Labor Diplomacy: In the Service of Democracy and Security

Unfortunately, few of the report’s recommendations, even those formally accepted by the Department, have been implemented. Though the Committee is aware of the burdens associated with the transition to a new administration, and the new priorities in the wake of September 11, we are disappointed to note that resources devoted to the labor diplomacy program have remained static and cooperative programs involving the Departments of State and Labor have been frozen.

This report will focus on the role and importance of labor diplomacy in promoting U.S. national security and combating the global political, economic and social conditions that undermine our security interests. In this context, we note that labor diplomacy includes not only the Department of State’s labor diplomacy program, but also the overseas labor technical assistance programs of the U.S. Government, public diplomacy programs, and diplomatic initiatives on labor issues in a number of multilateral fora.

Cognizant that international economic security and international political security are interrelated, the Committee believes that freedom from want is a necessary condition for a peaceful world order. Sustainable economic growth that is broad-based is required to tackle poverty, and democracy is required to address the exclusion that allows poverty and resentment to fester.

Effective labor diplomacy contributes significantly to our progress on each of the four interrelated goals of U.S. foreign policy: stability, security, democracy and prosperity. In the context of the war on terrorism, labor diplomacy helps to provide an assessment of the economic conditions faced by ordinary people and to identify factors that can contribute to the breeding grounds for terrorism. Labor diplomacy also provides a framework for developing tools to combat these problems.

The events of September 11 have focused our attention on the connection between the failure of political institutions in many Muslim countries and the rise of political extremism and terrorism. The absence of institutions of democracy and civil society, especially independent channels for constructive participation and peaceful dissent, has resulted in growing frustration, anger, and alienation among many Muslim populations. Poverty has also been a critical factor. The ordinary men and women in these Muslim societies must be the focus of a concerted campaign if the war against terrorism is to succeed. Part of that campaign includes adequate foreign assistance. Unfortunately, the United States has for a long time stinted on its foreign assistance obligations, failing to meet the minimum standards recommended for developed countries.

Of course, terrorism is not the only challenge to a peaceful, prosperous and democratic world. Around the world, poverty continues to take an unacceptable toll. Where poverty dominates, democratic institutions are usually weak. The availability of decent employment is a powerful deterrent to political extremism.

Trade unions play an important role in addressing poverty and building up democratic participation. The primary goal of unions is to promote the economic well being of their members, but unions also engage in the democratic process in order to achieve their goals and thus are natural promoters of democracy in society. Trade unions protect human rights and promote public accountability. Where free unions are allowed to operate, political extremism is less likely to flourish. In the developing world, free trade unions help to provide the underpinning for economic growth and democracy by contributing to the emergence of a stable, fairly paid, working middle-class.

In many countries, trade unions are one of the few organizations with a membership that reflects all or most of the country’s ethnic, religious, tribal, and linguistic groups. As such, unions can play a valuable role in providing a venue for these groups to recognize and strengthen their common interests, air their grievances, and work together to build understanding and consensus.

Trade unions exist in varying degrees in Muslim countries and have a role to play in the struggle against terrorism and for democracy. However, there is often little protection in law or practice for trade unionists. The Middle East stands out as the region where the right to organize trade unions is least likely to be protected by law. Where unions do exist, their independence is often threatened by authoritarian governments on the one hand and Islamist political factions on the other. A policy that aims to cultivate union leadership at the enterprise and industry levels represents a promising approach to inculcate modern economic incentives and democratic political values among workers in Muslim countries.

Multilateral labor organizations also contribute to the development of democracy and economic inclusion. The International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) is a global umbrella organization of national trade union centers, such as the AFL-CIO in the United States. Associated with the ICFTU are trade union internationals organized on a sector-by-sector basis worldwide, known collectively as the International Trade Secretariats (ITS). The principal objective of the democratic international trade union movement organized in the ICFTU and ITS has been the promotion of democracy and worker rights.

The International Labor Organization (ILO) is an important multilateral institution for the promotion of worker rights, trade unions and constructive workplace relations between employers and workers. The ILO was created in 1919 with the aim of raising working conditions worldwide through the negotiation and adoption of internationally-recognized labor standards by representatives of the governments, labor unions and employers of its member States. The ILO conducts an extensive program of international technical cooperation to help countries put these policies into practice.

Though the expanding global economy has done much to promote prosperity, globalized markets have also produced growing inequality within and between countries. In this context, worker and trade union concerns about globalization are often a warning sign of deeper social unrest and economic dislocations. Governments and intergovernmental organizations have a critical role to play in creating the policies, institutions, rules and procedures required to maximize the positives and minimize the negatives generated by the globalization of markets. Labor standards are an important part of this process. Core labor standards are international and actually do at least as much to help developing country workers as those in more developed countries.

Recommendations
The Committee wishes to emphasize the importance of the recommendations contained in its first Report and to offer the following additional recommendations:

Particular emphasis should be given to encourage citizen participation in the economic and political affairs of developing countries through civil society institutions such as trade unions.

The Committee believes that a comprehensive toolkit for the ILO needs to include the possibilities of penalties as well as incentives – sticks as well as carrots – to bring about greater compliance by recalcitrant governments with a persistent record of violating basic worker rights. The Committee believes that the United States should continue and increase its support for ILO technical cooperation programs.

The U.S. Government should reexamine the issue of ratification of the core labor conventions of the ILO for the purpose of increasing the pace and number of ratifications.

The United States has one of the worst records of ratification of ILO conventions of any member state of the ILO, especially of the core labor conventions. This failure to ratify the core conventions undermines U.S. efforts to lead the international campaign to eliminate child labor, forced labor, and discrimination.

The Department of State should work with the Department of Treasury and Department of Labor to promote the importance of core worker rights in the operations of the World Bank, IMF, and other international financial institutions, with particular reference to the Frank Amendment of 1995.

The Department of State should ensure that the policy framework on international labor issues, encompassing both their economic and political aspects, is consistently implemented in the U.S. Government’s diplomatic initiatives and its technical assistance programs.

Since the Under Secretary for Global Affairs currently has oversight responsibility for democracy, human rights and labor, she is singularly qualified to allocate these funds and approve project expenditures for this purpose.

The Departments of State and Labor should utilize the interagency committee recommended in the Committee’s first report to develop labor diplomacy. The Committee reiterates its recommendation that the Department of State enlarge and strengthen the labor diplomacy corps, with the maintenance of senior Labor Officer positions.

