IFAs have existed since the early 1990s. They reflect a commitment to observe core international labour standards, as defined by the ILO and the UN. Under the terms of such agreements, multinational companies agree to respect the fundamental rights of their workers in every country in which they operate. More specifically,
IFAs aim to promote the role played by international trade unions and to develop trade unions in countries that are hostile to labour rights.
These developments might point to the emergence of a new system of social dialogue and industrial relations at the cross-border level.
Background
In 1998, the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) and the International Trade Secretariats (ITS) proposed a Code of Labour Practices seen as a guide for unions on the rules of conduct of transnational enterprises, specifying that companies must undertake to respect the fundamental labour rights defined in the 1998 ILO Tripartite Declaration. The ICFTU/ITS Code was used by the ITSs as a reference for negotiating
IFAs. In 2002, the ITSs were transformed into Global Union Federations (GUF). Several GUFs have their own model framework agreements.
By 2002, the term
International Framework Agreement was adopted by GUFs as a means of distinguishing these agreements from the codes of conduct that corporations adopt unilaterally to ostensibly demonstrate their commitment to corporate social responsibility. Whereas codes of conduct represent unilateral initiatives,
IFAs can be seen as the start of collective bargaining at the transnational level. Furthermore, most
IFAs provide procedures whereby the signatories may jointly develop implementation and monitoring procedures whereas corporate codes of conduct are only implemented and monitored by the companies.
Contents and Scope
These agreements, along with similar dialogue and agreement initiatives at the sectoral and regional levels, cover only a small portion of the world labour force (by June 2006, 46
IFAs had been signed), but they reflect a search for a structured response to the challenges of globalization.
The
IFAs' inclusion of all workers, organized or not, is much broader than any of the nationally-based legal class compromises. But not everyone who is covered by an
IFA is present at the negotiating table.
Experiences with the implementation of existing
IFAs vary considerably. In some instances, employees have just been informed about the existence of
IFAs. In others, concrete steps have been taken to build international union networks and to develop action plans to make the fullest use of
IFAs to ensure that complaints are acted upon.
It should be recognized that no legal enforcement mechanisms exist at the global level. Any enforcement of
IFA provisions relies on the willingness of management to cooperate or on the capacity of trade unions to compel companies to resolve complaints. Also, other problems may occur, such as poor coordination between global and local trade unions and lack of budget.
Towards International Collective Bargaining?
"
IFAS are not traditional collective agreements, but rather framework agreements on the fundamental principles and rights at work that national or local agreements can use or improve on, thus creating a new space for transnational and national trade unions' cooperation in collective bargaining. […]
[They] are an important instrument for the development of trade union cooperation in collective bargaining within MNCs and the promotion of fundamental social and human rights at the international level. They can also open the way for international sector-based collective bargaining on minimum working conditions and fundamental social and human rights. However, these developments need to be enhanced by international trade union structures with more resources and responsibilities than the GUFs currently have."
(Bourque, R.,
International Framework Agreements and the Future of Collective Bargaining in Multinational Companies,
Just Labour: A Canadian Journal of Work and Society, Vol. 12, 2008, visited 18-05-2011)
International Framework Agreements v. European Framework Agreements
"Unlike collective agreements, which settle key issues such as wages and working time, transnational company agreements address ‘soft' issues. Transnational agreements concluded by the management and global union federations (GUFs) – often referred to as ‘
International Framework Agreements' – deal primarily with the implementation of ILO core labour standards (e.g. Voss et al. 2008), whereas agreements concluded between the MNC management and EWCs and/or ETUFs (also labelled ‘European Framework Agreements') deal mainly with issues such as corporate social responsibility, transnational guidelines for the company's personnel & HRM policies, restructuring and health and safety (e.g. Telljohann et al. 2009). EWCs are the predominant actors in the negotiation of transnational company agreements and by March 2011 71 such agreements had been signed by EWCs (ETUI 2011). […]
In some cases the distinction between ‘European' and ‘
International' Framework Agreements is blurred because agreements are signed by both GUFs and EWCs."
(Glassner, V. and P. Pochet,
Why trade unions seek to coordinate wages and collective bargaining in the Eurozone: past developments and future prospects ,
European Trade Union Institute, 2011, visited 09-06-2011)
