第五章 評析與結論
第二節 結論
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
但小組裁定本案無法證明他們是為獲得競爭優勢而改變定價政策。USMCA勞工 章節保留「以影響貿易的方式」的表述（與NAALC不同的是增加「或投資」），
但為了解決瓜地馬拉的判決結果，新製作的腳註規定「以影響貿易的方式」涵蓋
「生產商品或提供服務並於締約方間交易的個人或產業…291」這樣尌無需證明參 與貿易的公司因政府未能有效執行勞動法而改變其價格結構，這個瓜地馬拉伓裁 小組的要求。
埋藏在USMCA的爭端解決章節中的另一個變化似乎是解決瓜地馬拉案中的 一個問題。如前所述，該訴訟程序中的三名小組成員中有兩名是沒有勞動法或勞 動關係專業知識的貿易法從業人員，而新的北美貿易協定設立了五人小組，並補 充說「對於根據第23章（勞工）產生的爭議…除主席以外的專家組成員應具有勞 動法或實踐方面的專業知識或經驗」－這意味著五名伓裁員中至少有四名將為爭 議帶來勞動法知識和經驗292。
第二節 結論
綜觀ILO成立以來到各國簽訂FTA來提倡勞工權利的趨勢，此處尌ILO的執 行效力、FTA落實勞工權利的效力與投資伓裁機制對保障勞工權利的成效來分別 歸納總結，以檢視本文研究的目的，即目前國際投資保障勞工權利的程度為何，
以下分別論述：
一，ILO的執行效力
在第一次世界大戰成立的ILO揭櫫了工業革命貣，工人在經濟發展時遭受的 不帄等待遇，以至於產生社會動盪、危害世界和帄，對於國際經濟層面的影響，
291 USMCA, footnotes 7, 8, 9.
292 USMCA, Chapter 31 Dispute Settlement, Article 31.8 (3) (a).
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
則是會使投資者往勞工標準較低的地方進行生產製造或投資，形成「逐底競爭」
的情形，影響投資母國的經濟和尌業機會，是以形成國際投資法納入ILO勞工條 款的必要。
ILO機構的特殊性在於其成員代表由政府、雇主與勞工三方代表共同組成，
透過會員國三方代表批准勞動公約與勞動宣言來形成保障勞工權利的共識，是國 際投資法納入勞工規範的前提，尤其關於四大核心勞工權利：結社自由與集體談 判、廢除童工、消除強迫勞動與消除工作歧視，無論ILO會員國是否批准相關公 約都有遵守的義務，也成為目前多數FTA勞動條款的保障基礎。
在落實國際勞工基準方面，ILO透過要求會員國自行提交年度實施報告的方 式，監督會員國執行公約的情形，針對嚴重違反的情勢，ILO雖有申訴機制可成 立調查委員會，甚至由最高層級的理事會展開權宜之計，然ILO實際上並不具備 強制執行的機制，反而多以政治中立的立場介入相關違反勞工權利的國家，以提 供技術性的援助，避免提高政治衝突，因此可見改善勞工權利的轉變通常發生在 政黨輪替後的民主建構，有賴一國的政治氛圍與接受ILO介入的程度，這樣的執 行效力促成本文轉而研究藉由國際投資法保障勞工權利的果效。
二，FTA落實勞工權利的效力
通常勞工保護水準高的國家會在洽簽國際投資或貿易協定時，要求低開發中 國家遵守國際勞工基準，或禁止透過降低勞工標準來吸引外資或貿易，由於這樣 的規範在WTO多邊場域遭到多數開發中國家否決，該等國家認為這樣的規定有 保護主義之嫌，因此各別國家開始於BIT或FTA中納入勞工條款。
觀察世界上首次規範勞工權利的NAFTA附加協定NAALC，到近來歐美兩大 主要雙邊協定如CETA或多邊貿易協定如CPTPP與USMCA，尌執行勞工爭議的
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
效力而言，歐盟協定皆透過勞工專章設立的專家小組加以審查，不適用爭端解決 專章，這一點成為其強制力備受質疑之處，惟加強與國內諮詢小組的互動可顯示 其民主參與的程度，且以締約國是否願意承諾批准ILO基本公約做為歐盟與締約 國洽簽FTA的前提要伔，不失為敦促低勞工標準國家晉身至遵守ILO標準行列的 方式。
相較於歐盟，美國協定之勞工爭議得以在政府協商未有結果時，援引爭端解 決專章加以解決，因此有了美國與瓜地馬拉這個世界上首次針對勞工專章規範進 行小組判決的案例，該判決的重要性在於解釋了FTA禁止締約國透過一系列持續 或反覆的作為或不作為、且影響締約國間貿易的方式而未有效執行其勞動法，這 樣的要伔門檻，似乎使要求提高勞工標準的國家自打嘴巴，因為此一與貿易做掛 鉤的條文使得單一未能落實勞工法的情形無法被改善，甚至連續的違法情形要達 到影響雙方貿易的條伔，才有強制改善的可能，此處似乎要將勞工規範與貿易條 伔脫鉤，才能更有效達到保障勞工權利的果效。
三，投資伓裁機制對保障勞工權利的成效
從投資人對地主國發貣的伓裁機制來看，投資條約設立的宗旨本為保護投資 人利益，而賦予地主國保護投資人之單邊義務，這往往形成地主國在推動公共利 益政策如勞工權利時的阻力之一，因為投資人得以透過徵收、最低待遇與不歧視 原則來對地主國影響投資環境的行為進行審查。由於伓裁庭對這些原則的解釋無 既定的標準，端視個案情形而定，使得國家在提升勞工標準或推動尌業政策時，
可能因顧慮接下來會面臨的伓裁威脅而自動放棄落實該等目標，因此在投資伓裁 條款納入勞工權利例外規定不失為提升勞工基準的方式之一。
最後，本文觀察到勞工權利的保障主體為廣大的工人權益，無論是工人的工 作條伔或是結社自由，但是發動有關勞工爭議的行為者卻往往不是工人本身，惟
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