Currently, USAID "graduates" a mission country based on economic development criteria. Unfortunately, often a country’s development of democratic institutions lags behind its economic development, and therefore the withdrawal of USAID democracy-promotion programs has a deleterious effect on the development of democracy in the mission country.

The ability of the U.S. Government to relate to trade unions as examples of democratic institutions and constructive members of civil society, and as institutions that contribute to a level economic playing field, must begin with obtaining basic knowledge of trade unions. The Committee urges the reinstatement of the Foreign Labor Trends series as a required reporting responsibility of the Labor Officer corps.

Introduction
The Advisory Committee on Labor Diplomacy’s first report, A World of Decent Work: Labor Diplomacy for the New Century, issued in September 2000, focused on the importance of labor diplomacy in U.S. foreign policy. The report identified worker rights as a key factor in economic globalization and submitted a set of recommendations on how to strengthen the labor function in the Department of State and the Foreign Service in this context.

Our report noted that "promoting worker rights contributes to vital U.S. national interests, by promoting global economic prosperity and broadly-shared economic development, furthering democracy, the rule of law and human rights, and fostering stability." More particularly, the Committee pointed out that to fulfill these commitments "the Department of State must imbue the entire Foreign Service, from Ambassador down to the newest Foreign Service Officer, with a deeper understanding of the importance of these issues and must have a skilled group of men and women on the front lines as America’s labor diplomats".

The report addressed the successes and shortfalls of the labor diplomacy program and offered a comprehensive series of recommendations designed to improve the program. While the majority of our recommendations were accepted, and a lesser number were accepted with modifications, the reality as of December 2001 is that few of those recommendations have been implemented. The overall size of the labor diplomacy program and its resources have remained static, the important cooperative programs involving State and Labor Departments in interagency collaboration have been frozen, and our efforts to create an enlarged, improved and more effective labor diplomacy program have not yielded the results we sought. There are undoubtedly many reasons for this state of affairs – the difficulties of transition from one administration to another, superseding priorities, bureaucratic inertia – but we must record our disappointment.

We urge the Department of State to undertake a detailed re-examination of the earlier recommendations and to act upon them. A detailed review of the state of implementation of those recommendations will be the subject of a separate administrative communication to the Secretary.

In addressing labor diplomacy issues in our first report, the Committee focused primarily on the labor function in the Department of State, including the role of Labor Officers and U.S. missions overseas, and the direction and support they receive from the Department of State in Washington. The report also touched on coordination with the Department of Labor.

In this report, we define "labor diplomacy" in its widest sense to include the overseas labor-related technical assistance programs of the U.S. Government, regardless of the specific funding agency and whether through bilateral or multilateral channels; public diplomacy programs that promote U.S. international labor interests such as the exchange visitor program and public broadcasting; and programs which promote worker rights in multilateral and regional fora such as the United Nations, the Bretton Woods Institutions, the International Labor Organization (ILO), the Organization of American States (OAS) and the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

The Committee was in the process of developing a second report assessing the effectiveness of, and policy coherence among, U.S. Government agencies involved in the full range of international labor issues when the United States was attacked on September 11 by terrorists. In the wake of these attacks, the committee decided to limit its consideration of interagency processes and reflect more on the role of labor diplomacy in advancing and ensuring U.S. national security.

Thus, the main focus of this report is the role and importance of labor diplomacy in promoting U.S. national security and combating the global political, economic and social conditions that undermine our security interests.

Economic and Political Security – The Role of Labor Diplomacy
International economic security and international political security are interrelated. Poverty, the gap between rich and poor countries, and the gap between rich and poor within countries, breed resentment and anger that can lead to political upheaval, rebellion and even wars. This was formally recognized by the victorious Allied countries at the end of the First World War and is why a clause was written into the Versailles Peace Treaty in 1919 establishing an International Labor Organization to set minimum international labor standards. The Committee believes that freedom from want is a necessary precondition for a peaceful world order and that sustainable economic growth requires both broad-based economic development, in which the greatest number of people share the fruits of economic growth, and broad-based democracy, which is governed by the rule of law and respect for human rights. Economic growth and democracy are essential for fostering political stability and are key elements in defining U.S. national security.

Effective labor diplomacy is essential to success with respect to each of the four interrelated goals of U.S. foreign policy: stability, security, democracy and prosperity. Such labor matters as poverty, wages, employment, workforce development, labor standards, and popular commitment to (or alienation from) economic and social institutions are central to economic performance and political and social stability in any country.

An effective corps of Labor Officers within the U.S. Foreign Service is essential if the U.S. Government is to understand foreign labor developments and help people in other countries understand U.S. policies and institutions. Labor issues are inherently multidisciplinary–both political and economic. Understanding and interpreting them requires specialized training and knowledge, as well as an ability to relate to a variety of labor, business, political, and civil leaders. It is the unanimous view of the Committee that a specialized labor function in the U.S. Foreign Service is a necessary tool for effective foreign policy making and diplomacy. In addition, the Committee considers that increased coordination and coherence among labor-related instruments of U.S. foreign policy, such as technical assistance projects, public diplomacy strategies, and initiatives within the international financial institutions, will greatly enhance the efficacy of U.S. international labor policy.

The War on Terrorism
The war on terrorism provides one more example of why labor diplomacy functions are so important. Working conditions that lead to misery, alienation and hopelessness are extremely important in the constellation of forces responsible for terrorism, especially when demagogues blame the United States, globalization, or other external forces. Policies to improve these conditions are necessary components of strategies to prevent and counter terrorist activities. Effective labor diplomacy is important in informing American analysis and shaping its policy to combat the conditions that breed terrorism around the world.

The Committee does not claim special expertise with respect to the Muslim world, religious fundamentalism or Islamist political movements. But we are familiar with the economic poverty and the lack of democracy, human rights and worker rights in most of the Middle East and in other Muslim countries.

Economic despair does not explain the motivation of the assassins who took part in the September 11 attacks. Some who piloted the hijacked planes were evidently engineers possessing employable technical skills. However, poverty is a common factor among Pakistani volunteers who have taken up arms on behalf of the Taliban in Afghanistan. According to the families of the missing Pakistani "jihadis", as they are called, few of them had ever had a job, and those who had rarely earned more than the equivalent of $1.20 for a day of backbreaking work in the fields, and only in the planting and harvesting seasons. The availability of decent work opportunities–and the resulting ability to have a decent life–is a powerful deterrent to political extremism. Even after consideration of the extraordinary potency of Islamic fundamentalism and militancy, this is true in the Muslim world as well. The Committee is pleased to note that Secretary of State Colin Powell holds a similar view. In his speech at the University of Kentucky on November 19, Secretary Powell articulated his vision of a Middle East in which "all people have jobs that let them put bread on their tables and a roof over their head and offer a decent education to their children."

