Global Labor Standard example essay topic

As the meaning and effects of globalization become more and more widespread, people across the world have formed grassroots organizations. These organizations protest the negative effects encouraged by globalization and try to form worldwide acknowledgement of a particular problem. This paper discusses some disadvantages of globalization and which have prompted people to protest. It will then examine at a closer level two protested issues, labor injustice and wealth inequality. Finally, conclusions on the prospect of globalization in the future will be reached. Globalization includes the global exchange of capital, labor, information, politics, technology, and culture, all which have formed an integrated "global" world.

But growing disparity, corporate power, and environmental destruction has overshadowed the hope for a global civil society, a global community. Ordinary people have become increasingly aware of these problems (due in part to globalization itself and the spread of instantaneous information) and protest movements have sprouted. Although many are unorganized and address a single issue, grassroots organizations' protests have had a surprisingly influence on the institutions they protest, including the World Trade Organization, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank. The World Trade Organization's meeting in Seattle of November 1999, for example, "saw the birth, and to date, the high point of this new mode of activism", where protesters aimed to "shut down, or at least badly disrupt, the meetings of the global elite" (Angry and Effective, 2). Protestors have greater aims than simply disrupting the work of international organizations; they wish to bring attention to a variety of issues. The major issues of globalization that have prompted people to protest are environmental destruction, human rights standards, labor injustices, and the growth of multinational corporations.

Specific problems within these issues include industrialized countries exploit the resources of developing countries, corporations exploit underprivileged people in labor, the outsourcing of jobs, and corporations transforming culture and consumerism. Other issues that prompt protests are animal rights, the distribution of wealth (inequality), and the loss of culture and tradition. While each of these issues, no matter how few or many protest them, hold importance, some are more convincing reasons for protest than others. The vast disparity in wealth between the upper class and the impoverished, and developed countries and developing is staggering. As globalization has continued, multinational corporations, foreign investors, and citizens of more powerful nations have entered a time of great prosperity and a high standard of living, much at the expense of the third world. Much of globalization has become an "affair of the industrial North... destroying local cultures, widening world inequalities and worsening the lot of the impoverished, the majority condemned to a life of misery and despair" (Giddens, 33).

Although this is a rather pessimistic view of globalization, statistics prove the daunting truth of disparity: "The UN Development Program reports that the richest 20% of the world's population consume 86% of the world's resources while the poorest 80% consume just 14%". (Top Ten Reasons, 2). One of the main reasons for the growing disparity is that more powerful countries already have more wealth and thus an upper hand in "free" trade and many other aspects of globalization- "Globalization might actually be good for poor countries, if only rich countries played by the rules" (Beatty, 1). Free trade has in many ways become harmful to developing countries that are prohibited from following the same policies that developed countries once pursued, such as protecting domestic industries until they can be internationally competitive. From 1960 to 1998, the most recent period of rapid growth in global trade and investment, inequality worsened internationally and within countries, as foreign investors moved production to where labor is cheapest and environmental costs are low. Clearly, inequality is an immense problem, perhaps worsened by globalization, that begs for a solution.

Unfortunately, protests against wealth inequality itself aren't very convincing. Inequality is not a specific enough topic- there is no one solution that can drastically solve the disparities we see because this problem is caused by so many different issues, only one of which is the irony of "free" trade. Moreover, inequality is inevitable in any society, and can never be fully removed. Even if a global civil society could occur and the gap between the rich and the poor was lessened, "haves" and the "have-nots" would still exist. Inequality is inherent, much a result of the inevitable power struggle in any society.

Thus, wealth inequality can never be wholly removed. Although it is a staggering problem that desperately needs solution, protests against inequality itself are futile- only support for gradual steps that will lead to a more equal society can prove convincing. One of these issues is labor injustice. By improving labor standards, labor organization, and labor practices, a block is added in the formation of the steps toward a more equal world.

Labor injustice culminates in third world countries but exists in the United States and other world powers as well. In a Race to the Bottom, investors and corporations become "flying geese", (Section 20 Nov. 2002) continually moving from country to country in search of the cheapest labor and most lenient government policies on environment and labor. Thousands of jobs in America alone have been lost to foreign competition and new technology, and the restructuring of businesses have forced blue-collar, relatively low-wage factory and manufacturing jobs to find new, more specialized work (Video, Philadelphia Story). The problem is much more serious in developing countries. Labor injustice in these countries is a backlash against globalization, workers have not benefited from globalization, instead, they have lost. Women of the maquiladoras in Mexico, workers in the sweatshops in Indonesia, and the farmers of Africa have all experienced labor injustice, including incredibly low wages, poor working conditions, harassment at work, long hours, and the threat of losing a job if a labor union or protest is formed.

Labor injustice has become so ironically sickening that in some cases, like in the sweatshops in Indonesia, workers don't want Americans to protest or boycott their employers, for fear of losing their jobs (Video, The Seattle Syndrome). Even companies that claim to help third world workers have been accused of exploitation. For instance, The Body Shop, a company formed on "green consumerism", claiming to protect the environment, has been accused of using the Kayapo Indians of Brazil as a marketing strategy. The Body Shop's use of Brazilian organic products has only created resentment and internal divisions within the Kayapo community (London Greenpeace, 2).

The impact of free trade and globalization on labor rights has been overlooked. Countries that consistently violate international labor conventions disadvantage countries that enforce labor rights. Although labor and human rights abuses are explicit, developing countries argue that labor standards constitute a barrier to free trade for countries whose competitive advantage is cheap labor. The WTO has even ruled that it is illegal for a government to ban a product based on the way it is produced and that governments cannot take into account non-commercial values, such as human rights and the behavior of companies, when making purchase decisions (Top Ten Reasons, 1). Labor injustice is an indisputable problem that exists in many different forms in many different regions across the world.

It is a convincing issue to protest because it has realistic and tangible solutions unlike the vague broadness of inequality. By addressing labor problems, a step is made in a positive direction to solving other larger issues. It seems that with the growing number of protests and the increasing awareness of global issues that the road to a more prosperous and peaceful world is coming into view. In reality, it will be a long and gradual process, and a goal of a complete global civil society, or of an equal world without conflict is probably unattainable. We can hope for a series of progressive reforms towards positive globalization, perhaps beginning with smaller steps like eliminating labor injustice. Each step, however, will be difficult.

Labor, for instance, raises a number of questions: If we accept that conditions of workers are not as they should be, what can we do? Should we create a global labor standard, leveling the playing field for businesses in all countries? What are the rights of labor in a globalized economy when labor cannot move as easily as capital? (Section 20 Nov. 2002). The ideology that can spur a movement towards a peaceful, prosperous globalization is the cosmopolitan vision. Cosmopolitans believe that "political boundaries have no particular significance", that "moral claims", or the rights of all human beings, are universally shared (VanKlinken, 3).

Most importantly, the cosmopolitan view has led to a "universal political ethic" (VanKlinken, 3), through which each person can accept his / her own and others' multiple identities based on ethnicity, region, race, and nation, but is part of a global citizenship as well. None of us can predict the future, and none of us can single-handedly solve the negative effects of globalization and our evolving society. By adopting a cosmopolitan viewpoint and gradually reforming step by step, lofty goals of equality can be reached. Hopefully, each of us will eventually identify ourselves as a global citizen of a peaceful and prosperous planet..