Abstract
This paper investigates the need in existence of labor laws. A literature review was conducted to find out the results of labor market deregulation, as well as the potential benefits of implementing labor laws. It was found that, although it is believed that deregulation may bring potential benefits, labor laws are paramount when it comes to protecting the basic rights of workers and averting potentially disastrous social consequences. After this investigation, three examples of the use of labor laws (U.S. court cases) are provided at the end of the paper.
Introduction
The current paper considers the problem of labor laws. It is explained that, while deregulation of labor market is believed to lead to “economic efficiency,” it results in poor working conditions and potentially disastrous social consequences. Also, three examples of use of labor law in companies (taken from legal cases) are provided to further demonstrate that such laws can help protect workers in unfair situations (Katz, 2013).
The Need in Labor Laws
Proponents of the free market often state that labor laws are harmful, because they supposedly limit the economic freedom of companies, slow the economic growth, etc.; see, for example, Wilson (2012). On the other hand, the absence of labor laws is supposed to hasten the economic growth and bring numerous benefits to both workers and employers (Wilson, 2012). However, practice shows that this is simply not true – at least not the part where workers enjoy multiple benefits from the deregulated market and economically upgraded organizations (Barrientos, Gereffi, & Rossi, 2011).
In the labor market, it is the employer who makes the decision about hiring or firing a worker. Simply because of this, the employer has more power than the worker. Next, because the employer usually aims to increase the effectiveness of their business to maximize the profitd, they will make attempts to lower the salary of their staff, cut the expenses on improving working conditions, etc. Companies can also collaborate with one another to drive down the wages of their workers, lower the spending on working conditions, etc. Surely, some workers may drive a bargain if they have rare and wanted skills to sell; however, this can rarely be said of e.g. blue-collar workers, who still need work, and whose work, although unqualified, is still vital.
There are multiple examples of what the absence of proper worker protection can lead to. Many notorious cases from less developed countries have been heard of. For instance, Rowlatt and Deith (2015) exposed the situation behind several Western drink companies (such as Unilever, owning PG Tips and Lipton brands) who grow tea in India. The labor laws in India were weak and poorly enforced; the misconducts of Western companies were overlooked. As a result, the workers growing tea were forced to live in terrible, unsanitary conditions, in overpopulated barracks, with flowing toilets; wages were miserable; child labor was extensively used (Rowlatt & Deith, 2015).
There is little doubt that numerous similar cases of worker exploitation still exist across the globe in countries where labor laws are non-existent or not enforced; Raj Adhikari and Gautam (2010) provide some more examples from Nepal.
When it comes to the U.S., the situation is also adverse. Some of the results of poorly regulated relations between workers and employers include the high numbers of work-related injury and disease; for instance, over 14,000 employers died and over 2,000,000 suffered from workplace injury in 1970; nearly 300,000 instances of occupational disease were registered yearly (Twomey, 2013, p. 361). To decrease these disastrous numbers, the Occupational Safety and Health Act was adopted in 1970 (Twomey, 2013).
Another example is related to the present: currently, only 83% of men aged 25-54 are working or looking for work; the rest (mainly less educated men) are missing from the market (Irwin, 2016). The precise reasons are unknown, but many of them probably withdrew from looking for work due to work-related injury, chronic diseases and pains, lack of perspectives, depression, the resulting drug abuse, etc. (The Editorial Board, 2016; Irwin, 2016).
Thus, while deregulating the labor market might bring some benefits to developing businesses, the social effects of it may prove disastrous. Therefore, it is paramount to create adequate legal protection of workers when it comes to their safety and working conditions.
Examples of Use of Labor Laws in Organizations
Example 1
An example of use of labor legislation in organizations is provided by Twomey (2013, p. 367). The case is entitled American Textile Manufacturers Institute v. Donovan (1981). The crux is that the representatives of the cotton industry made a suit doubting the validity of the existing standard, the so-called Cotton Dust Standard, which was aimed at limiting the exposure of workers to cotton dust in the workplace (Twomey, 2013).
