The U.S. Department of Labor's recent report on working conditions for Haitian migrant workers in the Dominican sugar industry highlights a shift in the way U.S. DOL's Office of Trade and Labor Affairs (OTLA) reviews petitions submitted under the labor chapters of U.S. free trade agreements. Just 15 years ago, the OTLA's predecessor (the National Administrative Office - NAO) declined to review a petition from the Florida Tomato Exchange alleging that farmers in Mexico utilized child labor to grow and harvest tomatoes, reasoning that the U.S. tomato producers did not supplement their allegations with additional facts. Such a high standard made it difficult for NGOs, human rights organizations and trade unions - and even business trade associations - to persuade the U.S. DOL to examine lapses in labor law enforcement if they lack the budgetary or technical capacity to produce the kinds of facts that would persuade the U.S. DOL to accept a petition for review. Thus, an opportunity to address child labor in agriculture in Mexico - along with the unfair trade implications of child labor - was lost 15 years ago. The shift in the OTLA's methodology may make it easier for advocacy groups to file petitions and bring more attention to child and forced labor issues among U.S. trade partners.
The report also shows that over 200 years after Haiti became independent, Haitian migrant workers still work in slave-like conditions on Dominican sugarcane plantations. Although the report does not explicitly address the issue of racism, it appears that Haitian sugarcane workers and their families are continually exposed to racial, ethnic and national discrimination in the Dominican Republic. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) denounced a recent decision of the Supreme Court of the Dominican Republic that denied and revoked citizenship status of Dominicans of Haitian descent born in Dominican territory. According to the IACHR, the court decision strips tens of thousands of people of Dominican citizenship. Discrimination against Haitians and Dominicans of Haitian descent plays a role in the prevalence of child and forced labor in Dominican agriculture. Lack of legal clarity about the citizenship of Haitians born in the Dominican Republic perpetuates child labor and poverty and will make it even more difficult for employers, worker rights organizations, NGOs and government authorities to find a solution to child labor in Dominican agriculture. I would argue that the situation also hampers sustainable economic development in both Haiti and the Dominican Republic because it precludes access to education and social security among a significant immigrant community in the Dominican Republic. Access to education and social security could improve the labor market outcomes for Haitians and alleviate poverty in both countries.
The $10 million grant issued by the U.S. Department to address child labor in agriculture in the Dominican Republic is a major step forward in the types of remedies and solutions available as a result of labor petitions filed under U.S. FTAs. Such grants greatly increase the potential positive outcomes of such petitions, showing that it is possible for civil society to utilize the labor petition process under FTAs to affect the international aid process. Nevertheless, the facts discussed in the OTLA's report cry out for even more creative and innovative regional solutions - such as negotiation of a broad ranging Social Security Agreement between Haiti and the Dominican Republic, as well as an internationally funded program and campaign to provide documentation to all unregistered children of Haitian descent born in the Dominican Republic.
A number of obstacles exist to the negotiation of a Social Security Agreement between Haiti and the Dominican Republic, but the time and circumstances may be right for the international community to press for just such an agreement. Although Haiti and the Dominican Republic share both an island and a labor market, a December 10, 2013 article in the St. Maarten Island Times highlights how the relationship between the two nations has deteriorated in light of the recent citizenship decision issued by the Dominican Supreme Court. In addition to international approbation by both the U.S. OTLA and IACHR, the Dominican Republic's action has been condemned by the Caribbean Community and Common Market (CARICOM), which as a result of the Supreme Court decision has deferred the Dominican Republic's application for full membership in the regional organization. Potential trade sanctions under the CAFTA-DR resulting from mistreatment of Haitian migrant workers as well as the prospect of full membership in CARICOM can be utilized as leverage by the Organization of American States, CARICOM and international trade partners such as the U.S. and European Union to bring the Dominican Republic to the table to negotiate a Social Security Agreement with Haiti and address other issues related to the two nations' joint labor market and unresolved citizenship issues.
While the darkest hour may be before the dawn, the dawn may not come for Haitian migrant agricultural workers in the Dominican Republic if the international community does not seize this rare historical opportunity to press for a Social Security Agreement between these two island nations.
Showing posts with label Agricultural Labor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Agricultural Labor. Show all posts
Tuesday, December 17, 2013
Saturday, November 23, 2013
Can NAFTA and CAFTA be used as tools to eliminate indigenous child labor in the Americas?
Sara Shahriari's November 20, 2013 article in Indian Country Today
highlights the prevalence of indigenous child labor in the Americas -
particularly exploitation of indigenous child laborers in the Bolivian
mine industry. Indigenous child labor is also prevalent in agriculture throughout
the Americas, as highlighted in these studies in Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, Peru and Costa Rica.