The terrorist attacks have dramatically underlined the connection between the failure of political institutions in many Muslim countries and the rise of political extremism and terrorism. The absence of democracy in some Muslim countries has resulted in a systematic denial of a political voice for their citizens. Civil society organizations are either co-opted, heavily restricted or completely banned. Advocates for democratic change are trapped between repressive autocrats and extremist political forces that use religion to advance their political ideologies. The lack of independent channels for constructive participation and peaceful dissent has resulted in growing frustration, anger, and alienation among many Muslim populations. Building effective political and civil institutions to enable citizens to have a voice in the policies that shape their lives is a promising way to combat terrorism, achieve political stability and thus enhance global security.

The military campaign against Al-Qaeda and its protectors is only one element in the war against international terrorism. Not only must terrorism per se be rooted out and eliminated, but so must its facilitating environment. Terrorists swim in a sea of tacit popular support and resentful acquiescence. A broader campaign needs to be waged with those who feel most threatened by the modern secular world.

The difference between bin Laden and the alienated, poverty-stricken sea he fishes in is that he preaches isolationism, backwardness and hostility, whereas the people he seeks to recruit are ordinary men and women who are concerned to feed their children. These people must be the focus of a concerted campaign if the war against terrorism is to succeed. This war can only be won with a much stronger, and sustained, U.S. commitment to political and economic aid. Unfortunately, the United States has for a long time stinted on its foreign assistance obligations, failing even to meet the minimal standards recommended for developed countries.

The Need for Widening the Democracy-Promotion Front
It is clear to the Committee that the promotion of democracy needs to be part of any sustainable U.S.-led effort to combat terrorism, promote stability and insure national security. The United States must dramatically expand such efforts, particularly with regimes that are cooperating in the war against terrorism. The work currently done in the democracy promotion field demonstrates that significant progress can be made without narrowly imposing American culture or destabilizing countries and regions.

It is self-evident that peace, democracy, and respect for human rights and worker rights are best protected by governments accountable to the people. President Ronald Reagan understood this reality. In 1982 in his address to the British Parliament, which foreshadowed the creation of the National Endowment for Democracy, he proposed the need for a worldwide program of fostering the infrastructure of democracy, which he described as a system -- encompassing a free press, trade unions, political parties, and universities -- which allows the people to choose their own culture and to reconcile their own differences through peaceful means. President Reagan noted that such an infrastructure provided the means for genuine self-determination and protection for diversity.

There are countries on almost every continent that are in danger of backsliding into anarchy or dictatorship, or both. While free and fair elections are the sine qua non of democracy, to ensure the long-term sustainability of emerging democracies, there is a growing need for programs that support the development of representative government and civil society institutions, including trade unions.

As economics Nobel laureate Amartya Sen emphasizes, the "recognition of democracy as a universally relevant system, which moves in the direction of its acceptance as a universal value, is a major revolution in thinking, and one of the main contributions of the twentieth century." A major change in thinking about political democracy is that it is a means as well as an end: democracy promotes stability and broader prosperity by providing a means for people to make their concerns known to leaders who must address these concerns or suffer the consequences, including removal from office. As Sen shows, democracy works for poor as well as rich countries. For example, no independent democratic country with a free press has ever experienced a substantial famine, whereas famines are common in dictatorial regimes where bad economic policies go uncriticized and uncorrected.

Democratic systems -- with voting and respect for election results, the protection of liberties and freedom, respect for legal entitlements and the guarantee of free discussion and the uncensored distribution of news -- not only satisfy the need for political participation and freedom, but also keep governments responsible and accountable.

Social capital, the ability of people to develop enough trust to act collectively to solve or avoid problems and achieve common objectives, can be an important resource to promote broadly shared prosperity. Democratic institutions like free trade unions develop social capital by providing voice for their members in various governing processes, and by promoting the education and personal development of members and leaders.

The Role of Trade Unions
The right of workers to organize and bargain collectively is a fundamental form of democratic participation. A basic objective of labor diplomacy should be to strengthen these institutions in order to provide authentic voices for workers in the work place and in society. While free and independent trade unions are not the only organizations of concern to labor diplomacy (others include political parties, cooperatives, mass movements, and works councils), worker organizations of some kind exist in every country and can form the basis for further work by U.S. labor diplomacy.

Around the world, trade unions are front-line organizations that protect human rights, build informed participation and promote public accountability. While their principal function is to promote the economic well being of their members, free trade unions engage in the democratic process in order to achieve their goals. Because they must practice democracy in the workplace to address successfully the varying needs of their members, trade unions are natural promoters of democracy in society.

Free trade unions can be instruments of change in society. Where free unions are allowed to operate, political extremism is less likely to flourish. In the developing world, free trade unions help to provide the underpinning for economic growth and democracy by contributing to the emergence of a stable, fairly paid, working middle-class. Without free unions, developing countries tend to enrich only narrowly based economic and political elites while the vast majority of their increasingly alienated citizens continue to be trapped in poverty.

From Poland to the Philippines and from Indonesia to South Africa trade unions have been in the forefront of the struggle for political rights and have helped to create an enabling environment for other civil society organizations and democratic forces to pursue their own efforts for democratic change. In Poland, what began as a workplace-based effort by workers to exercise their basic right to associate freely, turned into a mass movement that overthrew a communist dictatorship. In the Philippines, the courageous acts of trade union leaders who stood up to Marcos and his cronies helped to mobilize public support for his removal from office. In Indonesia, trade unionists were active in conducting an extensive civic education program that helped to ensure free and fair elections resulting in the first democratically elected government in almost fifty years. In South Africa, trade union support for democracy and an end to apartheid were key to the monumental political changes that have taken place in that country. In each of these examples, trade unionists involved in the struggle for democratic change were subsequently called upon by newly elected officials to help secure and strengthen democratic rule in their countries. In many cases trade unionists were recruited for public service because of their working knowledge of democratic procedures honed over many years as leaders within their labor movements.

