Fall/Winter 2002 TEA FOR TWO: CHINESE AND U.S. LABOR A Report from China By Gregory Mantsios

At the invitation of the All China Federation of Trade Unions (ACFTU), a six-member delegation of labor educators and members of the Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance visited the People's Republic of China.[1] Our delegation arrived in China on March 20, 2002, visited the cities of Beijing, Dalian, and Shanghai, and met with wide range of union leaders and labor educators over the course of nine days.^[2]  Our purpose as a delegation was twofold: (1) to improve mutual understanding of our respective labor movements, and (2) to explore ways in which relations between the Chinese and U.S. labor unions could be improved.

The ACFTU and the U.S. Labor Movement: What Are the Issues?

From the Chinese perspective, U.S unions are perceived to be the leading force in anti-China campaigns in the United States. Specifically identified were U.S. labor's opposition to China's admission to the World Trade Organization (WTO), its opposition to Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) status for China, and its advocacy on behalf of trade tariffs.  These positions were perceived to be in direct opposition to China's effort to lift itself out of poverty and to advance the well-being of its working class. The AFL-CIO's failure to recognize the ACFTU was a source of considerable disappointment insofar as it precluded a forum for discussing these issues or for building strategic alliances.

On the other hand, the concerns of U.S. unions generally fall into three categories: low labor standards in China, ACFTU's ties to the Chinese government and Communist Party, and human rights violations in China including the arrests of dissident union leaders.  A fourth set of concerns for many on the Left within the labor movement revolve around China's apparent surrender to global capitalism and what is perceived to be its abandonment of its avowed socialist values and principles.

About the ACFTU

Founded in 1925, the ACFTU is currently the only legally recognized union in China. It has over 103 million members and employs a full-time staff of 526,000. This makes it, by far, the largest national labor organization in the world.

The federation is organized along both industrial and geographic lines, and membership is voluntary and open to all workers whose wages constitute their principal means of livelihood. The union is funded by membership dues (.5 percent of monthly wages) and a payroll tax (2 percent) on employers in enterprises where the union is certified.^[3]  Approximately 50 percent of the urban workforce in China is unionized—over 95 percent in the state-owned enterprises and less than 20 percent in the private sector.^[4]  Organizing workers in the private sector is one of the ACFTU's highest priorities.

The ACFTU's governing body is the National Congress of Trade Unions, which meets once every five years. An elected executive committee, presidium, and secretariat govern the federation when its Congress is not in session. The ACFTU is led by its chairman, Wei Jianxing, who also serves on the six-member politburo that governs China. According to its own words, the role of the ACFTU is to "reflect and safeguard the interests of workers while safeguarding the overall interests of the people as a whole.”

During our discussions with ACFTU officials, we found that opinions varied greatly, as did the level of interest in our concerns, and the degree of sophistication in the answers to our questions. It was clear that the Chinese labor movement is far from monolithic. Yet after numerous meetings and discussion, certain common sentiments and themes emerged.

ACFTU and the Transition to the Market Economy

Shifting to a market economy, privatizing many state enterprises, and opening China to foreign investment were seen by all those we interviewed as necessary steps to lifting China out of poverty. Economic reform, they argued, took place under the guidance of a socialist leadership with a pragmatic approach to improving the quality of life for the nation's working class. The remarkable growth of the national economy and rapid modernization that China has experienced over the course of the past two decades were seen as evidence of the wisdom of this pragmatic approach.

Furthermore, Chinese unionists point with pride to their system of worker participation in the management of enterprises known as the "Workers Congress." These are organized at state enterprises and are gradually being introduced into the private sector. These "congresses" must approve all major decisions made by management and represent a significant level of workplace democracy.

ACFTU and Labor Standards

As low as they are, labor standards in China do not differ much from those in other parts of Asia or the developing world in general. But Chinese unionists proudly point to the significant improvements in living standards. Income (in real dollars) nearly tripled in both rural and urban China since the Chinese government shifted to a market economy in 1978.^[5]   China has also introduced, for the first time, a system of collective bargaining that is expected to accelerate wage increases further.

China's labor laws now mandate an 8-hour day, 40-hour week, paid vacations and maternity leave. Overtime is voluntary and overtime pay is stipulated at time-and-a-half and triple compensation for working on holidays. The laws also protect against child labor and racial and sexual discrimination. These laws apply to all employers —state and private—within China's borders.

