Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 10:46:28 -0800 From: Caspar Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: NAFTA and Human Rights Is there an interest to have related Newspaper articles forwarded to this list? This one was in the Toronto Star, and was forwarded from the MAI_not list. The article says, inter alia, "While trade may now easily cross national borders, human rights questions bump up against national pride. "That's one reason why provisions for enforcement are not part of the ``side agreements.'' Publicity and quiet pressure are supposed to do the job." Thus National Pride ranks above human rights (and the environment) but obviously far far below covering the bad decisions of "investors;" the IMF obviously has no interest in national pride but every interest in having innocent populations bail out greedy and inept financial institutions. Caspar Picture>January 13, 1998 By Stephen Handelman - The Americas Where's the free flow of human rights under NAFTA? NEW YORK - ASMALL GROUP of Mexican women finally got their voices heard yesterday. But in the process, the idea of balancing profit and human rights under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) took another blow. The story began last May, when about 45 female Mexican workers at computer technology and textile plants just across the U. S. border complained they were being victimized because they were pregnant. According to their complaint, employers did everything in their power to drive them off the payroll in order to avoid paying maternity benefits. They were given the worst shifts and the hardest jobs, and endured a stream of verbal harassment. There's nothing unusual about such complaints. They are part of the seamy underside of a global economy that has made thousands of workers victims of the most blatant kind of robber-baron capitalism. But what is unusual is that someone listened. Three human rights groups - Human Rights Watch, the International Labour Rights Fund, and the National Association of Democratic Lawyers of Mexico - filed a petition to the U.S. National Administrative Office on the women's behalf. The office, part of the U.S. department of labor, is one of the three national bodies which investigates violations of the special ``side agreements'' concluded when NAFTA was signed. Those agreements, on issues like labour rights and the environment, have more often been honoured in the breach than the observance, which is one reason why NAFTA critics have been growing in number as trade barriers across the Americas come down. Canada and Mexico also have similar investigative bodies, but ``we decided to file our petition in the U.S. because it's just across the street from our office,'' joked LaShawn Jefferson, a researcher in the Washington-based Women's Rights Division of Human Rights Watch. In fact, filing a complaint in the U.S. guarantees more of an interested hearing than usual as this country begins a Congressional election year likely to be rife with trade issues. Yesterday, U.S. Labor Secretary Alexis Herman announced she was taking action on the complaint. According to a statement issued in Washington, Herman has ``requested consultation'' with her Mexican counterpart, Javier Bonilla, minister of labor and social welfare. ``We don't think that what is needed is more discussion of a clearly sexist practice,'' said Jefferson. ``What is needed is a clear statement that discrimination occurred.'' But, as human rights advocates concede, such statements would approach the sticky territory of having one sovereign country ``interfere'' with the business of another. The case is a good illustration of the contradictions of free trade arrangements like NAFTA. While trade may now easily cross national borders, human rights questions bump up against national pride. That's one reason why provisions for enforcement are not part of the ``side agreements.'' Publicity and quiet pressure are supposed to do the job. It is true that the Mexican women's complaints have reached a high enough level to make them hard to ignore. The petition argues that Mexico is violating its own laws against gender discrimination by allowing the employers to operate the way they did - and the U.S. labor department appeared to agree. The best remedy the officials could suggest was that ``additional efforts should be directed towards awareness programs for women workers on the protection they are afforded by law and the means by which they may seek relief.'' Perhaps the ``consultation'' will persuade the Mexican government to find better ways to protect its workers. Meanwhile, the trucks keep rolling across the border. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Stephen Handelman writes Tuesday and Sunday on world affairs. ----- End of forwarded message
