As this year’s Conference wrapped up, we sat down with three WIEGO experts to hear the highs and lows of their experiences participating in the standard-setting discussion on biological hazards (Christy Adeola Braham), on decent work in the platform economy (Pat Horn) and the general discussion on innovative approaches to promoting transitions from the informal to the formal economy (Carmen Roca).
1. What committee did you participate in at this year’s ILC and why was it important to bring the issues of workers in informal employment into these discussions?
Christy: There’s been a long push for establishing a new [labour] standard on biological hazards over many years. We’ve finally come to the point where we’ve been able to successfully negotiate a new Convention and accompanying Recommendation. With the workers’ group in each committee made up of delegates from national trade unions, there’s no guarantee that they would be able to speak to the specific needs and demands of workers in informal employment. So workers representing the global networks of workers in informal employment needed to be there – to amplify their demands themselves.
Carmen: The committee on formalization had the task of setting the ILO’s work priorities on informality, building on ILO Recommendation 204 on the transition from the informal to the formal economy. Because we were talking about informality, it was essential that we be here with representatives of organizations of workers in informal employment.
Pat: The discussion about the platform economy in this International Labour Conference was like a battlefield. Workers in the platform economy are completely unprotected. In theory, there are lots of ILO instruments that protect them. But in practice, because of the misclassification of platform workers – they get called independent contractors and put into other categories, rather than being recognized as workers – they are not enjoying any of those rights.
2. What were priorities for workers in informal employment in the discussions?
Carmen: Our first demand was for the legal recognition of workers in informal employment – with rights including social protection. Social dialogue and collective bargaining are also rights we want recognized, as well as the need for spaces where workers can negotiate. We also emphasized the social solidarity economy and the contribution it can make to improving the situation of workers – and to formalization.
Pat: Our main demand was to stop the misclassification of platform workers and get an instrument that does recognize them as workers, whether they are own-account workers or workers with some sort of employment relationship or contract with the provider of the digital services. Many other things platform workers need will flow from that.
Christy: The vast majority of workers in informal employment are exposed to biological hazards. Those who operate in non-traditional workplaces – whether that is a landfill, a marketplace, a private home, on the street – are simply not covered by any legislation that’s linked to health and safety. And when there are occupational health and safety laws in place, they are often not implemented. It is very important that legal frameworks and policies at national levels that cover biological hazards are explicitly extended to workers in informal employment. Also, we know that women face specific risks from biological hazards and therefore need specific protections and a gender-responsive way to address these.
3. Did any “big wins” for workers in informal employment come out of these discussions?
Christy: The adoption of the Convention and Recommendation was a big win. And it was a struggle to secure language that captures the broad scope of biological hazards, but we did manage to do that. We also secured a reference to self-employed people in Article 7 of the Recommendation. Another was to secure language that names migrant workers as among those who face significant risks from biological hazards (in Article 11(g) of the Recommendation).
Carmen: A major win was that for the first time, the adverse impact of climate change and the way it intensifies existing vulnerabilities for workers in informal employment was recognized as a driver of informality (in Article 7(q) of the Resolution). In terms of good practices to promote the transition to formality, the text also speaks to the need for coordination between just transition and formalization strategies so that these support the climate resilience of workers and economic units in the informal economy (Article 14(j)).
Throughout the Conference, the Global Networks brought in the voice of workers, saying how they are criminalized, harassed and stigmatized. Recognition of these challenges is reflected in the text in Article 7(f) of the Resolution. The right of workers in informal employment to collective bargaining also features throughout the Resolution: as a prerequisite to formalization in Article 11(b)(i), as part of an enabling environment for formalization in Article 14(u) and included among the actions the ILO should take to accelerate transitions to formality in Article 15(c).
4. Are there issues you would flag as concerns in the outcome documents?
Pat: [Given that this is the first of a two-year standard-setting process and we will go into negotiations again next year], we are going to have some North/South misunderstandings about the digital platform economy as we go along, and the governments may get divided. I don’t think we in the South want to go with the Northern model of regulation because it’s too restrictive.
Christy: The biggest issue for workers in informal employment is that so many are self-employed, such as street vendors or waste pickers. There is an imperative for the authorities – whether it’s a local municipality or a city council – to take responsibility here. In public space, the conditions you work in are dictated by the infrastructure, or lack thereof, provided by the public authority, and so that brings those public authorities into the equation of who’s responsible.
5. During the Conference, a new labour standard was adopted to protect workers against biological hazards. Can you talk about what happens next – what can governments and workers do with this new instrument?
Christy: Now that we have a Convention and Recommendation as the latest standards, the hope is that governments – which are now legally obliged to consider developing new policies and legal frameworks in their own national contexts. This is the first in what we hope will be a series of health-related ILO standards.
This is where the real struggle begins. There needs to be significant grassroots mobilization at a national level. Workers in each sector will need to take the time to really understand what this Convention and Recommendation mean for them – and interpret the text in the best possible way, which makes clear the rights and entitlements of workers in informal employment. Through this, they can build their cases, make their arguments and forcefully push their demand for governments to ratify this Convention.