No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Twenty-Fifth Session of the International Labor Conference
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 12 April 2017
Abstract
The 25th Session of the International Labor Conference opened on June 8 in Geneva and ended on June 28. Appropriately enough, its President was Dr. Edmond Schultess, of Switzerland, a Federal Councillor and chief of the economic department of the Swiss Government since 1925. This was the first time a Swiss national had been honored with this position and the appropriateness of the election lay in the fact that just fifty years ago Switzerland sent out a renewed invitation to an international labor conference which led directly to the convocation of the Conference in Berlin in 1890. Figures in the Provisional Record of the 25th Session list 45 countries represented at the session through 154 delegates and 198 advisers, for a total of 352 persons in attendance.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © by the American Society of International Law 1939
References
1 Lowe, B. E., The International Protection of Labor (New York, 1935), pp. 26–27 Google Scholar.
2 Prov. Rec., Int. Labor Conf., 25th Session, Geneva, No. 2, p. 2; No. 4, p. ii; and No. 9, p. 1.
3 For a brief summary of the action of the 24th Session, see Simpson, Smith, this Journal , Vol. 32 (1938), p. 801 Google Scholar ff. For a longer summary, see International Labor Review, Vol. XXXVIII, No. 3 (September, 1938), pp. 301–375. See also, Smith Simpson, “The I. L. 0. Month by Month,” American Federationist, Vol. 45, No. 8 (August, 1938), pp. 821–830 at pp. 825–828.
4 The 24th Session of the Conference considered that in view of the discussion which had been held in the Technical Tripartite Meeting on the Coal Mining Industry from May 2–10, 1938, a single discussion by the Conference itself would be adequate. Int. Labor Conf., 24th Session, Geneva, 1938, Record of Proceedings, pp. 625–639 (Report of the Committee on Hours of Work), especially at p. 638; p. 339 ff. (discussion in the Conference); p. 438 (record vote on the placing on the agenda of the 1939 Session of the Conference of the question of the reduction of hours in coal mines). For discussion of the utilization of a preparatory technical meeting as a first discussion by the Conference itself, see Report of Committee on Standing Orders, ibid., p. 427 ff.
5 Paxt II, Sec. 2 (2). The text of the recommendation is printed in Prov. Rec., id., No. 20, pp. i-ix.
6 Prov. Rec., id., No. 21, p. 314. See the discussion at the 24th Session of the Conference on the Report of the Committee on Technical Education, Rec. of Proc., id., p. 395 S.
7 Part III, Sec. 3 (1).
8 Part IV, Sec. 5 (1).
9 Id. (2).
10 Id., Sec. 6 (1).
11 Id. (2).
12 Id., Sec. 10 (1).
13 Id., Part VII, Sec. 16 (1).
14 Id., Part VIII.
15 See the preamble of the recommendation and comment by the reporter, loc. cit.
16 Prov. Rec., id., No. 21, pp. 315–316.
17 Ibid., p. 319.
18 Sec. 3 (2) (b). The text of the recommendation is printed in ibid., No. 22, pp. i-iv.
19 Id. (d).
20 Id. (e).
21 Id. (f).
22 Id. (h).
23 Id. (i).
24 Id., Sec. 2 (2).
25 Ibid., No. 27, pp. 372–373.
26 See the reply of the United States Government to the questionnaire of the International Labor Office on this subject, Regulation of Contracts of Employment of Indigenous Workers, Report II, Int. Labor Conf., 25th Session (Geneva, 1939), pp. 3–4. However, objection was taken to this question on the agenda by certain women’s groups in the United States on the ground that the definition of “indigenous worker” in the proposed convention would apply to Indian women on reservations in the United States, and to women in Alaska, Hawaii, the Philippines, Guam and other overseas possessions of the United States and there was no need to regulate by international action “the right of any American women to contract for their labor.” From mimeographed statement supplied by Senator Arthur Capper. Because of this objection, Senator Capper introduced in the Senate a resolution requesting the United States delegation to the Conference to oppose the convention. S. Res. 82,76th Cong., 1st Sess. The issue was solved by action of the International Labor Office excluding women from the protection of the convention. New York Times, April 3, 1939, 17:5; also, text of the draft convention.
27 Minutes of the 32nd Session of the Governing Body (International Labor Office, Geneva), pp. 288–290.
28 International Labor Conference, 14th Session, 1930, Record of Proceedings, p. 333 (vote in the Conference).
29 The text of the draft convention is found in ibid., 14th Session, pp. 671–684.
30 The text of the recommendation will be found in ibid., pp. 684–685. For the discussion at the Conference concerning the recommendation, see ibid., pp. 337–338.
