My report on the International Labour Law Congress

My participation in the Congress was focused on two activities: on the one hand, I delivered a paper on “EU management of migration for economic purposes. Proposals to be considered in accordance with the 2016 United Nations Declaration on migrants and refugees”. On the other, I was appointed commentator (or discussant) in a plenary session on migrant workers. I was asked to comment on the Report regarding this issue presented by the international society that organised the Congress, represented by Prof. Kübra Dögan, and which I will refer to later.

The Congress was organised into plenary sessions in which issues of interest in the international field of Labour Law and Social Protection were discussed. The purpose of each plenary session was, therefore, to present a Report on the subject of the session prepared by an academic member of the International Society (ISLSSL),which was then summarised by a commentator.

I attended all the plenary sessions, except one (on Welfare at Work) as my return flight was scheduled at that time. Nonetheless, I have decided to publish a review of the main issues addressed in all the other plenary sessions on my website, so the reader can get a rough idea of the issues currently addressed by academics and researchers in the international arena.

I am going to comment on the main themes in each session, starting with a reference to those who presented the Report and the discussants, who commented on these Reports. Basically, in this summary I will talk about the concepts addressed, without referring in general to what people said at any particular moment.

1st Plenary Session: Presentation of the “Global Report on New Forms of Social Security” by Prof. Franz Marhold, Vienna University of Economics and Business, and Prof. Edoardo Ales, University of Cassino, as discussant.

One of the main issues that emerged in the presentation of this Report were the changes facing the world of work. One consequence of these changes is an increase in self-employment and, accordingly, the debate focused first on the distinctions that the law currently makes between categories of workers, such as salaried and self-employed workers. In relation to social security protection, in particular, we were reminded of the European Commission recommendations that self-employed workers, or all those involved in the new forms of employment should have adequate coverage in social protection systems. In addition, it was commented that Social Security coverage could not protect workers in the same way (for example, digital platform workers compared to those who do not work digitally, and even among workers on the same app).

In the two hours dedicated to this subject, the issue of a basic income for every citizen was also discussed. The overwhelming majority tended towards adopting this type of minimum or guaranteed income, provided that it was linked to work. In other words, the participants were in favour of ensuring a citizen’s income as long as the willingness to work or carry out an economic activity could be demonstrated. However, where no consensus was reached, not even a minimal agreement, was in relation to who would be responsible for paying this income, and to what extent.

2nd. Plenary Session: “Global Report on Informal Workers” by Prof. Humberto Villasmil Prieto, ILO, and Prof. Margarita Isabel Ramos Quintana, University of La Laguna, as discussant.

The Report presentation and ensuing debate were based on the need to adequately delimit what we mean by informal work, or to be more precise, the informal economy, which includes the scope of employment that is not formally covered or protected. On the one hand, we discussed the need to distinguish between categories of informal workers (for example, between those who work in urban and rural environments),and even between their economic situations, since informal work does not always necessarily imply situations of poverty. On the other, we were reminded that the concept of informality can be present in any type of activity, even formal employment. In other words, workers who are covered by an employment contract and the applicable legislation may also be subject to situations of informality in their work.

These situations lead to a lack of social protection, precarious working conditions and workers being denied their labour rights, especially their collective rights. Hence, the discussant, Dr. Ramos, defended a legal approach to labour relations, thereby seeking to enforce the application of the ILO Conventions, since these – and especially those related to the recognition of trade union rights – can also be applied to informal workers, or undocumented, migrant workers.

3rd. Plenary Session: Presentation of the “Global Report on Global Trade and Labour, by Prof. Janice Bellace, University of Pennsylvania and Prof. Adalberto Perulli, Cà’ Foscari University, Venice. Prof. Maria Teresa Carinci, University of Milan, was the discussant.

The main issue addressed in this plenary session was the inclusion of social clauses in Free Trade Agreements.

