Global Labour Journal <p style="font-size: 1.2em;" align="justify">The <em>Global Labour Journal</em> is an open-access, fully peer-reviewed online journal launched in January 2010. It is the official journal of the International Sociological Association’s Research Committee on Labour Movements (<a href="">RC44</a>). The Journal is co-hosted by the Global Labour University (<a href="">GLU</a>), and supported by the International Center for Development and Decent Work (<a href="">ICDD</a>) in Kassel, Germany, and the Center for Global Workers’ Rights (<a href="">CGWR</a>) at Penn State University in State College, USA.</p> <p style="font-size: 1.2em;" align="justify">The Journal serves as a forum to capture the plentiful and diverse scholarly work emerging on labour activities worldwide. It seeks to explore the role of globalisation in breaking down boundaries between the global/local and the public/private as they relate to labour activities.</p> <p style="font-size: 1.2em;" align="justify">Our aim is to provide a global forum for scholarly work on a comparative sociology of labour movements. Thus our intention is to understand, record and promote the transition of the labour movement into a new form of global unionism, and to highlight how labour activities are increasingly shaped by global forces.</p> <p style="font-size: 1.2em;" align="justify">Manuscripts may be <a title="Submissions" href="/globallabour/about/submissions#onlineSubmissions" target="_blank" rel="noopener">submitted</a> via this website. Should you have any questions about the suitability of your manuscript for consideration in the Global Labour Journal, or any difficulty in submitting online, please do not hesitate to contact the <a title="GLJ Managing Editor" href="" target="_blank" rel="noopener">GLJ Managing Editor</a>.</p> <p style="font-size: 1.2em;" align="justify">ISSN 1918-6711</p> <p><strong>&nbsp;</strong></p> <p style="font-size: 1.6em;"><strong><a href="">CURRENT ISSUE: Vol. 10, No. 1 (2019)</a></strong></p> <p><strong>&nbsp;</strong></p> <p style="font-size: 1.2em;"><strong>&nbsp; &nbsp;</strong> <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>EDITORIAL TEAM</strong></span></p> <table width="690" cellpadding="16"> <tbody> <tr> <td style="vertical-align: top; width: 33%;"> <p><strong>Editors</strong></p> <p>Maria Lorena Cook&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Cornell University <br>United States</p> <p>Madhumita Dutta<br>Ohio State University<br>United States</p> <p>Alexander Gallas<br>University of Kassel<br>Germany</p> <p>Ben Scully<br>University of the Witwatersrand<br>South Africa</p> </td> <td style="vertical-align: top; width: 33%;"> <p><strong>Managing Editor</strong></p> <p>Karin Pampallis<br>University of the Witwatersrand<br>South Africa</p> </td> <td style="vertical-align: top; width: 33%;"> <p><strong>Reviews Editor</strong></p> <p>Jörg Nowak<br>University of Nottingham<br>United Kingdom<br><br></p> <p><strong>Consulting Editor</strong></p> <p>Robert O'Brien<br>McMaster University<br> Canada</p> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> McMaster University Library Press en-US Global Labour Journal 1918-6711 <div style="text-align: justify;"><p><em>Global Labour Journal's</em> authors grant the journal permission to publish, but they retain copyright of their manuscripts. The <em>Global Labour Journal</em> applies a <a title="Creative Commons License" href="" target="_blank">Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International License</a>.</p><p>Under the terms of this licensing framework anyone is free to share, copy, distribute and transmit the work, under the following conditions:</p><ol><li><em>Attribution</em>: You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).</li><li><em>Noncommercial Use:</em> You may not use this work for commercial purposes.</li><li><em>No Derivative Works</em>: You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work.</li></ol><p>For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work.</p><p>Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder, the author of the piece. The author's moral rights are retained in this license.</p><p> </p></div> Editorial Editorial Board ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2019-01-31 2019-01-31 10 1 10.15173/glj.v10i1.3867 For a Future of Work with Dignity: A Critique of the World Bank Development Report, The Changing Nature of Work <p>Technological change has brought about rapid changes in the world of work over the past decade. The World Bank’s <em>World Development Report 2019: The Changing Nature of Work </em>is a welcome contribution as it discusses the transformations that are taking place and tries to advise governments on how best to adapt to them. The report also brings out the concern related to the growing risks associated with tax evasion by large corporations that control the market power and have an ever-greater share of economic activity. However, the report is flawed in many ways as it portrays these changes in the nature of work as essentially benign, requiring “adaptation” and skills acquisition by workers facilitated by the provision of skills and “universal” social coverage by governments, with the latter understood as a prelude to labour-market deregulation. Such a narrow perspective ignores the growing body of research that points to very serious risks and challenges faced by workers in ensuring decent working conditions due to technological changes. This article provides a critique of the World Bank report by focusing on five areas related to technology and the future of work that are fundamental for ensuring minimum standards for workers and to ensure social cohesion: inequality, jobs, labour regulations, trade unions and social protection.