Not only has the ACFTU drafted labor legislation and succeeded in passing progressive new laws to protect workers, it is also an important force in helping to enforce the law. The Daily Worker—the newspaper of the ACFTU and second largest daily in the nation—has exposed poor working conditions throughout the country and is increasingly exposing corporate violators of the law. The ACFTU is training its staff and rank and file members in the law and encouraging them to report violations to the authorities. It is pressing for fines and jail time for corporate violators of the law. Seeking permanent and systemic legal remedies to abuses, it is increasingly litigating cases on behalf of workers.

While much of the safety net provided to Chinese workers in the past (what was referred to as the iron rice bowl) is now gone, many of the services previously provided by the state are now provided either by a social insurance system or by the union. Employers (and workers) are required to participate in an insurance plan that provides benefits for retired workers, the ill, the injured, the unemployed, and women on maternity leave.^[6] The union also provides a wide range of services. Asked about housing and the shift away from public housing previously provided by the work units—in the past 70 percent lived in public housing, today it is less than 30 percent—those we spoke to pointed to the government-subsidized low housing prices and the higher wages that now allow workers to take pride in owning their own apartments.

Role of the ACFTU in Relation to the Communist Party and the Government

Critics of the ACFTU maintain that it cozies up to employers and fails to act independently of either the party or the government. Asked about this, one of our hosts tossed back the question. "What, after all, should be the primary role of the union?  Is it to be in opposition to government and employers or to represent the interests of workers?" The interests of workers at this point, he maintained, are better served by working with employers and government officials to spur the economy to greater heights. Besides, most unionists around the world aspire to "one big union" and hope to see their union share power in governing their nation. The ACFTU, he explained, is part of the Communist Party and accepts its leadership in governing China:  as a result, the union is in a position to represent the interests of workers at the highest level of government. He pointed to hundreds of laws drafted by the ACFTU over the past twenty years to protect workers, countless examples of ACFTU publicly exposing wrongdoing on the part of employers, and ongoing ACFTU battles to defend workers at the worksite.

During our visit to China, the role of the union in relation to the state was being called into question in northern provinces. Unauthorized strikes against state-owned enterprises had been reported, and a number of strikers had been arrested by local authorities.  Angry about layoffs, back pay, and inadequate state benefits, workers were clearly protesting state policies and practices. The ACFTU is not known for its militancy and the unauthorized strikes were seen by many as a direct challenge both to the government and the union itself. When questioned about the ACFTU's position on these strikes, union officials gave us answers that illustrated not only the union’s ambiguous role in China, but the ambivalence of some of its leaders toward that role. According to one official, “The Chair of the ACFTU made it clear that the union sides with the workers, even when a strike is unauthorized. At the same time, the role of the union is to convince workers to be reasonable, help reach a settlement, and get everyone back to work building the Chinese economy.” Another official said, "Strikes aren't bad, it’s just that legal cases are more effective: by taking grievances to the courts, resolutions and improvements are institutionalized and apply throughout the provinces.”  Another leader readily acknowledged that the wildcat strikes were a result of a poor public policy, legitimate demands of workers, an inadequate dispute settlement system, and ineffective local union leadership. One official told us, "Union power comes not from government, nor from the ability of the union to persuade employers, but from the workers’ ability to withhold labor."  Another leader said it was just a matter of time before the labor movement in China would view strikes not as an aberration but as an important tool to fight capitalism. Still another argued that with the increasing shift from state to private employers and the emergence of more conflict laden labor-capital relations, the union was becoming both more aggressive and more independent of the state.

ACFTU and Human Rights

Our discussions on human rights were limited primarily to the rights of dissident workers to act independently of their unions. In this regard, our hosts assured us that workers, with or without a union, were free to make economic demands and to protest economic injustices. At the same time, we were told that worker discontent was sometimes manipulated by those who are politically motivated to overthrow the government. This, we were reminded, was a criminal activity and would lead to detainment or imprisonment.

China is a signatory to a number of UN human rights covenants, including one upholding the right to strike.  China's labor laws provide workers with the right to join a union and to elect and remove their union leaders. Under China's labor law, workers cannot be dismissed for engaging in union activity, anyone has a right to investigate conditions and grievances, and unions have a responsibility to present the demands of workers engaged in a work stoppage.

As for human rights issues in general, the Chinese response is usually threefold. One, human rights standards are selectively and hypocritically applied to China for the purpose of retaining capital investment within one's own borders. Two, the West conveniently defines human rights too narrowly in order to mask its own human rights violations.[7]  Three, human rights conditions in China have improved and will continue to do so with the emerging economic pluralism.