In countries divided by ethnic and sectarian violence, trade unions are important instruments to bridge divisions. In many countries, trade unions are one of the few organizations with a membership that reflects all or most of the ethnic, religious, tribal, and linguistic groups within their borders. As such, free trade unions can play a valuable role in providing a venue for these groups to recognize and strengthen their common interests, air their grievances, and work together in a democratic process to build understanding and consensus. In Bosnia, free trade unionists successfully founded a multi-ethnic union in Brcko and are working to develop a dialogue among the various ethnic groups in that country. In Sierra Leone trade unions are one of the key institutions involved in mediating the conflict between the rebels and the government. In South Africa trade union leaders have been strong supporters of the South African government’s reconciliation efforts. In Northern Ireland trade unions have been directly involved in mediation efforts to resolve the sectarian issues that divide that society.

Trade Unions in Muslim Countries
Trade unions exist in varying degrees in Muslim countries and have a role to play in the struggle against terrorism and for democracy. They are most developed in countries like Morocco, Tunisia, Egypt, Kenya, Uganda, Ghana and Nigeria. However, there is often little protection in law or practice even in these countries for trade unionists, who are liable to be imprisoned for exercising basic worker rights.

The Middle East stands out as the region where the right to organize trade unions is most highly restricted. Undemocratic regimes simply outlaw any form of trade union activity as inappropriate to their societies. They cannot tolerate any independent source of power. In most countries where unions do exist they are under close government control. In the Gulf States, trade unionism is hardly permitted at all, although recently some governments in the region have approached the ILO for assistance in modernizing their industrial relations systems.

Where unions do exist, democratic union leaders from Muslim countries have been among those who sent messages of solidarity to American workers after the September 11 attacks. They understand unambiguously that the world of the terrorists does not include worker rights, and that working women, children and labor activists would be among the first victims if terrorism were to prevail.

In many Arab countries, the independence of trade unions is threatened by authoritarian governments on the one hand and Islamist political factions on the other. These unions are a political battleground because they are proxy political institutions and instruments for controlling the hearts, minds and jobs of workers in these countries. Where there is a trade union monopoly, the top confederation leaders are sometimes co-opted by the government and serve its interests rather than workers’ interests. Others continue to struggle to defend and advance workers’ interests in the face of governmental or religious opposition. Often, the leadership at levels closest to the shop floor more genuinely represents rank and file worker interests.

As the U.S. Government-supported programs of the American Center for International Labor Solidarity (Solidarity Center) already demonstrate, a policy that aims to cultivate union leadership at the enterprise and industrial sector levels represents the most promising approach to inculcate modern economic thinking and democratic political values among workers in Muslim countries. These programs merit continued support. This does require greater readiness on the part of the U.S. Government, however, to cultivate and nurture moderate dissident elements with democratic potential in countries ruled by authoritarian governments including –indeed especially– those currently providing support in the war on Al-Qaeda, and to factor this into its relationship with these governments.

The International Trade Union Movement
In addition to the bilateral role which U.S. Government agencies and the American labor movement play in international labor diplomacy, the contribution of multilateral organizations needs also to be taken into account.

The principal objective of the democratic international trade union movement organized in the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) and the International Trade Secretariats (ITS) has been the promotion of democracy and worker rights. Representing a total of 156 million workers in 148 countries, the Brussels-based ICFTU is the largest and most important trade union international in the world. The ICFTU is a global umbrella organization of national trade union centers in these countries, such as the AFL-CIO in the United States. Associated with the ICFTU are a dozen or so trade union internationals organized on an industrial sector-by-sector basis worldwide, known collectively as the International Trade Secretariats. The trade unions of some Arab and Muslim countries, have been longstanding affiliates of the ICFTU and ITS.

The International Labor Organization
The International Labor Organization was created in 1919 and has been part of the UN system since 1946. The ILO was created with the aim of raising working conditions worldwide through the negotiation and adoption of internationally-recognized labor standards by representatives of the governments, labor unions and employers of its member States. The ILO has established supervisory systems for monitoring country compliance with these standards.

In an innovative move beyond the ILO’s standards and supervisory system, the worker and management representatives in the organization played a critical role in the adoption in 1998 of a solemn Declaration of Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work which commits the member States of the ILO to promote, observe and respect fundamental principles and rights in the workplace. Indeed, the employer spokesperson on the ILO Drafting Committee was a representative of the American business community. The Declaration defined the four areas of Fundamental Principles and Rights as:

• Freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining;

• The elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labor;

• The effective abolition of child labor; and

• The elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation.

No right is more basic to democracy and the guarantee of fundamental human rights than the right of citizens to associate freely. Without the right to create their own organizations, working men and women have no means to defend the other fundamental rights of freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and freedom of religion. Such basic freedoms remain vulnerable without freedom of association. A basic rationale for collective bargaining is that it provides a means for workers and employers to formulate working rules to reflect their interests as preferable to unilateral decision-making or government regulation. Placing a value on negotiation as a way to solve problems is often lacking in less developed, less democratic countries.

Beyond its standards setting, monitoring and promotion activities, the ILO conducts an extensive program of international technical cooperation formulated and implemented in active partnership with its tripartite constituents, to help countries put these policies into effect in practice. In addition to its rights-based approach and its emphasis on strengthening social dialogue, the ILO’s "Decent Work" agenda is unique among the international agencies in focusing on job-creation as the key to economic development.

As part of U.S. assistance efforts and in addition to bilateral programs to promote democracy and human rights worldwide, the Committee believes that the United States should continue to support ILO technical cooperation programs and that there should be a greater effort to work through the ICFTU and ITS system for strengthening and developing a genuinely democratic-oriented leadership in trade unions around the world, including in Arab and Muslim countries. Especially in countries where an American--and especially a U.S. Government—intervention is viewed with suspicion, multilateral institutions like the ICFTU/ITS system and the ILO provide an opportune alternative channel to promote democratic trade union leadership in these areas.

The Role of Globalization, Economic Growth and Development
The Committee rejects the view that globalization is to blame for the economic woes of Muslim countries and thereby an indirect cause of the September 11 attacks. As one writer has stated, with a few notable exceptions–Turkey, Malaysia, Indonesia, some of the North African and Gulf states–most Muslim countries live in self-imposed exile from the new global economy. The Muslim world suffers from too little globalization, not too much.

The expanding global economy has done much to promote prosperity, at least as measured by rising average incomes. Participation in the global economy provides the main opportunities for growth and development today. The internationalization of production has opened up new avenues for the transfer of capital, technology and skills, and for the generation of employment and income. Globalization clearly has the potential to generate broadly shared prosperity.

However, a significant number of workers in industrialized countries, and increasingly in middle-income countries, have seen their jobs being exported to lower wage countries. Developing countries seeking to participate in the global economy find themselves in a "Catch-22." If they attempt to enforce international labor rights and standards and allow workers to form unions, investors may move to some other country with even lower standards and production costs. It is not possible to predict the outcome of job migration and the race to the bottom but a growing number of workers in developing countries believe that they have seen none of the benefits that integration into the world economy was supposed to deliver.

