Persuasion, coercion and the domestic costs of compliance: evaluating the NAALC resolutions against Mexico

Abstract

Why have some of the cases filed under the dispute resolution mechanisms of the NAFTA labor side agreement precipitated changes in labor practices within Mexico, while others have had little or no impact on domestic labor rights regulation? The paper draws on the literature on state compliance with international institutions to problematize the range of outcomes that have resulted from the labor dispute resolution procedures. Competing political and economic interests at federal and subnational levels of governance lead some domestic actors to prefer to continue to violate labor rights. Once disputes are filed at the NAFTA labor boards and violations are made public, states are compelled to answer for their role in allowing violations to occur. I trace out the domestic context of labor jurisdiction in Mexico to show that the split between federal and subnational labor offices helps account for some of the variance in case resolutions. As such, the paper attempts not only to account for the positive resolutions associated with the labor clause, buts also asks what the labor dispute process can tell us about how states respond domestically to transnational pressures for political change, including coercive pressures.

¿Por qué algunos de los casos tramitados a través de los mecanismos del acuerdo laboral del TLCAN precipitaron cambios en las prácticas laborales en México, mientras que otros han tenido poco o ningún impacto sobre la regulación interna de los derechos laborales? El documento se basa en la literatura sobre el cumplimiento del Estado con las instituciones internacionales para problematizar el rango de resultados de resoluciones en el campo laboral. Los conflictos de intereses políticos y económicos llevan a algunos actores nacionales a preferir continuar violando los derechos laborales. Una vez que los conflictos se presentan en los paneles del TLCAN y las violaciones se hacen públicas, los estados están obligados a responder por haber permitidio que las violaciónes a ocurrieron. Identificamos el contexto interno de la jurisdicción laboral en México para demostrar que la división entre los agentes federales y subnacionales ayuda a explicar las variaciones en las resoluciones de casos del TLCAN.