Prolonged exposure to cotton dust causes bysinossis, and obstructive pulmonary disease which causes the loss of pulmonary functions in its least serious form, and leads to irreversible obstruction of pulmonary organs and is potentially lethal in its most serious form (Twomey, 2013). This can be prevented by e.g. providing appropriate ventilation in the workplace. And yet, approximately 35,000 (1/12) of employed or retired cotton mill workers suffered from the most severe form of bysinossis, while 100,000 (1/4) had at least some form of the disease (Twomey, 2013).
Nevertheless, the association of employers which petitioned against the Cotton Dust Standard stated that this standard was not “economically feasible”; however, the court of appeals “upheld the standards in all major respects” (Twomey, 2013, p. 367).
This case provides a blatant example of how employers disregarded the severe adverse effects of workplace conditions on workers’ health, the possible social consequences of this, and united to cancel the regulation obliging them to provide adequate workplace conditions.
Example 2
The case Pollard v. E.I. duPont de Nemours & Co. (2001) pertains to anti-discrimination legislation (Twomey, 2013, p. 410). The plaintiff, Sharon Pollard, filled a suit against her former employer, stating that she faced discrimination and sexual harassment at her workplace, to which she was subjected by her co-workers, and about which her supervisors knew. It was found that the plaintiff was forced to take a medical leave from her work and seek psychological aid, as well as that she was fired from her job due to her refusal to continue working in such a hostile environment. The plaintiff won the case, receiving a monetary compensation for her suffering (Twomey, 2013).
This case demonstrates the use of some of anti-discrimination legislation related to workplace. While the employer was not directly involved in worker discrimination, it was still the employer’s obligation to provide safe working environment for their personnel. Failure to do so may result in disastrous consequences for the discriminated persons, so such laws are also paramount in labor legislation.
Example 3
The case Whirlpool Corp. v. Marshall (1980) is an example of a situation in which workers were expected to perform actions posing risk to their life and health (Twomey, 2013, p. 377). The maintenance routines in Whirlpool Corporation plant required that workers perform maintenance routines on mesh screens located ≈20 feet above the floor of the factory; however, several days prior to the accident, a co-worker of the plaintiffs had fallen to death from these screens. The workers refused to obey the order of their superior and perform the maintenance routines, for which they were ordered to punch out, were not paid for the remaining 6 hours of their shift, and received reprimands for insubordination, which were added to their employment records (Twomey, 2013).
It is stated that, although some actions were carried out to make the mesh screens safer, it was apparent that their condition with respect to safety was far from perfect. The workers refused to obey the command due to the lack of desire to endanger their lives. Although the court initially denied relief for the case, this decision was reversed by the U.S. court of appeals (Twomey, 2013).
This case provides an example of use of laws pertaining to occupational safety. It is clear that such laws should exist to protect the employees from potentially hazardous actions which they may be required to carry out by their supervisors.
Conclusion
On the whole, despite the claims of economic effectiveness of deregulated labor market, it often results in violations of workers’ basic rights. Thus, labor legislation is paramount if the workers’ basic rights to adequate salary, safe working conditions, etc., are to be protected.
References
Barrientos, S., Gereffi, G., & Rossi, A. (2011). Economic and social upgrading in global production networks: A new paradigm for a changing world. International Labour Review, 150(3‐4), 319-340.
The Editorial Board. (2016). Millions of men are missing from the job market. The New York Times. Web.
Irwin, N. (2016). Would America have fewer missing workers if it were more like France?The New York Times. Web.
Katz, C. J. (2013). Protective labor legislation in the courts: Substantive due process and fairness in the progressive era. Law and History Review, 31(02), 275-323.
Raj Adhikari, D., & Gautam, D. K. (2010). Labor legislations for improving quality of work life in Nepal. International Journal of Law and Management, 52(1), 40-53.
Rowlatt, J., & Deith, J. (2015). The bitter story behind the UK’s national drink. BBC News. Web.
Twomey, D. P. (2013). Labor and employment law: Text & cases (15th ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning.
Wilson, M. (2012). The negative effects of minimum wage laws. Policy Analysis, 701, 1-13. Web.