</p> <p><strong>KEYWORDS </strong>future of work; technology; inequality; jobs; labour regulation; trade unions; social protection</p> Mark Anner Nicolas Pons-Vignon Uma Rani ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2019-01-31 2019-01-31 10 1 10.15173/glj.v10i1.3796 Navigating the City and the Workplace: Migrant Female Construction Workers and Urban (Im)Mobilities <p>While their labour shapes the growing cityscape, migrant construction workers often remain invisible – not only to property developers and consumers but also to the state. For female workers, this is compounded by gender-based discrimination within the industry. Utilising ethnographic data, this article explores how women working in construction in Bengaluru, India, both experience and strive for mobility. It provides a multi-sited analysis to establish the ways in which intersectionality between employment conditions, the urban environment and gender norms may inhibit or facilitate urban mobility for migrant female workers. Few ethnographic studies have attended to women’s experiences of intermingled work/accommodation sites within the industry, although the practices and outcomes produced by the blurring of such boundaries provides fertile ground for analysis. While the article confirms the enduring nature of discrimination experienced by women in the construction industry, it also attends to the ways in which female workers were able to utilise spaces of exploitation. I conclude that precarious livelihoods may not at first glance yield enduring or substantive beneficial outcomes for those compelled to undertake them, but they are nevertheless productive – allowing for the maintenance and fulfilment of aspirations which may not reside within the urban domain.</p> <p><strong>KEYWORDS </strong>circular migration; labour; gender; women; construction work</p> Rebecca Bowers ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2019-01-31 2019-01-31 10 1 10.15173/glj.v10i1.3406 Competing Marxist Theories on the Temporal Aspects of Strike Waves: Silver’s Product Cycle Theory and Mandel’s Long Wave Theory <p>Despite the profound changes in capitalist development since the industrial revolution, strike waves and mass strikes are still a feature of the twenty-first century. This article examines two Marxist theories that seek to explain the temporal aspects of strike waves. In the main, I argue that Silver’s product cycle theory, suffers from an over-determinism, and that turning point strike waves are not mainly determined by lead industries. Mandel’s long wave theory argues that technological innovations tend to cluster and thus workers in different industries feature prominently in strike waves. By re-examining and comparing two competing Marxist theories on the temporality of strike waves and turning points, I will attempt to highlight the similarities but also place emphasis on where the theories differ. I examine the applicability of the theories to the South African case, and reference recent world events in order to ascertain the explanatory power of the competing theories. In the main I argue that Silver’s product cycle lead theory does not fit the South African experience.</p> <p><strong>KEYWORDS&nbsp; </strong>turning point strike waves; product cycle; long waves; capitalism</p> Eddie Cottle ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2019-01-31 2019-01-31 10 1 10.15173/glj.v10i1.3460 A Decade Later: The Legacy of the Supreme Court of Canada's Health Services Decision on Workers' Rights <p>The year 2017 marked the ten-year anniversary of the <em>Health Services</em> case, a precedent-setting decision by the Supreme Court of Canada that ruled collective bargaining is protected by the <em>Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms</em>. This article explores the impact and legacy of <em>BC Health Services</em>, and finds that while workers’ constitutional rights have been expanded under the <em>Charter</em> over the past decade, governments nevertheless continue to violate these rights. It concludes that the legacy of the case is not an enhanced level of protection for these rights to be enjoyed fully, but rather that the default option has been and will continue to be a financial penalty for the state in instances in which they violate workers’ rights.&nbsp;</p> <p><strong>KEYWORDS&nbsp; </strong>labour rights; <em>Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms</em>; human rights; health services</p> Brad Walchuk ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2019-01-31 2019-01-31 10 1 10.15173/glj.v10i1.3397 The Perils of the "White Working Class": Analysing the New Discussion on Class Mark Bergfeld ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2019-01-31 2019-01-31 10 1 10.15173/glj.v10i1.3868 Power Resources and Global Capitalism Stefan Schmalz Carmen Ludwig Edward Webster ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2019-01-31 2019-01-31 10 1 10.15173/glj.v10i1.3824 Review of: Nomkhosi Xulu-Gama (2017) Hostels in South Africa: Spaces of Perplexity Sithembiso Bhengu ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2019-01-31 2019-01-31 10 1 10.15173/glj.v10i1.3786 Review of: Jennifer A. Miller (2018) Turkish Guest Workers in Germany: Hidden Lives and Contested Borders, 1960s to 1980s Edward Dunsworth ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2019-01-31 2019-01-31 10 1 10.15173/glj.v10i1.3778 Review of: Alexandra Guisinger (2017) American Opinion on Trade: Preferences without Politics Simone Franzi ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2019-01-31 2019-01-31 10 1 10.15173/glj.v10i1.3792 Review of: Phoebe V. Moore (2018) The Quantified Self in Precarity: Work, Technology and What Counts Benjamin Herr ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2019-01-31 2019-01-31 10 1 10.15173/glj.v10i1.3811 Review of: Edward Webster and Karin Pampallis (eds.) (2017) The Unresolved National Question: Left Thought Under Apartheid Marcel Paret ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2019-01-31 2019-01-31 10 1 10.15173/glj.v10i1.3784