Introduction: The long trajectory of workplace human rights advocacy
Lebanon was referred to as the “Switzerland of the Middle East” when it gained independence in 1943. Originally a land of communitarian diversity and cosmopolitan cultural openness, it gradually degenerated into sectarian conflicts, political crises, and economic collapse. Developments in workplace democracy and social justice played an essential role in promoting national cohesion but were also instrumental in its demise. The Human Rights of Human Resources (HRofHR) project explores employer–employee collaboration as a viable instrument for promoting workplace democracy.
One of the first acts of the newly independent Lebanese Republic was to pass a comprehensive Labor Code in September 1946. It was a response to two decades of intense labor unrest and mobilization in the tobacco, soapmaking, typography, petroleum, and transportation sectors during the French Mandate period. At that time, female industrial workers played a pivotal role in pushing Lebanon’s recently established parliament to pass this law, thus laying the groundwork for social and national cohesion. During a major tobacco workers strike leading up to the ratification of the law, the police opened fire on striking workers, who were predominantly women, killing many of them.
For its time, the Labor Code was considered a model in the region. It introduced a set of comprehensive and highly progressive policies governing industrial relations, workplace health and safety, and social protection. Furthermore, it represented a first step in bottom-up social planning, building on developments in commerce, technology, and production to help integrate the various strands of Lebanon’s social and cultural fabric.
Despite these early advancements, various actors have significantly impeded Lebanon’s progress towards a robust labor environment. Systemic corruption, sectarian divisions, and a culture of impunity prevalent in the broader West Asia and North Africa (WANA) region are deeply embedded in Lebanese society. This toxic mix has eroded trust in institutions, fostered a sectarian and clientelist power-sharing system, and alienated citizens. As a result, the country has struggled to implement meaningful reforms at all levels.
Historically marginalized and excluded from the workforce, Lebanese women have faced significant barriers to economic and political participation. Subjected to discriminatory labor practices and underrepresented in leadership positions, women were “symbolically annihilated” and downgraded to secondary roles in Lebanon’s economic and social narrative. Women’s resilience is evident in their contributions to economic development and their role in mobilizing for labor rights as early as the late 19th century, culminating in their crucial role in promoting the groundbreaking 1946 Labor Code. Yet, progress has been limited, and gender inequality and discrimination remain predominant in the workplace in Lebanon.
The business sector: Salvaging the social fabric
In this seemingly hopeless constellation, the business sector—and labor relations in particular—is seen as the arena in which real political and cultural change is possible. The HRofHR project aims to turn the workplace into an arena for equality, social justice, and ecological development. Lebanon’s dilemma is multifaceted. Like most Arab countries, its social contract is based on clientelism—the exchange of loyalty for access to services and limited resources. This is overlaid in Lebanon with toxic sectarianism and a culture of impunity.
There is consensus among reformers that these two root problems need to be tackled before progress will be possible. Toxic sectarianism (mazhbia; مذهبية in Arabic) results when organic social diversity—or confessionalism (taeefiya; طائفية)—is abused to create almost impenetrable walls of animosity and division along linguistic, religious, racial, or class lines. The culture of impunity is unique in that it goes beyond pervasive corruption and the mere absence of the rule of law and is internalized within the fabric of society as a whole. In countries like Lebanon, both sectarianism and impunity are embraced by large segments of society, irrespective of their position in the power hierarchies that dominate the country.
It is also currently unclear who can credibly champion authentic change. The usual suspects have failed miserably. Within civil society—encompassing a wide spectrum of non-governmental organizations, alternative reform parties and electoral lists, the “Fourth Estate,” and independent experts and academics (the much-applauded technocrats, whom many had hoped could turn things around with the support of the proverbial “street”)—the results have been disappointing.
In this impasse, reformers might direct their focus to the business sector and the driving role played by technological advancement, systemic workplace design, and just governance within each enterprise. As opposed to the governmental players, who have little incentive to promote reforms, and civil society, who are largely kept solvent through generous external donor financing, the private sector has a built-in regulatory mechanism: they need to remain profitable in order to stay in business.
Work on human rights reform and the promotion of social justice has conventionally been limited in scope. It has targeted politics, the media, organized religion, education, and the role of extended families in a traditional setting. These sectors are customarily referred to as the “superstructure” within society as a whole.
A new approach to combat corruption and promote rights
The Political Economy of Sectarianism and Coexistence (PESC) methodology was designed by these authors in order to search for the root causes of the culture of impunity and toxic sectarianism in Lebanon beyond the superstructure. This uniquely dialectical approach focuses on the economic and technological foundation of society, where goods and services are produced, and workplace reform is promoted—ultimately—to increase productivity and secure profitability.
The PESC approach expands the focus on the “endtimes” of the human rights scenario in Lebanon to include technological development, workplace organization, the use of research and development for civilian and military purposes, and the economy as a whole. These sectors are referred to as the “base,” which provides the tangible value that is invested in the societal “superstructure.” The synergetic interaction between the two is referred to as the “base–superstructure dialectic.”
Finally, the HRofHR takes the political economy approach one step further and applies it to fields in which cultural and political change can be seeded from the bottom up using the base–superstructure dialectic. The FORGE experiment for change team introduced the term “political economy of coexistence” in order to grapple with business models in Lebanon that work. Examples in which just governance, ecological sustainability, and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) are successful on a sectoral basis include fair trade farming and commerce, as well as sustainable tourism projects, which often include barrier-free access for people with disabilities for a more just and equitable Lebanon.
Our goal is to mainstream the political economy of coexistence with employers and employees in a variety of sectors—including energy, transportation, media, education, agriculture, tourism, government infrastructure, and services—to promote a human rights approach based on previous experience, with stakeholder input at all levels. Existing positive role models and good practice can thus serve as a call to action through which the workplace (the “base”) can become an arena for the promotion of democracy and human rights within Lebanese society as a whole.