From the comfort of their plush offices and five- to six-figure salaries, self-employed NGOs often condemn child labor as their employees move from one five-star hotel to another, in the hands of $3000 sub notebooks and PDA's. The hairsplitting distinction made that "child work" and "child labor" conveniently targets poor countries, while giving its budget contributors - developed ones - off-the-hook. Reports regarding the surface of child labor from time to time. Children crawling in mines, ashes on their faces, mutilated bodies. The agile fingers of hungry babies knitting football***** for their more privileged counterparts in the United States. Little figures are placed in the sweatshop, working hard in inexplicable conditions. All of this is heartbreaking and has spawned a veritable non-cottage industry of activists, commentators, legal eagles, scholars and opportunistic sympathetic politicians. Ask citizens of Thailand, sub-Saharan Africa, Brazil, they will tell you how they perceive this altruistic hyperactivity – with skepticism and outrage. Underneath the compelling arguments lies the agenda of trade protectionism, which they wholeheartedly believe. Stringent and expensive labor and environmental provisions in international treaties may be a ploy to deter imports based on competition for cheap labor and well-established domestic industries and their political puppets. This is especially sad because the Holy West has deposited its wealth on the broken backs of slaves and children. The 1900 census in the United States found that 18 percent of all children—about two million—were gainfully employed. The Supreme Court struck down unconstitutional laws banning child labor in late 1916. This decision was reversed only in 1941. The GAO published a report last week in which it criticized the Labor Department for its inadequate attention to working conditions in manufacturing and mining in the United States, where many children are still employed. The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates the number of working children in the United States at 3.7 million between the ages of 15-17. Of these, one in 16 worked in factories and construction. More than 600 teenagers have died in work-related accidents in the past ten years. Child labor – let alone child prostitution, child soldiers and child slavery – are incidents that are best avoided. But they cannot and should not be dealt with in isolation. Nor should underage workers be punished with blankets. Working in the Philippines' gold mines or fisheries is hardly comparable to waiting at tables in a Nigerian or, for that matter, American restaurant. There are gradations and colors of child labor. Children should not be exposed to hazardous conditions, worked long hours, used as a means of payment, physically punished, or to work as s*** slaves is usually agreed. Whether they should not help their parents plant and harvest can be a matter of much debate. As Miriam Wasserman observed in "Eliminating child labor" published in the Federal Bank of Boston's "Regional Review" in the second quarter of 2000, it depends on "family income, education policy, production technologies and cultural norms". Around a quarter of children under the age of 14 worldwide are regular workers. This figure hides the huge disparities between regions such as Africa (42 percent) and Latin America (17 percent). In many poor areas, child labor is all that stands between the family unit and the all-encompassing, life-threatening, destruction. There has been a significant decline in child labor with increasing per capita income. Denying these breadwinners the opportunity to raise themselves and their families above malnutrition, disease and famine - is an apex of immoral hypocrisy. Quoted by "The Economist", a representative of the Ecuadorian Banana Growers Association and the Ecuadorian Minister of Labor, neatly summed up the dilemma: "Just because they are young doesn't mean we should reject them, they should be alive that they have also right to stay. You can't just say that they can not work, you have to provide alternatives. Sadly, the debate is so full of emotions and selfish arguments that the facts are often overlooked. Workshops run by Nike and Reebok were relocated due to protests over soccer ***** tailored by children in Pakistan. Thousands lost their jobs, including countless women and their, 7000 children. The median family income - somehow meager - has declined by 20 percent. Economists Alan, and Robert Stern observe oddly: "While Baden Sports can quite credibly claim that their football ***** is not sewn by children, the relocation of their production facility undoubtedly did nothing for their former child workers and their families." These examples are abound. Producers – fearing legal retaliation and “reputation risk” (naming and shameful by overzealous NGOs) – engage in preemptive dismissal. German apparel workshops fired 50,000 children in Bangladesh in anticipation of the American Child Labor Prevention Act in 1993. Wasserstein, former Secretary of Labor, quoted by Robert *****, notes, stopping child labor without doing anything can make the condition of children worse. If they are working out of necessity, as most are, stopping them could force them into prostitution or other employment with more personal threats. The most important thing is that they be in school and get an education to help them leave poverty. Less than 1 percent work in mining and another 2 percent in the construction. Most of the rest work in retail outlets and services, including "personal services" – a euphemism for prostitution. UNICEF and striving to establish a school network for child laborers and provide alternative employment to their parents.
But it is a drop in the ocean of neglect. Poor countries rarely provide regular education to more than two-thirds of eligible children of their school age. This is especially true in rural areas, where child labor is a widespread scourge. Education – especially for women – is considered an unforgivable luxury by many rigid parents. In many cultures, work is still considered indispensable in shaping a child's morals and strength of character and teaching him a trade.
"The Economist" elaborates:
"Children in Africa are usually treated as young adults; from an early age, every child must do household chores, such as sweeping or fetching water. It is also common to see children working in shops or in the streets Poor families often send a child to a wealthy relative, such as a housewife or houseboy, in the hope that he will receive an education.
One solution that has been gaining steam recently is to provide families in poor countries access to loans secured by the future earnings of their educated offspring. The idea – first proposed by Jean-Marie of Namur University and James A. Robinson of the University of California at Berkeley – has now entered the mainstream.
Even the World Bank has contributed to some studies, notably, in June, "Child Labor, The Role of Income Variability and Access to Credit across the Country" by Rajiv Dehejia and the Bank's Development Research Group. K Roberta Gatti has written.
Abusive child labor is abhorrent and should be banned and abolished. All the other forms should be phased out gradually. Developing countries already produce millions of unemployed graduates annually – 100,000 in Morocco alone. In some countries – such as Macedonia – unemployment is widespread and reaches more than a third of the workforce. Children at work may be treated harshly by their supervisors, but at least they are kept off more dangerous roads. Some children end up with even one skill and are made employable.
You must be logged in to post a comment.