Brexit dan Perdagangan Internasional Salah satu konsekuensi keanggotaan United dalam Inggris adalah bahwa banyak aspek hubungan eksternal UK8217 sekarang dilakukan sebagian atau seluruhnya melalui UE. Sebagai hasil Brexit, Inggris akan dapat kembali mengasumsikan kontrol langsung hubungan eksternal, termasuk hubungan dagang. Kamp pro-Remain menyarankan dalam kampanye bahwa Brexit akan menghasilkan tahun-tahun ketidakpastian sementara Inggris menegosiasikan ulang pengaturan perdagangan internasionalnya. Pendapat ini tidak didukung oleh fakta dan bukti. Seperti yang kami jelaskan secara lebih rinci dalam bagian penelitian ini: Inggris saat ini tidak dapat menentukan tingkat tarif yang kami pungut pada impor, karena ini ditetapkan pada tingkat yang seragam untuk Uni Eropa secara keseluruhan di bawah Uni Eropa. Setelah keluar, peraturan WTO akan berlaku yang memungkinkan Inggris menentukan tingkat tarif impor kita sendiri, dengan ketentuan bahwa tarif rata-rata tidak lebih tinggi daripada di bawah pabean Uni Eropa. Sekali lagi, karena serikat pabean EU dan kebijakan komersial bersama, Inggris tidak dapat menegosiasikan perjanjian perdagangannya sendiri dengan negara-negara non-anggota - kami hanya dapat melakukannya sebagai bagian dari UE. Inggris akan dapat berpartisipasi dalam perjanjian perdagangan baru dengan negara-negara non-anggota dari hari setelah keluar. Proses negosiasi kesepakatan perdagangan baru dapat dimulai selama periode pemberitahuan 2 tahun menjelang Brexit, dengan maksud untuk memberlakukannya pada atau segera setelah tanggal keluar. Uni Eropa telah memiliki perjanjian perdagangan bebas yang saat ini berlaku di Inggris sebagai anggota UE. Sebagian besar perjanjian UE ini bersama negara mikro atau negara berkembang dan hanya sejumlah kecil mewakili pasar ekspor yang signifikan untuk Inggris. Baik UE dan negara-negara anggota (termasuk Inggris) adalah pihak dalam kesepakatan ini. Inggris hanya dapat terus menerapkan ketentuan substantif dari kesepakatan ini secara timbal balik setelah keluar kecuali Negara pihak lawan secara aktif mengajukan keberatan. Kita tidak dapat melihat alasan rasional mengapa negara pihak lawan keberatan terhadap kursus ini karena hal itu akan menjadi sasaran perdagangan ekspor mereka yang ada ke pasar Inggris, yang saat ini bebas tarif, dengan tarif baru. Tidak perlu negosiasi ulang yang rumit dari kesepakatan yang ada seperti yang diklaim secara salah oleh propaganda pro-Remain. Inggris adalah anggota pendiri EFTA namun mengundurkan diri saat bergabung dengan MEE pada tahun 1973. Kami dapat mengajukan permohonan untuk bergabung kembali dengan efek dari hari setelah Brexit. Tidak ada alasan mengapa empat negara EFTA saat ini tidak akan menyambut kami kembali, mengingat Inggris merupakan salah satu pasar ekspor terbesar EFTA. Keanggotaan EFTA akan memungkinkan kami melanjutkan hubungan perdagangan bebas tanpa henti dengan empat negara EFTA, dan juga berpartisipasi dalam promosi EFTA untuk penawaran perdagangan bebas dengan negara-negara non-anggota di seluruh dunia. Uni Eropa benar-benar dibebani dalam mencoba menegosiasikan kesepakatan perdagangan dengan sejumlah besar kepentingan khusus proteksionis gencar di dalam perbatasannya. Setelah Brexit, Inggris dapat menegosiasikan kesepakatan perdagangan baru yang tidak terbebani oleh kepentingan khusus ini jauh lebih cepat daripada UE, dan dengan prioritas yang lebih tinggi untuk memfasilitasi akses ke pasar untuk industri ekspor kita sendiri termasuk layanan. Sama sekali tidak benar bahwa Anda perlu menjadi anggota blok besar seperti Uni Eropa untuk melakukan transaksi perdagangan. Catatan aktual UE dibandingkan dengan (misalnya) negara EFTA menunjukkan kebalikannya. Garis dasar hubungan dagang kami dengan negara-negara UE yang tersisa akan diatur oleh peraturan WTO yang memberikan non-diskriminasi dalam tarif, dan melarang tindakan non-tarif yang diskriminatif. Dari baseline ini, dan sebagai pasar ekspor tunggal Uni Eropa yang tersisa, kita berada dalam posisi yang kuat untuk menegosiasikan kesepakatan yang saling menguntungkan yang menyediakan arus barang dan jasa bebas yang terus berlanjut di kedua arah. Kami menjelaskan seperti apa kesepakatan di bagian Brexit - melakukan kesepakatan dengan UE. Uni Eropa dan kebijakan komersial bersama Uni Eropa adalah serikat pabean, bukan hanya wilayah perdagangan bebas. Kami akan menjelaskan beberapa seluk beluk dan konsekuensi dari perbedaan antara serikat pekerja dan wilayah perdagangan bebas di kemudian hari. Tapi intinya dari sebuah serikat bea cukai adalah bahwa semua anggotanya mengoperasikan satu sistem tarif bea cukai tunggal sehingga kategori barang tertentu akan dikenai tarif yang sama apakah memasuki Uni Eropa melalui, katakanlah, Rotterdam atau melalui Felixstowe. Karena dinding tarif eksternal identik untuk semua anggota, anggota serikat bea cukai perlu beroperasi sebagai blok ketika mereka memasuki perjanjian perdagangan yang melibatkan tarif dengan negara lain. Kesepakatan untuk mengurangi atau menyingkirkan tarif impor dari negara lain harus melibatkan pabean secara keseluruhan. Misalnya, jika satu negara di serikat bea cukai bertindak sendiri adalah untuk mengurangi tarif barang dari negara luar, barang tersebut kemudian akan mengalir melalui pelabuhan dan beredar di sekitar seluruh serikat pabean, dengan-melewati tarif yang lebih tinggi yang dikenakan di pelabuhan Dari anggota dewan bea cukai lainnya. Untuk alasan ini, kebijakan perdagangan eksternal yang umum dibangun ke dalam Perjanjian Roma sejak dimulainya EEC, sebagai mitra penting dari serikat bea cukai yang diciptakan oleh Traktat tersebut. Ini disebut kebijakan komersial no.30221. Berdasarkan kebijakan tersebut, Komisi Eropa dipercayakan dengan tanggung jawab utama untuk menegosiasikan kesepakatan perdagangan, di bawah pengawasan Negara-negara Anggota yang bertindak melalui Dewan Menteri. Perjanjian perdagangan kemudian dapat disimpulkan oleh EEC (sekarang UE) atas namanya sendiri, yang memiliki kompetensi yang disebut 8220 eksklusif untuk mengklarifikasi kesepakatan dengan negara-negara non-anggota yang berada di dalam bidang kebijakan komersial bersama. Kata 8220competence8221 di sini memiliki makna hukum Prancis tentang kekuatan hukum untuk melakukan sesuatu. Kesepakatan WTO dan kompetensi 8220mixed Dalam praktiknya, perjanjian perdagangan hampir selalu mencakup untuk mencakup materi pokok yang lebih luas daripada hanya tarif dan hal-hal terkait yang berada dalam lingkup kebijakan komersial umum EECEU. Jika sebuah kesepakatan eksternal mengandung ketentuan yang melampaui cakupan kebijakan komersial yang sama atau kekuatan lain Uni Eropa untuk menyimpulkan kesepakatan eksternal atas namanya sendiri, maka Negara Anggota dan Uni Eropa harus menjadi pihak dalam kesepakatan tersebut. Ini disebut perjanjian kompetensi 8220mixed8221 atau 8220shared8221: di mana bagian dari kompetensi untuk menyimpulkan kesepakatan tersebut adalah milik UE, namun sebagian tetap dengan Negara-negara Anggota. Satu rangkaian kesepakatan yang sangat penting yang melibatkan kompetensi campuran adalah Kesepakatan Organisasi Perdagangan Dunia (WTO) yang disimpulkan pada tahun 1993 sebagai hasil dari Negosiasi Perdagangan Multilateral Putaran Uruguay. Seri Perjanjian terkait ini merupakan fondasi perdagangan global. Baik masing-masing Negara Anggota termasuk Inggris, dan UE sendiri, merupakan pihak dalam Persetujuan WTO. Kekuatan hukum masing-masing Komisi Eropa (seperti saat itu) dan Negara-negara Anggota diperintah oleh Pengadilan Eropa di Op 194 Kembali pada Persetujuan Putaran Uruguay 1994 ECR I-5267. Pengadilan menolak sebuah pertengkaran oleh Komisi Eropa bahwa Komisi Eropa memiliki kompetensi lintas dewan untuk menyimpulkan Kesepakatan WTO atas namanya sendiri. Meskipun ketentuan inti dari Perjanjian WTO yang berkaitan dengan perdagangan barang masuk dalam kompetensi eksklusif EC8217 berdasarkan kebijakan komersial yang sama, Pengadilan memutuskan bahwa wilayah lain yang tercakup dalam Perjanjian WTO yang berkaitan dengan layanan (bagian dari Persetujuan Umum Perdagangan Jasa - GATS) dan Perjanjian tentang Aspek Kekayaan Intelektual Berkaitan Perdagangan (TRIPS) berada di luar kompetensi EC8217 atau wilayah di mana kompetensi EC8217 dibagi dengan Negara-negara Anggota. Hasil dari skenario competency8221 8220mixed ini adalah bahwa berhadapan dengan pihak lain, ECEU bertanggung jawab untuk mematuhi, dan berhak mendapatkan keuntungan dari aspek-aspek tertentu dari Kesepakatan WTO sementara Negara-negara Anggota secara individu tetap bertanggung jawab atas, dan berhak untuk Manfaat dari, aspek yang tersisa. Batas antara kompetensi ECEU dan Negara Anggota tidak diam: di bawah doktrin Lugano ECJ8217, UE memperoleh kompetensi eksternal di wilayah di mana harmonisasi UE internal terjadi, dan pergeseran signifikan dalam kompetensi berlangsung berdasarkan Perjanjian Lisbon yang membuat aspek terkait perdagangan Bagian kekayaan intelektual dari kebijakan komersial EU8217s. Meskipun garis batas yang berfluktuasi ini mungkin membingungkan anggota WTO lainnya, namun pada umumnya diterima oleh mereka. Namun, konsekuensi dari ini setelah Brexit sangat mudah. Uni Eropa