This chapter focuses on the contentious negotiations for International Labor Organization (ILO) Convention No. 155. It argues that the negotiations were not simple matters of tripartite dialog and decision-making. What had occurred was a more insidious use of power. Classic laissez-faire self-regulation, the very problem that gave rise to the ILO itself, was now in part advocated through global worker health and safety policy. Workers were sidelined in their representation and could not gain a conceptual or rhetorical footing once this political environment was established and the approach tacitly agreed on in the mandate to draft the new convention. The best strategy for the workers might have been to withhold their support by leaving the negotiation and allow the drafting to collapse.
Cornell Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.