Indigenous girls face particular challenges, as exemplified by
this 2008 UNICEF report about the lives and status of indigenous girls in Guatemala.
In addition to International Labor Organization conventions prohibiting child labor and ILO resources on indigenous child labor - not to mention the ILO's Guidelines on Combating Child Labor among Indigenous and Tribal Peoples cited in Shahriari's article - labor chapters in a number of free trade agreements between the United States and Latin American countries - such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA-DR), U.S.-Peru Free Frade Agreement and U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement - prohibit child labor and discrimination on the basis of race. The labor provisions in these free trade agreements (FTAs) contain mechanisms for members of the public to file international complaints that can lead to trade sanctions.
There has been skepticism among NGOs and trade unions about the effectiveness of the labor provisions in these FTAs, especially the NAFTA labor side agreement. Although the NAFTA labor side agreement has been in force for 20 years, there has yet to be a petition filed under the agreement that focuses specifically on the issue of child labor in agriculture, despite the fact that prohibition of child labor is one of 3 out of 11 labor principles which can lead to trade sanctions under the NAFTA labor side agreement. While some petitions filed under the NAFTA labor side agreement have involved racial and ethnic minorities (such as the 2005 Puebla petition, where a number of the workers were indigenous, and the 2006 North Carolina petition, where the majority of the workers were African American), no NAALC petition to date has focused on racial discrimination per se. Thus, the issue of systemic racism has yet to be formally addressed under the NAFTA labor side agreement - or under any of the other FTAs the U.S. has with nations in the Americas and elsewhere.
A report issued by the U.S. Department of Labor under the CAFTA-DR in September 2013 regarding child labor, forced labor and racial discrimination against Haitian migrant workers in the sugar cane fields of the Dominican Republic is a positive indication that FTA labor provisions may be a useful tool for addressing labor by indigenous and other children in the U.S., Mexico, Central America and South America. This is the first report issued by the Office of Trade and Labor Affairs (OTLA - the U.S. Department of Labor office tasked with accepting petitions alleging a trade partner violated the labor chapter of an FTA) to address and discuss at length the issues of forced labor and child labor in agriculture. The petition and findings led to the commitment by current Secretary of Labor Thomas Perez (who is himself of Dominican heritage) of a $10 million project to improve labor conditions in the sugar sector in the Dominican Republic .
While there are numerous existing international and national programs designed to address child labor in the U.S. and Latin America, petitions filed under the above-mentioned FTAs regarding the issue of indigenous child labor could have a significant impact by drawing attention and resources to indigenous child laborers. An FTA labor petition can get indigenous advocates a seat at the table in policy discussions related to child labor. It would also afford indigenous advocates and their allies the opportunity to affect and change the bases for policy conversations about indigenous child workers - particularly in addressing and dispelling stereotypes about indigenous parents and families and their motivations for having their children work alongside them or sending their children to work instead of school. Advocates could make specific education and labor policy proposals and use FTA labor petitions as leverage to get their proposals and ideas on the desks of policy makers. Under the NAFTA labor side agreement, it is possible to cross-file petitions. Indigenous and child advocates could file a petition with the U.S. Department of Labor regarding child labor in agriculture in Mexico and at the same time file a petition with Mexican labor authorities regarding child labor in agriculture in the U.S. - and file both petitions with Canadian labor department to involve an international third partner to see through the Gordian knot of U.S.-Mexico relations and leverage creative Canadian policy mechanisms to address common issues in both of Canada's trade partners to the south. Such a cross- and dual-filed petition might lead to a call for an Evaluation Committee of Experts (ECE) - the 2nd of 3 tiers of dispute resolution under the NAFTA labor side agreement - to draft an independent report about indigenous child labor in agriculture in the NAFTA region. Similarly, the regional structure in the CAFTA-DR could be leveraged to design policies to combat indigenous child labor at the regional level in Central America. While the U.S., Mexican and Canadian labor departments have 20 years of experience in accepting and addressing petitions filed under the NAFTA labor side agreement, it is a process that may be new to Central American nations. Strategically, it might be interesting to dual file indigenous child labor petitions under the CAFTA-DR with Central American nations - for example, filing a petition in Costa Rica about the treatment of indigenous child laborers in Guatemala, or one in Honduras about the treatment of indigenous child laborers from Honduras in Costa Rica - as well as in the United States, to leverage the financial and institutional resources of the U.S. Department of Labor.