Market Forces Alone Are Inadequate
Market forces depend heavily on supportive governmental and civil institutions and rules. In the past, these institutions have existed primarily at the national level. However globalizing markets have eroded the effectiveness of national institutions and policies, requiring the creation of new supranational rules and institutions more compatible with globalized markets. The creation of these new international institutions has not kept pace with globalization.

At the same time, globalized markets have produced growing inequality within and between countries. Inequality causes economic, social, and political instability, and therefore threatens democratic institutions.

These and other factors mean that market-driven economic growth will be inadequate and unsustainable.

To be sustainable, market systems must have wide public support, and that support depends on the public’s ready access to opportunities for upward mobility, which, in turn, can improve economic growth and overcome some of the growing inequality. Sustainable market systems likewise require that the system be perceived as fair as well as efficient. Competitive markets are concerned with efficiency, but care nothing about fairness. It can be demonstrated, however, that in the long run a just system can be very efficient and an unjust system can be very inefficient.

In that light, rather than being viewed as impediments to progress, worker and trade union concerns about globalization should be regarded as a warning sign of deeper social unrest and economic dislocations that must be addressed through the creation of appropriate international institutions and the reform and revitalization of national institutions to deal with market failures. Union and worker discontent can also be a tool for generating reform or transparency within a corrupt government.

Economic and Financial Institutions
At the international level, multilateral economic and financial institutions are far from perfect. An unfortunate reality is that labor issues, despite their obvious importance, are often ignored in political and economic policy making within and between countries. There are several reasons for this neglect. Perhaps the most important is the limited economic and political power of workers and their organizations. Another reason is the multidisciplinary nature of labor matters, which makes it difficult for economists at the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, WTO and other economic and financial institutions to fit these concerns into their narrow market-oriented analyses. These analysts are likely either to minimize the importance of labor concerns, or to consider labor policies to be inimical to the operation of competitive markets. Economic technicians are likely to stress the widely acknowledged benefits of market incentives, but to ignore or denigrate the political institutions that can improve market outcomes and make market systems more equitable and sustainable.

Good government and public services are essential to the development of broad social, economic, and political programs and policies beneficial to civil society. Indeed, a strong case can be made that faulty governance processes are mainly responsible for creating, encouraging, or permitting the persistence of conditions that encourage the ignorance, poverty, misery and hopelessness that are the breeding grounds for terrorism, crime and other pathologies. Often the prescriptions of the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and regional development banks cut most harshly against public employment opportunities and can weaken governmental efficiency. These international financial institutions should carefully examine the effects of public employee reductions in the context of government efficiency and the need for a social safety net. Governments have a critical role to play in creating the policies, institutions, rules and procedures required to maximize the positives and minimize the negatives generated by the globalization of markets.

The Role of Labor Standards
Labor standards have an important role to play in promoting the foreign policy goals of democracy, stability, security, and prosperity. The rationale for labor standards in a more globalized economy is as valid as it was in earlier, less interdependent national economies. The equity rationale is to prevent the costs of change from being borne inordinately by the poorest and least powerful members of society and to provide a better balance of power between workers and non-worker interests in society and the work place.

Labor standards promote efficiency by strengthening management and causing competition to be more about improving productivity and quality than about reducing wages and other labor standards. Indeed, it can be demonstrated that a high value added strategy in international as well as national markets is more compatible with sustainable development, democratic institutions, and good relations between countries, than low-wage competition.

We want to stress that labor standards must be considered in connection with all international economic transactions, not just in trade rules. Deeply integrated global markets impact all national policies and institutions. NAFTA, for example, was more about investment than trade, which was relatively open between the United States, Canada and Mexico before that international agreement was adopted. And workers’ ability to influence their wages and working conditions through collective bargaining is weakened by the ease of shifting production to countries that violate core labor standards, not merely by the amount of production actually relocated. The extent of globalization and its impacts therefore cannot be measured by trade statistics alone, as those who would minimize the negative effects of globalization on workers often argue.

Labor diplomacy should seek to expand support for core labor standards by addressing the legitimate concerns of workers, employers, and policy makers in other countries while counteracting common myths. For example, labor standards do not involve imposing developed country standards on developing countries. Core labor standards are international and actually do at least as much to help developing country workers as those in more developed countries. Core labor standards protect workers everywhere, just as allowing companies to gain a competitive advantage by suppressing core labor standards damages workers everywhere. If developing countries lack the resources or ability to enforce core labor standards, they should receive technical assistance for this purpose from the ILO or other multinational institutions, and from U.S. bilateral and multilateral programs administered by State, USAID and the Department of Labor.

Support for a workable system of labor standards would be enhanced by the globalization of civil and political institutions to match the globalization of markets and business enterprises and financial institutions. This process could be facilitated by closer working relationships between the ILO, the World Bank, the IMF and the WTO, as well as by stronger international labor and civil institutions and broader participation in international economic and financial institutions. The ILO has considerable expertise in the development of labor standards, but has limited power to enforce compliance with those standards. International financial and trade institutions have considerable economic power, but limited experience with labor standards. Closer relationships between these institutions therefore could improve labor standards by making them more enforceable and could produce more upward economic mobility.

The Institutional Environment of International Labor Policies
Governmental policy on international labor issues arises from a number of different agencies and actors depending on the subject matter of the policy and, sometimes, depending on who gets there first. Some of the most important issues of international labor policy have arisen in the trade area and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) has had the decisive role in defining U.S. international trade policy.

The Department of Labor conducts both bilateral and multilateral technical assistance programs abroad. The Department of State formulates policy on the promotion of human rights and democracy issues, many of which intersect with labor union interests. USAID’s labor-related programs currently are implemented through the Office for Democracy and Governance (within USAID), and thematically these programs fall under the democracy-promotion aspects of the Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian Assistance pillar of USAID’s organizational structure.

The Department of Treasury impacts U.S. labor policy through its instructions to the U.S. Executive Directors at the World Bank, IMF, and other international financial institutions, on U.S. Government objectives, including those pertaining to labor issues. USTR plays the lead role in trade negotiations and develops labor-related trade policy through an interagency process that includes DOL, DOS/USAID, and Treasury, among other relevant agencies.

