A OIT, a Declara o de 1988 e a promo o da liberdade sindical no Brasil

1. A OIT, a Declara��o de 1988 e a promo��o da liberdade sindical no Brasil Ana V. M. Gomes Universidade Cat�lica de Santos � Brazil this paper focuses on whether the ILO can effectively help Brazil move from this paralysis that keeps the country from transforming its trade union system and whether the 1998 Declaration is an effective instrument in this case. In order for the 1998 Declaration to provide the framework for the ILO to promote changes even in an environment of low political will, the ILO should not be totally limited in its actions by state�s acceptance of cooperation and assistance to reform the trade union structure, as in the case of Brazil, According to the 1998 Declaration, member States have the �an obligation arising from the very fact of membership in the Organization to respect, to promote and to realize, in good faith and in accordance with the Constitution, the principles concerning the fundamental rights�. The consensus in promoting these rights in respect of the ratification of the conventions is the logic of a human rights declaration, such as the 1998 Declaration. If the organization�s action now is in the field of human rights, the ILO can then take a more proactive approach without violating states�s sovereignty. Therefore, the ILO can act at a stage previous to when the country is ready to start the changes, developing projects to train labour bureaucracy, to promote debates on freedom of association, to disseminate information on freedom of association � that is to prepare the ground for changes among the right actors. � this paper focuses on whether the ILO can effectively help Brazil move from this paralysis that keeps the country from transforming its trade union system and whether the 1998 Declaration is an effective instrument in this case. In order for the 1998 Declaration to provide the framework for the ILO to promote changes even in an environment of low political will, the ILO should not be totally limited in its actions by state�s acceptance of cooperation and assistance to reform the trade union structure, as in the case of Brazil, According to the 1998 Declaration, member States have the �an obligation arising from the very fact of membership in the Organization to respect, to promote and to realize, in good faith and in accordance with the Constitution, the principles concerning the fundamental rights�. The consensus in promoting these rights in respect of the ratification of the conventions is the logic of a human rights declaration, such as the 1998 Declaration. If the organization�s action now is in the field of human rights, the ILO can then take a more proactive approach without violating states�s sovereignty. Therefore, the ILO can act at a stage previous to when the country is ready to start the changes, developing projects to train labour bureaucracy, to promote debates on freedom of association, to disseminate information on freedom of association � that is to prepare the ground for changes among the right actors. �

2. O Caso Brasileiro A liberdade sindical � protegida no Brasil? representa�ao mandat�ria por um sindicato �nico (unicidade sindical); (ii) organiza�ao mandat�ria de sindicatos a partir do crit�rio de categorias; (iii) pagamento compuls�rio de contribui��o sindical. Caracter�sticas do sistema de rela��es de trabalho caracterizado por:No election for the representative trade union lack of dialogue, reciprocal distrust, promotion of individual court conflicts, presence of intermediary actors (lawyers, judges, labor inspectors) replacing the trade unions in their natural functions, limited space for collective bargain. Only one legally recognized union can represent a specific category of employees. These trade unions represent workers whether or not they are members of the union. They are covered by the collective agreements that are negotiated, whether or not they are members of the union. And compulsory dues payments must be made to the union and the association. A liberdade sindical � protegida no Brasil? representa�ao mandat�ria por um sindicato �nico (unicidade sindical); (ii) organiza�ao mandat�ria de sindicatos a partir do crit�rio de categorias; (iii) pagamento compuls�rio de contribui��o sindical. Caracter�sticas do sistema de rela��es de trabalho caracterizado por:No election for the representative trade union lack of dialogue, reciprocal distrust, promotion of individual court conflicts, presence of intermediary actors (lawyers, judges, labor inspectors) replacing the trade unions in their natural functions, limited space for collective bargain. Only one legally recognized union can represent a specific category of employees. These trade unions represent workers whether or not they are members of the union. They are covered by the collective agreements that are negotiated, whether or not they are members of the union. And compulsory dues payments must be made to the union and the association.

