|

Report shows NAFTA has harmed
workers in all three countries
Washington, DC, April 11— An evaluation
of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) on its seventh
anniversary finds a continent-wide pattern of stagnant worker
incomes, lost job opportunities, increased insecurity, and rising
inequality, according to NAFTA at Seven, a new report from the
Economic Policy Institute, written by economic analysts from
the United States, Mexico, and Canada.
As proponents press for extending free trade to
the rest of the hemisphere through a Free Trade Area of the
Americas (FTAA) agreement, the report warns that other countries
are susceptible to the ill effects already experienced by NAFTA
countries.
In the United States, NAFTA eliminated over 766,000
job opportunities between 1994 and 2000, as the trade deficit
between the US and its northern and southern neighbors ballooned,
according to US author Robert Scott.
In Mexico, large trade surpluses with the United
States have not been enough to overcome even larger trade deficits
with the rest of the world. Wages and incomes in Mexico fell
between 1991 and 1998, and with NAFTA, inequality has grown
and job quality has deteriorated for most workers, according
to Mexican author Carlos Salas.
And in Canada, exports now account for 40 percent
of gross domestic product. Still, overall growth during the
1990s was worse than in any other decade since the 1930s, and
productivity growth has not led to growth in wages, according
to Canadian author Bruce Campbell.
Key findings from the study for the United States
include:
• Since NAFTA took effect on January 1, 1994,
exports to Mexico have grown by 147 percent and exports to Canada
have grown by 66 percent. But imports from Mexico have grown
much faster, by 248 percent; and imports from Canada have grown
by 79 percent.
• As a result, the net export deficit between
the US and its neighbors has grown from $16.6 billion in 1993
to $62.8 billion in2000 in real terms.
• This growing trade deficit has led to the loss
of 766,030 jobs in the United States since NAFTA’s implementation.
These job losses are spread across all 50 states and the District
of Columbia, with the biggest losses -- where more than 20,000
job opportunities were eliminated per state -- in California,
Michigan, New York, Texas, Ohio, Illinois, Pennsylvania, North
Carolina, Indiana, Florida, Tennessee, and Georgia.
• By reducing the prices of import-competing
products, the growing US trade deficit, and the new rules of
the NAFTA agreement, have put downward pressure on the wages
of non-college-educated workers in this country, who account
for 72.7percent of the workforce.
• This has happened for at least three reasons.
First, displaced manufacturing workers have sought jobs in the
service sector, where the average wage is 77 percent of the
average manufacturing wage. Second, this movement from manufacturing
to the service sector has increased the labor supply there,
further depressing wages. And finally, employers have used their
new freedom to move across borders as a tool in collective bargaining,
by threatening to close plants. Key findings from the study
for Mexico include:
• Between 1995 and 1999, manufacturing exports
improved rapidly, growing at an annual rate of 16 percent, due
almost exclusively to maquiladora factories, factories built
near the border for the purpose of manufacturing exports to
the US.
• Maquiladora employment grew rapidly over the
last two-and-a-half decades, from 60,000 jobs in 1975 to 420,000
in 1990 to 1.3million in 2000. Maquiladora factories remained
largely unaffected by the recession of the mid 90s, given their
limited dependence on the Mexican economy. Though these factories
have thrived under NAFTA, they have contributed little to Mexico’s
development and internal markets. Wages, benefits, and workers’
rights are deliberately suppressed in maquiladoras.
• The growth in manufacturing imports during
this period outpaced exports, however, growing by 18.5 percent,
which explains Mexico’s rapidly growing overall trade deficit
from 1995 to 1999,and which could lead to another major currency
crisis like the collapse of the Peso in 1995.
• NAFTA has not delivered many of its promised
benefits to Mexican workers. By 1998, the incomes of salaried
workers had fallen by 25 percent since 1991, while incomes of
the self-employed had fallen 40 percent.
• During the 1990s, the minimum wage in Mexico
lost nearly 50 percent of its purchasing power. Manufacturing
wages fell 21 percent between 1993 and 1999.
• Mexico has no social safety net, so deteriorating
labor conditions are likely to be reflected in lower quality
of jobs rather than the unemployment rate. The growing share
of urban workers holding low-productivity, low-paying jobs reflects
the Mexican economy’s inability to create higher-quality jobs.
The share of salaried employees among all workers decreased
from 74 percent in 1991to 61 percent in 1998. Key findings from
the study for Canada, where NAFTA was largely an extension and
renegotiation of the 1989 Free Trade Agreement with the U.S.,
include:
• Exports now account for 40 percent of Canadian
gross domestic product, up from 25 percent in 1989. And 85 percent
of Canadian exports now flow to the U.S., up from 74 percent
in 1989.
• Imports destroyed more jobs than exports created;
the net destruction of jobs had reached 276,000 by 1997. This
happened despite an annual average trade surplus of $19.7 billion
(Canadian)during the 1990s, far higher than the $9.4 billion
(Canadian)average in the 1980s. It also happened despite growth
in employment in export industries.
