International Labour Organization

International Labour Organization — latest news, discussion & facts — IJR

Origins

It is one of the first specialized agencies for the UN. While the ILO was established as an agency of the League of Nations following World War I, its founders had made great strides in social thought and action before 1919. The core members all knew one another from earlier private professional and ideological networks, in which they exchanged knowledge, experiences, and ideas on social policy. Pre-war "epistemic communities", such as the International Association for Labour Legislation (IALL), founded in 1900, and political networks, such as the socialist Second International, were a decisive factor in the institutionalization of international labour politics.

In the post-World War I euphoria, the idea of a "makeable society" was an important catalyst behind the social engineering of the ILO architects. As a new discipline, international labour law became a useful instrument for putting social reforms into practice. The utopian ideals of the founding members—social justice and the right to decent work—were changed by diplomatic and political compromises made at the Paris Peace Conference of 1919, showing the ILO's balance between idealism and pragmatism.

Over the course of the First World War, the international labour movement proposed a comprehensive programme of protection for the working classes, conceived as compensation for labour's support during the war. Post-war reconstruction and the protection of labour unions occupied the attention of many nations during and immediately after World War I. In Great Britain, the Whitley Commission, a subcommittee of the Reconstruction Commission, recommended in its July 1918 Final Report that "industrial councils" be established throughout the world. The British Labour Party had issued its own reconstruction programme in the document titled Labour and the New Social Order. In February 1918, the third Inter-Allied Labour and Socialist Conference (representing delegates from Great Britain, France, Belgium and Italy) issued its report, advocating an international labour rights body, an end to secret diplomacy, and other goals. And in December 1918, the American Federation of labour (AFL) issued its own distinctively apolitical report, which called for the achievement of numerous incremental improvements via the collective bargaining process.

As the war drew to a close, two competing visions for the post-war world emerged. The first was offered by the International Federation of Trade Unions (IFTU), which called for a meeting in Bern, Switzerland, in July 1919. The Bern meeting would consider both the future of the IFTU and the various proposals which had been made in the previous few years. The IFTU also proposed including delegates from the Central Powers as equals. Samuel Gompers, president of the AFL, boycotted the meeting, wanting the Central Powers delegates in a subservient role as an admission of guilt for their countries' role in bringing about war. Instead, Gompers favoured a meeting in Paris which would consider President Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points only as a platform. Despite the American boycott, the Bern meeting went ahead as scheduled. In its final report, the Bern Conference demanded an end to wage labour and the establishment of socialism. If these ends could not be immediately achieved, then an international body attached to the League of Nations should enact and enforce legislation to protect workers and trade unions.

Meanwhile, the Paris Peace Conference sought to dampen public support for communism. Subsequently, the Allied Powers agreed that clauses should be inserted into the emerging peace treaty protecting labour unions and workers' rights, and that an international labour body be established to help guide international labour relations in the future. The advisory Commission on International Labour Legislation was established by the Peace Conference to draft these proposals. The Commission met for the first time on 1 February 1919, and Gompers was elected as the chairman.

Two competing proposals for an international body emerged during the commission's meetings. The British proposed establishing an international parliament to enact labour laws which each member of the League would be required to implement. Each nation would have two delegates to the parliament, one each from labour and management. An international labour office would collect statistics on labour issues and enforce the new international laws. Philosophically opposed to the concept of an international parliament and convinced that international standards would lower the few protections achieved in the United States, Gompers proposed that the international labour body be authorized only to make recommendations and that enforcement be left up to the League of Nations. Despite vigorous opposition from the British, the American proposal was adopted.

Gompers also set the agenda for the draft charter protecting workers' rights. The Americans made 10 proposals. Three were adopted without change: That labour should not be treated as a commodity; that all workers had the right to a wage sufficient to live on; and that women should receive equal pay for equal work. A proposal protecting the freedom of speech, press, assembly, and association was amended to include only freedom of association. A proposed ban on the international shipment of goods made by children under the age of 16 was amended to ban goods made by children under the age of 14. A proposal to require an eight-hour work day was amended to require the eight-hour work day or the 40-hour work week (an exception was made for countries where productivity was low). Four other American proposals were rejected. Meanwhile, international delegates proposed three additional clauses, which were adopted: One or more days for weekly rest; equality of laws for foreign workers; and regular and frequent inspection of factory conditions.

