Notes – Civil society questions World Bank approach to the future of work
•
A civil society policy forum panel was held on Wednesday 10th of October entitled The Future of Work and the World Bank.
Sponsors
The panel was sponsored by Public Services International, the International Trade Union Confederation with Building Woodworkers’ International Asia Pacific, and UN Global Union Asia Pacific Regional Organisation.
Panellists
- Kate Lappin: Regional Secretary for the Asia Pacific Region, Public Services International
- Jayasri Priyalal: Director, UNI Global Union (Chair)
- Michal Rotkowski: Senior director for social protection and jobs, World Bank Group
- Max Lawson: Head of inequality, Oxfam International
- Edward Miller: Building and Wood Workers’ International
Discussion
Edward Miller kicked off the discussion, asking the audience who are the World Bank, and what is their purpose? He then outlined an illustration of how the International Financial Corporation (IFC), the World Banks private sector arm, started funding a timber company that had a poor track record in terms of their labour rights.
He said, “at the time that the IFC stepped in to Sabah Forest Industries (SFI) [whose operations are located in the Sabah state of Malaysia], there had already been a struggle to form a union.” And that on three separate occasions they had tried to file for union recognition, but that the Malaysian framework for collective bargaining is extremely restrictive and there was a refusal from the company to allow a union to be formed.
Highlighting the problems associated with the way in which the IFC, Edward stated that, despite a 25 year labour struggle, the pre-investment review did not identify FOA risks or include analysis of FOA risks in Malaysian timber sector, proceeding the appraisal stage.
Despite the problems outlined in the CAO report, Edwards said, the IFC still holds $100 million equity investment in the deal, and opposed many of the findings in the CAO report.
He finished his presentation by making five recommendations:
- Without the remaining $100 million in equity investment
- Blacklist BILT/SFI
- Internal training required to make sure that FOA issues are properly dealt with – unions must be part of this process
- Mandatory reporting to the board on labor rights issues
- Supervision should not be suspended until sale is finalised
Kate from PSI, who represent 20 million public sector workers, spoke next, saying that the Bank is not alone in trying to work out what could replace the current market, but that while she believes that the developments in technology and workers needs to happen, that she thinks the discussion of how workers can compete with automation as a starting point is the wrong one.
Referring to the controversial World Banks draft World Development Report 2019 – which was released during Annual Meetings – Kate stated that while after some lobbying, “elements of it have been changed” but reiterated the need for a more comprehensive overview.
Kate stated that we should not encourage the “globalisation of the amazon model” whereby poverty wages are supplemented by the state through social protection, which Kate argued is not a model that enhances collective bargaining or the capacity of trade unions to drive up wages.
Instead, she said we should ask ourselves, what is the regulatory environment for technology? She stated that technology can improve health conditions for example, but how its distribution impacts workers.
Turning to the Doing Business report, Kate stated that the indicators value companies that push down taxes at the expense of social protection: “If we look at the countries that had elevation in their indicators, it’s those that either pushed down corporate taxes or reduced labour payments through the tax system.” She added that while the report recognises the tax evasion problem, it doesn’t address the wider questions of a digital data economy.
Returning back to the World Development Report 2019, Kate stated that “we want to see the WDR an anomaly.”
Max begun his talk by highlighting an example of the link between inequality and poor labour practise, stating that a woman named Dolores was forced to stand for 14 hours in a poultry factor in the USA, resulting in her wearing nappies. “To think that in the richest country in the world, we have this level of labour exploitation shocked me.” He added that he wants to draw a link between this level of exploitation and the incredible accumulation of wealth.
Turning his attention to the draft WDR 2019, Max expressed his outrage at the publication and described it as “wrong”. He noted that the World Bank is a broad church and that while the WDR can be modified, it’s “politically blind” and stressed the need for strong labour movements and elected representatives if we are to have strong workers.
Upon asking what the World Bank should be doing, he stated that NGOs have put so much effort in to engaging with the ICF and they’re not changing. Max added that, “It’s my taxes. The UK Government is the second biggest shareholder of the World Bank”.
Max stressed that that in spite of the problems, there are amazing people in the Bank doing good things, adding that “inequality is ultimately a policy choice” and that there is no reason why the IMF and World Bank can’t encourage collective bargaining.
Michal spoke next, outlining that different skills are needed throughout the world, and that technology is changing the way in which people work and the terms in which they work.
He stated that there are more changes on and off the labour market and that this questions the assumptions around work. He said that changes are moving away from the standard employment contract and that the trend is cler, adding that countries that had 90% informal economy 50 years ago have the same now, giving India as an example of this.
He said that the World Bank was set to look at inequality in the Human Capital Index, and stated that the WDR focusses on skills that start with the poorest and as possibilities growth, cash tranfers to the poorest, adding that these could be “unconditional and conditional if necessary”.
He stated that informal sector workers need more social protection, “it goes beyond WDR, but could we have social assurance in the informal sector?” Stating that our social sensitivity in the World Bank is to care about this.
