Sir, – When, in his article "Ireland symbolises the benefits of free trade", John FitzGerald mentions "those who stand to lose", he acknowledges that free trade is predicated on sacrificing part of the population and, if we are not to face social breakdown, on the need to redistribute resources to them so that they quietly accept the loss of their jobs, their status, their hopes for the future and their dignity ("Ireland symbolises benefits of free trade as protectionism on the rise", Economics, August 26th).
Many workers in Ireland are now faced with short-time, minimum-hour contracts, paid by the hour, at the minimum wage. The fact that, in some sectors of employment, they only get their timetable for the week at the last minute means that they cannot even plan their life outside work.
Our education system is more and more adapted to the needs of enterprises rather than to the needs of the person and, furthermore, it prepares students psychologically to a life of “flexibility”, which, in practice, means a destabilising prospect of insecurity.
Workers throughout the world, if they are employed by multinational corporations, are pitched against each other, with the threat of the relocation of their enterprise should they ask for better salaries or work conditions.
Instead of this race to the bottom, could we not envisage a basic income for all and, for workers, a shorter working week (which could create more jobs) and a living wage?
And could we restore education to its proper role, giving more space in the curriculum to literature, sports, art or music, so that people would have the option to use their free time in personally fulfilling, creative ways?
In short, could we envisage, in the brave new world of free trade, treating all people with respect? – Yours, etc,
CLAUDINE GAIDONI,
Navan Road, Dublin 7.