High-end investment a better way to end forced labour

 

From P Ramasamy

The government has turned to the US Embassy and the International Labour Organization to help resolve the issue of forced labour.

But I am puzzled as to how the US Embassy and the ILO can assist Malaysia in doing this.

The US has barred the goods of some Malaysian companies from entering the country for having engaged in the practice of forced labour.

The ILO, which represents the interest and welfare of the global labour force, has come out with a set of criteria as to what constitutes forced labour.

I understand that the enforcement division of the human resources ministry uses this set of criteria to determine whether companies indulge in forced labour or not.

Forced labour can be broadly defined as the use of unfree labour in the production of goods and services.

To use the definition of the ILO, forced labour exists under conditions of low wages, long working hours beyond those stipulated by the law, excessive overtime, payments of wages not in cash but in kind, no provision of holidays and many others.

I am not sure whether the US uses the criteria established by the ILO as the former operates on the notion that its labour laws are far superior to the ones of the ILO.

It is not that the government in general and the human resources ministry cannot obtain the assistance of the two bodies in the battle against forced labour.

If it is merely advice, then there is no problem in getting such advice to move forward on the problem of forced labour.

But human resources minister M Saravanan has gone further by asking the two bodies to investigate and to point out instances of forced labour in Malaysia.

Such a move is akin to asking them to interfere in the internal affairs of the country.

I think that if the minister gives the proper direction, the ministry has the resources to investigate and report on the extent of forced labour in the country.

But why turn to the US Embassy and the ILO unless of course the government is not capable of investigating its own mess over forced labour.

The US cannot adopt a holier than thou attitude in banning goods into the country from companies engaging in forced labour.

As I have said numerous times, forced labour is not an aberration but a condition of a segment of Malaysian economy that relies on cheap and malleable labour.

I don’t think that forced labour is something foreign to the US.

The use of migrant labour from Latin American countries in sweatshops is a classic example of the pervasive use of millions as forced labour in the US.

It is not only Malaysia that uses forced labour; this phenomenon is widespread in the developing world.

I think that the US ban on products manufactured in Malaysia might have to do with some other reasons than the simplistic notion of forced labour.

The US, due to its unfettered power, is in a position to establish what constitutes right and wrong.

Since countries like Malaysia and others depend on the export market in the developed countries, they have no choice but to adhere to the whims and fancies set by the latter.

American hypocrisy is well known when it comes to racial discrimination, supporting corrupt regimes around the world and the constant engagement in unfair trade practices.

Unfortunately, Malaysia is caught in the trap of a master-servant relationship with the US.

Ironically, Malaysia may be caught in a bind by seeking assistance from the US that is the main source of the problem.

The ILO’s definition of forced labour might be a practical methodology to understand what is forced labour, the conditions of existence and others.

But then, ILO by uniformly applying the concept of forced labour fails to understand why the practice is more widespread in some countries and not in others.

In other words, ILO’s specious definition of forced labour fails to link it to the nature of the development process of countries.

It is my argument that forced labour is not something accidental that can be removed with the right mix of policy and enforcement, or extending an invitation to the US Embassy and the ILO to provide investigation and advice.

Forced labour is not a surface phenomenon but is much more deeper and structural.

It is a particular condition of our economy where employers, given the nature of their production, rely on unfree labour at the cost of labour freedom.

Forced labour is mainly found among the millions of foreign workers, although the phenomenon is not exclusive to foreign labour.

If there is continued emphasis on the need to recruit cheap foreign labour, then how do we eradicate forced labour?

This conundrum is yet to be explained by the government.

It is not that steps should not be taken to reduce and ultimately rid the country of forced labour. However, efforts in the direction of the removal of forced labour might remain piecemeal unless long term efforts are taken in the developmental direction of the country.

High-end investments from local and foreign companies with the backing of talents might contribute to efforts in reducing forced labour.

Asking the assistance of the US Embassy and the ILO to end forced labour appears childish and unthinking. - FMT

P Ramasamy is a Penang deputy chief minister.

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.