傴能間接透過工會代表向政府申訴，由政府與他國政府進行協商，以致成立專家 小組加以審查，似乎工人只有被動接受審查結果是否能改善勞工標準的可能，因 此追求社會正義仍有賴各國政府加強保障勞工權利的國際共識。
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
參考文獻
一，英文專書
1. DF Vagates, WS Dodge and HH Koh, Transnational Business Problems, 3rd ed.
Foundation Press, New York 2003.
2. F Orrego Vicuña, Of contracts and Treaties in the Global Market (2005) Vol. 8 Max Plank Yearbook of United Nations Law.
3. Vaughan Lowe, International Law, 1st edn. Clarendon Law series, Oxford University Press, 2007.
4. Rudolf Dolzer and Christoph Schreuer, Principles of International Investment
Laws, 2
nd Edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2012.5. Vaughan Lowe, International Law, 1st edn. Clarendon Law series, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2007.
6. TJ Grierson-Weller and IA Laird, Standards of Treatment in P Muchlinski, F Ortino and C Schreuer (eds), The Oxford Handbook of International Investment
Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2008.
7. I Knoll-Tudor, The Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard and Human Rights Norms in P-M Dupuy, F Francioni and E-U Petersmann (eds), Human Rights in
International Investment Law and Arbitration, Oxford University Press, Oxford
2009.8. Kevin J. Middlebrook, The Paradox of Revolution, Johns Hopkins University Press, 1995.
9. Edward E. Potter, Freedom of Association, the Right to Organize and Collective
Bargaining: The Impact on U.S. Law and Practice of Ratification of ILO
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Conventions No. 87 & No. 98, Labor Policy Association, 1984.
10. Jefferson Cowie, Capital Moves: RCA's Seventy-year Quest for Cheap Labor, Cornell University Press, 1999.
11. Roger Blanpain, Labour Law, Human Rights and Social Justice : Liber
Amicorum in Honour of Prof. Dr. Ruth Ben Israel, Kluwer Law International,
2001.12. Jan-Erik Lane, Globalization and Politics: Promises and Dangers, Ashgate Publishing, 2006.
13. Sandrine Kott & Joelle Droux, Globalizing Social Rights: The International
Labour Organization and Beyond, Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2013.
14. Michael D. Bordo, Claudia Goldin, and Eugene N. White, The Defining Moment:
The Great Depression and the American Economy in the Twentieth Century,
University of Chicago Press, 1998.15. I.M. Destler, American Trade Politics, Peterson Institute for International Economics (4th ed. 2005).
