Episode #233: Workers Strike Back
For this episode, we welcome Jeffrey Vogt, legal director of the Solidarity Center, an international NGO that promotes the rights of workers and trade unions worldwide, and a member of the ILO’s (International Labor Organization) governing body, a UN Agency devoted to social justice and safeguarding worker rights around the world. It has been joined by 187 of the UN’s 193 member countries. “We have been working with workers and trade unions in Myanmar for several decades,” Vogt explains, before clarifying two of its “conventions” that make the situation in Myanmar relevant to his focus.
The first is Convention 87,or the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise; and the second is Convention 29, which addresses forced labor. “These are two conventions which Myanmar has ratified, which allows us to seek a Commission of Inquiry,” he explains. Echoing what past guests such as Maung Maung and Stephen Campbell have said on recent episodes, Vogt notes how trade unions were almost non-existent until the government allowed their formation during the transition period, along with their ability to engage in collective bargaining and disputing settlements. “These two laws had numerous defects, but at least set the foundations for trade unions to be once again legal and to undertake their activities, though with many limitations. So this led, from that period forward, to a kind of a new springtime for trade unions in Myanmar,” he says. Like the post-Soviet transition period after the fall of the USSR, he notes how thousands of Burmese workers across the country took advantage of that environment of increased freedoms by coming together to organize and demand better wages and working conditions.
But the 2021 coup reversed this trajectory. Many trade union leaders were involved in the Civil Disobedience Movement, which Vogt chalks up to their adept organizing skills. Because of this, the military regime quickly went after them to arrest or, in extreme cases, seek a revocation of their citizenship; as a result, many went into hiding. These repressive measures violated Convention 87, prompting the Vogt, along with the ILO, to open an inquiry on behalf of Myanmar workers.
Highlighting Convention 29, Vogt explains that forced labor is far from a new problem in Myanmar, and in fact, it has the notorious distinction of being the only country in the world to have been subject to two different ILO Commissions of Inquiry. The first was in 1990, and involved forced civilian porters for the military, forced labor in military camp construction, and forced conscription, including for children. The second inquiry was initiated after the coup. It included all the above, along with the added charges of using forced labor to clear roads, human shields, and forced overtime. These issues continue to intensify as the Burmese military, engaged on multiple fronts, has increasingly resorted to abducting villagers and forcing them into the heart of the combat zones.
Providing further background, Vogt explains that the ILO is distinctive among UN agencies for its governance structure: governments hold only half the seats, while unions and employers hold a quarter each, facilitating a collaborative model between labor, employers, and states. As with many other UN bodies since the coup, Myanmar has been excluded since the coup over due to the unresolved dispute over who legitimately represents the country. Vogt further explains that it is no small step for the governing body to have chosen to take such a drastic measure in considering the censure. “The Commission of Inquiry is not established in the first place unless there is a serious violation of a ratified convention. There are there mechanisms that can be used within the ILO system to raise complaints about non adherence. The Commission of Inquiry is only really reserved to those situations where there are very serious concerns about non-adherence or non-compliance. And this is certainly one of those cases.”
The question then comes, given that the junta has long shown an indifference to demands from the international community, how the ILO will respond if their Commission of Inquiry yields no results. Vogt notes that various countries have already imposed a wide number of sanctions on Myanmar, including financial, trade, and visa restrictions. The ILO, itself, might decide to raise these concerns at the annual plenary session of the ILO Conference, which is attended by member states, unions, and employers, and which acts as the organization's legislature. The issue could be raised under Article 33 of the ILO Constitution, a rarely invoked article that calls on member states to take measures against any that do not comply with their obligations. Invoking Article 33 would represent the ILO membership's consensus that Myanmar's actions are egregious, and necessitate comprehensive measures to address the situation. This has only happened twice before in the 100-year history of the organization: once previously with Myanmar, and once with Belarus. If invoked again, it would make Myanmar the first country to face Article 33 measures twice. This could prompt broader international pressure from UN organizations, financial institutions, and member states, as well as from unions and employers, to force Myanmar to respect its international obligations. Such measures could include increased difficulty for companies to invest or conduct business in Myanmar, particularly those who adhere to the ethical standards of human rights due diligence obligations, or the process that businesses undertake to identify, prevent, or mitigate their impacts on human rights. It could also ultimately result in Myanmar losing trade preferences.
It’s important to note that the ILO has no real, direct authority itself; however, it can propose recommendations for other bodies to act on, such as other UN agencies, financial institutions, and ILO constituents (unions and employers) to enforce the conventions. “It actually is, in some senses, a coordinating body, and it is able to interact with other intergovernmental organizations on the same issue,” Vogt says. “So the governing body would then outline a set of recommended actions, which could be taken, and then it would be up for the conference as a whole to then decide whether to amend that list, or to vote on it, as is or amended.” In other words, enacting Article 33 could broaden the international pressure on Myanmar, potentially complicating investments and business operations there, especially for companies with human rights commitments. It might also lead to Myanmar losing certain trade benefits. Invoking Article 33 would embody the ILO membership's strongest condemnation, demanding comprehensive actions to address the extreme violations occurring in Myanmar.
In closing, Vogt speaks to the critical role that workers have historically played in civil societies and building democracy. “As the report reflects, the ability of workers to be able to associate and collectively form trade unions is absolutely important. And it's not only important because of the role of workers in advocating for members of their workplace, but the role of workers in their unions in being proponents for democracy, both in the workplace and in their communities and society. That is a reason why we saw the military regime acting quickly to crack down on trade unions, because other governments around the world have recognized in the past that organized labor has played very important roles in the promotion of democracy in their countries… This underscores the importance of an organized civil society, and organized workers in a democracy. That is also why we need to support workers and support the principle of the freedom of association, because fundamentally it's about questions of democracy, whether it's democracy in the workplace in your community or in your country.”