NAFTA's arbitration process has allowed AFL/CIO to sue Mexico dozens of times

[Recursion]

for preventing workers in Mexico from organizing. 75% of the time they have won. (The arbitration process takes too long; on average a decade -- that would be a good thing to fix.)

Of all the crap spewed about the TPP, this one bugs me probably the most. The entire point of the arbitration process is that US interests (eg, AFL or SEIU) can (and do) sue trade partners for preventing workers from organizing. Sort of like what VW's unions did to the plant here. The NAALC was a very good innovation Clinton brought to the NAFTA table (GHWB had opposed the idea) and it's resulted in real gains for labor organization in Mexico. As NAALC itself says, individual problems like wages or conditions are important, but the ability of workers to organize solves most of those problems on its own.

This, incidentally, is why none of us will see a US/China free trade deal in our lifetimes (US/India is possible, but it will take a long time): China will never, ever submit to the kind of arbitration process for labor protections that NAFTA/NAALC requires.

[newthinking]

1. Then why do labor leaders not have access and input to TPP, as corporations do?

[Recursion]

3. What makes you say that?

The US Trade Representative has consulted labor on these negotiations.

[newthinking]

9. "consulted" labor? Vs the access that corporations get?

[Recursion]

10. What "corporations" and what "access"?

Which corporations are you claiming have had what level of "access"? To what?

[Enthusiast]

2. Unrecommended a whole bunch.......

[Recursion]

4. Care to present an argument?

And, by the way, there's a metric shitload of stuff I'd change about NAALC given the chance. What would you like to be different?

[RiverLover]

5. China wants in & is negotiating with us now.

And I remember you saying the purpose of the TPP was to fight China's global domination in the marketplace,

Strange bedfellows of 2015: As the Obama administration pushes toward a major new trade agreement in Asia this spring, it is developing two unlikely allies — Chinese officials abroad, who are signaling that they want in, and Republicans in Congress, who appear willing to support what would be one of President Barack Obama's biggest successes.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP, as the Asia trade deal is known, is down to its final haggling. This past week, negotiators from 12 countries met in New York to resolve the remaining issues, which have been narrowed from more than 2,000. The toughest matters left, ironically, are agricultural disputes with Japan and dairy and poultry disagreements with Canada.

U.S. negotiators hope they can close out the TPP deal by the summer and get it approved by Congress — thanks to Republican votes promised by House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. Republicans like trade even more than they dislike Obama, evidently. It's a jobs bill that doesn't cost any money. The Peterson Institute for International Economics estimates that the market-opening features of the TPP will boost U.S. exports by about $123 billion annually by 2025 and add 600,000 jobs.

What's fascinating is that China seems to be catching TPP fever as the trade negotiations accelerate. Four years ago, when the talks began, Beijing was dismissive. Chinese leaders argued that the Great Recession showed America wasn't competent to lead the global economy, and that the TPP was just another scheme to encircle and contain the fast-growing Chinese economy.

You don't hear that kind of carping now. Chinese Prime Minister Li Keqiang sounded supportive last week at the World Economic Forum in Davos, where he said: "We need to act along the trend of our time, firmly advance free trade, resolutely reject protectionism, and actively expand regional economic cooperation."

Chinese officials go further in private, in recent conversations in Beijing and Washington. They said China wants to negotiate membership in the TPP, and, indeed, would like to join in the process of setting its rules. The Chinese are more cautious in talking with U.S. trade officials, asking instead how the process might work. But the message is clear: China sees this train leaving the station and wants eventually to be onboard.

U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman is said to have cautioned the Chinese that it will take a while for their economy to match the openness that the TPP would require. But in the meantime, the U.S. and China are negotiating a bilateral investment treaty that front-loads some of the toughest TPP issues. Chinese President Xi Jinping personally decided last year to embrace the investment treaty. The two sides are bargaining now over the so-called "negative list" of industries or products that would be excluded from the pact; everything else would be included — a big jump for Beijing....

http://www.courant.com/opinion/op-ed/hc-op-ignatius-trade-deal-obama-china-republicans-0201-20150130-column.html

[joshcryer]

7. "eventually"

China knows its long terms economic plans are scuttled by the US soaking up practically every other Asia-Pacific partnership. Of course they're "willing" to adapt. They simply know that to come to the bargaining table at this point they have literally nothing. They cannot fulfill US/western labor standards (which I just commented aren't even that good), and therefore they will be unable to meet the requirements, as of now, a trade deal. Instead we'll continue buying goods from them and they'll continue providing slave labor for us. All the while the rest of the Asia-Pacific nations improve their standards until which point China becomes obsolete.

It's up to China to fix their internal slave labor issues. This may or may not happen. As long as they have Ghost Cities, it is unlikely.

[joshcryer]

6. The only good thing about certain trade deals are labor protections.

But US labor protections are mediocre at best. The arbitration length in Mexico is merely a symptom of our own failed labor protection system. The NLRB is not a huge friend of labor. In fact, it impedes labor by banning wild cat striking and forcing labor to conform to a hierarchical structure.

I agree that China would never agree to US labor protection laws, and likewise, I agree that TPP puts those laws in there, though not necessarily for US economic self-interest (China is still a top trade partner). The reason the provisions exist are geopolitical.

[RiverLover]

8. TPP a 'Back Door' to Deepen NAFTA: Mexico Ambassador

Notice his derision of 'Made In America".