31 For the discussion at the 12th Session, see ibid., 12th Session, p. 384 ff.
32 For text of the resolution adopted, see ibid., 12th Session, p. 1058.
33 For text, see ibid., 16th Session, p. 841.
34 Minutes of the Governing Body, 61st Session (February, 1933), p. 22; 66th Session (April, 1934), p. 23 ff.
35 Int. Labor Conf., 20th Session, Geneva, 1936, Rec. of Proc., p. 399 (text).
36 Int. Labor Conf., 25th Session, 1939, Prov. Rec., No. 26, p. 365.
37 Art. 3 (1). Text of the convention is to be found in ibid., No. 20, pp. x-xxiii.
38 Id., Art. 4 (1).
39 Id., Art. 5 (1).
40 Id., Art. 6 (1).
41 Id., Art. 6 (6).
42 Id., Art. 7 (1).
43 Id., Arts. 13–15.
44 Sec. 2. Text of the recommendation is found in ibid., No. 20, pp. xxiii-xxiv.
45 Art. 2. Text of the draft convention is to be found in ibid., No. 20, pp. xxiv-xxviii.
46 Text of the recommendation is found in ibid., No. 20, p. xxviii.
47 For a useful discussion of the problem, see the memorandum submitted by the International Labor Office to the Assembly of the League of Nations, reprinted in International Labor Review, Vol. XXXVI, No. 6 (December, 1937), p. 721 ff.
48 Art. I (a) (i). For text of the draft convention see Prov. Rec., id., No. 22, pp. v-xL
49 Id., Art. 2 (1).
50 Id., Art. 3 (1).
51 Id., Art. 5.
52 Id., Art. 6.
53 Id., Art. 7.
54 Art. II, Sec. 2. Text of the recommendation is found in Prov. Rec., id., No. 22, pp. xi-xvii.
55 Art. III.
56 Sec. 1. Text, ibid., No. 22, pp. xvii-xix.
57 Postponement of the question had been suggested by the International Labor Office after replies of governments to its questionnaire had shown the reluctance of many governments to assume the obligations of the proposed draft convention. See Generalization of the Reduction of Hours of Work in Industry, Commerce and Offices, Report V, International Labor Conference, 25th Session (Geneva, 1939), pp. 140–141. Postponement of the question was voted by the Conference by 90 votes to 2. Prov. Rec., id., No. 6, p. 44. The only objection to the postponement voiced on the floor was by Mr. Langstone, government delegate of New Zealand. Ibid., No. 6, pp. 30–32. Messrs. Hallsworth, workers’ delegate of the British Empire, and Jouhaux, workers’ delegate of France, expressed for the Workers’ Group its reluctant acquiescence in the postponement in order to impose no obstacle, actual or psychological, to the rearmament of the nations threatened with aggression. Ibid., No. 6, pp. 33–38. The reluctance of governments to support the proposed draft convention, however, was not due entirely, or even mainly, to armament conditions, but rather to the fact that they had not yet fully accepted the 48-hour week and were therefore not prepared to go so far as a general 40-hour week.
58 The Office in its Blue Report submitted to the 25th Session made no suggestion that consideration of this question be suspended. However, the committee of the Conference on hours of work in coal mines came to the conclusion that it would be best “not to proceed at the present session with the examination of the reduction of hours of work in coal mines, although the question will be kept before the International Labor Organization,” and so reported to the Conference. Prov. Rec., id., No. 9, p. v, esp. at pp. xiii-xiv. The Conference accepted this decision. This question, therefore, is not considered to be in exactly the same status as the generalization of hours. The latter is postponed; the former is only adjourned. The distinction seems one of tactical importance only.
59 Art. 5. Text, ibid., No. 23, pp. i-xi.
60 Id., Art. 7.
61 For definition of “persons,” see id., Art. 1.
62 Id., Art. 15.
63 Id., Art. 14 (1).
64 For text of the recommendation see ibid., No. 23, pp. xii-xiii.
65 For text, see ibid., No. 23, pp. xiii-xiv.
66 For text, see ibid., No. 23, pp. xiv-xv.
67 For text, see ibid., No. 23, pp. xv-xvi.
68 Czechoslovakia and Albania.
69 Report of the Director, International Labor Conference, 25th Session (International Labor Office, Geneva, 1939), Foreword.
70 Debate on the Report of the Director, Prov. Rec., id,.. Nos. 6–13.
71 Mr. Ferguson, government delegate of Ireland, ibid., No. 10, p. 194.
72 Loc. cit., p. 9.
73 Loc. cit., p. 9.
74 Ibid., p. 10.
75 Simpson, Smith, “The I. L. O.,” American Federationist, Vol. 46, No. 2 (February, 1939), p. 181 ff., at p. 183 Google Scholar.
76 See remarks of Mr. Mertens, of Belgium, and Mr. De La Luz Leon, of Cuba, Prov. Rec., id., No. 7, p. 90, and No. 11, p. 230.
77 Ibid., No. 5.
78 Report of the Director, 24th Session, p. 57.
79 Report of the Director, 25th Session, p. 6.
80 Debate on the Report of the Director, 25th Session, loc. cit.
81 Prov. Rec., id., No. 8, p. 128.
82 Ibid., No. 7, p. 91.
83 Ibid.
84 Ibid., p. 89.
85 Ibid., No. 8, p. 128; No. 9, p. 153; No. 10, p. 199; No. 11, p. 229.
86 Ibid., No. 10, pp. 182–183.
87 Ibid., No. 6, p. 72; No. 7, pp. 87, 98; No. 10, pp. 180, 187, 194, 203, 213; No. 11, p. 231; No. 13, p. 267.
88 Ibid., No. 10, p. 194.
89 Ibid.
90 Ibid., No. 11, p. 220.
91 Ibid., No. 6, p. 64.
92 Ibid., No. 7, pp. 74, 99.
93 Ibid., p. 95.
94 Ibid., No. 10, p. 196.