Finally, utilizing FTA labor provisions to combat indigenous child labor in the Americas may increase the vitality of these provisions and their capacity to foment positive policy development and exchange on a regional level, especially in the NAFTA region. Since there is general consensus that child labor implicates fundamental human rights, dual-filed petitions may increase engagement between authorities and advocates across borders to address and eliminate indigenous child labor, including affording the opportunity to child labor specialists in Mexico, Central America and South America to lend their expertise, experience and language skills to their counterparts in the United States. The NAFTA labor side agreement is in particular need of revitalization, as traditional and more recent disputes between the U.S. and Mexico in the area of labor policy - as well as mutual lack of enthusiasm among the 3 trade partners' labor authorities and social partners - have rendered the agreement's potential for innovative labor market and human rights policy fallow. As child labor in agriculture is a difficult issue to combat in both the U.S. and Mexico, a dual and cross-filed petition on the issue of indigenous child labor might provide the common ground North American labor authorities need to rebuild their strained and tattered relations. Since the North American labor departments closed down their joint tri-national labor secretariat in 2010, the labor ministers of the three trade partners have not held North American Labor Council meetings or engaged in cooperative activities as required by the NAFTA labor side agreement. Since not a single one of the three trading partners has completely clean hands in the areas of racial discrimination against indigenous peoples or child labor in agriculture - but all three countries have active programs to eliminate both - working together to resolve a common issue of basic human rights may afford them an opportunity to rebuild their relationships and eventually engage in North American regional labor policy and research in a more productive fashion and on more sound footing than in the early years of their relationship.
Indigenous child labor in agriculture is an issue in which the cooperative mechanisms engaged in as part of the dispute resolution processes under FTA labor chapters - such as meetings, studies, bringing people to the table and financing special programs - may actually work. Petitioners would have to craft the petitions and their requests for remedies to include their ideas for what kinds of programs and dialogue they want. For example, advocates could ask for the participation of educational authorities and experts and have a set of ideas ready for what kinds of social dialogue they want and who should participate.
While the history of application of FTA labor chapters has shown the processes and outcomes to be less than perfect, recent reports and activities exemplified by the 2013 Dominican Republic Sugar Cane Industry report and ensuing action plan show that workers may have some vindication of their allegations and some productive outcomes as a result of petitions. And, as demonstrated by action by the Centro de Migrante and its allies, petitions filed under FTA labor chapters in conjunction with legislative initiatives related to agricultural labor visas in the United States can lead to administrative and legislative progress on important human rights issues as well as the energizing of communities.
In addition to International Labor Organization conventions prohibiting child labor and ILO resources on indigenous child labor - not to mention the ILO's Guidelines on Combating Child Labor among Indigenous and Tribal Peoples cited in Shahriari's article - labor chapters in a number of free trade agreements between the United States and Latin American countries - such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA-DR), U.S.-Peru Free Frade Agreement and U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement - prohibit child labor and discrimination on the basis of race. The labor provisions in these free trade agreements (FTAs) contain mechanisms for members of the public to file international complaints that can lead to trade sanctions.
There has been skepticism among NGOs and trade unions about the effectiveness of the labor provisions in these FTAs, especially the NAFTA labor side agreement. Although the NAFTA labor side agreement has been in force for 20 years, there has yet to be a petition filed under the agreement that focuses specifically on the issue of child labor in agriculture, despite the fact that prohibition of child labor is one of 3 out of 11 labor principles which can lead to trade sanctions under the NAFTA labor side agreement. While some petitions filed under the NAFTA labor side agreement have involved racial and ethnic minorities (such as the 2005 Puebla petition, where a number of the workers were indigenous, and the 2006 North Carolina petition, where the majority of the workers were African American), no NAALC petition to date has focused on racial discrimination per se. Thus, the issue of systemic racism has yet to be formally addressed under the NAFTA labor side agreement - or under any of the other FTAs the U.S. has with nations in the Americas and elsewhere.
A report issued by the U.S. Department of Labor under the CAFTA-DR in September 2013 regarding child labor, forced labor and racial discrimination against Haitian migrant workers in the sugar cane fields of the Dominican Republic is a positive indication that FTA labor provisions may be a useful tool for addressing labor by indigenous and other children in the U.S., Mexico, Central America and South America. This is the first report issued by the Office of Trade and Labor Affairs (OTLA - the U.S. Department of Labor office tasked with accepting petitions alleging a trade partner violated the labor chapter of an FTA) to address and discuss at length the issues of forced labor and child labor in agriculture. The petition and findings led to the commitment by current Secretary of Labor Thomas Perez (who is himself of Dominican heritage) of a $10 million project to improve labor conditions in the sugar sector in the Dominican Republic .
