This is a travesty.

As a retired AFL/CIO member and active Democrat I can only say that this is a massive betrayal. If the AFL/CIO doesn't get something started than we will know that there is no longer any hope for organized labor.

I quess it's time to write some more letters...

When I read this diary I immediately noticed a disconnect between what Newman is (pro)claiming:

the one thing that has come out of the announcement of the trade deal between Dem leadership and Bush is an admission by US corporate leadership that US law does not meet minimum international human rights standards, as embodied by the International Labor Organization (ILO)

and what was actually said in the linked-to article:

The US Chamber of Commerce welcomed the bipartisan deal, saying it would secure support for Congressional approval of the four pending bilateral trade agreements.

"It is our hope that this deal can pave the way for a solid majority of members to vote in favor of renewing trade promotion authority and passage of bilateral agreements with Peru, Colombia, Panama, and Korea," said Tom Donohue, president and chief executive of the world's largest business federation.

"Over the course of these negotiations, legitimate concerns have been expressed about how addressing labor issues in trade agreements could affect US federal and state labor laws," he said.

"However, we are encouraged by assurances that the labor provisions cannot be read to require compliance with ILO Conventions."

The article simply doesn't contain an admission that US labor law does not meet ILO standards, only a statement of Donohue's belief that the deal does not require them to comply with ILO conventions (as they exist today or may be changed in the future). Do I need to explain why those are two different things?

Now if there are instances in which US labor law, or its enforcement, does not strictly comply with all the freedom-of-association provisions, or other provisions, of ILO conventions or any other legally meaningful international human rights standards (and of course there are bound to be, especially today), it's certainly worth talking about them.

But slickly twisting the meaning of the statement in the article pushes it toward propaganda and does not inspire confidence in the writer's other points.

To the extent the US has not ratified a convention, it is not bound by its provisions, and failure to comply with its provisions is not a "violation of international law."

The US does not appear to have ratified the ILO Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention of 1948...and cannot violate it.

So let me see if I have this right.

The U.S. refuses to protect its own workers rights but insists others do so if they have agreed to such law.

The suffering middle class that depends on cheap labor for high living standards is most grateful for all the union busting.

Shame on you, Mr. Newman. Have you no regard for the upper classes that own both major parties in this country?

Best, Terry

I was also thinking about how the Dems can't get no respect no more--and if that has anything to do with losing its large base of union members....)

Great line.  The Democrats becoming the Rodney Dangerfield party.  The only problem is they're not as funny as Dangerfield was.  And Newman's post tells us why.

aMike

As the Human Rights Watch report emphasizes, the US is very much out of complicance with the ILO, which is why the Chamber of COmmerce has fought so hard against binding treaties to follow the ILO standards.

You can argue that the Chamber of Commerce thinks the US is in compliance with the ILO, but is also worried about enforcement of those standards, but my interpretation that they are de facto admitting that we are out of compliance is just as reasonable a translation-- and more accurate.

Of course my statement was a bit ironic-- I am noting a sad irony in bad news of a bad trade deal.  What's pathetic is that the media will not followup with the Chamber of Commerce or other political leaders to ask whether they think the US is in complicance with the ILO and why we might sign trade deals that allow us to stay out of compliance.

So what? There are more than 12 MILLION illegal immigrants from more than 130 different countries violating the law by working illegally in the U.S. even as I write this post.

The United States government and its lawmakers do not care about these violaters so obviously our nation simply doesn't consider itself a nation of law anymore. Why the hell should we adhere to the International Labor Rights Laws? Why should we honor trade agreements? What the hell does the law matter for anyway? As long as we can exploit laws to work in our favor and make the big bucks by violating them or ignoring them, I say "go for it." It wouldn't make much sense to start adhering to laws now that we have been ignoring them for twenty years would it?

The neo-left doesn't care about worker rights and the issues of labor, the closest they get is to the SEIU, and only because Andy Stern, who betrays workers in favor of cozying up to the corporate elite feels like one of them.

If Kos is talking about it, it's because he feels he can exploit the issue. It'll be dealt with on a shallow level so as to slap at a few democrats.

The left are as complicit with the US Chamber of Commerce on the illegal alien issue as those who betrayed labor by helping Bush backstab labor with this new agreement.

Don't expect the corporate democrats to stand up for labor until ALL of labor stands up for labor. Labor unions continually support the election campaigns of democrats while knowingly receiving nothing in return. Until labor abandons their commitment to the "least worst" approach to politics, or the supreme court no longer believes money = free speech, or political campaigns get free TV air time, the democrats will continue to take labor for granted while they rake in the corporate donations needed to run television campaigns.

You got a problem? What has DailyKos got to do with any of this. You support more trade? Great! Hope your job goes with it.