IKEA is a Europe based multinational company that sells over 12,000 products worldwide. The company was founded in 1943 in Sweden and specializes in furniture. It was founded by Ingvar Kampand. He was one of the richest persons in the world in 2016. In this paper, I am going to explain the unethical incident occurred in 1994 with IKEA. The paper also discusses the methods to cope with the unethical incidents and what kind of decisions can be taken at that time. It also mentions the risks and problems faced by outsourcing and role NGO and MNC partnerships.
IKEA is a multicultural company. It’s a private European company that designs and sells furniture and other household stuff like kitchen appliances and gadgets. The company was founded in 1943 in Sweden by Ingvar Kampand who was 17 years old at that time. In the present scenario, the company is the biggest furniture retail company. The founder of IKEA was the eighth richest person on the globe in the year 2016. This multinational (MNC) enterprise in 2019, operates in 52 nations and manufactures around 12,000 products worldwide. The company also offers online services.
In the year 1994, the company landed in a controversy, where some children were found working in the factory. The children were making the rugs and other products for one of the suppliers of the company IKEA. UN took urgent action upon this and the incident did lots of damage to the goodwill of the company in those days due to which company had to change in their ongoing policies and strategies.
This matter was unethical and occurred at the international level and this needed to be solved effectively and efficiently. The company IKEA followed some of the effective methods to cope with this obstacle. At first, the CEO of the enterprise came forward at the news channel and apologized for the mistake and ensure to set a committee to settle down and investigate the reasons and people behind that happening. The company also contracted with all of its suppliers and the responsibility to solve this problem was given to Mr. Millianne Barner, the area manager for the rugs and carpets. The manager called and consulted with all the other persons working for IKEA in India and started selling the rugs under the new label which was the proof that the rugs production does not include the use of child labor. Moreover, to eradicate this arising concern, the company started monitoring all the importing and supplies at international levels to ensure quality and ethical work. IKEA’s carpets business area manager, Mr. Barner, also introduced an organization called ‘Save the Children’ that started dealing and responding to this kind of situation and worked as a watchdog on all the worldwide production operations. Also, the enterprise decided to minimize their production in the areas of India, Nepal, and Pakistan for their profit issues and their ethical image.
Outsourcing is one of the most used policies of manufacturing by companies nowadays. Companies get their products supplied from another nation as they get quality work and less cost. But it also raises some problems.
The biggest risk is uncertainty. The company was sometimes unable to meet the demands on time. Also, delay in the delivery from the outsourcing nation to the numerous marketing places because of environmental factors like heavy rains and floods that cause problems in the shipments through planes and ships and also sometimes the products do not match the expectations of the people. The other factor can be that the control of management is comparatively very less in producing the product from any other country because of cheap factors than manufacturing domestically. Experience also plays a vital role in outsourcing. The workers working in other nations do not know what people in another part of the world need or like and technology they use for production can be outdated sometimes which causes the usual delays. Financial uncertainties are the biggest factor and risk which leads to numerous business situations even to shut down. Some hidden costs in production like machinery repairs and bonuses affect the financial stability of an enterprise and push it towards the loss.
Outsourcing requires proper connections plus management. Though its cheap method to produce its results in heavy losses sometimes. A social enterprise is an organization that works and applies profitable (money-making) strategies and also works for improvements in the society side by side. IKEA as well works with trade unions, NGOs for the development and betterment of the society. IKEA has a partnership for environment conservation with WWF (global conservation organization). The partnership between an organization and the NGOs helps the big MNC’s to sustain in the era of competition. The NGOs keep check on the activities of the company and prevents companies to do unethical activities and it also encourages the businessmen to empower different communities and provides chances to new talents. It also reduces the stress on the company to think about society. Overall, it is the best way to work jointly as new people will come to a company and holistic growth in an ethical way is done but it also has some cons like loss of independence in decision making and policy formation.
