Workers Rights vs Rights of the Rich

 

"The rules of economic globalization are likewise designed to benefit the rich: they encourage competition among countries for business, which drives down taxes on corporations, weakens health and environmental protections, and undermines what used to be viewed as the 'core' labor rights, which include the right to collective bargaining."

 

               - Jacob Sloan, disinfo.com

 

It makes sense from one perspective. Multinational corporations are obviously the ones who create the employment opportunities for the workers. In order to keep those giants (and by extension, the jobs they create) in your country, you gotta keep em happy. Competitive tax rates and few restrictions on their actions are the two most popular ways to do this.

 

Another key factor in the equation is a steady and reliable workforce. If you can't supply that, the giant has monetary muscle but no arms.

 

There are two ways to keep the workforce in place:

 

1. Safe and healthy working conditions, competitive wages and benefits packages. These are favored by workers, for obvious reasons. In essence, bribery.

 

2. Desperation and intimidation. Pay enough to keep people coming back the next day, and beat them if they ask for a raise. These are favored by multinational corporations and governments. They're cheaper and easier to organize.

 

From the former, you get companies into bidding wars for the best workers, offering the best conditions and compensation for talent. Workers in these situations are happy, productive and long-serving (they actually live longer).

 

From the latter, you don't get workers who are happy or productive. You get the bare minimum - just enough to keep from getting fired. You might also notice that your employees resent you. Resentment builds. Shit happens.

 

Unfortunately, it's simpler to keep a corporation happy. Their needs are simple: profit and growth. And they're all pretty much the same. Some are governed more conscientiously than others, but they all show the basic signs of psychopathy.

 

Workers are problematic because they are individual people, which are all different and rarely agree. Some of them are psychopathic too, but in this case it's the exception rather than the rule.

 

Neither group is ever entirely happy. Corporations are - by charter and by law - unsatisfied. Profit and growth must be followed by more of the same. If either stops, the corporation dies.

 

Or they get a massive, tax-funded bail-out. Something about that still smells illegal somehow. Whatever.

 

But we need them, right? They are the economic engines of the world. Without them, we go right back to sustenance farming. Right? That's what the world was like before corporations were declared persons under the law, right?

 
What if companies continue to grow but stop creating jobs? Then what's the point of keeping them around?

 

"Imagine what the world might look like if the rules were designed instead to encourage competition among countries for workers. Governments would compete in providing economic security, low taxes on ordinary wage earners, good education, and a clean environment — things workers care about."

 

               - also Jacob Sloan, disinfo.com

 

That only works if all the countries do it at once. If not, then the "job-creators" go to whatever countries are still desperate enough to kowtow to their demands.

It's naive to think the above scenario will ever play out, but cynical to dismiss the erosion of workers' rights. Yeah, things are worse for workers in Bangladesh or Indonesia. Is that sufficient reason to blow off the indignation of workers in better - but declining - circumstances? Are those the kinds of jobs we want, and the companies we want setting up shop here?

Guessing here, but no.

A grassroots boycott doesn't work. Not enough people care. Need pressure from higher up. Trade restrictions. Truly ban the sale of sweatshop products in your country, and enforce those bans.

Truly punitive fines for companies that violate the terms might be effective. You can't incarcerate a corporation, but you can hit em where they live. Fines in the millions don't deter; they are considered the cost of doing business. Hit em up for billions. Watch em shape up.

I'm not talking about punishing the rich for being rich. More like punishing the greedy for being colossal, international douchebags. Force companies to treat their employees like people, not indentured or disposable servants. Make that the mandate. Profit and growth don't need to be legislated.

Who knows? They might like it. Probably not, but does it matter?

See you in another present.