The Paradoxes of Decent Work in Context: A Cultural Political Economy Perspective

Abstract

Scientific discourses of decent work can be roughly grouped into two main lines of interpretation. The first, optimistic line sees the International Labour Organisation's (ILO) decent work agenda as indicative of counter-hegemonic forces successfully injecting post-neo-liberal norms into global labour regulation. Specifically, feminist scholars have welcomed the emergence of decent work, because of its explicit concern with non-standard work, informal labour and care work. The second, more pessimistic line is critical of the decent work agenda, seeing it as compatible with or even reinforcing neo-liberal hegemony, especially because of its embrace of soft labour regulation and corporate social responsibility. This article aims to analyse the paradoxes of decent work by putting this discourse in its historical and theoretical context. The article first draws on the framework of Cultural Political Economy (CPE) to identify competing 'economic imaginaries' of decent work. Two prominent interpretations will be juxtaposed to outline a 'feminist' and a 'business case' decent work imaginary. Second, the article interrogates two different ILO initiatives, each of which is underpinned by one of these decent work imaginaries, in terms of the ways they may challenge or reinforce neo-liberal hegemony -the Domestic Workers Convention and the Better Work Programme.

Labor Regimes, Global Production Networks, and European Union Trade Policy: Labor Standards and Export Production in the Moldovan Clothing Industry

“…Nor are proposed reforms (European Commission 2017) likely to overcome these structural contradictions. 30 As such, there are strong parallels here with the limits of other ILO core labor standards and decent work motivated programs such as Better Factories/Better Work in Cambodia (Arnold and Shih 2010) and elsewhere (Hauf 2015). As Hauf (ibid., 150) has argued, ILO decent work proclaims the right to universal standards "without challenging the structural mechanisms causing indecent working conditions in the first place."…”

“…Our argument is that an emerging new form of labor governance utilizing international labor standards in the social clauses of free trade agreements (FTAs) does not give adequate attention to the ways in which labor regimes are constituted in macroregional production networks-a constitutive process shaped in part by asymmetric interfirm power relations of GPNs and deepening trade integration. Our focus is on the European Union as a leading proponent of such social clauses, and our argument is that the social clauses are not only inadequate at protecting labor standards, but they overlook structural dynamics in GPNs (see Hauf 2015).…”

“…Together these form the cornerstone of many labor governance initiatives, including the Better Work Program of the ILO and the International Framework Agreements signed by global unions and corporations. Reliance on such core labor standards is part of a wider erosion of the ILO's ability to regulate work in a globalizing economy (Alston 2004;Standing 2008;Hauf 2015), while such standards are also noted for their gender blindness (Kabeer 2004;Elias 2007). As we show, further problems are found insofar as core labor standards, even when mandated through a legally binding trade agreement, fail to articulate the most pressing issues in export-oriented production networks arising from the structural inequalities in GPNs.…”

“…Consequently, the capacity of these labor provisions to attend to the primary structural causes of poor working conditions is severely limited (cf. Hauf 2015).…”

Discussing the Notion of Decent Work: Senses of Working for a Group of Brazilian Workers without College Education

“…Di Ruggiero et al (2015) and Hauf (2015) indicate that there are competing discourses on decent work in different economies and contexts, because “asymmetries in power relations shape different conceptualizations of decent work” (Di Ruggiero et al, 2015, pp. 120–121).…”