The Covert Assault on Labor by Mega-Regional Trade Agreements

Author/s Christoph Scherrer
Publishing Year 2016 Issue 2016/150 Language English
Pages 21 P. 343-363 File size 227 KB
DOI 10.3280/GDL2016-150006
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

I trattati mega-regionali, come il Partenariato Transatlantico per il Commercio e gli Investimenti, costituiscono la nuova generazione di trattati di libero scambio e investimento, in grado di accrescere il potere societario e limitare lo spazio politico. Essi rappresentano una nuova forma di costituzionalismo che rinforza il potere del capitale nel lungo periodo, attraverso l’imposizione di riforme neo-liberali. Questo contributo analizza le pretese dei trattati mega-regionali in merito alla crescita dell’occupazione, identifica le forze che spingono in loro favore, evidenzia i privilegi societari e la scarsa protezione garantita ai lavoratori, e individua alcune delle conseguenze che i trattati mega-regionali potrebbero avere sui lavoratori stessi. In conclusione, sono presentate alcune considerazioni circa le strategie a disposizione di lavoratori, e rispettive organizzazioni, in risposta a tali accordi.

Keywords: Mega-Regionals; TTIP; TTP; CETA; Free trade; Corporate power; Weakening of workers’ rights; Political space reduction.

  1. Adler L. (2011). Meeting the Right’s Attack on Public Sector Unions in the United States: Are there Effective Strategies?. In: Serrano M., Xhafa, E., Fichter, M., eds, Trade unions and the global crisis: Labour’s visions, strategies and responses. Geneva: International Labour Office.
  2. Anuradha R.V., Singh Dutta N. (2012). Trade and Labour under the WTO and FTAs. Centre for WTO Studies.
  3. Beck S. (2014). TTIP: Possible Negotiating Outcomes and Consequences. In: Scherrer C., ed., The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: Implications for Labor. Rainer Hampp Verlag. München: Mering.
  4. Beck S., Scherrer C. (2014). Selling Free Trade with Pseudo-Exact Science: The ifo-Studies. Global Labour Column Nr. 181,
  5. Berden K., Francois J., Thelle M., Wymenga P., Tamminen S. (2009). Non-tariff measures in EU-US trade and investment – An economic analysis. In: ECORYS, Study for the European Commission, Directorate-General for Trade. docs/2009/december/tradoc_145613.pdf.
  6. Bernasconi-Osterwalder N., Liu Y. (2013). Interpreting Fair and Equitable Treatment in International Investment Law. Jur, p. 374 ss.
  7. Bureau J.-C., Disdier A.-C., Emlinger C., Fouré J., Felbermayr G., Fontagné G., Jean S. (2014). Agriculture and Rural Development Risks and Opportunities for the EU Agri-Food Sector in a Possible EU-US Trade Agreement. Study for the Directorate-General for Internal Policies Policy, Department B: Structural and Cohesion Policies. Brussels: European Union.
  8. Capaldo J. (2014). TTIP: European Disintegration, Unemployment and Instability. GDAE Working Paper No. 14-03. Tufts University, USA.
  9. Capaldo J., Izurieta A., Sundaram J.K. (2016). Trading Down: Unemployment, Inequality and Other Risks of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement. Global Development and Environment Institute Working Paper No. 16-01. Tufts University, USA
  10. CEO (2013). European Commission preparing for EU-US trade talks: 119 meetings with industry lobbyists. Corporate Europe Observatory. 2013/09/ european-commission-preparing-eu-us-trade-talks-119-meetings-industry-lobbyists.
  11. CEPR (2013). Reducing Transatlantic Barriers to Trade and Investment. An Economic Assessment. London: Final Project Report, Centre for Economic Policy Research. 150737.pdf.
  12. Compa L. (2014). Labor Rights and Labor Standards in Transatlantic Trade and Investment Negotiations: An American Perspective. In: Scherrer C., ed., The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: Implications for Labor. Rainer Hampp Verlag. München: Mering, p. 120 ss.
  13. Deutscher Richterbund (2016). Stellungnahme zur Errichtung eines Investitionsgerichts für TTIP – Vorschlag der Europäischen Kommission vom 16.09.2015 und 12.11.2015. Nr. 04/16, 4 February 2016,, unofficial translation: eu-us_trade_deal/2016/english_version _deutsche_ richterbund_opinion_ics_feb2016.pdf
  14. Eberhardt P. (2014). Investment Protection at a Crossroads. In: Scherrer C., ed., The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: Implications for Labor. Rainer Hampp Verlag. München: Mering, p. 100 ss.
  15. Eberhardt P. (2016). The zombie ISDS Rebranded as ICS, rights for corporations to sue states refuse to die. Brussels: Corporate Europe Observatory et al.
  16. European Commission (2013). Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership. The Regulatory Part. Sept. Brussels. 151605.pdf
  17. Felbermayr G.J., Heid B., Lehwald S. (2013). Transatlantic trade and investment partnership (TTIP): Who benefits from a free trade deal?. Part 1: Macroeconomic Effects. Bertelsmann Foundation. %20study %2017June %202013.pdf