In terms of interagency cooperation, there should be recognition that different U.S. Government agencies and U.S. civil society institutions play different but important roles in the promotion of labor rights and bring to the table differing perspectives and expertise. While there is a need for coordination, there is also a need to support a pluralistic approach to the promotion of labor rights.

In democracy-building programs there is also a diffusion of programs and authority and a need for coordination. USAID funds many democracy-building initiatives within its sphere of operations and funds a large number of labor programs designed to strengthen democratic forces abroad. The Department of State similarly funds such programs. The National Endowment for Democracy (a government-supported but independent agency) funds its four core grantee institutions, including the Solidarity Center, as well as a large number of grantee groups around the world.

The Need for Coordination of Democracy-Building Programs
An effort to manage the several programs within the Department of State designed to aid democracy-building began with the creation of the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor in 1977. That office manages the annual reports on human rights and religious freedom, the international labor programs and consults on the allocation of Economic Support Funds. The primary responsibility for this office rests with the Assistant Secretary, who reports directly to the Under Secretary for Global Affairs.

In the past, there has been some coordination with the then-separate USAID. With the new structure of USAID as an element of the Department of State, that coordination should be substantially enhanced.

USAID, originally intended only as an economic development organization, has through the years developed programs for democracy-building, development of the rule of law, and combating corruption, among other areas. But its priorities are, appropriately, still driven by economic development issues and it "graduates" countries from its overall program based on economic development measures. That has meant that its non-economic programs are sometimes prematurely terminated.

We would also note our view that the rule-of-law programs, significant and important as they are in other areas of societal law, have too often neglected any consideration of the law pertaining to employment and labor rights. These programs, properly developed, can provide real opportunities to influence developing nations’ legal frameworks for observance of freedom of association and can provide the essential underpinning and structure for a system of labor laws and labor protections for working people.

Recommendations
In its first report, the Committee offered a series of recommendations designed to improve the Department of State’s programs in labor diplomacy. The war on terrorism has only highlighted how central the mission of strengthening independent trade union movements and promoting labor and human rights is to the development of a world in which our national security is guaranteed.

The Committee therefore wishes to emphasize the importance of the recommendations contained in its first Report and to offer the following additional recommendations:

The U.S. has the lowest percentage of GNP devoted to foreign assistance of any developed country and this percentage has been decreasing for the past decade. The ability of the U.S. to advance American interests in the developing world is severely hampered by the perception that it has not fulfilled its obligations to assist developing countries’ efforts to respond to the basic needs of their people, grow their economies and to promote political inclusion and the rule of law.

We are more convinced than ever that America must remain engaged in the world and utilize all of the tools and resources it has to strengthen U.S. national security -- including the international affairs budget. We urge the Administration to support increased funding for the international affairs budget, including the foreign operations portion, which represents only one percent of the federal budget. A small increase in our foreign assistance funding can make a significant difference in protecting and promoting America's national interests.

Foreign assistance for humanitarian relief should be coupled with expanded funding for democracy promotion. Particular emphasis should be given to encourage citizen participation in the economic and political affairs of developing countries through civil society institutions such as trade unions.

ILO standards are developed on a tripartite basis with the full participation of government, employer and worker representatives. The obligation to adhere to them is voluntarily adopted by countries. This commitment, once a country ratifies an ILO convention, has the same standing as any international treaty obligation.

The machinery for enforcement of ILO labor standards is built upon voluntary compliance by member countries. The primary tool available to the ILO to promote compliance is moral suasion, which can be quite effective at times. However, there are a substantial number of cases of repeated violations of fundamental worker rights, usually by authoritarian or dictatorial governments that ignore the recommendations of ILO supervisory bodies for protracted period of time. Efforts to date by the U.S. Government to raise the issue of worker rights in the GATT and the World Trade Organization, where trade enforcement measures are available, have met with stiff resistance from developing countries and led to a conclusion that worker rights issues are the responsibility of the ILO and should be taken up there.

In response to the controversy over trade and labor standards, the ILO adopted its Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work in 1998. The "Follow-Up" implementation program under the Declaration represents a promotional effort to gain greater compliance with the core labor rights by offering technical cooperation and other assistance to countries that want help in improving their worker rights performance. For the first time in its history, the ILO also recently used a provision under Article 33 of its Constitution to authorize its members to take action they deemed wise and expedient to secure Burma’s compliance with the ILO Convention on Forced Labor (No. 29). The ILO is also expected to establish shortly a World Commission of eminent persons to examine the impact of the global economy on worker rights, employment and social protection, and what new international architecture is needed to cope with the labor and social problems presented by globalization. The Declaration program and the Burma action are still too recent for the Committee to be able to judge their long-term effectiveness and significance. Moreover, these measures fall short of vesting an enforcement power in the ILO and there would be strong resistance from the developing countries against establishing any international agency to enforce labor standards, whether in the ILO or any other multilateral organization. The Committee believes that a comprehensive toolkit needs to include the possibilities of penalties as well as incentives – sticks as well as carrots – to bring about greater compliance by recalcitrant governments with a persistent record of violating basic worker rights. The ILO should continue to explore ways of strengthening its monitoring, reporting, and supervisory mechanisms, in order to bring about greater compliance by its member states with the core worker rights standards.

The U.S. Government should continue its active support of ILO efforts to strengthen its capacity to bring about greater country compliance with core labor standards, including the Declaration and the technical cooperation program which accompanies it, the campaign to end forced labor in Burma, and the World Commission, and it should lead a campaign in the ILO to explore further ways to strengthen its enforcement capabilities.

The U.S. Government should reexamine the issue of ratification of the core labor conventions of the ILO for the purpose of increasing the pace and number of ratifications.

The United States has one of the worst records of ratification of ILO conventions of any member state of the ILO, especially of the core labor conventions. This failure to ratify the core conventions undermines U.S. efforts to promote the ILO Declaration and to lead the international campaign to eliminate child labor, forced labor, and discrimination.

ILO standards constitute a rules-based system which aims to raise working conditions worldwide by encouraging ILO member states to bring their national law and practice into conformity with internationally-agreed minimum norms. The United States endorses this system because these standards contribute to economic and political stability in these countries, a level economic playing field, and other interests. However, the United States has extraordinary difficulty itself in ratifying ILO conventions. The Federal-State relationship and other aspects of the U.S. legal and political tradition will permit ratification only to the degree that ILO conventions are not inconsistent with, and therefore will not modify, domestic U.S. labor legislation. In practice, this means that U.S. ratification is possible only when domestic legislation is already in place that complies fully with the detailed provisions of ILO conventions. As a consequence, the total number of U.S. ratifications is extremely limited. Of the total 184 conventions adopted by the ILO, the United States has ratified 14 (and of the eight fundamental conventions, only two).