Does It Wash?

Members of our delegation were neither economists nor China scholars.  This, along with the brevity of our visit in China and our limited exposure to people while we were there, makes us reluctant to pass judgment on a society and culture so different from our own. Nonetheless, we all considered ourselves engaged and relatively informed observers who, after nine full days of meetings, were left with some fairly strong impressions. For most of us, the answer to the question, "Does it wash?" was both yes and no.

It makes no sense to either demonize or glorify China—past or present. China is clearly experiencing an economic boom of enormous magnitude. The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of China is estimated to be $4.5 trillion—quadruple what it was in 1978. Those of us who had been to China before found its cities—especially Beijing—transformed. Gone were the throngs of bicycles and many of the old, drab, gray brick one-story housing units. In their place were hordes of automobiles, an elaborate system of elevated highways, a multitude of modern (and air-conditioned) high rise  apartment complexes, and a skyline with architecturally stunning structures. 

One city we visited, Dalian, had been a fishing village only eighteen years earlier. Declared an economic development zone in 1984, the city's population has quickly grown to a mind-boggling 5.5 million people. It has attracted $10 billion in foreign investment—mostly from Japan—and now boasts fifteen international hotels, two universities, modern architectural structures, cultural halls and museums, open air spaces, and green promenades.

On previous trips such basic amenities as refrigerators, telephones, and copy machines were in very short supply. On this trip, we saw a proliferation of consumer goods (including high tech products), retail shops, and restaurants. At the same time, however, we saw beggars in the street and people rummaging through garbage dumps in Beijing. The level of poverty appeared to us nowhere near what we have seen in other developing nations, but it was there nonetheless. Clearly the economic boom was leaving people behind and exacerbating social and economic inequities.

Questioned about the consequences of shifting to a market economy and the inequities it is fostering, one union leader responded this way,  "Sure there was greater equality in China in the past: in the past we were all equally poor."  Another shrugged off the differences between socialism and capitalism saying, “As long as the conditions of workers improve, it doesn’t matter.” He added, “We realize that some must get rich before others”.[8]

What is seen by westerners from both the political Left and the Right as a reversal of China's ideological stance is dismissed by the Chinese we spoke with as a consistent and logical development. The Communist Party, we were reminded, still maintains ultimate power in China and continues to act on behalf of the long-term interests of the working class. These responses are not easily rejected in light of the very real gains in national wealth and the significant reduction in the overall poverty level.^[9]

But as westerners who are all too familiar with the arguments of trickle-down economics, the promise of prosperity for all through unfettered capitalism fell on rather skeptical ears. Our concern was both for those left behind by the current economic boom, as well as for those who will be hurt when the economic bubble inevitably bursts. Poverty in China, although reduced, remains at 65 million; unemployment is in the double digits; and the new safety net now in place is nowhere near what it was in the past. While wages have increased significantly, so too have costs, and the minimum wage in China is less than half what some observers consider a living wage.^[10]  Economists believe that the significant gains in reducing poverty in the 1980s have now stagnated in rural areas and have actually reversed themselves in urban areas.^[11] 

All this is in the context of an extraordinary economic boom that has made some people in China very wealthy very fast. There are now several thousand households with an annual income exceeding one million^[12]—an extraordinary amount of money in a country where the per capita income is less than $1,000 per year.^[13]  This new stratum of super rich stands in sharp contrast to the rest of the population and is composed mostly of private entrepreneurs and their senior managers.  During the 1970s, economists believed China to be one of the most egalitarian societies in the world; it is now considered one of the more unequal countries in the region and among developing countries generally.^[14] This extraordinarily rapid and discouraging retreat from equality is likely to lead to further class polarization and popular resentment.

Furthermore, we were deeply concerned that the drive for profit and the new commodity culture are producing a moral vacuum in a society where issues of equality and the public good were previously part of the public discourse. As one member of our delegation so aptly put it to a rather sympathetic Chinese leader, "The market, after all, has no morals." As a delegation we were left with the question: economic development at what price?

The Nature of China's Unions

The ACFTU is an important advocate on behalf of workers: it has successfully drafted progressive labor legislation, defended the rights of workers on the job, negotiated collective bargaining agreements, promoted democratic management, and provided essential services to its members. At the same time, the union's ties to the Communist Party and the government put it in a compromised position.