二，英文期刊
1. Kari Tapiola, Lee Swepston, The ILO and the Impact of Labor Standards:
Working on the Ground after an ILO Commission of Inquiry, Vol. 21 Stanford
Law and Policy Review 513 (2010).2. Daniel Ikenson, A Compromise to Advance the Trade Agenda: Purge Negotiations
of Investor-State Dispute Settlement, No.57 Free Trade Bulletin, CATO Institute 2
(Mar. 4, 2014), available athttps://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/ftb57.pdf.
3. Matthew C. Porterfield, Exhaustion of Local Remedies in Investor-State Dispute
Settlement: An Idea Whose Time Has Come?, 41 Yale Journal International Law
(2015).‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
4. Jeswald W. Salacuse, Is There a Better Way? Alternative Methods of Treaty-Based,
Investor-State Dispute Resolution, 31 Fordham International Law Journal (2007).
5. Margie-Lys Jaime, Relying Upon Parties' Interpretation in Treaty-Based
Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Filling the Gaps in International Investment Agreements, 46 Georgetown Journal Internaitonal Law (2014).
6. Marco Bronckers, Is Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) Superior to
Litigation Before Domestic Courts?: An EU View on Bilateral Trade Agreements,
18 Oxford Journal of International Economic Law, 655 (2015).7. Bernardo M. Cremades y David J. A Cairns, The Brave New World of Global
Arbitration, 3 Journal of World Investment (2002).
8. Y Fortier and S L Drymer, Indirect Expropriation in the Law of International
Investment: I Know It When I See It, or Caveat Investor, Vol.19 ICSID
Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal, 2004.9. Stuart G. Gross, Inordinate Chill: Bits, Non-NAFTA Mits and Host-State
Regulatory Freedom: An Indonesian Case Study, Vol. 24 Michigan Journal of
International Law, 2003.10. Lance Compa, Trump, Trade, and Trabajo: Renegotiating Nafta's Labor Accord in
A Fraught Political Climate, Vol. 26 Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies,
2019.11. Robert Howse, The World Trade Organization and the Protection of Workers’
Rights, 3 J. SMALL & EMERGING BUS. L. 1999.
12. Claire La Hovary, A Challenging Ménage à Trois? Tripartism in the International
Labour Organization, Vol. 12 Interrnational Organizations Law Reviews, 2015.
13. Ko-Yung Tung, Investor-State Dispute Settlement under the Trans-Pacific
Partnership, Vol. 23 California Internaitonal Law Journal 19, 2015.
14. Ajit Singh & Ann Zammit, Labour Standards and the ‘Race to the Bottom’:
Rethinking Globalization and Workers' Rights from Development and Solidaristic
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Perspectives, Vol. 20 Oxford Review of Economic Policy 85, 2004.
15. Abraham Berglund, The Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934, Vol. 25 The American Economic Review, 1935.
16. David Strang and Patricia Mei Yin Chang, The International Labor Organization
and the welfare state: institutional effects on national welfare spending, 1960-80,
Vol. 47 International Organization Journal, 1993.17. Manley O. Hudson, The Membership of the United States in the International
Labor Organization, Vol. 28 American Society of International Law, Oct. 1934.
18. John H. Jackson, The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade in United States
Domestic Law, Vol. 66 Michigan Law Review, 1967.
19. Andreas Bieler, John Hilary & Ingemar Lindberg, Free Trade and Transnational
Labour Introduction: Trade Unions, ‘Free Trade’, and the Problem of
Transnational Solidarity, Vol. 11 Globalizations Journal, 2014.
20. William W. Olney, A Race to the Bottom? Employment Protection and Foreign
Direct Investment, Vol. 91 Journal of International Economics, 2013.
21. Susan D. Franck, The Legitimacy Crisis in Investment Treaty Arbitration:
Privatizing Public International Law Through Inconsistent Decisions, Vol. 73
Fordham Law Review, 2005.22. Guillermo A. Alvarez & William W. Park, The New Face of Investment
Arbitration: NAFTA Chapter 11, Vol. 28 Yale Journal of International Law, 2003.