The position that the U. S. Government takes on ratification sends the message that ILO conventions are basically irrelevant for U.S. law and practice. This has the unfortunate consequence of undermining the credibility of U.S. Government efforts to promote worker rights in other countries. The President’s Committee on the ILO and its Tripartite Panel on International Labor Standards (TAPILS) should reopen the issue of ratification of the core labor conventions and explore innovative ways to make ratification possible. At the same time, an immediate effort should be made to schedule a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on ILO Convention on discrimination in employment (No. 111), which was approved by the President’s Committee and forwarded for consideration of ratification in May 1998.

The Department of State in consultation with the Department of Labor should work with the Department of Treasury to promote the importance of core worker rights in the operations of the World Bank, IMF, and other international financial institutions, with particular reference to the Frank Amendment of 1995. Practical measures include: instructing the U.S. Executive Directors to promote core worker rights as part of the World Bank’s operational directives; increasing funding for the Labor Market Unit within the World Bank’s Social Protection Division; and vigilantly supervising the Poverty Reduction Strategy Processes (PRSPs) in PRSP program countries to ensure participation by trade unions and other elements of civil society.

The Department of State should ensure that the policy framework on international labor issues, encompassing both their economic and political aspects, is consistently implemented in the U.S. Government’s diplomatic initiatives and its technical assistance programs.

In order to give labor diplomacy programs the force, direction and consistency which we believe they require in the Department of State, the Committee reiterates its recommendation from our first report that labor diplomacy programs should be coordinated by an official who is clearly perceived within the Department as having direct access to, and the support of, the Secretary of State. For this reason, the Committee continues to hold the view that the position of the Special Representative for International Labor Affairs should be retained.

Coordination should be improved between Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor at the Department of State and the Office for Democracy and Governance at USAID, and also between these functional offices and their regional counterparts in both USAID and State. In terms of interagency coordination, closer coordination is required among the Departments of State, Labor, and Treasury, USAID, USTR, and the NSC. Improved interagency coordination will help build consensus on priorities, achieve better targeting of resources, and create synergies – all of which contribute to greater policy coherence.

For example, USAID’s development assistance programs should be consistent with overall U.S. Government international labor policy. Specifically, programs that promote human capacity development and improvement in business, trade, and investment climate should take into account basic worker rights and the positive role of trade unions. Programs that promote new approaches to anticipating crisis and conflict analysis should take advantage of the experience of trade unions within the program country.

While Economic Support Funds (ESF) can be broadly construed as a tool to promote U.S. security objectives, the nature and use of this funding in democracy-building is distinct from more typical security assistance. Since the Under Secretary for Global Affairs has oversight responsibility for democracy, human rights and labor, she is singularly qualified to allocate these funds and approve project expenditures for this purpose. Consequently, the Under Secretary for Global Affairs should have primary authority for the allocation of ESF appropriated to the Department of State and designated for democracy-building and worker rights programs.

The Departments of State and Labor should utilize the interagency committee recommended in the Committee’s first report to develop all aspects of a labor and democracy-building strategy. This Committee again recommends that the interagency committee be formally constructed for the original purposes and for additional coordination on labor-related and democracy-building issues, including the related overseas assistance programs of both Departments. The interagency committee should develop a labor-related public diplomacy strategy on U.S. international labor policy that can be implemented by the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and Office of International Information Programs. In addition, it could work to ensure that the labor-related International Visitor Program and Exchange Programs be expanded and strengthened.

The Committee reiterates its recommendation that the Department of State enlarge and strengthen the labor diplomacy corps, with the maintenance of senior Labor Officer positions necessary to ensure adequate representation in major capitals and to provide career enhancement opportunities for Foreign Service Officers who specialize in labor diplomacy.

In the context of democracy-building, conflict prevention, and economic development, the Department of State should examine at which missions and offices within the Department of State Labor Officers would be particularly helpful. For example, policy strategies addressing long-term goals in the U.S. campaign against terrorism in front-line states should include increasing the total number of Labor Officers in order to place new Labor Officer positions in some of those key countries.

Currently, USAID "graduates" a mission country based on economic development criteria. Unfortunately, often a country’s development of democratic institutions lags behind its economic development, and therefore the withdrawal of USAID democracy-promotion programs has a deleterious effect on the development of democracy in the mission country. Though mechanisms exist to continue democracy promotion efforts, they are relatively limited, particularly in comparison to the resources and expertise available in USAID mission programming. Therefore, in order to secure the development and achievement of democracy, USAID should create a separate "graduation" protocol for democracy issues specifically, which would allow for appropriate resources to remain in a country that has already achieved a certain level of economic development.

Alternatively, some formal process for "handing off" democracy development programs to another government agency or to the NED should be developed. USAID resources which had been dedicated to democracy-building in the "graduated" country should be transferred to the successor agency so that these programs can be continued, rather than being transferred to another USAID country.

The ability of the U.S. Government to relate to trade unions as examples of democratic institutions and constructive members of civil society, and as institutions that contribute to a level economic playing field, must begin with obtaining basic knowledge of trade unions. The Department of State has paid negligible attention to trade union movements in Arab and Muslim countries. The Department of Labor and other government agencies which have in the past maintained up to date information of this type have seen it fall victim to budget cuts and resource reallocations. Currently, there is no central repository for information on trade unions around the world. It is the recommendation of the Committee that a coordinated system for gathering and maintaining this data be created as a collaborative effort of the Department of State and the Department of Labor, and that specifically, the Department of State should encourage missions worldwide to devote appropriate resources to obtaining information on host country trade unions.

The Committee urges the reinstatement of the Foreign Labor Trends series (published by the Department of Labor) as a required reporting responsibility of the Labor Officer corps. This was a required responsibility of Labor Officers prior to 1993, but subsequently, it became a voluntary activity. There is a need to increase reporting not only in countries where Labor Officers currently serve, but also in countries and regions of priority interest to the United States Government. We would further urge that the interagency committee recommended above develop an expanded list of priority countries for submission of Foreign Labor Trends reports.

This recommendation for increased reporting is premised on the recognition that an expanded Labor Officer corps is necessary on both a country-specific and regional basis in order to provide comprehensive information on relevant labor, economic, and civil society issues in areas of strategic importance.  

