛开其它机构，按照自己的议程行事。各国政府也有责任，它们愿意主持实施这种混乱的政策。
工会会员也能做得更好。尽管我们宣称自己致力于改造世界，但有时却难以改变自己。这就是国际工会联盟成立的原因。该组织遍布150多个国家，有400多个下属机构，它是创造历史的一次机会。我们必须抓住这一机遇，确保工会组织能有效代表全球经济中的工人群众。国际工会联盟能够成为实现新的工会国际主义的工具，成功应对全球化的各种挑战和状况。
这种情况不会仅仅由于数量的增加就发生。按照全球化的要求，我们的国际主义需要超越“有事时”的短暂团结，而置于组织和谈判议程的中心位置，要做到这一点，我们还需要做出一些艰难的决定。
简礼达是国际自由工会联盟秘书长。威利?蒂斯是世界劳工联合会秘书长。
