On Sat, 3 Mar 2001, Doug Henwood wrote:
> ... I think the effects of trade are generally exaggerated, but
> they're appealing because they locate the source of trouble abroad
> instead of within our own economy and poliitcs. Besides, it's an
> empirical fact that the U.S. working class did better in terms of both
> employment and earnings in the 7 years since NAFTA took effect than it
> did in the previous 7...
Doug--
Have you discussed the study by Kate Bronfenbrenner of Cornell, "The Effects of Plant Closing or Threat of Plant Closing on the Right of Workers to Organize," commissioned by the NAFTA Labor Secretariat? She summarized it in "We'll Close! Plant Closings, Plant-Closing Threats, Union Organizing and NAFTA," Multinational Monitor 18:3 (March 1997) <http://www.essential.org/monitor/hyper/mm0397.04.html>.
Apparently the full study was released by Canada and Mexico, but the Clinton Administration initially refused to do so. (I don't know if they ever did.) One can see why. The study indicates that NAFTA had a big effect on strikes: (a) half of all union organizing efforts are disrupted by employer threats to transfer production abroad; and (b) when organizing was successful, plants were closed at triple the pre-NAFTA rate.
--CGE