In 19.1 on labour, party nations are required to "adopt and maintain in its statutes and regulations" certain rights, including
- "freedom of association"
- "a prohibition on the worst forms of child labour"
- "the elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation"
- "acceptable conditions of work with respect to minimum wages, hours of work, and occupational safety and health."
Sounds nice, but there is absolutely no guidance on what types of regulations these incredibly subjective "rights" would require, and I imagine every party will interpret them differently (and probably conclude that their existing regulations already provide all of these guarantees.)
> - "a prohibition on the worst forms of child labour"
Just the worst. A little child labour, that's OK. I'd love to see the circles any lawyer would have to run to give a legal definition of the "worst" forms of child labour.
This may be an unpopular opinion, but what's wrong with child labor under proper conditions? Only 50 years ago and even today in the country side children have been working the land alongside their parents.
And even though I don't agree with exploited children and this rule sounds good, there is such a thing as the sovereignty of a country, so I'm surprised that such rules made it into a trade agreement at all.
It still provides a legitimate means to hold countries accountable. For example if you were holding children in literal slavery working 100hr/wk absolutely no one would believe that this constitutes "acceptable conditions." You can only get so ridiculous with vague language before people will draw the line.
- "freedom of association"
- "a prohibition on the worst forms of child labour"
- "the elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation"
- "acceptable conditions of work with respect to minimum wages, hours of work, and occupational safety and health."
Sounds nice, but there is absolutely no guidance on what types of regulations these incredibly subjective "rights" would require, and I imagine every party will interpret them differently (and probably conclude that their existing regulations already provide all of these guarantees.)