The ACFTU's dual set of goals—representing and safeguarding workers while maintaining harmonious relations in the interest of economic development—are not always reconcilable. Development and harmony may mean jobs and collaborative management, but as one Chinese labor leader we interviewed put it, "Economic development also requires stability." And industrial stability may well require ignoring or suppressing worker demands and worker militancy in the interest of productivity. While most of the labor leaders we met with seemed quite comfortable wearing two hats (e.g., the head of the Dalian labor federation we met with also served as secretary-treasurer of the city's Business Development Council), we couldn't help but wonder how their rank-and-file members felt about the dual role of their leaders.

The ACFTU's relationship to the Communist Party and the government poses a similar set of issues. On the national level, the ACFTU's seat on the politburo clearly provides it with unprecedented access and influence. At the regional and local level, its ties to the party and state enhance the union’s ability to persuade government agencies to intervene on behalf of workers.

Yet, all does not seem well with this relationship. The position of the union within the government and the Communist Party does not appear to be strong and the relationship seems to yield only limited gains. "Why can't the ACFTU simply use its influence in government to insure a higher standard of living for workers, stronger enforcement of the law, and a higher union density rate?" asked one member of our delegation. The reasons we were given were threefold: competing forces within the party and the government; a real fear of scaring off investors; and the ACFTU is simply not that strong within the party and state apparatus.

Is the ACFTU playing out an inside/outside strategy to the best advantage of its members or is it serving as an instrument of the status quo? Our impression was that it was both. The union is making progress in eliminating management's and government's less tenable practices, while at the same time serving as a conciliatory force. It is both caught in the middle and thriving in the middle.

This dilemma is not unique to the Chinese. The U.S. labor movement, past and present, has had to struggle with similar issues and certainly has not been immune to accusations of colluding with employers, serving as the instrument of the Democratic party, and doing the bidding of the U.S. State Department. Anyone who plays an inside/outside game in the labor movement has to question when he or she is representing the interests of labor in the councils of industry and government or representing the interests of industry and government in the councils of labor.^[15]

The ACFTU is not likely to come into serious conflict with the Communist Party or the Chinese government any time soon, but its role in China is changing. On the one hand, privatization has brought membership losses, as well as competing forces into the political and economic arenas in which it operates. The union is increasingly finding itself coming up against not public officials, but private entrepreneurs and multinational corporations. On the other hand, this is creating both more space for the union to operate and new opportunities for it to function as the representative of working class. "It hasn't been easy defining the role of the union in this transition period," said one Chinese labor leader. "We are not yet satisfied with our role and we are trying to redefine ourselves in this new environment."

Labor Rights/Human Rights

China's international agreements as well as its domestic labor and trade union laws provide important rights and protections. Workers in China have the right to join a union, to elect and remove union leaders democratically, and to strike against an employer;^[16]  China's labor laws limit the workweek, define the rates of compensation, restrict managerial prerogatives, and specify worker protections. Yet these laws are routinely ignored. Chinese and Western press regularly report on forced overtime, physical abuse of workers, and conditions of indentured servitude.[17] Much of this occurs because of unscrupulous employers and/or corrupt public officials (a large problem in and of itself).  But there is something systemic about all this as well. With provinces and local governments desperately competing with each other to attract foreign investment, even honest officials—often with the consent of workers themselves—have an incentive to overlook workers' rights and ignore environmental hazards.

Human rights are routinely ignored as well. Mindful of both the upheaval caused by its cultural revolution and the chaos that led to the dissolution of the Soviet Union when it opened its doors and embraced a market economy, China’s national leaders are so fearful of social unrest that any perceived threats to Communist Party rule are quickly squashed. So while the ACFTU and economic protests are considered legitimate, political protests and independent unions are not.

China’s accusation that too much of US-China relations have been encumbered by cold war baggage, racism, undemocratic practices, and the application of double standards is not without merit. And charges about our own role—as a nation and a union movement—in supporting repressive regimes and corporatist unions when doing so is in our economic interests, suggests we need to adapt a more uniform approach to combating human rights violations wherever they exist.  Yet ACFTU participation in governing China means it must bear responsibility for human and labor rights violations in China. All the union leaders we spoke to recognized the need for stricter enforcement of labor laws, many acknowledged the need to improve human rights, and some predicted the flourishing of political democracy.

Capitalism Vs. Socialism

The shift to a market economy has brought much needed capital investment to China: nearly half of the nation's gross national product is now produced in the private sector. Although China has developed a complex system of joint ownership for many of the ventures established within its borders, the nation as a whole has turned over a large segment of its economy to foreign investors, many of whom have a long record of indifference to environmental concerns and a history of exploitative relations with their workforce. This leaves China's resources and its workers open to further abuse. 

