Conference Agenda

Labour informality refers to a complex, structural, multidimensional, heterogeneous, dynamic and difficult to understand phenomenon. However, in the last two decades important efforts have been made to advance in its conceptual clarification, operationalization and quantification. These efforts have borne fruit, especially in Latin America, where various institutions have developed an ambitious agenda aimed at analysing this issue.

Our interest in this paper is to analyse the evolution of labour informality in Latin America, and in the main countries that comprise it, in the period between the turn of the century and the present; to analyse the labour formalization policies implemented, such as those developed by the ILO in the last decade (FORLAC) and the one projected for the period 2024-2030 FORLAC 2.0; and to investigate the new forms of informality that appear in the current context linked to the platform and GIG economy.

For our task, data from the ILO are used, from the indicators estimated from its modelling [https://ilostat.ilo.org/data/#], as well as taking as sources the data on informality offered by the national statistical institutes of the different Latin American countries and compiled by the ILO.

Based on the analysis of the data, we question whether labour informality in Latin America has historically had a greater impact on women, as some of the literature has repeatedly argued (e.g. ILO), or whether its evolution depends mainly and almost exclusively on economic growth, without taking into account considerations such as the implementation of social, economic and labour policies explicitly designed to reduce informality and promote labour formalization. The perspective we highlight is in line with the diagnosis and new guidelines set by FORLAC 2.0, which is based on the development of an integrated framework of labour formalization policies composed of 4 types of interventions: 1) productive development policies; 2) employment and skills development policies; 3) social protection policies; and 4) policies for the recognition and enforcement of labour rights and incentives for labour formalization. In this regard, we offer an analysis of the cases of Brazil and Mexico, which, with similar economic growth rates over the last two decades (2 tenths of a percentage point higher on average in the case of Brazil), have a radically divergent evolution of labour informality.

Introduction and literature

Recent literature has explored how cities around the world have experimented with alternative economic models that attempt to move beyond the narrow goals of GDP growth and competition for inward investment (Crisp et al., 2023). Inclusive growth, Community Wealth Building and the Foundational Economy all represent efforts to promote more sustainable approaches to local development and economic upgrading. Such approaches also seek to address underlying issues of inequality and exclusion through ‘decent work’ experiments such as the living wage, improved social protection, and strengthened mechanisms of worker representation (Johnson and Herman, 2024). These experiments link with a growing recognition of the importance of localised policy reforms in promoting the SDGs particularly SDG8 (decent work and sustainable growth), and SDG11 (sustainable cities and communities) (ILO, 2015; OECD, 2017).

Methods and data

Through a comparative study of diverse cities around the world, we explore the distinct ‘motives and means’ of local experimentation and critically reflect on how alternative economic and labour market models are framed within national and local institutional frameworks (Gough, 2014). We also analyse the potential implications of these models for the quantity and quality of work within foundational sectors such as care, retail, transport and hospitality. Our analysis draws on semi-structured interviews with elite and non-elite actors, along with secondary sources such as policy reports, official documents, published statistics, and media coverage.

Findings and contributions

We find that many cities have attempted to combine transformational policies aimed at expanding and upgrading foundational industries, with more incremental approaches that seek to upskill the workforce and distribute existing job opportunities more evenly. These policies rely on a combination of voluntary negotiation with employers and other social actors to improve job quality, as well as more institutionalised rules that seek to protect decent minimum standards. This piecemeal approach reflects the practical difficulties of tackling entrenched labour market issues at the local level, as well as the fragile coalitions of social actors that have a stake in promoting decent work. Nevertheless, in the ‘interstices’ of municipal policy making, which have widened in many cities after COVID-19, we find dynamic examples of experimentation that seek to improve pay and working conditions and build worker voice from the bottom-up.

This study explores the intersection between decent work and meaningful work in four different work contexts in Portugal: domestic workers, musicians, construction workers and workers on digital platforms. The main objective is to understand how working conditions and social perceptions influence the experience of decent work and meaningful work in sectors with different challenges. The research aims to answer the following questions: (1) How do workers in different sectors perceive distinctive work and meaningful work? (2) What contextual factors facilitate or hinder the coexistence of these two dimensions? (3) What are the similarities and differences between the sectors studied? The evidence-based methodology involves a qualitative analysis using semi-structured interviews to capture the subjective experiences of workers. Forty interviews were conducted (10 per sector), with questions about working conditions, employment relationships, security, recognition, and goal setting. The data were analyzed using a thematic approach, which allowed for the identification of patterns and specificities across sectors. The results indicate that decent work and meaningful work do not always coexist. In the case of domestic work, workers value emotional closeness to their families but are confronted with informal working conditions and social vulnerability. In the case of musicians, the work is often perceived as very meaningful because of the creative expression, although economic insecurity detracts from the dignity of the work. In the construction industry, the completion of concrete projects gives meaning to work, but security issues and low wages limit the perception of dignity. Finally, workers on digital platforms value autonomy, but the lack of stability and social benefits reduces overall satisfaction. This study contributes to the literature by combining the concepts of decent work and meaningful work in different work contexts, highlighting the importance of contextual and structural factors. The voices underscore the need for public policies and organizational interventions that address inequalities in the workplace while promoting dignity and meaning at work. Furthermore, the study paves the way for future studies investigating the relationship between these dimensions in other sectors and cultural contexts.

