The Importance of the ILO in International Processes: The Centenary of the International Organization

The article considers the centenary of the ILO and analyzes the main transformations of the organization in the context of deepening globalization in recent decades; there have been significant changes in the ILO’s norms and standards. The article reveals the main problem of the ILO, which remains the task of increasing the number of ratifications of conventions for global proliferation of ILO’s standards in most member-states, and the ILO’s efforts to address the problem are also analyzed. It is shown that it is not yet possible to solve the problem of the low level of ratifications of many conventions which set standards in the most important areas of social and labor development. It is substantiated that an insufficient level of ratification can lead to a loss of control over the political consequences of the measures taken by the ILO. The problems of the fragmentation of international law and the consequences of fragmentation in the proliferation of norms and programs related to the rights of employees, labor standards and labor market regulation patterns are analyzed. The fragmentation fostered by both state and non-state international and transnational subjects is deteriorated by contradictory interpretation of common law. The article reveals the main problems of applying the latest ILO recommendation (2015) on the transition from the informal to the formal economy, that, as the author posits, should not be forced, because in the modern world the informal economy encourages the reduction of poverty by allowing to work those who cannot be employed in the formal economy. The reason lies in the tax system, which in many countries imposes an excessive burden on entrepreneurs. The article notes that the implementation of the green initiative and The Green Jobs Programme contributes to the expansion of the formal employment sector in developing countries. The ILO recommendation No. 204 is evaluated in the article as excessive in terms of the scope of activities in modern society. The main conclusion of the article connects the slowdown of ILO's norms-making activities in recent decades with the instability of the system and the lack of noticeable progress in the process of ratifying conventions.

1. Benanav A. (2019). The Origins of Informality: The ILO at the Limit of the Concept of Unemployment. Journal of Global History. Vol. 14. Iss. 1. P. 107–125. DOI: 10.1017/S1740022818000372

2. Bourque R. (2008). International Framework Agreements and the Future of Collective Bargaining in Multinational Companies. Just Labour: A Canadian Journal of Work and Society. Vol. 12. Spring. P. 30–47.

3. Demograficheskaya ehnciklopediya [Demographic Encyclopedia]. Moscow: Encyclopedia Publishing, 2013. 944 p.

4. Heijden Paul van der (2018). The ILO Stumbling towards Its Centenary Anniversary. International Organizations Law Review. Vol. 15. Iss. 1. P. 203–220. DOI: 10.1163/15723747-01501007 Konvencii i rekomendacii, prinyatye Mezhdunarodnoj Konferenciej truda. 1957–1990. V 2-h t. [International Labour Conventions and Recommendations. 1957–1990]. 2nd Vol. Geneva: International Labour Office, 1991. 2247 p.

5. Lomeiskie konventsii [Lomé Convention]. In: Great Russian Entsiklopedia. Vol. 17. Moscow: Scientific publishing house Great Russian Entsiklopedia, 2010.

6. Maupain F. (2013). The Future of the International Labour Organization in the Global Economy. Oxford, Hart Publishing. 320 р.

7. Mezhdunarodnaya organizatsiya truda. Konventsii, dokumenty, materialy [The International Labour Organization. Conventions, Documents, Materials]. Comp., author of preface and introduction Z.S. Bogatyrenko (Ed.). Moscow: Delo i servis, 2007.

8. Morse David A. The Origin and Evolution of the I.L.O. and Its Role in the World Community. Ithaca, New York: New York State School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Cornell University, 1969. 125 p.

9. Riisgaard L. (2005). International Framework Agreements: A New Model for Securing Workers Rights? Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society. Vol. 44. No. 4. P. 707–737. DOI: 10.1111/ j.1468-232X.2005.00408.x

10. Rittich K. (2015). The ILO: Challenges in Times of Crisis. International Labour Review. Vol. 154. No. 1. P. 85–90. DOI: 10.1111/j.1564-913X.2015.00230.x

11. Schmaehl W. (2004). EU Enlargement and Social Security. Intereconomics. Vol. 39. Iss. 1. P. 21–28. DOI: 10.1007/BF03032203

12. Tkachenko A.A., Koryuhina A.V. (1995). K probleme ratifikacii Rossijskoj Federaciej konvencii MOT № 169 «O korennyh narodah i narodah, vedushchih plemennoj obraz zhizni v nezavisimyh stranah» [On the Problem of Ratification by the Russian Federation of the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169)]. Etnograficeskoe Obozrenie. No. 3. P. 122–132.

13. Tkachenko A.A. (2009). Mezhdunarodnoi organizatsii truda 90 let [The 90th Anniversary of International Labour Organization]. Vlast. No. 4. P. 7–13.

14. Yudin V. (2011) Gosudarstvennaya politika Norvegii v otnoshenii naroda saami: pravovye osnovaniya i sociokul'turnye protivorechiya [Norwegian Public Policy towards the Lapps: Legal Grounds and Sociocultural Contradictions]. Vlast. No. 12. P. 183–186.