• In part, to be more competitive under NAFTA,
the Canadian government cut public spending from 16 percent
to 11 percent of GDP, greatly weakened the social safety net
so that the share of unemployed collecting unemployment insurance
declined from 75 percent in 1990 to 36 percent in 2000, and
cut corporate and high-end taxes; all after the Bank of Canada
worked to raise unemployment.
• Average per capita income in Canada fell steadily
in the first seven years of the 1990s, and only regained its
1989 levels in1999. Growth performance was worse in the 1990s
than in any decade since the 1930s. Unemployment averaged 9.6
percent for the decade, compared with a US average of 5.8 percent,
and was also higher than any decade since the 1930s.
• By the end of the 1990s, manufacturing employment
was still six percent below its level in 1989. Self-employment
and part-time employment skyrocketed, accounting for 43 percent
and 37 percent of new job creation, respectively. The absolute
number of full-time jobs did not reach its 1989 level again
until 1998.
• Income inequality expanded in Canada during
the 1990s, as the top 20 percent of families saw their share
of pre-tax/transfer incomes increase from 41.9 percent to 45.2
percent by 1998; the bottom 20 percent saw their share drop
from 3.8 percent to 3.1percent. After taxes and transfers, the
distribution still favored the top 20 percent.
“The experience [with NAFTA] suggests that any
wider free trade agreement . . . that does not give as much
priority to labor and social development as it gives to the
protections of investors and financiers is not viable,” writes
Jeff Faux, EPI’s president, in the report’s introduction. “Rather
than attempting to spread a deeply flawed agreement to all of
the Americas, the leaders of the nations of North America need
to return to the drawing board and design a model of economic
integration that works for the continent’s working people.”
Source: Economic Policy Institute: www.epinet.org
Turkish unions back demonstrations
despite violence
By Ralph Boulton
Ankara, Turkey, Apr. 12— Turkish trade
unions vowed on Thursday to stage weekend protests over government
handling of a financial crisis despite violence that erupted
at a demonstration in Ankara this week.
The demonstrations would come at a time of high
tension in Turkey and coincide with announcement of a new economic
rescue program, formulated with the International Monetary Fund
(IMF) to calm markets and win new foreign loans.
“Unfortunately, the government just doesn’t understand
the people’s problems,” said Kaya Guvenc, spokesman for the
Labor Platform, which embraces 15 civil groups including the
main trade unions.
He confirmed that the demonstrations planned
for Saturday would go ahead. The Labor Platform was considering
the legality of a month-long ban on demonstrations declared
by the governor of the capital Ankara after violent scenes on
Wednesday.
Ankara police used water cannon and tear gas and
fired warning shots into the air on Wednesday when a demonstration
by some 50,000 small businessmen degenerated into violence.
Groups had tried to break through police cordons to march on
parliament and demand the resignation of Prime Minister Bulent
Ecevit.
Economy chief Kemal Dervis set Saturday as the
date for announcement of a new economic program that, to garner
foreign support, must include radical reform of the banking
sector, aggressive privatization and budgetary austerity.
The IMF, which backed an anti-inflation program
that collapsed with the onset of crisis in February, has been
a major target of criticism in street demonstrations. Many see
soaring inflation, unemployment and an almost 50 percent cut
in the value of the lira currency as a result of IMF maladminstration.
The battered stock market rose over four percent
on hopes Dervis’ program, which he acknowledges will need strong
foreign backing, will drag the country out of crisis.
Ecevit, who triggered the crisis in February
with a bitter attack on his presidency that raised market fears
of instability, has rejected calls to resign. He dismisses suggestions
that his three-party coalition is paralyzed by inner tensions
and unable to press radical financial reform.
Many mainstream newspapers said on Thursday the
violence had been provoked by leftist and Islamist militants
who had begun by pelting the platform where leaders of the confederation
of tradesmen had gathered to deliver speeches.
“Those with a score to settle with the established
order, yesterday were out on the streets. Especially the radical
Islamists were trying to gain ground by assuming the role of
crowd leader,” Hurriyet commentator Erdal Saglam wrote.
Any suggestion Islamist radicals are fomenting
trouble would be viewed with extreme concern by the military,
a highly influential force in Turkish politics. The generals
have taken a particularly firm line on political Islam and played
a strong role in the downfall of an Islamist-led government
in 1997.
Union to defy ban
Murat Yetkin, commentator with Radikal newspaper,
saw a deeper danger beyond any organized “provocations.” Many
of those involved in the protests were unemployed people, often
from the impoverished southeast, living in the shanty towns
on the edge of major cities and facing serious hardship as prices
soar.
“These are people who have lost all hope,” he
said. “OK, they might not hit the streets again for another
10 days or six months. But the problem is there. This crisis
is a blow to the last hopes of these unemployed and uneducated
people.”
He said he was not certain the trade unions would
go ahead with their protests on Saturday. “They don’t know if
they’ll be able to control their grassroots properly. They might
go out of control as well,” he said.
The head of Hak-Is, an Islamist trade union,
Salim Uslu, said his grouping would go ahead with a protest
in Ankara on Saturday despite the ban in the city.
Source: Reuters
|