INTRODUCTION

As per the Prison Statistics of India the current population of prisoners is 573, 220 and 75.8% are undertrials (most of them are in confinement for more than one year). Undertrial prisoners can opt to work in prisons whereas convict prisoners with rigorous imprisonment have to work. Incarceration impacts earnings, contribution to family finances, breeds idleness and jeopardizes future employment. The major challenge in this regard is -how to convert punitive labor into rehabilitative? Key challenges are- marginal involvement of undertrial prisoners in prison labor as it is optional; no uniform categorization of prisoners into- skilled, semi-skilled and unskilled prisoners; interstate variations in the payment of wages; disguised employment; insufficient labour opportunities inside prisons; budget allocation across states is not uniform; labour is confined to sustaining prison life - cooking, cleaning, gardening and fails to prepare the prisoners for post release decent employment; idleness exacerbates mental health issues among prisoners; may breed recidivism. The United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, Rules 96-103 deals with various aspects of labor in prisons for the holistic development, rehabilitation and reintegration of inmates.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

Whether prison labour can be equated with general labour ?​

Whether the existing labour laws can be applied with regards to prison labour ?

Whether incentivized labour as per the skill and educational background of undertrial prisoners can be successfully introduced in India?

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Qualitative and quantitative research, primary data shall be collected from prison management staff across India. Secondary data from government reports, analysis of legal framework, regulatory institutions, judicial responses, interstate comparative analysis on work inside prisons, model prison manuals and recommendations of All India Jail Manual Committee.

CONTRIBUTION TO LITERATURE

Pave way for comprehensive reforms in prison industry, jail branding of products, usage of online sale platforms, involvement of prison labour for environment friendly production, boasting agriculture, making jails self-sufficient through prison industry. Robust aftercare to reintroduce prison labour into industrial/manufacturing units as a part of aftercare program post release.

FINDINGS

Manufacturing in the prisons can be undertaken on the basis of availability of raw material, local demand for the products, compulsory purchase of the jail manufactured products by govt. offices and institutions, engagement of private companies under Corporate Social Responsibility to upgrade prison labour, Skill building and literacy programs.

Researchers from many academic disciplines have developed and employed various typologies and models to explain difference in industrial relations systems in different countries as well as tried to explain the development of industrial relations systems using those models. Furthermore, the relevance of those typologies and models were also dominated by ‘standard’ (macroeconomic) models and indicators of ‘performance’ and ‘importance’ (e.g. Hall and Soskice, 2001; Gould et al., 2015; Kim et al., 2015). In this work we are augmented this approach by including further indicators that are including an environmental as well as social component to these models and typologies, i.e. develop a more human-centred typology. Furthermore, we are augmenting existing theoretical and empirical discussions by widening the analysis to countries which have not received a lot of attention in literature, i.e. to countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Methodologically, in this paper, we are using the study by Eurofound (2018) as starting point but critically examine the Eurofound’s (2018) normative model of industrial relations in EU countries. More particularly we use OECD data to explore latent dimensions to go beyond the Euro-centric model’s existing analytical dimensions (industrial democracy, industrial competitiveness, quality of work and employment, environmental characteristics) in a global setting. We outline the processes used to develop the model in this manner, as well as their subsequent ‘testing’ at a global level using contemporary cluster analysis methods that integrate both quantitative and qualitative information and data. In particular, we rely on and integrate qualitative interview material from different regions to deepen knowledge on the area under investigation, and indicate avenues for future inquiry.

References

Eurofound. (2018). Mapping varieties of industrial relations: Eurofound’s analytical framework applied. 29 January, https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publications/report/2018/mapping-varieties-of-industrial-relations-eurofounds-analytical-framework-applied#:~:text=It%20identifies%20four%20key%20dimensions,their%20national%20industrial%20relations%20system

Gould, A., Barry, M. and Wilkinson, A. (2015). Varieties of Capitalism Revisited: Current Debates and Possible Directions. Relations Industrielles-Industrial Relations, 70(4): 587-602.

Hall, P. and D. Soskice. (2001). Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kim, D.-O., Kim, Y.-H., Voos, P., Suzuki, H. & Y. D. Kim. (2015). “Evaluating Industrial Relations Systems of OECD Countries from 1993 to 2005: a Two-dimensional Approach”, British Journal of Industrial Relations, 53(4): 645–663.