The Commission issued its final report on 4 March 1919, and the Peace Conference adopted it without amendment on 11 April. The report became Part XIII of the Treaty of Versailles.

Cold War era

Beginning in the late 1950s the organization was under pressure to make provisions for the potential membership of ex-colonies which had become independent; in the Director General's report of 1963 the needs of the potential new members were first recognized. The tensions produced by these changes in the world environment negatively affected the established politics within the organization and they were the precursor to the eventual problems of the organization with the USA.

In July 1970, the United States withdrew 50% of its financial support to the ILO following the appointment of an assistant director-general from the Soviet Union. This appointment (by the ILO's British director-general, C. Wilfred Jenks) drew particular criticism from AFL–CIO president George Meany and from New Jersey Assemblyman John E. Rooney. However, the funds were eventually paid.

On 12 June 1975, the ILO voted to grant the Palestine Liberation Organization observer status at its meetings. Representatives of the United States and Israel walked out of the meeting. The US House of Representatives subsequently decided to withhold funds. The United States gave notice of full withdrawal on 6 November 1975, stating that the organization had become politicized. The United States also suggested that representation from communist countries was not truly "tripartite"—including government, workers, and employers—because of the structure of these economies. The withdrawal became effective on 1 November 1977.

The United States returned to the organization in 1980 after extracting some concession from the organization. It was partly responsible for the ILO's shift away from a human rights approach and towards support for the Washington Consensus. Economist Guy Standing wrote "the ILO quietly ceased to be an international body attempting to redress structural inequality and became one promoting employment equity".

In 1981, the government of Poland declared martial law. It interrupted the activities of Solidarność, detained many of its leaders and members. The ILO Committee on Freedom of Association filed a complaint against Poland at the 1982 International Labour Conference. A Commission of Inquiry established to investigate found Poland had violated ILO Conventions No. 87 on freedom of association and No. 98 on trade union rights, which the country had ratified in 1957. The ILO and many other countries and organizations put pressure on the Polish government, which finally gave legal status to Solidarność in 1989. During that same year, there was a roundtable discussion between the government and Solidarność which agreed on terms of relegalization of the organization under ILO principles. The government also agreed to hold the first free elections in Poland since the Second World War.

Child labour

Child labour is often defined as work that deprives children of their childhood, potential, dignity, and is harmful to their physical and mental development. Child labour refers to work that is mentally, physically, socially or morally dangerous and harmful to children. Further, it can involve interfering with their schooling by depriving them of the opportunity to attend school, obliging them to leave school prematurely, or requiring them to attempt to combine school attendance with excessively long and heavy work.

The ILO's International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC) was created in 1992 with the overall goal of the progressive elimination of child labour, which was to be achieved through strengthening the capacity of countries to deal with the problem and promoting a worldwide movement to combat child labour. The IPEC currently has operations in 88 countries, with an annual expenditure on technical cooperation projects that reached over US$61 million in 2008. It is the largest programme of its kind globally and the biggest single operational programme of the ILO.

The number and range of the IPEC's partners have expanded over the years and now include employers' and workers' organizations, other international and government agencies, private businesses, community-based organizations, NGOs, the media, parliamentarians, the judiciary, universities, religious groups and children and their families.

The IPEC's work to eliminate child labour is an important facet of the ILO's Decent Work Agenda. Child labour prevents children from acquiring the skills and education they need for a better future.

The ILO also hosts a Global Conference on the Elimination of Child Labour every four years. The most recent conference was held in Durban, South Africa from 15 to 20 May 2022.