akan berhenti memiliki kompetensi sehubungan dengan perdagangan Inggris atau hubungan eksternal lainnya, dan Inggris secara otomatis akan mengambil hak dan tanggung jawab sehubungan dengan 100 hubungannya dengan anggota lainnya berdasarkan Perjanjian WTO. Selain itu, hubungan perdagangan antara Inggris dan Uni Eropa yang tersisa (8220the r-EU8221) akan berhenti diatur oleh perjanjian UE, dan secara otomatis akan diatur oleh kerangka Perjanjian WTO - kecuali tentu saja kesepakatan perdagangan pengganti dinegosiasikan Antara Inggris dan r-EU yang mulai berlaku saat keluar. Tidak ada pertanyaan tentang Inggris harus meninggalkan WTO atau mengajukan permohonan kembali untuk keanggotaan. Inggris adalah salah satu anggota pendiri WTO yang asli, sebagaimana ditetapkan dalam Pasal XI (1) dari Persetujuan WTO: 1. Pihak yang melakukan kontrak dengan GATT 1947 pada tanggal mulai berlakunya Persetujuan ini, dan Eropa Masyarakat, yang menerima Persetujuan ini dan Perjanjian Perdagangan Multilateral dan untuk mana Jadwal Konsesi dan Komitmen dicaplok pada GATT 1994 dan dimana Jadwal Komitmen Spesifik dicaplok pada GATS menjadi Anggota WTO yang asli. Hak dan kewajiban berdasarkan Perjanjian WTO Kesepakatan WTO memberikan kerangka kerja saat ini untuk perdagangan global dan mengandung sejumlah prinsip dan peraturan yang sangat penting, dan juga mekanisme untuk ajudikasi perselisihan di bawah Organisasi Perdagangan Dunia. Resort ke mekanisme perselisihan WTO saat ini menghalangi Inggris dalam perselisihan apapun dengan UE atau Negara-negara Anggota lainnya berdasarkan Pasal 344 dari Perjanjian tentang Fungsi Uni Eropa (TFEU), yang menyatakan bahwa: Negara-negara Amerika Serikat tahun 2009 tidak boleh menyerahkan Sebuah perselisihan mengenai interpretasi atau penerapan Perjanjian terhadap metode penyelesaian selain yang disediakan di dalamnya.8221 Salah satu prinsip utama dari Kesepakatan WTO adalah non-diskriminasi dalam hubungan dagang. Ini berarti bahwa anggota WTO tidak diperbolehkan, misalnya, untuk mengenakan tarif berbeda pada barang yang diimpor dari berbagai negara kecuali dalam keadaan yang jelas dan terbatas. Dengan demikian, menyusul Brexit dan dengan asumsi bahwa tidak ada kesepakatan perdagangan antara Inggris dan Uni Eropa, r-EU akan menerapkan tarif standar tarif eksternal untuk impor dari Inggris namun tidak boleh dibedakan oleh Pengisian tarif yang lebih tinggi ke Inggris daripada negara non-UE lainnya. Demikian pula, Inggris akan menerapkan tarif eksternal standar untuk impor dari r-EU. Namun, Inggris tidak berkewajiban untuk mengenakan tarif atas impornya pada tingkat yang sama seperti yang diwajibkan untuk mengenakan biaya sementara merupakan anggota serikat bea cukai UE, dan tentu saja akan memiliki hak hukum untuk menguranginya karena sesuai. Uni Eropa telah memberikan sejumlah besar komitmen dalam perundingan perdagangan multilateral untuk tidak menaikkan tarif di atas tingkat tertentu (disebut tarif terikat). Karena, seperti yang dijelaskan di atas, komitmen ini diberikan oleh UE sendiri mengenai masalah yang berada dalam kompetensi eksklusifnya dan bukan oleh masing-masing Negara Anggota, hal ini mungkin sebagai masalah teori hukum bahwa Inggris setelah keluar tidak akan terikat oleh peraturan ini. Komitmen dan oleh karena itu secara teori dapat menaikkan tarifnya di atas tingkat tarif terikat UE. Tapi dalam prakteknya sangat tidak mungkin Inggris ingin menaikkan tarif setelah keluar, kecuali mungkin dalam keadaan sempit dan luar biasa. Sebagai negara perdagangan global, Inggris memiliki ketertarikan yang kuat terhadap pengurangan tarif secara umum di seluruh dunia dan tentu saja tidak ingin bertindak sesuai dengan keinginan yang bertentangan dengan semangat jika bukan surat Perjanjian WTO. Menurut Pasal XXIV tahun GATT 1994, bila suatu serikat bea cukai terbentuk rata-rata tertimbang keseluruhan tarifnya harus sama dengan atau lebih rendah dari rata-rata tertimbang tarif dari negara komponennya, dan Inggris pasti akan menerapkan prinsip yang sama ketika Itu meninggalkan yaitu untuk menjaga tarif rata-rata sama dengan atau lebih rendah daripada di bawah rezim tarif EU8217 saat ini. Ini adalah poin penting. Inggris tidak berkewajiban untuk mempertahankan tarifnya pada tingkat yang sama seperti saat ini diwajibkan untuk mengenakan di bawah pabean Uni Eropa. Dalam banyak kasus, tarif Uni Eropa ditetapkan pada tingkat tinggi untuk melindungi industri di bagian lain UE dimana Inggris memiliki sedikit atau tidak ada industri dalam negeri untuk dilindungi, seperti tekstil dan pakaian, sepatu dan berbagai jenis hasil pertanian yang sangat dilindungi. Dalam kasus-kasus ini, Inggris tidak menerima keuntungan, namun membayar dua kali lipat untuk hak istimewa untuk melindungi industri asing dari persaingan dengan biaya lebih rendah di pasar dunia: konsumen kami membayar harga yang lebih tinggi daripada yang mereka butuhkan untuk produk yang bersangkutan, dan di atas itu dan untuk menambahkan penghinaan Untuk cedera, kami harus menyerahkan tarif yang dikumpulkan di pelabuhan kami ke UE sebagai bagian dari sumber daya sendiri yang disebut. Salah satu aspek menakjubkan dari studi Treasury pada bulan Mei 2016 yang menyatakan bahwa kerugian ekonomi meninggalkan Uni Eropa adalah anggapan bahwa jabatan Inggris Brexit akan terus mengenakan tarif impor pada tingkat yang sama dengan yang diberlakukan di bawah bea cukai UE, jadi dengan sia-sia menghukum Konsumen kita sendiri dengan memaksa mereka untuk membayar harga yang lebih tinggi daripada yang tersedia di pasar dunia. Ini akan menjadi keuntungan yang jelas dan tidak pasti untuk membiarkan Uni Eropa memiliki hak untuk menetapkan tarif pada tingkat yang sesuai dengan keadaan kita sendiri dan mungkin, sebagai negara dengan bias untuk melakukan perdagangan bebas, menguranginya dalam banyak kasus. Sebagai kelompok pengacara, kami tidak merasa berkualifikasi untuk mencoba mengukur potensi keuntungan ini dalam bentuk uang namun mengacu pada penelitian yang diterbitkan oleh Prof Patrick Minford dan yang lainnya yang menyarankan agar meninggalkan UE dan menerapkan kebijakan tarif dan perdagangan liberal akan menurunkan harga dan Meningkatkan GDP Menurut Pasal XXIV ayat 5 GATT 1994, anggota WTO berhak membentuk serikat pekerja atau daerah perdagangan bebas dan untuk menghapus tarif antara mereka sendiri tanpa hal ini dianggap diskriminatif terhadap negara lain. Uni Eropa adalah serikat bea cukai. Setelah Brexit, Inggris dapat mempertahankan rezim tarif nol di kedua arah antara dirinya dan r-EU baik dengan terus menjadi anggota pabean EU atau dengan menandatangani sebuah perjanjian perdagangan bebas. Menurut angka terbaru (2015, ONS 8220Pink Book8221) Inggris mengekspor barang senilai 134,3 miliar ke r-EU namun mengimpor 223,0 miliar. Ini mengindikasikan bahwa pengenaan tarif pada perdagangan bilateral antara Inggris dan Uni Eropa setelah Brexit akan sangat jauh lebih menyakitkan bagi eksportir r-EU daripada eksportir Inggris, apakah diperbolehkan terjadi. Kami menangani persyaratan kesepakatan perdagangan EU-EU post-Brexit. Di bagian selanjutnya. Pada bagian ini kami berkonsentrasi pada hubungan dagang Inggris-Brexit dengan negara-negara non-UE. Perjanjian Perdagangan Bebass EU8217 dan Inggris Uni Eropa telah menyelesaikan sejumlah perjanjian perdagangan bebas dengan negara-negara bukan anggota. Ini menyediakan untuk penghapusan tarif pada perdagangan sebagian besar barang, dan biasanya juga berusaha untuk menghilangkan atau setidaknya mengurangi hambatan non-tarif. Sejumlah perjanjian ini menyediakan perdagangan bebas untuk layanan dan barang. Untuk alasan yang dijelaskan di atas tentang kompetensi 8216mixed8217, Negara-negara Anggota UE (termasuk Inggris) biasanya merupakan pihak dalam perjanjian perdagangan bebas ini dan juga UE itu sendiri. Ini memiliki implikasi penting dalam hal Brexit, seperti yang akan kami jelaskan. Sebagai contoh, Persetujuan Perdagangan Bebas Uni Eropa-Korea menyimpulkan pada tahun 2011, baik Uni Eropa sendiri dan Negara-negara Anggota merupakan pihak dalam perjanjian dengan Republik Korea. Definisi para Pihak dalam Pasal 1.2 mengacu pada kompetensi 8220mixed8221 yang dijelaskan di atas: Partai 8216EU8217 didefinisikan sebagai 8216 Uni Eropa atau Negara-negara Anggotanya atau Uni Eropa dan Negara-negara Anggotanya di dalam wilayah kompetensi masing-masing sebagaimana berasal dari 8217 UE Perjanjian. Kewajiban substantif dalam perjanjian tersebut dinyatakan berlaku di antara Para Pihak. Jadi, misalnya, kewajiban Pasal 2.5 untuk menghapuskan bea cukai menyatakan bahwa 8220 masing-masing Pihak harus menghapuskan bea cukai atas barang asal Pihak lain sesuai dengan Jadwal yang termasuk dalam Lampiran 2-A. 8221 FTA juga mengandung kewajiban bersama mengenai kebebasan untuk menyediakan layanan, kekayaan intelektual dan hal-hal lain. Tidak akan ada kesulitan di Inggris yang terus mematuhi kewajiban substantif FTA ini setelah Brexit dan Korea secara timbal balik tidak akan mengalami kesulitan untuk terus menerapkan ketentuan substantif ini ke Inggris dan Uni Eropa. Langkah ini tidak memerlukan negosiasi ulang ulang dari ketentuan substantif FTA: semua yang dibutuhkan adalah sebuah