Think back to life in primary school. Running around the school oval with your friends, chanting rhymes and skipping or maybe you were reading a book with a large tree shading the harsh sun from you. What you were not doing was standing in a sweatshop for over 10 hours straight, cutting thread or feeding buttons through fabric. 170 million children around the world have their youth ripped away from them as they are forced to work to stay alive. I strongly believe that fashion companies that utilise child labour should be boycotted, instead we should put our resources towards ethical companies that focus on eradicating this disgusting practice. This exploitation of innocent children in the fashion industry, just to produce cheap clothing for a profit should be brought to an end as it denies children from a formal education, exposes children to chemicals and dangerous working environments and limits their physical and mental growth.
Making children work in sweatshops and textiles factories denies them from an education. Child labourers who spend time working rather than studying have their future. Opportunities that only children with an education have access to, such as higher paying jobs and tertiary education, are not given to child labourers and this keeps them in the vicious cycle of poverty. Going to school allows these children a chance to learn about the unseen parts of the world rather than the one through their restricted view. It allows them to gain the ability to read and write, skills which could completely change the way they live their life in the future. Learning in a classroom provides children with the mental stimulation they need to expand their knowledge bank. It is clear that child labour should not exist as it conflicts with children’s schooling.
Additionally, allowing children to work in sweatshops and garment factories exposes them to hazardous chemicals and dangerous working environments which could change their life forever. Typically young children are employed in sweatshops and garment factories because they have the agility that older adults may not have. However, young children should not be working with sewing machines, needles or even scissors unsupervised as they can easily cause harm to themselves. In Bangladesh, tanneries that produce ‘Bengali Black leather’ are a popular choice for children to work in. These children are exposed to cocktails of toxic chemicals such as hydrogen sulphide and sulphuric acid which can cause chronic skin and lung diseases the children have to handle for the rest of their lives. It is unfair that these children have to slave away and cause harm to their bodies by being exposed to dangerous tools and hazardous chemicals just to satisfy the selfish demands of the consumers in western nations.
Last but not least, keeping children working in factories restrict their mental and physical growth. Research shows that children involved in child labour from a young age tend to be lighter in weight and shorter than their peers. This is due to a calorie-deficit diet these children consume in a day as they slave away to get the allocated work done before the end of the day. Malnutrition can cause major health issues such as osteoporosis and decreased immunity against infections and diseases. This is extremely dangerous in the light of the current COVID-19 pandemic. Mentally, these children are much less developed than their peers in places such as Australia and Europe. Working in factories and sweatshops becomes a routine for them, providing no mental stimulation. Parents are taught to give mental stimulation to a child through to their teenage years, to allow them to fully develop their mind and gain mental skills. Therefore child labour should be brought to an end as it stunts a child’s mental and physical growth.
Although child labour seems like a reality too far away for many of us living here in Australia, it is a problem we unknowingly support. Child labour restricts children’s future by denying them of a formal education. Other reasons such as exposure to dangerous working environments and restriction of children’s mental and physical growth lead me to believe that we should not be supporting child labour. This revolting practice puts young and innocent lives at risk and we should boycott companies that engage child labour and divert our funds towards child labour organisations that fight towards the eradication of this issue from the face of Earth.
Hennes & Mauritz AB is a multinational company of Sweden who are involved in the clothing-retailing industry and well-known worldwide for manufacturing fast-fashion clothing for the people of all ages. They are operating in the different markets worldwide which call for the need of establishing factories in different parts of the world. They also collaborate with different factories (Nissen 2017). According to a book that was published in Sweden stated that children as young as 14 was appointed to work in their factories which are based in Myanmar for long 12 hours. The Guardian reported that one of the girls named Zu Zu who worked there since she was 14 mentioned that no recruitment policies and anybody were willing to work could have joined (Theguardian.com 2016). Adding to this, other girls of 15 years mention how they worked till 10 in the night which is even against the international labour convention also breaching the Myanmar laws.
The problem occurs over a statement which defended the case by mentioning it to be not a case of child labour as the age group of 14- to 18- year olds according to the international labour laws. However, it was not entertained by the ILO in lieu they stressed on the question of why this age group was not excluded. The company has claimed steadily that under any circumstances does not tolerate any form of child labour in their organisation (Mochalova 2017). H&M has emphasised on taking actions against both of the factories named Myanmar Garment Wedge and Myanmar Century Liaoyuan Knitted Wear, on overtime and ID-cards as they came to know that it has been on-going since 2013 where the children were working long tiring hours.