The ILO established the World Day Against Child Labour on June 12 as an annual event starting in 2002 to raise awareness and prompt action to tackle child labour worldwide. The event particularly targets the eradication of slavery and the use of child soldiers.

Because of different cultural views involving labour, the ILO developed a series of culturally sensitive mandates, including convention Nos. 169, 107, 138, and 182, to protect indigenous culture, traditions, and identities. Convention Nos. 138 and 182 lead in the fight against child labour, while Nos. 107 and 169 promote the rights of indigenous and tribal peoples and protect their right to define their own developmental priorities.

In many indigenous communities, parents believe that children learn important life lessons through the act of work and through the participation in daily life. Working is seen as a learning process preparing children of the future tasks they will eventually have to do as an adult. It is a belief that the family's and child well-being and survival is a shared responsibility between members of the whole family. They also see work as an intrinsic part of their child's developmental process. While these attitudes toward child work remain, many children and parents from indigenous communities still highly value education.

Forced labour

The ILO has considered the fight against forced labour to be one of its main priorities. During the interwar years, the issue was mainly considered a colonial phenomenon, and the ILO's concern was to establish minimum standards protecting the inhabitants of colonies from the worst abuses committed by economic interests. After 1945, the goal became to set a uniform and universal standard, determined by the higher awareness gained during World War II of politically and economically motivated systems of forced labour, but debates were hampered by the Cold War and by exemptions claimed by colonial powers. Since the 1960s, declarations of labour standards as a component of human rights have been weakened by governments of postcolonial countries claiming a need to exercise extraordinary powers over labour in their role as emergency regimes promoting rapid economic development.

In 1998, the International Labour Conference adopted a Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its follow-up that obligates member states to respect, promote and realize freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining, the elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labour, the effective abolition of child labour, and the elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation.

In November 2001, following the publication of the InFocus Programme's first global report on forced labour, the ILO's governing body created a special action programme to combat forced labour (SAP-FL), as part of broader efforts to promote the 1998 Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its follow-up. The SAP-FL was created in November 2001 "to tackle the elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labour, one of its foremost concerns, through both technical assistance and promotional means." SAP-FL has developed indicators of forced labour practices and published survey reports on forced labour.

In 2013, the SAP-FL was integrated into the ILO's Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work Branch (FUNDAMENTALS) bringing together the fight against forced and child labour and working in the context of Alliance 8.7.

One major tool to fight forced labour was the adoption of the ILO Forced Labour Protocol by the International Labour Conference in 2014. It was ratified for the second time in 2015 and on 9 November 2016 it entered into force. The new protocol brings the existing ILO Convention 29 on Forced Labour, adopted in 1930, into the modern era to address practices such as human trafficking. The accompanying Recommendation 203 provides technical guidance on its implementation.

In 2015, the ILO launched a global campaign to end modern slavery, in partnership with the International Organization of Employers (IOE) and the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC). The 50 for Freedom Campaign aims to mobilize public support and encourage countries to ratify the ILO's Forced Labour Protocol.

Commercialized sex

From the moment its creation in the 1919 Treaty of Versailles, the ILO has been concerned with the controversial issue of commercial sex. Prior to the creation of the ILO and League of Nations, the issue of sex work had been exclusively under the jurisdiction of the state, now, the ILO and League of Nations believed the issue transcended borders and within their jurisdiction. In the early twentieth, commercialized sex was considered both immoral and criminal activity. Initially, the ILO strongly believed prostitution was linked to vulnerable single working women emigrating to other nations without being under the paternal supervision of a man. After the widespread destruction caused by World War I, the ILO saw prostitution as spreading contagion requiring regulation. Under the leadership of the French socialist Albert Thomas, the ILO created a medical division whose primary focus was on male sailors whose lives were viewed as "nomadic" and "promiscuous", which made these men susceptible to infection of STD's. After the conclusion of the Genoa maritime conference in 1920, the ILO proclaimed itself as the critical leader of the prevention and treatment of STD's in sailors. In the interwar years, the ILO also sought to protect female workers in dangers trades, but delegates to ILO Conferences did not consider the sex trade to be "work", which was conceived of as industrial labour. The ILO believed that if women worked industrial jobs, this would be a deterrent from them living immoral lives. In order to make these industrial jobs more attractive, the ILO promoted better wages and safer working conditions, both intended to prevent women from falling victim to the temptation of the sex trades.