pernyataan oleh Inggris bahwa hal itu dimaksudkan setelah Brexit untuk terus menjalankan persyaratan FTA antara dirinya dan Korea, dan sebuah pengakuan oleh Korea itu juga akan terus melakukannya. Ada juga ketentuan prosedural dalam FTA yang melibatkan komite bersama bilateral atau sengketa bilateral dan prosedur arbitrase antara Uni Eropa dan Korea. Jelas tidak pantas bagi Inggris untuk terus diwakili oleh Komisi Eropa atau organ Uni Eropa lainnya dalam hubungannya dengan Korea setelah Brexit, jadi ini perlu dioperasikan berdasarkan Inggris secara bilateral karena kewajiban Inggris di bawah FTA. Untuk memberikan kelancaran dan kelanjutan arus perdagangan di kedua arah di Brexit, tidak ada negosiasi baru atau negosiasi ulang ulang dari persyaratan substantif FTA UE-Korea. Yang dibutuhkan hanyalah pengakuan sederhana oleh Inggris dan Korea bahwa mereka akan terus menjalankan persyaratan substantifnya secara saling pengertian sampai pemberitahuan lebih lanjut, dan untuk menyiapkan mesin UKKorea bilateral untuk mencerminkan mesin FUKS bilateral EUK Korea. Kemungkinan bahwa setelah Brexit Inggris ingin melangkah lebih jauh dan memperkuat dan memperdalam FTA yang ada seperti yang ada di Korea dan menegosiasikan FTA baru dengan pihak lain namun proses jangka panjang ini sama sekali tidak mencegah penggulungan persyaratan FTA Uni Eropa yang ada ke FTA Inggris. Korea dapat secara teori menolak penggulungan FTA dengan cara ini, namun tidak mungkin untuk melihat alasan yang mungkin harus dilakukan. Jika Korea mengakhiri hubungan perdagangan bebas yang ada antara dirinya dan Inggris sebagai Negara Anggota UE, akan mengakibatkan diberlakukannya tarif bea masuk barang ekspor Korea ke Inggris, yang substansial dan mencakup mobil dan barang elektronik. . Kami telah mengambil FTA UE-Korea sebagai contohnya, namun poin yang sama berlaku untuk FTA UE lainnya (yang biasanya mencakup Inggris dan Negara-negara Anggota sebagai pihak-pihak perjanjian serta UE untuk alasan-alasan yang dijelaskan di atas). Sebenarnya, jenis kewajiban perjanjian 8201 semacam ini adalah proses yang sudah kita kenal dalam hukum internasional. Ini terjadi dalam kasus suksesi 8220State8221 di mana perpecahan Negara Bagian yang ada dan bagian komponennya ingin melanjutkan hubungan perjanjian yang ada dengan Negara lain. Misalnya, ketika Cekoslowakia dipecah menjadi negara bagian yang terpisah dari Republik Cheska dan Slowakia pada tanggal 31 Desember 1992, kedua negara baru setuju untuk berasumsi dan terus menghormati kewajiban perjanjian dari Negara Bagian Cekoslowakia, dan negara-negara lain dan badan-badan internasional menerima suksesi tersebut. Sebagai efektif, jika perlu menyetujui mesin baru untuk representasi terpisah dari dua negara baru. Pintu keluar Inggris dari Uni Eropa tidak secara hukum merupakan kasus suksesi Negara Bagian. Seperti dijelaskan di atas, Inggris akan mengumpulkan kembali kekuatan penuh dari State State yang ada dengan mengasumsikan ulang hak dan tanggung jawab untuk hubungan internasionalnya sendiri di wilayah saat ini dimana kepentingannya diwakili melalui UE. Namun, isu-isu praktis yang terlibat sangat mirip dan ada kepentingan bersama yang sama untuk menjaga kesinambungan pengaturan perjanjian yang ada, terutama yang mempengaruhi perdagangan sehari-hari yang ada, kecuali ada beberapa alasan bagus dan konkret untuk mengubah pengaturan tersebut. Dengan demikian, pihak lawan internasional terhadap FTA UE yang ada hampir pasti akan mengikuti praktik Negara secara umum dalam kasus suksesi Negara dan menerima penggulungan peraturan FTA sehingga mereka terus berlaku di Inggris setelah Brexit. Asosiasi Perdagangan Bebas Eropa (EFTA) Inggris adalah anggota pendiri European Free Trade Association (EFTA) ketika dibentuk pada tahun 1960. EFTA beroperasi sebagai kawasan perdagangan bebas di Eropa bersama EEC dan berisi, selain Inggris , Norwegia, Swedia, Denmark, Swiss, Austria, dan Portugal. Pada tahun 1973, Inggris dan Denmark bergabung dengan EEC dan sebagai hasilnya mengundurkan diri dari EFTA. Seperti yang dijelaskan di atas, EEC adalah sebuah serikat bea cukai dan tidak mungkin bagi negara anggota individu yang berada dalam suatu serikat pabean untuk menjadi wilayah perdagangan bebas dengan negara-negara eksternal: perlu bagi serikat bea cukai sebagai blok untuk menjadi anggota Area perdagangan bebas Jelas tidak diinginkan bagi Inggris dan Denmark untuk menghentikan hubungan perdagangan bebas mereka dengan negara-negara EFTA lainnya ketika mereka bergabung dengan MEE pada tahun 1973, dan solusinya yang diterapkan adalah untuk EEC secara keseluruhan untuk mengadakan perjanjian perdagangan bebas dengan EFTA yang tersisa Negara bagian. Ini mempertahankan hubungan perdagangan bebas antara Inggris dan Denmark dan negara-negara EFTA lainnya, dan memang memperluasnya sehingga anggota EFTA juga terlibat dalam hubungan perdagangan bebas dengan Anggota EEC lainnya (the original six). Swedia, Austria dan Portugal juga kemudian bergabung dengan EEC dan sebagai hasilnya menarik diri dari EFTA, meskipun melestarikan hubungan perdagangan bebas mereka dengan negara-negara EFTA sebagai hasil dari perjanjian perdagangan bebas bilateral antara MEE dan negara-negara EFTA yang tersisa. EFTA sekarang terdiri dari Norwegia, Islandia, Swiss dan Liechtenstein. Mengenai 3 dari Negara-negara tersebut, European Economic Area Agreement (yang mana Uni Eropa dan Negara-negara Anggota UE adalah partai) sekarang mengatur sebagian besar hubungan perdagangan bebas antara ketiga negara bagian tersebut dan antara mereka dan UE. Namun, Swiss menolak untuk bergabung dengan EEA dan akibatnya hubungan perdagangan antara dirinya dan Negara-negara EFTA lainnya masih diatur oleh kesepakatan EFTA (sekarang direvisi dan dikenal sebagai Konvensi Vaduz). Dalam hal keputusan Brexit, akan masuk akal bagi Inggris untuk mengajukan permohonan pendaftaran kembali ke EFTA sebelum Brexit, dengan maksud agar keanggotaannya segera diberlakukan saat keluarnya EU. Sepertinya tidak ada alasan mengapa keempat negara EFTA saat ini tidak menyambut aplikasi semacam itu. Uni Eropa dan negara-negara anggotanya bukan merupakan pihak dalam konvensi EFTA dan tidak memiliki pendapat mengenai aplikasi keanggotaan tersebut. Efek langsung dari Inggris yang bergabung dengan EFTA saat Brexit adalah untuk melestarikan hubungan perdagangan bebas yang ada antara Inggris dan negara-negara EFTA, menghindari risiko, katakanlah, ekspor Swiss ke Inggris dikenai tarif (dan sebaliknya). Khususnya, pada tahun 2013, Inggris merupakan pasar ekspor terpenting kelima di Indonesia (Swiss official website), sementara Inggris merupakan mitra dagang terpenting Norwegia yang menerima 25 dari total ekspor Norwegia di tahun itu (situs resmi Norwegia). Konvensi EFTA yang telah direvisi (Konvensi Vaduz) melampaui perdagangan bebas barang, dan mencakup ketentuan mengenai perdagangan bebas layanan dan pergerakan bebas modal dan orang. Semua ini tidak menjadi masalah bagi Inggris mengingat bahwa Konvensi Vaduz hanya berlaku di antara para anggotanya dan karenanya tidak akan bertindak sebagai pintu gerbang bagi pergerakan bebas orang-orang dari Uni Eropa atau di tempat lain. Keempat negara EFTA memiliki standar hidup yang sebanding atau bahkan lebih tinggi dari Inggris sehingga tidak menimbulkan risiko migrasi massal. (Kesempatan terakhir dimana migrasi Norwegia yang tidak terkendali menjadi masalah adalah ketika tentara Norwegia yang menyerang di bawah Raja Harald Hardrada dikalahkan oleh Raja Harold Godwinson dari Inggris pada Pertempuran Stamford Bridge pada tanggal 25 September 1066). Bergabung kembali dengan EFTA akan memiliki kepentingan di luar hubungan perdagangan langsung antara Inggris dan negara-negara EFTA. Ini karena selain memfasilitasi dan memperdalam perdagangan bebas antar anggotanya sendiri, EFTA juga memfasilitasi hubungan perdagangan bebas antara dirinya dan negara lain. Dalam hal ini, EFTA telah jauh lebih berhasil daripada Uni Eropa, bertentangan dengan mitologi pro-Remain yang dijajakan dalam kampanye yang diklaim, bertentangan dengan fakta dan bukti objektif, bahwa hal itu bermanfaat untuk dimiliki oleh sebuah blok besar seperti UE secara berurutan. Untuk menempa perjanjian perdagangan dengan negara lain. Sebenarnya, ini adalah penghalang positif bagi kesimpulan sukses dari kesepakatan perdagangan bebas yang menjadi milik Uni Eropa. Baru-baru ini pada 26 April 2016, El Pais melaporkan bahwa Prancis dan sekelompok Negara Anggota UE lainnya mendesak Komisi Uni Eropa untuk menunda dimulainya kembali perundingan perdagangan bebas yang sudah tertunda antara Uni Eropa dan Mercosur, blok Amerika Latin yang mencakup Brasil dan Argentina. Kekhawatiran mereka adalah efek perdagangan bebas yang berpotensi berbahaya pada beberapa sektor produsen pertanian UE yang akan menghadapi persaingan dari produsen Amerika Selatan. Baru-baru ini, berlakunya perjanjian perdagangan Kanada-EU yang telah lama ditunggu-tunggu telah ditunda oleh penolakan Rumania untuk mengatasinya karena adanya perselisihan visa dengan Kanada. Demikian pula, usaha EU-USA yang telah lama keluar untuk menegosiasikan Kemitraan Perdagangan dan Investasi Trans Atlantik (TTIP) telah