The instrumental theories of child labour deal with the business development of the shareholders by maximising shares and values along with planning other strategies to be competitive to get competitive advantages. The cause-related marketing strategies are also followed in these theories. Child labour is a social disease which has been going on in different parts of the world (Røvik 2016, p.300). The H&M case of child labour in Myanmar is considered to be reflection of the mentioned theories. Due to the disempowerment of the workers in the country, in the current situation they are the least paid workers in the whole world. This has made the big companies to establish their factories collaborating with the local businesses. To reduce the production cost which will reflect in increasing economic objectives child labour is often practise in such setup as the economic issue persists in such countries (Globalcitizen.org. 2020). Lower production cost and higher productivity also makes the firms competitive in the business market. This is the strategy which aims at the bottom of the pyramid of economy. The firms indulges themselves in practising child labour of develop their dynamic capabilities to get competitive advantages out of it (Jones, Harrison and Felps 2018, p.380). Taking the advantage of the socio-economic structure child labour is often practised by the firms to achieve competitive advantages. Also the children are pushed to this by their family members because of low adult wages or poverty. Both the factories based in Myanmar of H&M used these factors to practise child labour without informing the corporate heads of the company.
Understanding all the above points it could be said that it becomes important to take care of the socio-economic issues which are on-going within any country. Due to the worker disempowerment issue in the country along with which the English companies which are spreading their business webs to establish capitalism the risk of child labour will be always persisting. Though all the companies have strictly mentioned about the exclusion of any form of child labour in their factories, to do so effectively it is needed to have strict rules and regulations to ban the act of employing children to work for more than 12 hours each day (Tranjan 2018). However, without threatening their health and safety along with not hindering their education children belonging to the age group of 13 to 15 could be entitled to do lighter works if they are willing to.
Reference List
Globalcitizen.org. 2020. Factory abuse fast fashion. Available at: https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/hm-gap-factory-abuse-fast-fashion-workers/ [Accessed 19th Feb 2020]
Grimm, M., Waibel, H. and Klasen, S. eds., 2016. Vulnerability to poverty: Theory, measurement and determinants, with case studies from Thailand and Vietnam. Springer. [Available at: https://books.google.co.in/books?hl=en&lr=&id=86gYDAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=poverty+theory&ots=3FrG4HvS9s&sig=qaknxyve5Z-hozXcjUNGekBdbb0]
Mochalova, K., 2017. Control and Coordination of Suppliers in MNEs: Case: Hennes & Mauritz (H&M), Case: Company X. [Available at: https://www.theseus.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/139783/Mochalova_Ksenia.pdf?sequence=2]
Nissen, A., 2017. A piece of work: H&M’s take on child labour in Myanmar. International Law Journal of London. [Available at: http://orca.cf.ac.uk/98581/]
Sundjo, F., Ezekiel, M., Michael, E., Bessala, S.O., Essama, M., Grace, D. and Aziseh, I.F., 2018. Comercial Openness, Foreign Direct Investment and Child Labour: Cross-‐ Country Empirical Evidence from Sub-‐ Saharan Africa. Economic Research, 2(9), pp.12-24. [Available at: https://www.jobmer.org/2018/vol2_issue9_article2.pdf]
Child labor is a global issue and not just a problem in the countries where this is happening.
It is thought that over 211 million children under 15 work, 73 million of them are under 10 years old, and around 22,000 die every year in work-related accidents. (Child labour | Ethical Trading Initiative, 2021)
Child Labour also has moral and ethical implications; this report will compare arguments for and against banning all forms of child labor in supply chains.
The first thing we should consider is what is child labor and why children work.