As discussed by the rapporteurs, the connection of these clauses with the Treaties themselves to the corresponding sanctioning instruments might serve to equip workers from the signatory countries with social rights. In fact, including social clauses in the Treaties was a subject of debate since it gave rise to possible interpretations on whether or not this promoted the development of social rights, particularly in developing counties.

Firstly, some argued that the interest of less economically developed countries in attracting investment works against the inclusion of social clauses. According to this interpretation, these agreements would actually favour developed rather than developing countries, since agreeing to such clauses might go against their own workers.

However, it could also be argued that the adoption of social clauses could imply adopting minimal social rights for workers who had not been granted them until then. In the debate on this issue, I recall the intervention of a representative from Vietnam who supported the recognition of trade union rights in her country, and the adoption of social clauses in the Treaties to which Vietnam was a signatory might be a good way to achieve this.

4th Plenary Session: Presentation of the “Global Report on Transnational Collective Agreements”, by Prof. Fausta Guarriello, University of Rome, and Prof. Isabelle Daugareilh (University of Bordeaux) as discussant.

The difficulties in establishing a general framework for transnational collective agreements were discussed in this session. Only specific actions in the area of collective bargaining exist; that is, there is no global legislation to protect these agreements, but only different stakeholders, companies and international unions interested in carrying them out. In addition, when some kind of transnational collective bargaining has existed, the language used has been very low-key and has resulted in no directly binding obligations.

Nonetheless, the interest that these kinds of agreements offer has been confirmed, as they can be developed on a small scale, by territory, sector, or activity. Thus, the very fact that a transnational collective agreement exists can already entail its development, not only in terms of its realisation, but also in the provision of binding laws implemented on a smaller scale, particularly in the achievement of decent wages for workers at company level.

5th. Plenary Session: Presentation of the “Global Report on Migrant Workers”, by Prof. Kübra Doğan Yenisey, Istanbul Bilgi University, and Prof. Ferran Camas Roda, University of Girona, as discussant.

This session, in which I intervened as a discussant, was very intense due to the size and quality of the Report prepared by Dr. Kübra Doğan. Added to this, migratory movements are currently a sensitive issue worldwide.

The following topics were addressed in this session: the importance of work-related migratory flows in the international arena and the need to ratify and implement existing global instruments in this matter; the differential treatment given to refugees and migrant workers (they are currently differentiated under existing laws and everything would indicate that they will continue to be so); and the need to promote global instruments for protecting people displaced by natural disasters as a consequence of climate change.

The issue of distinguishing between irregular migration and migration through regular channels was also addressed. In this respect, I defended opening up lawful migration channels at the European level for migrants entering Europe to work. On this point, I also addressed the need to consider opening up these channels for unskilled migrant workers.

The vulnerability of migrant workers and the need to guarantee their basic human and social rights at the workplace was also discussed.

I paid special attention in my speech to the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration, expected to be adopted in Morocco this December. The idea underpinning this multilateral global agreement on migration management and the strengthening of regular migration should be taken into account.

6th. Plenary Session: “Presentation of the Global Report on the Role of the State and Industrial Relations”, by Prof. Maria Katia Garcia Landaburu, University of Lima, and Prof. Jesús Cruz Villalón, University of Seville, and Prof. Elías González-Posada, University of Valladolid, as discussant.

The last plenary session was delivered by Spanish-speaking rapporteurs, who began by noting that state power is gradually losing the power to manage industrial relations and migration flows. The change in the perception of the importance of laws emanating from state power that regulate the labour institutions was discussed. Either the laws were sometimes not implemented, or their resulting protection once actually in force was different from what was originally sought.

The governance of industrial relations is acquiring great complexity and uncertainty, particularly in the face of the fragmentation of labour relations, and the weakening of social agents. In this context, the participants were in favour of establishing a dialogue with supranational institutions, as well as strengthening the role of the social actors and recognising that fundamental rights should apply to all workers, regardless of their employment status.

I hope you find this report interesting!