Corporations and other powerful contemporary institutions take decisions that increasingly impact the possibilities for well-being not only of those who work or live within them and are governed by them but also of distant people who are deeply affected by their functioning. This democratic deficit raises the question of whether the workers and others who are so affected should have a say in the policies that set the basic conditions for their own livelihoods and flourishing. This chapter sketches an understanding of the scope of the All-Affected Principle, taking it as an important addition to the “common activities” principle that requires democratic rights for the members of an institution or community. It proposes that both principles require democratic management (or “workplace democracy”) within firms, and suggests that the All-Affected Principle is especially apt for addressing the exogenous effects of decisions on people beyond the firm, or on distant people impacted by the institutions of global governance. The chapter goes on to consider applications of the All-Affected Principle for other labor rights under capitalism, including the right to form unions, support for care work, and for the unemployed.

Chapter 2 demonstrates how the recognition of the societal value of domestic service affected some aspects of domestic workers’ rights but not others. It analyzes debates around the 1926 law on domestic service and the effects it had on the domestic workers’ ability to resolve conflicts with employers in court or mediation. Domestic workers’ labor rights were limited by the new law to make their labor more accessible to employers: written labor agreements were no longer mandatory and there was no compensation for overtime work. Yet, the state was reluctant to limit domestic workers’ access to their employers housing after termination of contract because female homelessness was closely associated with prostitution. The new law put domestic workers at a disadvantage compared to other workers, which, together with continuing valorization of “productive” labor, made domestics seek employment opportunities outside domestic service. This chapter contributes to our understanding of the effects labor laws have on paid domestic labor and testifies to the importance of government regulations and protection.

This chapter explores the decisions of low-income factory workers employed in light manufacturing industries in relation to their social insurance benefits. It discusses why many factory workers have chosen to withdraw their social insurance money early rather than accumulating the social insurance benefits to receive a pension in their retirement. The chapter shows that, as workers experience unstable work and subsist on low incomes, they have come up with tactics that exploit the law to fulfil their daily needs. These tactics allow the workers to withdraw their social insurance early in a way that complies with the letter of the law but actually undermines law's objective and authority. The justifications for their actions reveal their struggle with family needs and financial hardship, and their moral obligations to family members. This chapter analyzes the complex and multifaceted nature of workers’ legal consciousness as they face a trade-off between their needs and their legal rights.

After the Neolithic transition, arguably the most important economic shift was the industrial revolution. Prior to the industrial revolution, for the previous 10,000 years, the world relied (almost) exclusively on small-scale agriculture or pastoralism for economic production. The industrial revolution, starting largely with the development of the steam engine, had a profound effect on the material relationship of the individual to economic production, as individuals became part of industrial production. This change also had significant impacts on demographics: cities grew as the economics drove mass migrations away from rural areas to industrialized areas. Industrialization also had a long-lasting effect on politics, as workers organized to make improvements in working conditions and shift the power balance between labor and capital. Marxism was born of this struggle, and I explore the premises behind this philosophy, and the reasons for expansion as well as ultimate failure of this profoundly influential economic model. Here I speak to the contradictions between modern humanism and the authoritarian application of Marxism, drawing in the discussion on chaos and complexity and the difficulties with attempting central control on something as complex as a national economy.

This chapter argues that democratic developing countries were more likely to open their economies during the late-twentieth century if they violated workers' basic rights to organize and strike. The more democracies adopted such labor repression, the more likely they were to embrace free trade. The more democracies respected workers' rights, in contrast, the more likely they were to maintain high tariffs.

This chapter tests my argument that the more democracies used labor repression to weaken union opposition, the more they moved toward free trade. It uses quantitative data on tariffs, democracy, and respect for labor rights from 126 developing countries from 1985 to 2010.

This chapter first provides a glimse of the development of international labor rights movement. It then discusses the concept of labor rights including the right to strike. It explores the issues of equal opportunity and equal treatment, right to unionize and collective bargaining, freedom from forced and compulsory labor, and child labor, four so-called “core labor standards,” and their status under international and regional human rights law. The chapter also examines the relationship among labor rights, migration and globalization, focusing on the issues of how to promote workers’ rights effectively in developing countries in the global economy. Labor rights concerning migrant workers are considered as well.

The importance of the struggle for labor rights and challenges to democracy in Africa can be linked to the decolonization process in the 1960s. Trade union formations had relative collective capacity to support agitation for political emancipation. The post-colonial relationship between labor movements and the state have been a mixed experience. We explore the role of labor rights as enhancers of democratic governance in Africa, using several countries as proxies for the continent. Exploration is informed largely by the ILO’s recent Centenary reflections, the link between labor rights and social justice, issues canvassed by the Global Commission on the Future of Work. The Commission provided a basis for continuing reflection among scholars and policy makers. It culminated in a rejuvenation and renewal of ILO mandate at the Centenary International Labor Conference, 2019.

Chapter 5 investigates China’s participation in the International Labour Organization’s Conference Committee on the Application of Standards, where its taker behavior can be attributed mainly to the lack of scrutiny it received from this Committee.This chapter unveils an instrumental aspect of Beijing’s behavior, exposing that beginning in the late 1990s, the PRC began using this venue to speak in defense of friendly countries during their reviews before the ILC.By analyzing the votes and statements of these countries in the UNCHR and HRC, I show that Beijing appears to have benefited from reciprocal treatment as these countries frequently voted against resolutions on China’s record and offered protective statements during the PRC’s Universal Periodic Review before the HRC.This behavior suggests that even though the PRC was a taker in this Committee, its actions did not necessarily uphold the principles undergirding the regime.

This chapter introduces the reader to the various guiding frameworks for responsible business conduct and how they relate to labor practices and labor rights within and across countries and cultures. The authors explain how and why the global community has found it necessary to address these issues as part of the movement to steer national and transnational corporations to uphold human rights and contribute to social development around the world. Key international instruments are introduced and discussed, such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Responsible Business Conduct (RBC) guidelines, the UN Guidelines on Business and Human Rights, and the ILO Tripartite Declaration of Principles Concerning Multinational Enterprise and Social Policy. An example is given that provides a concrete example of how the OECD guidelines are applied to a case of reported human rights abuse. The authors capture the significant components of the OECD RBC and associated guidelines from both social and organizational psychology perspectives and show how psychological knowledge and competence can strengthen the application of these international instruments for the protection of human rights and labor rights.

While recent decades have witnessed a rise in the use and forms of Global Performance Indicators (GPIs), there is little systematic evidence on their effects. In this article, we address the effects of GPIs through a specific focus on international organizations’ (IOs) reporting on state compliance with international rules. We focus on the International Labour Organization (ILO), which offers a unique case for evaluating the impact of performance indicators in the absence of enforcement. We develop an argument for why reporting by IOs should lead states to correct non-compliant behavior, and when those effects should be particularly strong. Our principal findings are three-fold. First, ILO reporting has significant and durable effects on state respect for labor rights, especially in addressing severe cases of non-compliance. Second, reporting affects state behavior quite immediately, but can also lead to improvements when repeated over longer periods of time. Third, reporting has stronger effects on improvements in labor rights when the target states are democratic and have the resource capacity to correct violations. These findings have important implications for our understanding of GPIs and the effect of IO reporting on state compliance.