Following the creation of the United Nations, the ILO took a back seat to the newly formed organization on the issue of commercialized sex. The UN Commission on the Status of Women called for abolishing both sex trafficking and prostitution. In the 1950s, the UN Economic and Social Council and the International Police Organization sought to end any activity that resembled slavery, classifying sex trafficking and prostitution as criminal rather than labour issues.

Beginning in 1976, the ILO and other organizations began to examine the working and living conditions of rural women in developing countries. One example the ILO investigated was the go-go bars and the growing phenomenon of hired wives in Thailand, which both thrived because the development of U.S. military bases in the region. In the late 1970s, the ILO established the Programme on Rural Women, which investigated the involvement of young masseuses in the sex trade in Bangkok. It was critical because it was the first time in the history of the ILO or any of its branches that prostitution was described as a form of labour. In the decades that followed, the increase in sex tourism and the exploding AIDS epidemic strengthened ILO interest in the commercial sex trade.

Relationship with state of Qatar

In 2014, amid growing international scrutiny of Qatar's treatment of foreign workers in the lead-up to the 2022 FIFA World Cup, international trade unions filed a formal complaint with the ILO, accusing Qatar of failing to address forced labour and widespread workers' rights violations.

In March 2023, The New York Times alleged that Qatar "embarked on a yearslong campaign of political maneuvering that helped turn the [ILO]... from critic to ally", and that intense lobbying by Qatari diplomats, rallying "employers and countries with Qatari business interests", successfully prevented the ILO from opening an investigation.

The ILO closed the complaint in 2017, and instead established a "Technical Cooperation Program" to help strengthen Qatar's labour regulations. As part of this arrangement, Qatar contributed $25 million to the ILO, which funded the opening of a dedicated ILO project office in Doha in 2018. The ILO stated that the funding was standard practice and did not compromise its mandate, but critics, including a former ILO official, questioned the organization's independence, and noted that the Qatari contribution was initially undisclosed, and of an unusually large sum.

The ILO frequently commended Qatar for implementing labour reforms, such as setting a minimum wage, restricting summertime working hours, and supposedly dismantling the kafala system, consistently taking a positive view. A 2022 ILO report stated that these reforms positively impacted "hundreds of thousands" of migrant workers, a statement repeated by a Qatari official speaking to Financial Times in 2025. A former ILO official told The Guardian in 2023 that the ILO had been "whitewashing Qatar", and that it produced "biased" reports about its reforms. Several current and former employees of the ILO told The New York Times that the organization "often treated Qatar more like a paying client than a country under scrutiny".

ILO officials justified the organization's blunted criticism by saying that the improvements it achieved via cooperation with Qatar were won through "delicate negotiations", and that "criticism... would have undermined that progress"; but, according to The New York Times, "labor advocates, human rights groups and some politicians said they were stunned by what they saw as one-sided public statements that minimized problems". The ILO maintained that while it did point to "the positive trajectory of labour reforms in Qatar", it also continued to "highlight specific gaps and challenges that remain in implementation and enforcement".

Abdulhadi Rashid Alkhayareen of Hamad Bin Khalifa University in Qatar found in 2013 that "the key accomplishments of the ILO and the government of Qatar include destroying the kafala system", and that this "signifies a shift toward more open, progressive migrant labor policies and an evolving acceptance of migrant rights and opportunities by the government and members of the mass culture". Zachary R. Calo, also of Hamad Bin Khalifa University, found in 2023 that the ILO "significantly aided the process" of Qatar's legal reforms, but concluded that "while reforms might endure at the level of formal law, the dispute system will fail to deliver genuine justice to workers unless it is refashioned". Antoine Duval of the T.M.C. Asser Instituut also noted in 2023 the legal changes that have been taken place "on paper" throughout Qatar's cooperation with the ILO, but criticized the organization for praising Qatari steps which he called "Potemkin reforms", and for embracing a false "rosy reformist narrative" alongside Qatar and FIFA.