Why did the Chinese government privatize so many of its state-owned enterprises? The dominant thinking in the Communist Party is that too many of these enterprises have lost money because of low productivity and a lack of clarity in assigning rights and responsibilities to workers and managers. These enterprises need to be incorporated and privatized in order to limit the liability of the state and to establish and enforce higher productivity standards. Others argue that responsibilities have been perfectly clear but that the problem is mismanagement, corruption, and a system that encourages short-term rather than long-term gains (leading to decapitalization, inefficiency, outdated production methods). They call for greater efficiency in management. Still others argue that the problem is a lack of real worker participation, public accountability, and economic democracy. They call for greater workers’ control over enterprises.^[18]

The Communist Party's tight control over the nation's decision-making process may be threatened from two sources. On the one hand, it may well face increased protests and disaffection if too many people are left behind and the government continues to dismantle its social welfare programs and reduce the rewards that come with its former socialized economy. On the other hand, Communist Party control may be eroded by the very corporations it has wooed and the emerging class of wealthy individuals who will inevitably use their vast resources not only to garner more wealth, but to increase their influence over the policies and practices that regulate China's economy and govern its political life. Without greater democratic control of policy making, China's hybrid system of "market socialism" may end up preserving the worst aspect of communism, i.e., centralized political control, while adapting the worst element of capitalism, i.e., unrestrained domination of society by market forces.

At a Crossroad

The delegation left China with ambivalent feelings. We met many extraordinary labor leaders and educators, and we could not help but share in the enthusiasm they expressed for the economic growth and technological advances their developing nation was experiencing. Yet so many unresolved issues remained. The ambivalence we felt is not unlike what we so often feel about our own nation or our own labor movement.

We also left China with a new appreciation for the complexity and enormity of the challenges the Chinese face. About this we had little ambivalence. We were keenly aware of how little, we as Americans, really know and understand about this great culture and vast land. We were in awe of how much dramatic change this nation and its people have experienced in the course of the last one hundred years: it has moved from feudalism to colonial rule to foreign occupation to communist revolution to cultural revolution to socialist market in the course of a lifetime, and it is still in flux.

Circumstances in China today are such that neither China nor its labor movement can be ignored. Whether or not we in the U.S. agreed with the course China and its unions have set for themselves and whatever we might have felt about China in relation to U.S. trade policies, it would be unwise to isolate the Chinese labor movement. U.S. and Chinese unions need to be in a dialogue, and it is time for the AFL-CIO and the ACFTU to establish relations.

The AFL-CIO should establish relations with the ACFTU for a number of reasons:

(1)  With its spectacular growth over the past two decades, China now stands as one of the largest economies in the world and is expected to total the GDP of the United States by the year 2020.^[19] With a total population of 1.26 billion, China is home to more than one in every five people on the face of the planet.

China's growth is not happening in isolation but in the context of the global economy. It is both exporting and importing at a rapid rate, and its role in the global economy is growing to that of an economic powerhouse. For better or worse, China has done exactly what the United States has been urging it to do for half a century: abandon centralized planning and shift to a market economy. It is attracting thousands of foreign firms and like so much of the rest of the world, it is being forced to find a balance between higher labor standards for its workforce and attracting and retaining capital investment. As it is integrated into the global economy, conditions of work in China will increasingly be evolving in the context of capitalist labor relations. The U.S. government and U.S. business organizations are active in China and are defining the terms of global engagement with China. Organized labor, too, needs to be at the table.

(2) The ACFTU is neither monolithic, nor oblivious to the criticism leveled against it, nor closed to new ideas.  The labor movement in China, like that in the United States has elements that seem lethargic and elements that appear very dynamic, leaders who are accommodationists and narrow in focus, and leaders who are militant and visionary. Much of the character of the labor movement in China depends on region, the personality of local leader, and the tradition of militancy among the rank-and-file.

Many of the leaders we met with, raised the same concerns we did about the state of labor affairs in China, themselves. In fact, almost all of the issues identified in this report—poverty, unemployment, poor working conditions, inadequate enforcement of labor laws, an inadequate social security system, the incentive to disregard of workers right in order to attract investments, the polarization of rich and poor, and the need for political reform—were raised by one or more of the Chinese union leaders themselves. "These are all issues we too are discussing," said one leader.

