Franklin Vargo 

Vice President 

International Economic Affairs 

Leading Innovation. Creating Opportunity. Pursuing Progress. 

1331 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20004 P 202•637•3144 F 202•637•3182 www.nam.org 

 

December 8, 2010 

The Honorable Susan L. Kurland 

Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE, West Building 

Washington, DC 20590 

Dear Ms. Kurland: 

We are concerned that one of the issues which has been under consideration by the 

Secretary’s Future of Aviation Advisory Committee is a requirement that the International Labor 

Organization (ILO) Core Conventions be incorporated into future open skies agreements. The 

National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) believes that international economic engagement 

and strong efforts to eliminate market barriers overseas and at home are more important than 

ever to the revitalization of America’s economy and new opportunities for American workers and 

industries. 

The NAM has been a leading advocate for economic policies, including international 

trade agreements, which open markets to United States businesses, provides expanded 

opportunities for economic growth at home and abroad, and creates jobs here in the United 

States. However, we oppose requiring the inclusion of extraneous provisions, like the ILO’s 

Core Conventions, in international economic agreements that are designed with those policies 

in mind. Our reasons are several. 

The United States has ratified two of the eight core conventions and already abides by 

the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work. The Unites States has a 

mature labor system which protects the rights of collective bargaining, the freedom of 

association, and protection against child labor. Five of the ILO Core Conventions, which have 

not been ratified by the U.S. Senate, have been found to conflict directly with United States law 

and practice. For example, Convention 98 would require the expansion of the scope of 

bargaining in the federal and other public sectors. Convention 29 conflicts with the ability of 

some states to subcontract the operation of prison facilities to the private sector. Convention 

138 regarding minimum age conflicts with varying state laws and regulations as well as federal 

law related to areas of youth employment. Finally, Convention 87 would alter fundamental 

principles of United States labor law based on the rights of individual employees. 

Aside from those concerns which are directly related to the core conventions, we do not 

see the benefit of including these provisions in open skies agreements intended to promote 

greater access to foreign markets for United States goods and services. As we have seen from 
The Honorable Susan L. Kurland 

December 8, 2010 

Page 2 

previous experience, including these kinds of additional labor requirements in international 

economic agreements makes these agreements with foreign governments much more difficult 

to achieve. Having no agreement at all is in no one’s interest. 

For these reasons, we strongly oppose any proposal that would recommend including 

the ILO’s Core Conventions as a standard provision of international economic agreements. 

Sincerely, 

Frank Vargo 

FV/dg 

By Fax: 202-493-2005