  18. Felbermayr G.J., Larch M., Flach L., Yalcin E., Benz S., Krüger F. (2013). Dimensionen und Effekte eines transatlantischen Freihandelsabkommen. ifo Schnelldienst 4/2013 – 66. Jahrgang – 27 Februar 2013, p. 22 ss.
  19. Fritz T. (2014). TTIP vor Ort. Folgen der transatlantischen Handels- und Investitionspartnerschaft für Bundesländer und Kommunen. Auftrag von campact.
  20. Gill S. (2002). Privatization of the State and Social Reproduction? GATS and New Constitutionalism. Paper prepared for International Workshop GATS: Trading Development? Center for the Study of Globalisation and regionalization. University of Warwick, Coventry, 20-21 September.
  21. Gill S. (2015). Market civilization, new constitutionalism and world order. In: Gill S., Cutler C., eds., New Constitutionalism and World Order. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  22. IILS (2015). Social Dimensions of Free Trade Agreements. Geneva: International Institute for Labour Studies, International Labour Organization, Revised Edition.
  23. IUF (International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers’ Associations) (2014). Trade Deals that Threaten Democracy. In: Scherrer C., ed., The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: Implications for Labor. Rainer Hampp Verlag. München: Mering, p. 160 ss.
  24. Johnson L., Sachs L. (2015). The TPP’s Investment Chapter: Entrenching, rather than reforming, a flawed system. CCSI Policy Paper, Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment, Columbia University.
  25. Kapczynski A. (2015). The Trans-Pacific Partnership — Is It Bad for Your Health?. NEJM, published on June 10, 2015, at
  26. Lethbridge J. (2011). Care Services for Older People in Europe – Challenges for Labour. Greenwich: Public Services International Research Unit (PSIRU) and European Federation for Public Service Unions (EPSU).
  27. Mayer F.C. (2014). Stellt das geplante Freihandelsabkommen der EU mit Kanada (Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, CETA) ein gemischtes Abkommen dar? Rechtsgutachten für das Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Energie, Universität Bielefeld, 28 August 2014.
  28. McGuire D. (2013). Re-Framing Trade Union Mobilization against The General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). Munich: Rainer Hampp Verlag.
  29. McGuire D., Scherrer C. et al. (2010). Developing a Labour Voice in Trade Policy at the National Level. Global Labour University Working Paper No. 8, Berlin.
  30. Milanovic B. (2013). Global Income Inequality in Numbers: in History and Now. GP, p. 198 ss. DOI: 10.1111/1758-5899.1203
  31. OECD (2011). Divided We Stand: Why Inequality Keeps Rising. OECD Publishing.
  32. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (2008). Compendium of Patent Statistics. Paris: OECD.
  33. Public Citizen (2014). Table of Foreign Investor-State Cases and Claims Under NAFTA and Other U.S. “Trade” Deals.
  34. Ragin C.C. (2008). Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  35. Raza W., Grumiller J., Taylor L., Tröster B., Von Arnim R. (2014). An Economic Assessment of the Claimed Benefits of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). In: Scherrer C., ed., The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: Implications for Labor. Rainer Hampp Verlag. München: Mering, p. 41 ss.
  36. Scherrer C. (2005). GATS: Long-term Strategy for the Commodification of Education. RIPE, p. 484 ss.
  37. Schmelzer-Roldán S. (2014). The Impact of Electricity Sector Privatization on Employees in Argentina and Brazil. A Comparative Institutional Analysis. Munich: Rainer Hampp Verlag.
  38. Schweisshelm E. (2015). Trade Union Pluralism through Free Trade? Vietnam’s Trade Agreements with the EU and the US. Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, Perspective.
  39. Scott R.E. (2012). The China toll: Economic Policy Institute. Washington DC: EPI Briefing Paper 345.
  40. Taleb N.N. (2008). The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable. Penguin.
  41. Trebilcock M.J., Howse, R. (1999). The Regulation of International Trade. 2nd edition. London: Routledge.
  42. Turnell S. (2001). Core Labour Standards and the WTO. assets/.../Number203202001.PDF
  43. Van Harten G. (2015). Key flaws in the European Commission’s proposals for foreign investor protection in TTIP. 18 November 2015, http://papers.ssrn. com/sol3/papers.cfm? abstract_id=2692122
  44. Wallach L. (2013). TAFTA – die große Unterwerfung. MD, 8.11.2013,
  45. Wallach L., Beachy B. (2015). Analysis of Leaked Trans Pacific Partnership Investment Text. Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch, March 25.

Christoph Scherrer, The Covert Assault on Labor by Mega-Regional Trade Agreements in "GIORNALE DI DIRITTO DEL LAVORO E DI RELAZIONI INDUSTRIALI " 150/2016, pp 343-363, DOI: 10.3280/GDL2016-150006