sangat terhambat oleh persyaratan Frances agar Uni Eropa harus menuntut industri film Prancis terlindungi dari persaingan terbuka dari Hollywood. Karena Hollywood adalah salah satu industri ekspor terpenting di Amerika Serikat, tuntutan proteksionis dan proteksionisme ini telah menyebabkan masalah yang parah dalam melanjutkan perundingan dan jauh dari jelas bahwa UE akan dapat benar-benar menyelesaikan sebuah perjanjian perdagangan bebas dengan AS. Sebagai konsekuensi dari Uni Eropa, kurangnya keberhasilan dalam menegosiasikan kesepakatan perdagangan bebas dengan pasar ekspor utama, kesepakatan perdagangan EU8217 sangat condong ke kesepakatan dengan negara-negara kurang berkembang, di Eropa Timur dan di tempat lain, dan sejumlah besar negara mikro (Peta FTA UE). Kesepakatan ini mungkin bermanfaat untuk alasan selain memperdagangkan kepentingan pribadi, misalnya untuk membantu perkembangan dan stabilisasi politik negara-negara ini, dan untuk alasan tersebut, Inggris mungkin ingin melanjutkan pengaturan perdagangan bebas ini setelah keluar. Tetapi mengenai pasar ekspor yang signifikan, Uni Eropa baru saja mengakhiri kesepakatannya dengan Korea pada tahun 2011 dan baru saja mencapai kesepakatan dengan Kanada setelah bertahun-tahun melakukan negosiasi. Sebaliknya, EFTA telah berhasil mencapai kesepakatan dengan pasar ekspor besar dan berkembang di seluruh dunia (EFTA Free Trade Map), dan terus melakukan negosiasi dengan pasar ekspor besar dan berkembang seperti India, Malaysia dan Indonesia. Dengan bergabung kembali dengan EFTA, Inggris dapat mencari perluasan FTA EFTA yang ada pada dirinya sendiri, dan juga memberi dorongan positif yang besar bekerjasama dengan mitra EFTA untuk menempa kesepakatan baru dan memperluas perjanjian perdagangan bebas yang ada terutama di bidang perdagangan. Dalam layanan. Menegosiasikan kesepakatan perdagangan dengan negara-negara non-UE sebelum keluar Mesin Pasal 50 dari Perjanjian Uni Eropa berarti bahwa ada kemungkinan periode 2 tahun antara pemberitahuan resmi Inggris mengenai keputusannya untuk meninggalkan UE dan keluarnya yang sebenarnya Tanggal ketika Perjanjian UE berhenti berlaku di Inggris dan tidak lagi menjadi negara anggota. Meskipun klaim telah dibuat sebaliknya, jelas bahwa Inggris berhak menegosiasikan dan menyimpulkan, selama periode sebelum keluar, perjanjian perdagangan yang akan mulai berlaku dari dan setelah tanggal keluar: lihat Merundingkan Perjanjian Perdagangan Internasional sebelum Keluar dari Pekerja Pekerja Butuh Serikat Pekerja, Dan Dont Michael Kazin, profesor sejarah, Universitas Georgetown Jay Moon, presiden dan CEO, Asosiasi Produsen Mississippi, Sara Ziff, pendiri dan direktur, Toko Model Alliance Union di sektor swasta telah menyusut dalam beberapa dekade terakhir. Sekarang, pemimpin serikat pekerja di seluruh negeri khawatir bahwa mereka kehilangan pengaruh politik, kekuatan tawar menawar dan anggota. Itu menimbulkan pertanyaan tentang apakah serikat pekerja menjadi korban kesuksesan mereka sendiri, dan siapa yang membutuhkan serikat pekerja. KONFERENSI NEAL, PEMBAWA ACARA: Ini adalah BIDANG BANGSA. Im Neal Conan di Washington. Wisconsins mengingat pemilihan pada hari Selasa bukan sepenuhnya memutuskan masalah hak serikat, namun tidak ada cara untuk melukis hasilnya sebagai sesuatu kecuali kekalahan besar bagi serikat pekerja publik. Awal tahun ini, sebuah referendum mengenai isu serupa juga terjadi di Ohio, namun tren tersebut tampaknya menunjukkan berkurangnya keanggotaan dan berkurangnya kekuasaan. Tentu saja, di sektor swasta jumlah toko serikat pekerja telah menurun dengan mantap selama beberapa dekade, yang menimbulkan pertanyaan. Siapa yang butuh persatuan Apa industri Apa profesi Apa jenis pekerja yang akan diuntungkan dan di mana serikat pekerja menjadi kontraproduktif Memiliki beberapa serikat pekerja lebih tua dari kegunaannya Apakah mereka korban kesuksesan masa lalu Beritahu kami tentang pekerjaan Anda. Apakah serikat akan membuat segalanya lebih baik atau menghalangi 800-989-8255. Email kami talknpr. org. Anda juga bisa bergabung dalam percakapan di website kami, itu di npr. org. Klik pada TALK OF THE NATION. Sekadar pengungkapan penuh, NPR adalah toko serikat pekerja. Kemudian dalam program tersebut, Andy Beyer di Belmont Stakes, Triple Crown, dan bagaimana memilih pemenang. Tapi pertama, Michael Kazin, seorang profesor sejarah di Georgetown University, penulis American Dreamers: How The Left Changed A Nation. Dia bersama kita di studio 3A. Senang Anda kembali mengikuti program ini. MICHAEL KAZIN: Senang berada di sini. CONAN: Dan yang pertama, hasil di Wisconsin, para pemimpin serikat menginvestasikan banyak waktu dan uang dan modal politik. Seberapa buruk kekalahan KAZIN ini: Nah, itu jelas kekalahan yang sangat buruk secara simbolis jika tidak secara material. Mereka menempatkan banyak energi ke dalam demonstrasi tahun lalu dan awal tahun ini melawan rencana Gubernur Walkers dan mereka memiliki harapan besar untuk pemilihan recall. Mereka benar-benar memenangkan kontrol senat negara bagian. Bukan pemimpin serikat buruh, tapi Demokrat menguasai senat negara bagian, tapi itu tidak berarti banyak karena senat negara tidak bertemu lagi sampai setelah pemilihan berikutnya. Tapi, Anda tahu, ini hanyalah indikasi lain, tentu saja, bahwa serikat pekerja telah melemah di Amerika sejak tahun 1950an ketika mereka mewakili sekitar 35 persen angkatan kerja. CONAN: And public employee unions had overtaken the number of people in unions in the private sector. KAZIN: Yes, thats still true, actually. There are more workers in public employee unions now, state, federal and local, than there are in private sector unions. CONAN: And are these defections, are they coming in certain professions, in certain areas of the country And how is it happening KAZIN: Well, its a complicated story. Private sector unions began to decline really in the 1960s and afterwards when manufacturing began to leave the United States and when construction firms began to hire more illegal immigrants to do some of the regular jobs and when more of the labor force began to move into service and clerical jobs where unions have historically always been weak. Public employee unions actually began growing in the 60s and have grown really up until the 1990s, and there, of course, the opposition to them is coming a lot from conservatives, mostly Republicans, not only Republicans, however. CONAN: Some big city Democratic mayors. KAZIN: Yeah, and governors like Andrew Cuomo in New York State as well, who, obviously, are trying to cut their very severe deficits and their budgets. And one of the largest budget items is both wages and pensions for public employees. CONAN: And the perception that those wages and benefits are A) out of whack with whats available in the private sector, and B) are a primary cause of the deficit problems that so many cities and states and indeed the federal government are experiencing. KAZIN: Yes, and one of the things that makes public employee unions vulnerable is that their employers are, to an extent, the taxpayers, not just the elected officials who actually hire them. And so a lot of, even some union workers in Wisconsin, for example, private sector union workers, think that public sector union workers are doing too well and too privileged and are sort of locked into these good pensions. And so they resent that, those privileges. CONAN: Were going to be talking about a plant thats trying to organize in Mississippi, a Nissan plant. But there is a piece in the Los Angeles Times by Jerry Hirsch, who quoted several workers there. I dont want to give anymore pieces of the pie to anyone else. I need it for myself, said Kevin Carroll (ph) of LaGrange, Georgia, who was unemployed when hired by Kia Motors manufacturing last year. This is Charles Miller of Powder Springs, Georgia: We have good communication with management here. Why would you need a union The only time a union shows up is to collect dues at election time. And this is after the union lost an election at the Nissan plant in Smyrna, Tennessee. This says the UAW has to have a reason to come inside a company. Nissan doesnt give them one. Thats Anish Peters(ph), whos built cars at Nissans factory for the 17 years. I dont need someone talking to the boss for me. This is in an industry thats almost synonymous with unions. KAZIN: Yes, but of course I would ask that gentlemen what happens if the boss isnt being nice to him, if the boss isnt listening to him. Then he doesnt have a leg to stand on. The whole purpose of unions, really, and weve forgotten this, I think, in many ways in recent years, was not necessarily primarily to lift peoples wages, to get them better benefits, to get them the weekend off, though those are important gains that unions have helped Americans make. It was to give Americans a voice on the job. After all, most of us spend a large proportion of our working hours working, and - on the job. And I think unions have always said we deserve some democracy, some democratic rights on the job. And unions are, at least in theory, a way to get that. CONAN: And are they, in some respects, victims of their own