Chinese union leaders see room for improvement and appear to be grappling with ideas. More than one union leader said there was an emerging interest within the Chinese labor movement in the German model of codetermination. The director of the ACFTU's legal department said that his department was translating and studying labor laws from over one hundred countries. Most of those we spoke to were anxious to exchange ideas about both values and strategies.

As Chinese labor relations increasingly become a battle between labor and capital, there will be increasing opportunities for unions in China to transform themselves. By establishing relations with ACFTU, the AFL-CIO will strengthen those within the Chinese federation who want to see progressive change.

(3) The ACFTU may help preserve the status quo in China (many on the Left say the same thing about unions in the United States), but it is also an important force for change.  China itself is far from monolithic. While there is only one real political party, the party has to contend with a multitude of forces inside of China, including a rising capitalist class. China's pursuit of capital, technology, markets, and a favorable geopolitical environment means that the system is subject to a variety of forces on the international level as well. Within the Communist Party itself are strong factions and movements and a diversity of opinions about China's future direction: some of these factions are prolabor and others are promanagement. A stronger labor movement is critical to China's future—especially during this period of leadership transition.

Ironically, the unauthorized strikes in the north which on the one hand reflect poorly on the ACFTU, may also be giving the union more leverage. Both the party and the government may see the union as an important alternative to spontaneous labor unrest. Several people we interviewed told us that the Communist Party is increasingly recognizing the importance of a strong labor movement in a market economy and capitalist labor relations.

Ties between the Chinese and U.S. labor movements may well make for a stronger ACFTU with more influence in the Communist Party and the government, and with a better chance of leading China in a more progressive direction. The ACFTU may, in fact, be China's best hope, not only for workers’ rights but for reversing the gap between rich and poor, adopting a more progressive social security system, and opening up China's political system.

(4)  Establishing relations with the ACFTU doesn't mean endorsing its policies. The AFL-CIO currently has relations with a number of unions whose policies and practices it certainly would not want to endorse. The corrupt and gangsteresque Confederation of Mexican Workers (CTM), until recently the "official" union of Mexico, is just one such example.

Nor does it mean abandoning exiled labor activists or ending relations with independent worker organizations. National unions in Germany and Japan maintain ties with both the ACFTU and the independent labor organizations based in Hong Kong. The AFL-CIO itself has pursued a similar dual relations strategy in Mexico, South Korea, and Indonesia.

The AFL-CIO isolation of the ACFTU isn't helping Chinese workers (nor is it helping U.S. workers for that matter). There is not much evidence that a massive, more militant independent labor movement is likely to erupt, nor that the AFL-CIO refusal to recognize the ACFTU is likely to impel such an eruption. Establishing ties with the ACFTU does not discredit the independent forces. There are, in fact, reformers both inside and outside the ACFTU. Conditions are such now that the ACFTU has gained more breathing room and is more open to transforming itself into a more militant and independent tradition. A dual strategy that recognizes both the ACFTU and the independent union formations is the best way the AFL-CIO can help workers in China.

(5)  Developing strategic alliances between the ACFTU and the AFL-CIO will enable the two labor movements to advance the interests of workers in the global economy. As one Chinese labor leader put it, "there needs to more discussion so that the international labor movement can develop, by consensus, a strategy for dealing with globalization." This can be accomplished with meetings among leaders, jointly sponsored conferences, and worker-to-worker exchanges. One Chinese labor leader suggested that the conversation begin with a discussion of common values. Another emphasized the importance of sharing information about corporations so that corporate policies and practices are made more transparent and corporations themselves are made more accountable. There is plenty of room for these two organizations to learn from each other and to provide each other with technical assistance.

Links among unions that operate in the same industries, or who share the same employers, will allow unions to support each other in negotiations, coordinate demands (recognizing regional differences), and develop joint strategies for empowering workers. Eventually such coordination can lead to global agreements with multinational corporations.

The two federations and their affiliates can also work together to pressure shareholders. (Yes, there are institutional and individual shareholders in China: the Shanghai and Shexhen stock exchanges now list over one thousand publicly traded companies.) This may prove very useful to U.S unions currently engaged in corporate campaigns and to Chinese unions that may engage in such campaigns in the future.

As we begin the 21st century, the global economy will increasingly entwine U.S. and Chinese workers. This is a time of enormous transition as these two labor federations endeavor to understand and respond to new challenges. Our delegation left China convinced more than ever that the AFL-CIO and its counterpart, the ACFTU, need to establish working relations if the international labor movement is to develop an effective strategy for confronting globalization.[20]