17. Direct and
Indirect Employer
The concept of indirect
employer includes both persons and institutions of various kinds, and also
collective labour contracts and the principles of conduct which are laid
down by these persons and institutions and which determine the whole
socioeconomic system or are its result. The concept of "indirect
employer" thus refers to many different elements. The responsibility of
the indirect employer differs from that of the direct employer - the term
itself indicates that the responsibility is less direct - but it remains a true
responsibility: the indirect employer substantially determines one or other
facet of the labour relationship, thus conditioning the conduct of the direct
employer when the latter determines in concrete terms the actual work contract
and labour relations. This is not to absolve the direct employer from his own
responsibility, but only to draw attention to the whole network of influences
that condition his conduct. When it is a question of establishing an ethically
correct labour policy, all these influences must be kept in mind. A policy
is correct when the objective rights of the worker are fully respected.
The concept of indirect
employer is applicable to every society, and in the
first place to the State. For it is the State that must
conduct a just labour policy. However, it is common knowledge that in
the present system of economic relations in the world there are numerous links
between individual States, links that find expression, for instance,
in the import and export process, that is to say, in the mutual exchange of
economic goods, whether raw materials, semimanufactured
goods, or finished industrial products. These links also create mutual dependence,
and as a result it would be difficult to speak, in the case of any State,
even the economically most powerful, of complete self-sufficiency or autarky.
Such a system of mutual
dependence is in itself normal. However, it can easily become an occasion for
various forms of exploitation or injustice and as a result influence the labour
policy of individual States; and finally it can influence the individual
worker, who is the proper subject of labour. For instance the highly
industrialized countries, and even more the businesses that direct on a
large scale the means of industrial production (the companies referred to as
multinational or transnational), fix the highest
possible prices for their products, while trying at the same time to fix the
lowest possible prices for raw materials or semi-manufactured goods. This is
one of the causes of an ever increasing disproportion between national incomes.
The gap between most of the richest countries and the poorest ones is not
diminishing or being stabilized but is increasing more and more, to the
detriment, obviously, of the poor countries. Evidently this must have an effect
on local labour policy and on the worker's situation in the economically
disadvantaged societies. Finding himself in a system thus conditioned, the
direct employer fixes working conditions below the objective requirements of
the workers, especially if he himself wishes to obtain the highest possible
profits from the business which he runs (or from the businesses which he runs,
in the case of a situation of "socialized" ownership of the means of
production).
It is easy to see that this
framework of forms of dependence linked with the concept of the indirect
employer is enormously extensive and complicated. It is determined, in a sense,
by all the elements that are decisive for economic life within a
given society and state, but also by much wider links and forms of
dependence. The attainment of the worker's rights cannot however be doomed to
be merely a result of economic systems which on a larger or smaller scale are
guided chiefly by the criterion of maximum profit. On the contrary, it is
respect for the objective rights of the worker - every kind of worker: manual
or intellectual, industrial or agricultural, etc.-that must constitute the
adequate and fundamental criterion for shaping the whole economy, both on
the level of the individual society and State and within the whole of the world
economic policy and of the systems of international relationships that derive
from it.
Influence in this direction
should be exercised by all the International Organizations whose concern
it is, beginning with the United Nations Organization. It appears that the
International Labour Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization of
the United Nations and other bodies too have fresh contributions to offer on
this point in particular. Within the individual States there are ministries or public
departments and also various social institutions set up for this
purpose. All of this effectively indicates the importance of the indirect
employer - as has been said above - in achieving full respect for the worker's
rights, since the rights of the human person are the key element in the whole
of the social moral order.
|