3. OIT/Brasil coopera�ao t�cnica

4. Peculiaridades liberdade sindical 4 possibilidades: Vontade pol�tica + capacidade; Vontade pol�tica, mas falta capacidade; Capacidade, mas falta vontade pol�tica; Faltam capacidade e vontade pol�tica. The second case is the one in which the Declaration can be more effective, acting through cooperation to build the country�s capacity. With the exception of freedom of association, generally if the country has capacity, it also has the political will to comply with the right. In the case of freedom of association, however, there are a significant number of cases of countries that have the capacity to comply, but no political will. Among these peculiarities, freedom of association�s close relationship to democracy is central to the reluctance of governments to support freedom of association rights. This close relationship means that freedom of association goes beyond the workplace, that is, to promote freedom of association rights is to promote more participation, debate and need for dialogue not only in the workplace, but also in the social policy�s decision making. Another peculiarity of freedom of association is that, besides been a fundamental right, freedom of association is also a labour right. Therefore, the human rights effect of the 1998 Declaration may not apply in the freedom of association�s case, because the guarantee of this right is mixed in political debates on the guarantee of labour rights much more than in the consensus about the guarantee of fundamental human rights. For example, while no country openly defends child labour, there are far fewer constraints in defending restrictions of freedom of association rights. In synthesis, freedom of association rights are much more seen as labour rights than as fundamental human rights, and changing this view is an important task of the ILO. A concrete peculiarity in the promotion of freedom of association concerns the dialogue with the entities that represent workers. In other words, in order to promote freedom of association the ILO must work together with trade unions that sometimes represent interests different from workers� interests. If the ILO is working with the wrong associations, such as trade unions that want to keep the corporativist system because they benefit from it, this work will not be efficient. The representation problem (�distorted representation�, according to Cooney) The second case is the one in which the Declaration can be more effective, acting through cooperation to build the country�s capacity. With the exception of freedom of association, generally if the country has capacity, it also has the political will to comply with the right. In the case of freedom of association, however, there are a significant number of cases of countries that have the capacity to comply, but no political will. Among these peculiarities, freedom of association�s close relationship to democracy is central to the reluctance of governments to support freedom of association rights. This close relationship means that freedom of association goes beyond the workplace, that is, to promote freedom of association rights is to promote more participation, debate and need for dialogue not only in the workplace, but also in the social policy�s decision making. Another peculiarity of freedom of association is that, besides been a fundamental right, freedom of association is also a labour right. Therefore, the human rights effect of the 1998 Declaration may not apply in the freedom of association�s case, because the guarantee of this right is mixed in political debates on the guarantee of labour rights much more than in the consensus about the guarantee of fundamental human rights. For example, while no country openly defends child labour, there are far fewer constraints in defending restrictions of freedom of association rights. In synthesis, freedom of association rights are much more seen as labour rights than as fundamental human rights, and changing this view is an important task of the ILO. A concrete peculiarity in the promotion of freedom of association concerns the dialogue with the entities that represent workers. In other words, in order to promote freedom of association the ILO must work together with trade unions that sometimes represent interests different from workers� interests. If the ILO is working with the wrong associations, such as trade unions that want to keep the corporativist system because they benefit from it, this work will not be efficient. The representation problem (�distorted representation�, according to Cooney)

5. Mudar quando h� pouca vontade de mudar A Declara�ao de 1988 possui mecanismos ideais para casos de baixa vontade pol�tica: F�rum do Trabalho: janela de oportunidade & oportunidade perdida Preparando para mudar: Identificar e fortalecer os atores com vontade de mudar, The Brazilian case constitutes an example of the representation problem affecting the promotion of freedom of association, since the ILO�s traditional partners, the trade unions, do contribute to this fully promotion of this right. Most trade unions support the central elements of the corporativist structure � the unicity rule and the mandatory representation � , which benefit these trade unions, as it guarantees mandatory representation and economic resources in respective of legitimate membership or support by workers. In this context, when the ILO cooperates with these actors in the promotion of freedom of association, it is unlikely that any substantial reform will be achieved. The organization invests its resources in wrong actors who in the end will oppose any change in the corporativist system. The analysis of the Brazilian case lead to the question whether the 1998 Declaration�s efficacy is compromised when a country lacks political will to promote a fundamental right. Section 3 examines whether the 1998 Declaration has any resources to overcome this disability. One of the most important innovations of the 1998 Declaration is that it involves in the ILO system countries that did not ratify the fundamental conventions. These countries are mostly the ones where there is a lack of political will to comply with fundamental labour rights. Therefore, it is incoherent that the Declaration would have no resources to affect these countries. Taking the Brazilian case as an example, this paper proposes that the 1998 Declaration provides mechanisms that can be used in these situations (information, qualification of the bureaucracy and support of independent actors) even outside the scope of a cooperation program to reform the law. For example, the ILO should centralize its efforts to build the idea of freedom of association as workers� fundamental right, disseminating information about what is freedom of association and how it relates with the features of the Brazilian system. Moreover, the ILO must identify the subjects with will to change the system. Even in Brazil, they can be found: in the government and among trade unions and employers� associations that are left outside the benefits of the corporativist system. Different from a cooperation program specifically design to reform trade union law, in these activities the organization will be acting to prepare the ground for future changes. Even though there is low political will in the country, these types of actions are legitimized by the human rights character of the 1998 Declaration. The Brazilian case constitutes an example of the representation problem affecting the promotion of freedom of association, since the ILO�s traditional partners, the trade unions, do contribute to this fully promotion of this right. Most trade unions support the central elements of the corporativist structure � the unicity rule and the mandatory representation � , which benefit these trade unions, as it guarantees mandatory representation and economic resources in respective of legitimate membership or support by workers. In this context, when the ILO cooperates with these actors in the promotion of freedom of association, it is unlikely that any substantial reform will be achieved. The organization invests its resources in wrong actors who in the end will oppose any change in the corporativist system. The analysis of the Brazilian case lead to the question whether the 1998 Declaration�s efficacy is compromised when a country lacks political will to promote a fundamental right. Section 3 examines whether the 1998 Declaration has any resources to overcome this disability. One of the most important innovations of the 1998 Declaration is that it involves in the ILO system countries that did not ratify the fundamental conventions. These countries are mostly the ones where there is a lack of political will to comply with fundamental labour rights. Therefore, it is incoherent that the Declaration would have no resources to affect these countries. Taking the Brazilian case as an example, this paper proposes that the 1998 Declaration provides mechanisms that can be used in these situations (information, qualification of the bureaucracy and support of independent actors) even outside the scope of a cooperation program to reform the law. For example, the ILO should centralize its efforts to build the idea of freedom of association as workers� fundamental right, disseminating information about what is freedom of association and how it relates with the features of the Brazilian system. Moreover, the ILO must identify the subjects with will to change the system. Even in Brazil, they can be found: in the government and among trade unions and employers� associations that are left outside the benefits of the corporativist system. Different from a cooperation program specifically design to reform trade union law, in these activities the organization will be acting to prepare the ground for future changes. Even though there is low political will in the country, these types of actions are legitimized by the human rights character of the 1998 Declaration.