success In many workplaces, most workplaces, you would think, the basics of working conditions and pay, these are not sweatshops anymore. KAZIN: No, but I wouldnt say theyre wonderful. People can be hired - can be fired rather easily now. They can even be fired for trying to organize a union, even though thats illegal, but its very difficult to enforce that particular part of the labor law. CONAN: This weekend Nissan workers in Mississippi, Congressman Bernie Thompson and the UAW met in Canton, Mississippi to discuss organizing a union. This was this past weekend. Previous efforts by the UAW to organize in Mississippi, a right to work state, have been unsuccessful. The same is true for much of the South. Jay Moon serves as president and CEO of the Mississippi Manufacturers Association and joins us now by phone from Jackson, Mississippi. Nice to have you with us today. JAY MOON: Thank you very much. Glad to be here. CONAN: And you argue that the auto workers there dont need a union. MOON: Well, thats exactly right. As the gentleman was mentioning before (unintelligible) employees here who have looked at this a number of times have determined themselves that they dont need a union. And therefore the wages, the benefits that are paid, by in this case Nissan, are very much according to standards that youll find across the country. CONAN: So are they modeled on the contracts at union shops MOON: Well, I think that theyre based upon the skill levels of the employees, the amount of time that they have been working there. I think they look at a wide variety of issues, the availability of the labor. As you know, in the country as a whole we have a real scarcity of labor out there in many areas, and so thats the way in which wages are determined, based upon demand and skill levels. And I think thats one of the ways that certainly Nissan is looking at their employees. CONAN: And somebody might be surprised when you say scarcity of labor when the unemployment rate just went up again, but yes, its true. In certain specialties, in certain kinds of jobs, you cant find enough people. MOON: Well, the National Association of Manufacturers that were affiliated with is estimating that across the United States today there are 600,000 jobs in advanced manufacturing that they simply cant find people with the skill sets to be able to fill those jobs. So we sure have a long way to go to increase the skill levels of our employees nationwide and certainly everybodys trying to do a lot of things to increase those skill levels. CONAN: You know, as you know, the UAW reports there have been civil and human rights violations at Nissan plants, and thats a reason, one reason there should be a union. MOON: Well, I havent seen any specifics relative to any of those allegations, relative to Nissan or any other plant in the state, for that matter. So we have to see exactly what theyre talking about. Its easy, in some ways, to make allegations without being able to show what the need is. But as I indicated a moment ago, the employees that work at Nissan, both in the plants that they have in Tennessee as well as in the state of Mississippi, have indicated themselves that they dont believe that joining a union or organizing for a union representation would provide any benefits to them whatsoever. So they have made that decision themselves. CONAN: Youre the president CEO of the Mississippi Manufacturers Association. Is there any situation in Mississippi anyplace in your industry where a union is a good thing MOON: Well, we dont believe so. As you mentioned, we are a right to work state, which means that an employee cannot be required to join a union as a condition of employment. And we feel like the relationship between the employer and the employee is the best way to go. They dont need a middle man, so to speak, between themselves and management and the employees. And that seems to be working out very well as we have seen time and again attempts to organize in the state have almost all failed over the last 10 years. So its really the employees that are saying themselves, we have a good relationship with those that were working with. We feel like our wages and our benefits are commensurate with what we should be receiving. We dont see a benefit to being in a union. CONAN: Jay Moon, thanks very much for your time. MOON: Thank you so much. CONAN: Jay Moon, as I said, president CEO of the Mississippi Manufacturers Association, with us on the phone from Jackson, Mississippi. Right to work states, Michael Kazin, this is another area where this is expanding. Indiana, the first time a state in the industrial Midwest has become a right to work state. KAZIN: Yes. And one of the reasons why auto plants like Nissan and others moved to the South, of course, was because they were right to work states. Right to work, by the way, just not sure all your listeners understand what that means. Right to work is not like equal rights or something. Basically, it says that if a union is organizing and your company and actually has a contract with the company, you dont have to join that union, even though you can get the benefits of that union contract. So, you know, its really a way of scaring people away from unions and scaring unions away from certain states where they have right to work. No, I mean, its clear that as unions have gotten weaker, partly because of economic structural reasons I talked about before and partly because of the Republican Party pretty much as a whole has gone to war against unions in the last few decades, not surprisingly, especially at a time of economic crisis, its easier to make the argument, I think, that unions just make it tougher for businesses to do well, especially in competition with non-union states. After all, if plants move into Mississippi, which has been a very weak union state for a long, long time, then Indiana employers are going to say, well, we cant compete with Mississippi and so you have a race to the bottom. CONAN: Let me flip the question I asked of Jay Moon to you. Is there any situation, any profession, any job type that wouldnt benefit from a union KAZIN: Well, in theory, I dont think so actually. It doesnt mean everyones going to organize unions, but there are countries like Sweden and Norway, which have about 60 percent, 70 percent of workers in unions and they have professors who are in unions, professors like me in unions, doctors who are in unions. You know, for me, the right to join a union is a basic democratic right, just like the right to vote. The right to be able to eat anywhere you want to, a civil right, a human right. And if workers decide they dont want that right, thats up to them. CONAN: Were talking with Michael Kazin and were talking about the challenges that face unions. Tell us about your job. Would a union make things better or get in the way 800-989-8255. Email us talknpr. org. This is TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. (SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC) CONAN: This is TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. Im Neal Conan. In two California towns an overwhelming majority of residents voted this week to reduce pension benefits for unionized city workers. Illinois Governor Pat Quinn, a Democrat, faces a huge pension shortfall in that state and hopes to strike a deal to cut workers pensions. Those places are hardly unique. Many unions face diminished bargaining and political power, declining membership, which leads to the question, who needs a union Tell us about your job. Would a union make things better or get in the way 800-989-8255. Email talknpr. org. You can also join the conversation at our website, thats at npr. org. Click on TALK OF THE NATION. Our guest is Michael Kazin, an expert in U. S. politics and social movements who teaches history at Georgetown University and is co-editor of Dissent magazine. And lets see if we can get a caller in on the conversation. This is Matt, and Matts on the line with us from Akron. MATT: Hello, Neal. As a part time faculty member at the University of Akron, and when I say part time, I mean, just part time in title. I was teaching a full time load. I earned less than 17,000 per year, received no health insurance of any kind was denied unemployment or would have been denied unemployment compensation in between terms. This is something that, in the state of Ohio, part time faculty, youre specifically excluded from public collective bargaining, which seems to me to be a real shame since 60 to 70 percent of our college faculty on American college and university campuses now are part time or contingent faculty. And most of whom operate or teach under similar circumstances. Some of whom even qualify as I did when I taught at the University of Akron for public assistance, for Medicaid and food stamps. CONAN: One is tempted to say puts a new meaning into the nickname Zips. MATT: Yeah. Absolutely. CONAN: And were there efforts to organize a union MATT: Well, you know, in Ohio, there have been, I guess, some efforts to try to put together, you know, some sort of operation. Im actually the vice president of an organization, New