Commodification forms are exemplified by the economic policies of Cuba and N. Korea. Both states see in their workers a commodity that can be leased to others. Sometimes the transaction is direct and pedestrian--N. Korea leases its workers to man the factories of advancing developing states in need for cheaper labor inputs to reduce overall production costs (e.g., here, and here). Other times it is tied to strategic political objectives. Cuba has managed both to advance its political agenda and to earn substantial cash from its programs leasing doctors and other medical facilities to (mostly) developing states through its so-called policy of medical internationalism (e.g., here, here, here, and here).
Abstraction forms are exemplified by the encouragement of labor migration targeted to certain areas for the purpose of generating remittances home. The export of domestic labor abroad, then, serves to generate wealth at home through the expectation that such exported labor will send home whatever cash they can. The individual laborer, then, is transformed to an income stream, the present value of which serves as an important element in macro-economic policy. Cuba has been famous for exploiting this effect as a part of its macro-economic policies (e.g., resources here). But other states across the middle and lower tiers of development have also relied heavily on this technique. South Asia is an important participant in this respect (e.g., here ("Pakistan is expected to receive remittances worth a record $22 billion in financial year 2018-19 as the government has offered an incentive package to overseas workers to attract more money through official banking channels, experts said.")). The Philippines offer another model--exporting domestic workers (e.g., here ("But one "export" that remains critically important is the outflow of Philippine workers to overseas countries from where they send home huge total cash remittances.")).
Developing states which profit form the practice, civil society that encourage or tolerate the practices without much criticism, and international institutions tend to see in the practice the positive values of wealth creation (for someone, it is not clear just what portion of the wealth created actually flows to the earner and her family) may not pay enough attention to the costs of such production of income. Attention is usually paid to such costs in the wake of scandal (e.g., Kuwait: Death of Filipina maid highlights abuse of workers; 6 out of 10 maids in Singapore are exploited; Mexican workers say they are victims of abuse on Canadian farms), though the role of international bodies could be subject to some analysis (e.g., UN labour body drops case against Qatar of migrant worker abuse).
Many of these stories fail to adequately consider the systemic costs to life of the generation of income strategies embodied in commodification and abstraction policies. And, indeed, the costs in terms of life and living conditions appear to "zero out" in any analysis that considers the "value added" of income generation that is represented by policies of labor leasing or remittance production. The effect is to create a system of income generation in which the state effectively "free rides" on the lives of the workers exported. Yet one wonders about the extent to which a state undertakes its duty to protect human right sin a context in which it effectively zeros out the lives and working conditions of individuals who have effectively traded their humanity for streams of income to themselves and ofr the state.
1) Available data indicates that at least 24,570 Indian workers died in the six Gulf countries between 2012 and mid-2018. This number could increase if the complete figures for Kuwait and UAE are made available publicly. This amounts to more than 10 deaths per day during this period