The term ‘child labor’ is often defined as work that deprives children of their childhood, their potential, and their dignity, and is harmful to physical and mental development. (What is child labor (IPEC), 2021)
Children could be forced into work if there is a shortage of well-paid jobs for adults, it is cheaper to pay children as they are less likely to complain. Families with large numbers require multiple income sources to feed their members. Jobs that pay by the amount collected or picked, like in agriculture, encourage families to bring their young to help with the labor. Many families are not aware of the rights of their children and think it is the norm to send them to work instead of school as they think school will not help their children survive. (Child labour | Ethical Trading Initiative, 2021)
Advantages of child labor
The money that the child brings in is a huge support for poor families, and in some countries, parents see this as a reliable source of income. The money earned can be used to pay for schooling if the children work in their spare time. (Positives and Negatives, 2021)
Working children learn to become independent, productive and mature quicker than the average child. (Pros and Cons of Child Labour, 2021)
Disadvantages of child labor
Children start work at a very young age depriving them of their childhood, often working in dangerous conditions. They have little or no access to education as they are working. (Positives and Negatives, 2021)
Companies that employ children often pay low wages for long hours, as they are children, they are more likely to be exploited.
Supply Chains
Child labor is found in various types of industries like agriculture, mining, manufacturing, and tourism, producing goods and services that are consumed by millions every day. (Us, Areas and Chains, 2021)
Child labor happens largely in rural and informal economies, where it is harder to check and much more difficult to protect workers from exploitation. The demand for products in these types of industries is massive and the growing culture of consumerism is encouraging companies to find cheaper labor so that costs are low, and profits are high. (Us, Areas and Chains, 2021). The reality is that children are seen as a source of cheap labor because they slip under the radar, they are looked upon as low-skilled workers without a voice so become easy targets. (Us, Areas and Chains, 2021)
Industries that employ children get away with it as supply chains have become extremely complex and it is hard for companies to monitor and control every stage of production however not impossible. Businesses need to play a part in the role of protecting children’s rights and adopting child-friendly practices by demanding transparency within the supply chains and understanding the size of the issue. (Us, Areas and Chains, 2021)
Arguments for child labor
The main reason for companies employing children would be the cost, adults are more likely to want better wages for their work whereas children are less inclined to complain about pay and working conditions. A child is thought to have nimble fingers, so industries like carpet and garment like to employ children as they see them as having irreplaceable skills.
Companies also see children as easier to manage than adults, they are less aware of basic working rights and less troublesome. Some employers like to have a reserve of casual labor so they can hire and fire at will. When the labor is illegal, they and their parents are less likely to complain to the authorities for fear of losing their source of income. (Why do employers outside the family hire children? 2021)
Another view is that child labor is better than living in poverty, in poorer countries families are dependent on the child bringing in income so that they may have the basics to survive. Stopping the child from working may make the families more vulnerable to poverty and harsher environments which can also have harmful effects on their physical, emotional, and psychological well-being. (Is Child Labour Better Than Living in Poverty? 2021)
Arguments against child labor
Child labor affects the general health and well-being of children, especially if they are in harsh and hazardous working conditions. It can have an impact on a child’s physical and mental health and can create several problems like premature aging, depression, and malnutrition. (Child Labour – Humanium, 2021)
Child labor also has an impact on children’s education, if they are working long hours then they will have little or no time for school.
Poverty and child labor create a vicious cycle that is very hard for poorer families to break out from.
(Child Labour in India: Causes, Consequences, Laws | UPSC Essay – IAS EXPRESS, 2021)
The fashion industry has one of the most complex supply chains, even when brands have strict guidelines in place, work often gets subcontracted by the suppliers to other factories that the buyer does not even know about. Companies that sell their products in Europe and the U.S. may not know where their textiles come from, they may know the initial supplier but have no idea where the cotton came from further down the supply chain. (Child labor in the fashion supply chain, 2021)
Recommendations
Governments should introduce and enforce laws that protect children from being exploited in the workplace, for example, they could set a minimum age that a child can work, have a minimum wage that businesses would have to pay, have a maximum working hours regulation and provide free education to all children up to a certain age.