Faculty Majority, which has been gaining some traction not as a union, but as an alternative advocacy group that has been working to raise public awareness of the condition under which part time faculty work. Because I think that we can all agree that earning less than 20,000 a year when you have a masters degree or a PhD teaching college students and not receiving any access to health insurance or other sources of benefits is just absolutely unacceptable. And I think most parents dont know that theyre actually contributing to the exploitation of workers. CONAN: Matt, thanks very much for your time. Appreciate it. CONAN: All right. Is the academic field, upper education, is that highly organized KAZIN: Not at all. Tidak semuanya. There is a faculty union, I think, at the state colleges in California, several other colleges around the country, mostly community colleges. But as the caller mentions, theres a huge gap between people like me, tenured, pretty well paid, pretty good health insurance, though not wonderful, and the temporary casual faculty, so to speak, who are really migrant workers. Some people have to travel 200 miles to teach at two or three different schools and still often make less than 30,000 a year even after seven, eight years of education. So theres a real two-tier system in higher education. CONAN: Lets go next to Bill and Bills with us from Grandville, Michigan. BILL: Yeah, I just wanted to make a quick comment that I was union and I saw a lot of non-production and we ended up losing our factory. It closed down due to not being able to reach a negotiation or whatever. Since Ive left the union, Im still working machining and Im actually doing better now not being in a union than I was before, benefits, pay and just basically the amount of rhetoric between me and my bosses directly. CONAN: So its a more pleasant situation and it pays as well or better. BILL: Its more pleasant, its more fruitful for the company and the employee. CONAN: And would you, if the opportunity arose, go back to a union job BILL: Absolutely not. CONAN: All right, Bill. Thanks very much for the call. And thats some of the complaints you hear in some unions, particularly, well, the UAW is one of them. KAZIN: Yeah. There are, you know, good unions, efficient unions, honest unions and corrupt, inefficient ones, which do very badly. But one of the things important to note is that as unions get weaker, they get weaker in helping people. They often attract people who are not as good at the leadership as they were in the past. But important to realize, too, historically, that the time when American wages were highest, the time when the gap between the richest Americans and the middle class was the least was when unions were strongest in the 1950s, when 35 percent of Americans were in unions. So, you know, unions are not wonderful institutions. If they were, everybody would join them. Ada beberapa. Some arent. Tapi. CONAN: We were talking on Monday with the Wall Street Journal reporter whod done a piece about Wisconsin in the run-up to the election. But it was about teachers there in one particular union because of previous legislation now given the right, if they chose not to join a union, not to pay the dues, more than half decided not to do it, in part, just because you said, he quoted one person in that article saying, the union doesnt do anything for me anymore. KAZIN: But the union was able to get people tenure, was able to get people a health plan, was able to get people a pension when it was stronger. And again, what happens a lot, I think, is individuals who have bad experiences with unions say all unions are like that. CONAN: Mm-hmm. If people have good experiences, say all unions are like that. KAZIN: But the basic thing, to me, is that people should have the right and the ability to join union if they want to. And that is one of the things which is being really undermined by recent legislation, by recent political conflicts and also by some of the mistakes unions have made themselves. CONAN: Lets go next to Zach(ph) and Zachs one the line from Orlando. ZACH: My name is Zach and I am a proud member of the Actors Equity Association, the union for stage actors. And I am really, really happy that we have a union. I think in a business where so many people are competing for such a limited amount of work, once we are under contract, theres so much benefit to knowing that were getting paid fairly. And were working a reasonable number of hours and were receiving all those other benefits and protection. CONAN: And this is also a sporadic profession. Its not exactly like youre working 52 weeks a year. ZACH: Well, currently I am because Im working at Walt Disneyworld, which is a steady job, but yeah, it can be somewhat sporadic so they also help - Equity can help having consistent benefits, consistent health insurance and everything else. CONAN: Theres also, well, this wouldnt apply to Equity, but I know that during the Screen Actors and the strike. ZACH: The writers strike. CONAN: The writers strike, a lot of it was about new technology. This is an area when theres new technology involved, Michael Kazin, I would think that theres interest at that point. They were trying to protect their whatever income there might be from aftermarket digital sales and that sort of thing. And this was a new area, one area where youre going to need a lot of people working together, collective power, to get the studios to pay attention to you. KAZIN: Yes, also, one of the things that unions can do and have always done is to educate people about the change in their job, the change in the technology, the change in production methods, and individuals, if left to their own devices, are not going to have time to do that kind of study. So you really need professionals in unions on the side of workers to help to educate them about whats going on in their industry and to a certain degree, in the larger economy. And thats something people dont have time to do by themselves, usually. CONAN: Zach, thanks very much for the call. CONAN: Sara Ziff is a fashion model who left the business to study labor and community organizing, came back to modeling and started a union. She joins us now by phone from New York. Nice to have you with us today. SARA ZIFF: Hi. I actually - Id just like to clarify, The Model Alliance is not a union. Its a nonprofit group. CONAN: A nonprofit group. You would like it to be a union, though. ZIFF: Well, originally, I was thinking in terms of pursuing unionization and I approached established unions. They said it would be a constitutional change to accept models into their membership. And so I tried to think in terms of alternative structures and thats how we came to form The Model Alliance, which is a nonprofit labor group that gives models a platform to organize for better working conditions in the fashion industry. CONAN: And what Zach, our previous caller, was saying about actors, a whole lot of people applying for limited work, sounds like a definition of the modeling industry. ZIFF: Sure. And actually, he mentioned that he is a member of Actors Equity and weve been working in partnership with both Equity and AGMA, the American Guild of Musical Artists. So we are not a union ourselves, but we have been working cooperatively with unions. CONAN: This glamorous profession, why would they need labor help ZIFF: Well, a lot of people, you know, they might roll their eyes and say, why would fashion models need a union because it seems like such glamorous work. But the fact is that, you know, we are actually a very vulnerable demographic. Most models start their careers between the ages of 13 and 16. You know, a lot of the time our careers only last a few years and then were out. Thats sort of the nature of fashion. Youre in one minute and out the next. And because theres such a high turnover rate, and its a very youth-centric industry, that makes it very hard to speak out if, say, youre not getting paid for your work or youre having to deal with sexual harassment. CONAN: Not getting paid for your work - oh, they just decided not to pay you ZIFF: Well, yeah, its kind of a dirty little secret in the fashion industry that a lot of designers at New York Fashion Week actually dont pay their models any money for their work, that youre expected to walk down the runway for trade, meaning, you know, heres a tank-top thanks, not cash. CONAN: Thats - its going to be difficult to pay the rent with that. ZIFF: It is. Ini. But since were generally considered independent contractors and not employees, minimum wage law does not apply to us. CONAN: All right, well, and so how many models do you have in the alliance now ZIFF: Weve got about 200 folks, and were growing. We just launched in February so were very a new group. But weve already seen results. So, for example, Vogue magazine just announced last month that theyve pledged not to hire models under the age of 16. CONAN: Sara Ziff, thanks very much for the call - for being with us today. Kami menghargai itu. ZIFF: Thanks so much. CONAN: Sara Ziff, the founder and director of Model Alliance, a nonprofit labor group for