The 1994 NAFTA had both labour and environmental side agreements. These agreements were mere window dressing. The same can be expected with respect to the provisions of the Labour chapter in NAFTA 2.0.
Reader Comments: George H.W. Bush's Ignored Legacy; Midterm election analysis; New York's two-tier minimum wage; Migrant Caravan; Sex, families, socialism; Political Culture of Fascism; Books for Children; Heather Booth film; Announcements; more...
“We’re not going to get a good trade deal until workers have more political power in all three countries.”
All North American workers, however, would benefit from the new labor chapter. Mexican “protection unions,” set up before anyone is hired to lock in low wages, would be effectively banned under the agreement.
However, five U.S. union leaders noted in a statement that “there is more work that needs to be done to deliver the needed, real solutions to NAFTA’s deeply ingrained flaws.”
Trump's "new" NAFTA is the old NAFTA. What we need are policies that benefits migrants, their home communities, and working people in the U.S. And we need a national policy that limits U.S. military and economic interventions abroad.
Ten organizations representing over 25,000 Mexican workers announced on 13 July the imminent creation of a Federation of Democratic and Independent Unions in the automotive sector.
The fallout from the trade wars could be horrific if Trump refuses to back down, while the countries he’s attacking ratchet up their own responses, whether in terms of tariffs or simply a refusal to buy American goods.
Free-market orthodoxy has failed. It’s time to consider our public interest. Europeans, Canadians and Mexicans buy more American goods and services than anyone else in the world. So why would the Trump administration be willing to start trade wars?
Spread the word