Fung, O'Rourke, and Sabel might retort that they are concerned with firms linked to global production, and that a strategy to curb some practices would be better than nothing. They must answer two standard objections. Surely, the basic principles of RLS should be equity, equality, democracy, and accountability. For example, there is no law in the United States to allow workers a toilet break when needed. This is rarely on any list of bad practices.
Labor standards are normative, and are a package or nothing.
RLS puts heavy emphasis on regulations, monitoring, and sanctions. The language is at best paternalistic. This is out of step with the time, where incentives to good practice are more likely to elicit support. There is also a moral hazard in the proposals. The authors do not address how to make NGOs and auditors accountable .