models. She joined us by phone from New York. And thats, as you say, an industry that you dont really think of as needing a union, but, according to her, it does. KAZIN: Yeah. And actually, youve got more and more sort of nonunion unions out there. Theres a freelancers union in New York state, for example, which has signed up a lot of young people who have a temporary job here, a temporary job there. They try to put some pressure on employers, but they also give people a way - a cheaper way to buy health insurance, a cheaper way to look for jobs sort of collectively, to talk about their problems together. Theres worker centers around the world, which have helped put pressure - around the country, rather - helped put pressure on some manufacturers of tomatoes, for example, to raise the price of wages by putting pressure on fast food restaurants, like Burger King and McDonalds. So because the labor laws have gotten really very tough to enforce, not help the unions as much as they did in the past, a lot of workers unhappy with their situation whether theyre professionals or migrant farm workers find other ways to press their demands. CONAN: Were talking with Michael Kazin, a history professor at Georgetown University. His book American Dreamers: How the Left Changed a Nation. Youre listening to TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. And heres an email. This is from Jeremy: Unions served their purpose in the past. I worked for Eastern Air Lines in the 1980s, and they might have survived if not for the continual labor disputes with the union and potential strikes. I remember trash collectors in the union making 20 an hour. And lets see if we can get another caller in. This is Sid, and Sid is on the line with us from San Jose. SID: How are you doing CONAN: Good. Terima kasih. SID: First, let me say that Im very positive on unions for a lot of the things they do in the way of working conditions, pay and whatnot else. But the one reason I did not join a union was because of the seniority system. I was a pilot in the Air Force, flying transport. The natural progression, of course, was to the airlines. And most of my friends went there. However, I was in the left seat, the equivalent of a captain, when you go to the airlines, to go to the left seat its not based on skill and ability. You, of course, have to pass the FAA requirements. Its based on seniority. I couldnt see like my friends did, waiting 10 to 15 years with a major airline getting in the left seat. So to me, the seniority system there and then some other businesses or education is also a problem. CONAN: So it seems like an artificial rule. So, on the other hand, what does a driver of a multiengine airplane do otherwise SID: Well, theres certainly - for example, in the Air Force. CONAN: No, I mean. CONAN. what other career opportunities are there for you other than going to the airlines SID: Well, certainly, private industry you can go with as a pilot of this aircraft, that type of thing. And a few people did that as well. CONAN: All right. Sid, thanks very much for the call. Appreciate it. KAZIN: Yeah. I just want to make a comment about seniority. You know, it was a great advance, I think, at the time, 1930s, 1940s when a lot of unions were able to press that as a - were able to win that for workers because employers did fire people just for being older even though they could still do the job because they realized that younger workers were cheaper and faster and often more efficiently. But its true that sometimes it can be a burden on an industry. But, again, it was important, a gain I think, to not - for a worker not just lose their job because he or she got old. CONAN: Lets go next to Greg(ph), and Greg is with us from Hilton Head, South Carolina. GREG: Yes. Good afternoon. GREG: Thanks for taking my call. GREG: Im a small business owner who has gone through about a year-and-a-half fight to - against a union to try to stay an independent contractor. Im in the construction industry, and, you know, its been quite a battle. I finally won the second election, and the NLRB said Im done. Its cost me about 100,000 to fight this thing on moneys I couldnt afford. I have 16 field employees, and its - they didnt get a vote the first time and got one the second time. The NLRB said I had to have a second election. And its been quite a battle. CONAN: And the second election, how did that turn out GREG: The second election, they got one vote. The first election, they got zero votes. CONAN: Im sorry. I misunderstood. So this has been, well, obviously something that is a passion in your life now GREG: Oh, what it does is its just - it puts me out of the business that I was in because I couldnt - it was 13 per working hour plus that I had to pay in benefits and in the construction industry is, you know, it is such a depressed industry to begin with. Its a - it was just another - a no deal. GREG: So it was quite a fight, and they just picked me out of the blue, I suppose. And they solicited my employees and I wound up having two elections. CONAN: Greg, thanks very much for the call. CONAN: This email from Joe(ph) in Oakland: Many years ago, I took a labor relations class at a large corporation after my first promotion to management. One important thing I remember learning was the major thing that workers - drew workers to vote for unions was not the possibility of higher wages but the certainty of a grievance procedure. They wanted to have a way to complain about unfair treatment by the boss. One of my employers strategies for keeping unions out was to have policies to ensure that all employees were treated equally. And, well, it sounds like maybe in Gregs shop they were and opposed the union and maybe in other shops thats not quite the case, Michael Kazin. KAZIN: Its possible, but, you know, the labor - Im curious. Im sorry Greg is not on the line anymore because the labor law has it that you dont have an election unless 50 percent plus one of the workers in a given bargaining unit call for an election, ask for an election. So there must have been something a little more complex going on there. CONAN: Michael Kazin, thanks very much for your time. Appreciate it. KAZIN: Thank you. CONAN: Michael Kazin, a history professor at Georgetown University, author of American Dreamers: How the Left Changed a Nation and co-editor of Dissent magazine. Stay with us. When we come back, well be talking with Andy Beyer about the Triple Crown and the Belmont Stakes. Its the TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. Copyright copy 2012 NPR. Seluruh hak cipta. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at npr. org for further information. NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc.. an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPRrsquos programming is the audio record. Related NPR Storiesglobalization American fast-food restaurant chains have become a symbol of modern globalization. Photograph by Sandry Anggada, MyShot Battle in Seattle The 1999 meeting of the World Trade Organization (WTO) was held in Seattle, Washington. This meeting was protested by thousands of people opposed to globalization. The protests turned violent. Hundreds of people were arrested. Many were injured in confrontations with police. Many buildings were damaged. The incident is sometimes called the Battle in Seattle. Powerful Peppers Food has long been an important part of globalization. Today, foods in Korea and many parts of China are often spicy. They get their spice from chili peppers. This was not the case before the 1600s. The fiery chili pepper is native to the Western Hemisphere. Explorer Christopher Columbus first brought chilies to Europe in 1493, and from there they spread across Asia. Globalization is the connection of different parts of the world. Globalization results in the expansion of international cultural, economic, and political activities. As people, ideas, knowledge, and goods move more easily around the globe, the experiences of people around the world become more similar. Globalization in History Globalization has a long history. Ancient Greek culture, for instance, spread across much of southwestern Asia, northern Africa, and southern Europe. The globalization of Greek culture came with the conqueror Alexander the Great. In fact, there are cities named for Alexander in Iraq (Iskandariya), Egypt (Alexandria), and Turkey (Alexandria Troas). The Silk Road. a trade route between China and the Mediterranean Sea, promoted the exchange of ideas and knowledge, along with trade goods and foods such as silk, spices, porcelain, and other treasures from the East. When Europeans began establish ing colonies overseas, globalization grew. Many early European explorers were eager to bring the Christian religion to the regions they visited. The globalization of Christianity spread from Europe to Latin America through Christian missionaries working with the local populations. Globalization was accelerate d in the nineteenth century with the Industrial Revolution. as mechanical mill s and factories became more common. Many companies used raw material s from distant lands. They