Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-fv566 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T15:43:59.302Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Functional Representation in the International Labor Organization

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Amy Hewes*
Affiliation:
Mount Holyoke College

Extract

A bloc system has superimposed itself upon national legislatures. Although their members are elected on a definite territorial basis, they associate themselves together in response to interests in their constituencies which have little relation to their electoral districts. Thus, in the United States, a foreign word has come into use to designate the organized agricultural interests which constitute the farm bloc.

More or less definite aggregations of this kind have been formed throughout parliamentary history. Some of these have been the result of particular manufacturing or commercial interests; other groupings have followed religious or social-class lines of cleavage; nevertheless, the basis of representation, in the popularly elected chambers, has remained territorial. Since 1919, however, an international assembly has been built up on a new political pattern. This is the Conference of the International Labor Organization, which convened for its tenth session at Geneva, in May, 1927, and in the following October completed the eighth year of its history. Notwithstanding the fact that structurally this body has a national basis, in that the delegates are sent by different member states, the conferences derive their character and mode of operation, not so much from the member states as from the three component groups in which national differences are more or less subordinate. These groups represent, respectively, the governments, the employers, and the workers of the several countries.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1928

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Monthly Summary of the International Labor Organization, April, 1927, No. 4, p. 21.Google Scholar

2 Up to the present time, indeed, the government group has had an even larger proportion than it is assigned in the constitution, because some member states have sent incomplete delegations, consisting of government representatives only in a number of instances. These have usually been the smaller and more distant countries, where the expense of a full delegation has been a deterring consideration and where some resident diplomatic representative of the country has been named to serve. On the other hand, a number of countries now maintain a permanent secretariat at Geneva to attend to their interests in the International Labor Organization. The numbers actually present in the three groups in the conferences of 1925 and 1926 were as follows:

3 The data presented are those of “record” votes only and do not include the “show of hands” votes, even when the official records reveal the numerical distribution of these votes.

4 The Eighth Session of the International Labor Conference,” International Labor Review, Vol. XIV, No. 2 (August, 1926), p. 188Google Scholar.

5 International Labor Conference, Eighth Session, Report of the Director (1926), p. 192.Google Scholar

6 International Labor Conference, Seventh Session, Vol. I, p. 108.

7 The Eighth Session of the International Labor Conference,” International Labor Review, vol. 14, no. 2 (August, 1926), p. 187Google Scholar.

Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.