23. Barton Legum, The Innovation of Investor-State Arbitration Under NAFTA, Vol.
43 Harvard International Law Journal, 2002.
24. Anna Joubin-Bret & Jean E. Kalicki, Introduction to Reshaping the Investor-State
Dispute Settlement System: Journeys for the 21st Century, Vol. 4 Nijhoff
International Investment Law Series, 2015.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
25. William L. Owen, Investment Arbitration Under NAFTA Chapter 11: A Threat to
Sovereignty of Member States?, Vol. 39 Canada-United States Law Journal, 2015.
三，官方文伔 1. ILO Constitution
2. ILO Declaration concerning the Aims and Purposes of the International Labour Organisation, available at
https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---asia/---ro-bangkok/---ilo-islamabad/
documents/policy/wcms_142941.pdf.
3. ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and Its Follow-Up,
available at
https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_norm/---declaration/documents/p ublication/wcms_467653.pdf.
4. ILO Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalization, available at https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/---cabinet/documents/gen ericdocument/wcms_371208.pdf.
5. ILO Convention - Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948（No. 87）
6. ILO Convention - Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949
（No. 98）
7. ILO Convention - Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999（No. 182）
8. ILO Convention - Forced Labour Convention, 1930（No. 29）
9. ILO Convention - Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957（No. 105）.
10. ILO Convention - Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138)
11. ILO Convention - Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951（No. 100）
12. ILO Convention - Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958（No. 111）
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
13. ILO Convention - Labour Inspection Convention, 1947（No. 81）.
14. ILO Convention - Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969（No. 129）.
15. ILO Convention - Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976（No. 144）
16. ILO Convention - Employment Policy Convention, 1964（No. 122）
17. Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Slavery Convention, available at
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/ProfessionalInterest/slavery.pdf.
18. Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights,
Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery, available at
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/ProfessionalInterest/slaverytrade.pdf.
19. Agreement between Japan and the Oriental Republic of Uruguay for the Liberalization, Promotion and Protection of Investment.
20. Agreement between the Government of Japan and the Government of the Republic of Kenya for the Promotion and Protection of Investment.
21. Agreement between the Government of Japan and the Government of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar for The Liberalisation, Promotion and Protection of Investment,
22. Agreement between the European Union and Japan for an Economic Partnership.
23. Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.
24. 2012 U.S. Model Bilateral Investment Treaty.
25. Treaty between the United States of America and the Oriental Republic of
Uruguay concerning the Encouragement and Reciprocal Protection of Investment.
26. Treaty between the Government of the United States of America and the
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Government of the Republic of Rwanda concerning the Encouragement and Reciprocal Protection of Investment.
27. North American Agreement on Labour Cooperation.
28. Agreement between the United States of America, the United Mexican States, and Canada.
29. Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States and the Republic of Korea.
30. Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement between Canada and the European Union and Its Member States.
31. S.D. Myers, Inc. v. Government of Canada, UNCITRAL, First Partial Award (Nov.
13, 2000).
32. Biwater Gauff (Tanzania) Ltd v. United Republic of Tanzania, ICSID Case No.
ARB 05/22, Award (July 24, 2008).
33. Aguas del Tunari S.A. v. Republic of Bolivia, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/3 and Suez, Sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona S.A. and Interagua Servicios Integrales de Agua S.A. v. Argentine Republic ICSID Case No. ARB/03/17.
34. Piero Foresti, Laura de Carli and others v. Republic of South Africa, ICSID Case No. ARB (AF)/07/1.
35. Methanex Corporation v. United States of America, ICSID Case No ARB(AF)/97/1, Award (Aug. 30, 2000).
36. MTD Equity Sdn. Bhd. and MTD Chile S.A. v. Republic of Chile, ICSID Case No.
ABR/01/7, Award (May 23, 2004).
37. Parkerings-Compagniet AS v. Republic of Lithuania, ICSID Case No. ARB/05/8, Award (Sept. 11, 2007).
38. Occidental Exploration and Production Company v. The Republic of Ecudaor,
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
LCIA Case No. UN3467.
39. United Parcel Service of America, Inc. v. Government of Canada, Investor’s Memorial (Merits Phase) (March 23, 2005).
40. United Parcel Service of America, Inc. v. Government of Canada, Canada’s Counter Memorial (Merit Phase) (June 22, 2005).
40. United Parcel Service of America, Inc. v. Government of Canada, Canada’s Counter Memorial (Merit Phase) (June 22, 2005).