They should monitor businesses when children are involved in the workforce, making sure that they are following the rules on child labor and imposing heavy fines or sanctions on businesses that do not adhere to them.
Businesses should regularly review their supply chains and try to apply methods to end child labor, they should try to foster a fairer wage for workers within their business across all sectors. They should label or certify that their goods were produced free from child labor.
We as consumers should be more vigilant when buying goods, making sure that child labor is not used in the production process and refusing to buy products from those companies that do.
Conclusion
In an ideal world, no child should ever bear the burden and the responsibility of being the main provider for their family and be forced into work from a young age, however, this is not the harsh reality that we live in. Although child labor is a terrible thing, I think stopping and eradicating it will be harmful if not done the right way as many poor families depend on the child to bring in income just so that they may survive. Charities like UNICEF and GOODWEAVE work tirelessly to help children in such situations, but I feel businesses and world governments could do more to help those stuck in a vicious cycle of poverty. Businesses could ask their suppliers to be fully transparent about where and how the raw materials used to make their products were obtained, the labor force used in the manufacturing process, and boycott suppliers if there are signs of child exploitation. World governments could help those working children’s families who are too busy for schooling by easing some of the financial burden put upon them. They should be given the chance to receive an education by reducing the amount of work they have to do, so in essence less work will mean more time for school. The families should be educated on the working rights of the child to try to prevent them from being exploited by the employer. Employers should also be monitored by both businesses and world governments especially when children are involved in the workforce, to make sure that they are in good working conditions, and that they are receiving a fair wage for the work being done. All this may be very difficult to achieve but if we all work together not impossible, as children are our future, and we should make sure that it is safe and secure.
The labor market today has obtained a flow of issues that have brought change in the economic sector. These changes have been caused by several factors, which include globalization and the economy itself. Among the issues which are currently observed in the labor market, child labor has been a major challenge faced by the world at large. It has been a major concern in the global issues of economics although it is viewed to be more experienced in regions like Africa and Asia.
This paper discusses the reasons of why Child labor is practiced, as well as the assumptions about its practicing in some regions more often than in others in the modern world. In the Cornell Daily Sun article of December 2004, one can find lots of useful information about why, how and where the child labor is practiced based on the research done by Professor Nancy Chau of the Cornell Institute for Public Affairs.
Labor has been conclusively defined as work or activities that deny the child an opportunity to be in school as well as an opportunity to be a child in terms of behavioral activities such as playing, interaction or learning (Oran 46).
Professor Chau’s definition can be backed up by Eric Edmond’s view on the subject. However, he adds that normal domestic chores can be calculated into child labor if the child does not get enough time to study (Edmonds 23) Professor Chau’s claim on child labor and its causes is that it is not only that the child labor cases are caused by poverty. It is for sure a major factor but, there are indeed other crucial factors that add up to the main one.
According to Professor Chau’s claim, the regions’ Gross Domestic Product may be the cause of the problematic practice. It is claimed that regions of low GPDs are affected by child labor practice (Oran 32). In another observation, Chau believes that the practice may be developed by the myth that children’s’ way of doing things better than adults would make them the appropriate substitute in the labor market.
In her research it is evident that, in a country like Paraguay, a child makes about a quarter of what the rest of the whole family make. These assumptions lead to the fact that adults ignore the fact that a child needs education. Instead, the parents value the idea of bringing more children rather than bringing up educated children.
Having observed the areas mostly stricken by child labor and various factors that cause the problem, Professor Chau suggests some solutions to the problem. She gives a very good example of Brazil’s plan to pay adults for keeping their children in school (Oran 5) .This seems to be a valid and very reasonable solution that would help to deal with the problem in our society.
I would definitely agree wit her, although in my opinion, this would be a solution for only the countries which are able to budget compensation for child education. What about the countries practicing Child labor due to poverty that cannot afford compensation for child Education? Child labor takes out the dignity and the rights of our children. Including children as laborers, often in dangerous working conditions, should be discouraged at all cost.
Works Cited
Edmonds, Eric. Child labor. The national bureau of economics research, 2007.
Oran, Olivia. Issues Around Child Labor. Cornell Publishers. 2008.