Conclusions
Labor diplomacy continues to have a very important role to play in a more integrated yet unstable global economy and society. This role is illustrated by, but by no means limited to, the current high priority war against international terrorism. By interpreting U.S. policies to people in other countries and providing a deeper understanding of working conditions and labor rights abroad to U.S. policy-makers, labor diplomats can contribute to effective U.S. foreign policy, helping to prevent future crises and take advantage of the opportunities in an open and expanding global economy.

Labor diplomacy has a particularly important role to play in helping provide the information, insights and analyses required to maximize the advantages and minimize the weaknesses in global markets. It is important as a means of promoting the democratic political and civil institutions required to overcome the defects in global markets and make them more sustainable. Our labor-related technical assistance programs, negotiations within the ILO and international financial institutions, and public diplomacy initiative, provide the means to actively and concretely address democracy and globalization issues through our labor diplomacy

The overarching truth is that labor diplomacy affords the Department of State an opportunity to work closely with the people of host countries and to understand their lives and aspirations. It connects the world of formal demarches and other diplomatic initiatives to the everyday reality of ordinary people and provides the opportunity to create a better understanding of America and by America.

Thomas R. Donahue, Chairman: Mr. Donahue is a Senior Fellow at the Work in America Institute. He served as Secretary-Treasurer of the AFL-CIO from July 1979-1995. He was elected President of the AFL-CIO at the Executive Council meeting on August 1, 1995, to complete the term of Lane Kirkland. From 1967-1969, Mr. Donahue served as Assistant Secretary of Labor for Labor-Management Relations. From 1969 to 1973, he was Executive Secretary of the Service Employees International Union. Mr. Donahue is Vice President of the Muscular Dystrophy Association, a member of the board of the National Endowment for Democracy and the Council on Foreign Relations, and holds other organizational posts.

Linda Chavez-Thompson: Ms. Chavez-Thompson was elected Executive Vice President of the AFL-CIO on October 25, 1995 and was elected to a third term in December 2001. Ms. Chavez-Thompson was an International Vice President of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) from June 1988 through June 1996. Prior to her election as Executive Vice President, Ms. Chavez-Thompson served as Vice President of the AFL-CIO since August 3, 1993. She also served as a National Vice-President of the Labor Council for Latin American Advancement from 1986 through 1996. Ms. Chavez-Thompson serves on the AFL-CIO Board of Trustees and United Way’s Board of Governors. She was appointed by President Clinton to the President’s Initiative on Race and to serve as Vice Chair of the President’s Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities and is a board member of several other organizations.

Frank P. Doyle: Mr. Doyle retired as Executive Vice President of the General Electric Company on January 1, 1996. From 1981 to 1991, he was a GE Senior Vice President with responsibility for Corporate Employee Relations, Public Relations, Government Relations, Corporate Marketing and Advertising. He joined GE in 1978 as Vice President for Corporate Employee Relations. Mr. Doyle served as a director of Compaq Computer Corporation, Paine Webber Group, and U.S. Office Products and currently is on the board of Roadway Express. He serves as Chairman of the Committee for Economic Development and on the Board of Trustees for Jobs for the Future. In 1992, Mr. Doyle was named the first Distinguished Fellow of the National Academy of Human Resources.

Anthony G. Freeman: Mr. Freeman is the director of the Washington D.C. Office of the International Labor Organization (ILO), a position he assumed on November 1, 1994. A career Foreign Service Officer from 1961 until his retirement from the U.S. Government in October 1994, he served in political and labor officer posts in Latin America and Western Europe. For ten years, starting in 1983, Mr. Freeman served as Special Assistant to Secretaries of State Schultz, Baker and Eagleburger, and Coordinator of International Labor Affairs. In that capacity, he advised the Department of State and the Agency for International Development on international labor policies. He also coordinated U.S. relations and programs with the American and international trade union movements, was U.S. Government delegate to the ILO’s annual International Labor Conference, and supervised the Department of State’s Labor Officer program. In 1993, he was named Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor.

John T. Joyce: Mr. Joyce is President of the Rome-based International Construction Institute, a position he has held since retiring in June 1999 as President of the International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers (BAC) after 20 years of service. He is a member of the Board of Freedom House, the American Institute of Architects Foundation Board of Regents, Union Labor Life Insurance Company, the Work In America Institute, the Senior Advisory Board of the National Democratic Institute, and the advisory board of the Jamestown Foundation. He has served as chairman of the AFL-CIO Defense Committee, chairman of the AFL-CIO Pension Investment Committee, the ILO Committee on the Application of Standards, labor vice-chair of the Center for National Policy, and the boards of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions, the Inter-American Organization of Workers, the National Endowment for Democracy, and the National Academy of Sciences Building Research Board.

William Lucy: Mr. Lucy was elected International Secretary-Treasurer of the 1.3 million-member American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), AFL-CIO, in May 1972, and has been reelected since, most recently in 2000. He is also a member of the AFL-CIO Executive Council, and holds several other leadership positions. In November 1994, he became President of Public Services International, the world’s largest federation of unions. He serves on the board for the Africa American Institute, Americans for Democratic Action and the Center for Policy Alternatives.

Ray Marshall: Mr. Marshall has held the Audre and Bernard Rapoport Chair in Economics and Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin since 1981. He serves on various boards and councils including the Council on Foreign Relations, Economic Policy Institute, Bretton Woods Committee, and National Center on Education and the Economy. From 1977 to 1981, Mr. Marshall was Secretary of Labor in the Carter Administration, and also served as member of the Domestic Policy Council, the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation, Cabinet-level Committee on the International Labor Organization (ILO), Economic Policy Group, and Collective Bargaining Group. Mr. Marshall has published over two hundred books and monographs.

John J. Sweeney: Mr. Sweeney was elected President of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations in 1995 and elected to a third term in December 2001. Before his election, he was serving his 4^th 4-year term as president of the Service Employees International Union, which grew from 625,000 to 1.1 million members under his leadership. He also was vice president of the AFL-CIO, and chaired the Executive Council committees on Health Care and Organizing and Field Services. He recently served on the Overseas Presence Advisory Panel. In 1996 he wrote a book America Needs a Raise, Fighting for Economic Security and Social Justice, and co-authored Solutions for the New York Work Force in 1989.

Eric Barboriak, Executive Secretary: Mr. Barboriak is a Labor Officer in the Office of International Labor Affairs in the Department of State’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor. His previous Foreign Service assignments include postings at the Consulates General in Belfast, Northern Ireland, and Shanghai, China. Prior to joining the Foreign Service, Mr. Barboriak worked extensively in refugee relief and development programs in SE Asia and served as a Peace Corps volunteer in Thailand.