also sold their goods in other countries. Britain8217s colony in India, for instance, supplied cotton to British merchant s and traders. Madras. a light cotton cloth, was made in the city of Madras (now called Chennai), a major port in India. Eventually, madras cloth was no longer manufactured in Madras at all8212the Indian labor force supplied the raw material, cotton. Factories in the county of Lancashire, England, created madras cloth. British factories made fabric and other goods from the cotton. British manufacturers could then sell their finished good s, such as clothing and blankets, to buyers all over the world8212the United States, Brazil, Australia, even India. Globalization sped up dramatically in the twentieth century with the proliferation of air travel, the expansion of free trade. and the dawn of the Information Age. Miles of fiber-optic cable now connect the continents, allowing people around the world to communicate instantly through the borderless World Wide Web. Modern communication has played a large role in cultural globalization. Today, news and information zips instantly around the world on the internet. People can read information about foreign countries as easily as they read about their local news. Through globalization, people may become aware of incidents very quickly. In seconds, people are able to respond to natural disaster s that happen thousands of miles away. About 60 percent of the people in the world now use cell phone s. A farmer in Nigeria can easily talk to his cousin who moved to New York City, New York. The success of global news network s like CNN have also contributed to globalization. People all over the world can see the same news 24 hours a day. Increased international travel has also helped globalization. Each year, millions of people move from one country to another in search of work. Sometimes, these migrant workers travel a short distance, such as between the Mexican state of Sonora and the U. S. state of California. Sometimes, migrant workers travel many thousands of miles. Migrant workers from the Philippines, for instance, may travel to Europe, Australia, or North America to find better-paying jobs. People do not travel just for work, of course. Millions of people take vacations to foreign countries. Most of these international tourist s are from developed countries. Many are most comfortable with goods and services that resemble what they have at home. In this way, globalization encourages countries around the world to provide typical Western services. The facilities of a Holiday Inn hotel, for instance, are very similar, whether the location is Bangor, Maine, or Bangkok, Thailand. Travel and tourism have made people more familiar with other cultures. Travelers are exposed to new ideas about food, which may change what they buy at the store at home. They are exposed to ideas about goods and services, which may increase demand for a specific product that may not be available at home. They are exposed to new ideas, which may influence how they vote. In this way, globalization influences trade, taste, and culture. Popular culture has also become more globalized. People in the United States enjoy listening to South African music and reading Japanese comic books. American soap operas are popular in Israel. India, for instance, has a thriving film industry, nicknamed 8220Bollywood .8221 Bollywood movies are popular both in India and with the huge population of Indians living abroad. In fact, some Bollywood movies do much better in the United States or the United Kingdom than they do in India. Clothing styles have also become more uniform as a result of globalization. National and regional costume s have become rarer as globalization has increased. In most parts of the world, professionals such as bankers wear suits, and jeans and T-shirts are common for young people. There has also been an increasing exchange of foods across the globe. People in England eat Indian curry. while people in Peru enjoy Japanese sushi. Meanwhile, American fast food chains have become common throughout the world. McDonalds has more than 31,000 restaurants in 118 countries. And people all across the world are eating more meat and sugary foods, like those sold in fast food restaurants. The worldwide expansion of McDonald8217s has become a symbol of globalization. Some menu items, such as the Big Mac, are the same all over the world. Other menu items are specific to that region. McDonalds in Japan features a green-tea flavored milkshake. At McDonald8217s in Uruguay, a 8220McHuevo8221 is a burger topped with a fried egg. Globalization has brought McDonald8217s to billions of consumers worldwide. The international economy has also become more globalized in recent decade s. International trade is vital to the economies of most countries around the world. American software companies, such as Microsoft, rely on international trade to make large profit s. The economy of the country of Saudi Arabia is almost entirely dependent on oil export s. To increase trade, many countries have created free trade agreements with other countries. Under free trade agreements, countries agree to remove trade barriers. For example, they may stop charging tariff s, or taxes, on imports. In 1994, the United States, Mexico, and Canada signed the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). which eventually ended all tariffs on trade goods between the three nations. This allowed globalization of goods and services, as well as people and ideas, between these three countries. Most large corporation s operate in many countries around the world. HSBC. the world8217s largest bank, has offices in 88 different countries. Originally, HSBC stood for Hongkong Shanghai Banking Corporation, which was founded in 1865 to promote trade between China and the United Kingdom. Today, HSBC has its headquarters in London, England. Economic globalization has allowed many corporations based in the West to move factories and jobs to less economically developed countries, a process called outsourcing. The corporation can pay lower wages, because the standard of living in less developed countries is much lower. Laws protecting the environment and workers8217 safety are less widespread in developing countries, which also lowers costs for the corporation. Often, this results in lower costs for consumers, too. Economic market s are global. People and organizations invest in companies all over the globe. Because of this, economic downturn s in one country are repeated in other countries. The financial crisis that began in the United States in 2006 quickly spread around the world. The way globalization allowed this situation to spread led to the nation of Iceland nearly going bankrupt. for example. Cultural and economic globalization have caused countries to become more connected politically. Countries frequently cooperate to enact trade agreements. They work together to open their borders to allow the movement of money and people needed to keep economic globalization working. Because people, money, and computerized information move so easily around the globe, countries are increasingly working together to fight crime. The idea of maintaining international law has also grown. In 2002, the International Criminal Court was established. This court, which handles cases such as war crimes, has a global reach, although not all countries have accepted it. Many problems facing the world today cross national borders, so countries must work together to solve them. Efforts to confront problems such as global climate change must involve many different countries. In 2009, representatives from 170 countries gathered at a conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, to discuss climate change. Other international issues include terrorism. drug trafficking. and immigration . The process of globalization is very controversial. Many people say globalization will help people communicate. Aid agencies can respond more quickly to a natural disaster. Advanced medicines are more easily and widely available to people who may not have been able to afford them. Jobs available through globalization have lifted many people out of poverty. Globalization has increased the number of students studying abroad . Not everyone says that globalization is good, however. Some people worry that Western culture will destroy local cultures around the world. They fear that everyone will end up eating hamburgers and watching Hollywood movies. Others point out that people tend to adopt some aspects of other cultures without giving up their own. Ironically, modern technology is often used to preserve and spread traditional beliefs and customs. Opponents to globalization blame free trade for unfair working conditions. They also say that outsourcing has caused wealthy countries to lose too many jobs. Supporters of globalization say that factory workers in poor countries are making much better wages than they would at other jobs available to them. They also argue that free trade has lowered prices in wealthier countries and improved the economy of poorer countries.
No comments:
Post a Comment