While there are numerous existing international and national programs designed to address child labor in the U.S. and Latin America, petitions filed under the above-mentioned FTAs regarding the issue of indigenous child labor could have a significant impact by drawing attention and resources to indigenous child laborers. An FTA labor petition can get indigenous advocates a seat at the table in policy discussions related to child labor. It would also afford indigenous advocates and their allies the opportunity to affect and change the bases for policy conversations about indigenous child workers - particularly in addressing and dispelling stereotypes about indigenous parents and families and their motivations for having their children work alongside them or sending their children to work instead of school. Advocates could make specific education and labor policy proposals and use FTA labor petitions as leverage to get their proposals and ideas on the desks of policy makers. Under the NAFTA labor side agreement, it is possible to cross-file petitions. Indigenous and child advocates could file a petition with the U.S. Department of Labor regarding child labor in agriculture in Mexico and at the same time file a petition with Mexican labor authorities regarding child labor in agriculture in the U.S. - and file both petitions with Canadian labor department to involve an international third partner to see through the Gordian knot of U.S.-Mexico relations and leverage creative Canadian policy mechanisms to address common issues in both of Canada's trade partners to the south. Such a cross- and dual-filed petition might lead to a call for an Evaluation Committee of Experts (ECE) - the 2nd of 3 tiers of dispute resolution under the NAFTA labor side agreement - to draft an independent report about indigenous child labor in agriculture in the NAFTA region. Similarly, the regional structure in the CAFTA-DR could be leveraged to design policies to combat indigenous child labor at the regional level in Central America. While the U.S., Mexican and Canadian labor departments have 20 years of experience in accepting and addressing petitions filed under the NAFTA labor side agreement, it is a process that may be new to Central American nations. Strategically, it might be interesting to dual file indigenous child labor petitions under the CAFTA-DR with Central American nations - for example, filing a petition in Costa Rica about the treatment of indigenous child laborers in Guatemala, or one in Honduras about the treatment of indigenous child laborers from Honduras in Costa Rica - as well as in the United States, to leverage the financial and institutional resources of the U.S. Department of Labor.
Finally, utilizing FTA labor provisions to combat indigenous child labor in the Americas may increase the vitality of these provisions and their capacity to foment positive policy development and exchange on a regional level, especially in the NAFTA region. Since there is general consensus that child labor implicates fundamental human rights, dual-filed petitions may increase engagement between authorities and advocates across borders to address and eliminate indigenous child labor, including affording the opportunity to child labor specialists in Mexico, Central America and South America to lend their expertise, experience and language skills to their counterparts in the United States. The NAFTA labor side agreement is in particular need of revitalization, as traditional and more recent disputes between the U.S. and Mexico in the area of labor policy - as well as mutual lack of enthusiasm among the 3 trade partners' labor authorities and social partners - have rendered the agreement's potential for innovative labor market and human rights policy fallow. As child labor in agriculture is a difficult issue to combat in both the U.S. and Mexico, a dual and cross-filed petition on the issue of indigenous child labor might provide the common ground North American labor authorities need to rebuild their strained and tattered relations. Since the North American labor departments closed down their joint tri-national labor secretariat in 2010, the labor ministers of the three trade partners have not held North American Labor Council meetings or engaged in cooperative activities as required by the NAFTA labor side agreement. Since not a single one of the three trading partners has completely clean hands in the areas of racial discrimination against indigenous peoples or child labor in agriculture - but all three countries have active programs to eliminate both - working together to resolve a common issue of basic human rights may afford them an opportunity to rebuild their relationships and eventually engage in North American regional labor policy and research in a more productive fashion and on more sound footing than in the early years of their relationship.
Indigenous child labor in agriculture is an issue in which the cooperative mechanisms engaged in as part of the dispute resolution processes under FTA labor chapters - such as meetings, studies, bringing people to the table and financing special programs - may actually work. Petitioners would have to craft the petitions and their requests for remedies to include their ideas for what kinds of programs and dialogue they want. For example, advocates could ask for the participation of educational authorities and experts and have a set of ideas ready for what kinds of social dialogue they want and who should participate.
While the history of application of FTA labor chapters has shown the processes and outcomes to be less than perfect, recent reports and activities exemplified by the 2013 Dominican Republic Sugar Cane Industry report and ensuing action plan show that workers may have some vindication of their allegations and some productive outcomes as a result of petitions. And, as demonstrated by action by the Centro de Migrante and its allies, petitions filed under FTA labor chapters in conjunction with legislative initiatives related to agricultural labor visas in the United States can lead to administrative and legislative progress on important human rights issues as well as the energizing of communities.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)