The ILO's positive reviews were cited and echoed by EU politicians, some of whom were later implicated in the Qatargate corruption scandal at the European Parliament. A Belgian official close to the Qatargate investigation told The New York Times that "the Belgian authorities see Qatar's campaign at the International Labor Organization as a key part of its efforts to shape public opinion". According to The New York Times, on the eve of the World Cup, Qatari officials asked the ILO to refrain from making negative commentary during the tournament, and "the agency's public statements during the World Cup made no mention of persistent labor abuses, opting instead to applaud its cooperation with the government".

In June 2023, Qatar's minister of labour, Ali bin Samikh al-Marri, was elected to preside over the ILO's International Labour Conference in Geneva. The nomination triggered a backlash from trade unions and labour and human rights groups, who "expressed concerns about his nomination", worrying that "a Qatari presidency would be a blow to the organisation's credibility and reputation" given the country's continued labour abuses and the Qatargate corruption scandal. The ILO's worker's group decided not to oppose al-Marri's presidency, and it took course as planned.

In late 2025, the ILO considered moving its Middle East headquarters from Beirut, Lebanon to Doha, Qatar, estimating that this would help save $500,000 for 2026-2027, and citing "support from host government", "persistent instability in Lebanon" and better access to Gulf resources as reasons for the move. A Qatari official said Qatar "expressed its openness to hosting the ILO's regional office in Doha". According to the Financial Times, the proposal "alarmed" ILO staff, who published a resolution supported by nearly 80% of the 70 members surveyed. They warned that relocating to a country that bans trade unions and faces global scrutiny for its treatment of migrant workers risks "normalising weak labour standards"; could silence researchers, jeopardize independence, and legitimize weak labor standards. While Lebanon has also faced criticism for mistreatment of migrant workers, some staff members said that stricter government oversight in Qatar would make researchers "feel unsafe publishing reports critical of Gulf states while living there" and that the move "could pose serious risks to the independence of the ILO staff", and worried that "the ILO [would be] compromising its mandate" by moving.

Besides the funding of the ILO's mission within Qatar, the Qatari government as also contributed $2 million to the ILO's Regular Budget Supplementary Account (RBSA), a flexible funding mechanism, in May 2025. The ILO said that "the event marked not just the flow of funds, but a deliberate pivot toward deeper, longer-term cooperation between" the ILO and the Qatar Fund for Development, which is the government entity that provided the funding.

International Labour Organization

International Labour Organization

Article

Related journals

Live room · 1 here

Related journals

Article

Structure

Governing body

Director-General

Membership

Objectives

History

Origins

Interwar period

Wartime and the United Nations

Cold War era

Offices

ILO headquarters

Regional offices

Sub-regional offices

Country and liaison offices

Activities

Conventions

International Labour Conference

Global forum meetings

Labour statistics

Training and teaching units

Responses to issues

Child labour

Forced labour

Minimum wage law

Commercialized sex

HIV/AIDS

Migrant workers

Domestic workers

Environmental sustainability

Awards

Criticism

Relationship with state of Qatar

About International Labour Organization

About International Labour Organization

Article

Related journals

Live room · 1 here

Related journals

Article

Structure

Governing body

Director-General

Membership

Objectives

History

Origins

Interwar period

Wartime and the United Nations

Cold War era

Offices

ILO headquarters

Regional offices

Sub-regional offices

Country and liaison offices

Activities

Conventions

International Labour Conference

Global forum meetings

Labour statistics

Training and teaching units

Responses to issues

Child labour

Forced labour

Minimum wage law

Commercialized sex

HIV/AIDS

Migrant workers

Domestic workers

Environmental sustainability

Awards

Criticism

Relationship with state of Qatar