Child protection has long been the concern of almost everybody. From child labor to child abuse, there are certainly different government and non-government agencies all over the world that support and are keenly watching the child’s rights and protection programs of every country.
In United Kingdom, there is a combined effort to prevent the increasing number of child abuse and child labour related cases. The government and policy makers have been trying to use the cases and programs in the neighbouring countries to create suitable and proper judicial laws and programs for the country.
Relevant Data Regarding Child Labour and Abuse
There are many forms of child abuse. The first of which is subjecting the child to unwarranted labour. It should be noted that children, on their very young age, should be using their time studying and or playing with other children of their age. However there are a good percentage of children who are found to be working like adults. More and more researches are done to find out whether children all over the world have been subjected to unjustifiable works. Below are two of the statistic results presented that are inline with this issue:
Table 1: Distribution of Economically Active Children under 15 Years of Age (percent of total world child abuse).
Region
1980
1985
1990
Africa
17.0
18.0
21.3
Americas
4.7
5.6
N/A
Asia
77.8
75.9
72.3
Europe
0.3
0.2
0.1
Oceania
0.2
0.2
0.2
Source: ILO 1993.
Table 2: Comparison of Labour Force Participation Rates of Children and Adults by Region (percent).
Region
15 years and over
10-14 years
Africa
65.2
22.0
Americas
61.8
7.9
Asia
68.1
15.3
Europe
54.5
0.3
Oceania
62.7
6.9
Source: ILO 1993.
The data shown above clearly implies that all over the world, child abuse is really imminent. Children are subjected to labour works that is not and should not be allowed. Children are facing harassment and brutalities instead of love and care. The data above is just on the continental perspective and looking closely as per each country, the numbers are more gripping.
Other forms of child abuse are violence, harassment and exploitation with which the children are the sole victims. Rapes, deaths, trauma and psychological instability are just some of the aftermaths of such kind of child abuse.
In the UK
The cases and reports of child abuse and/or child labour in the UK are astounding. Based on the recent statistics, it was reported that that at least one child die each week as caused by child abuse. This is the reason why the government is compelled to spend at least £1 billion a year. However, this financial resource is used mostly in dealing with the aftermath of abuse where in fact, the prevention programs should be dealt with too (Child Abuse, 2005.
Other related statistics to UK’s child abuse and/or child labour rate are (Child Abuse, 2005:
30,021 children were listed as part of the child protection program in 2001.
In 2005, 25,900 children were on child protection registers because of the risk they face on child abusers.
In 2002, 45% rates of rapes and attempted rapes reported in Wales and England were committed against children under 16.
In UK, an estimated number of 80-100 homicide cases each year is committed against children with ages from 0-16.
It was reported that there were approximately around 385,300 children in England were requiring some form of social service provision on 2005.
The number of internet child abuse in England and Wales rose from 549 to 2234 on the years 2001-2003.
Most of the child abusers are found to be closely related to the child being abused.
What do the government do about it?
It has then been concluded that government intervention is really a must. Enough funding on the child’s welfare, particularly on giving them the right for proper education, shelter, and food should be enhanced. Moreover, social workers, non-government organizations (NGO’s) are also there to assist the government in uplifting the lives of the many, hence the government can really work hand-in-hand with this groups.
Various activities are also encouraged to be initiated in highly youth-populated areas so that they may be given venues to enhance their skills in sports and to prevent them from going into abusive drugs and/or crimes.
In the UK alone, a vast range of laws and programs are being implemented to protect the children against child abuse. This is because the policymakers have found out that child abuse if not dealt properly will not stop and will cause more deviant issues, like what happened in the US and other neighbouring countries (Child Abuse, 2005.
Some examples of the programs implements dint he UK are the Infant Life Protection Act 1872 and Children Act 1889. The first is about protecting the children against too much work in farming while the second is aimed at imposing criminal sanctions to those who will be proven mistreating the children. However, since these ‘old’ laws have not been working successfully as planned, more laws and guidelines are now being studied (Child Abuse, 2005.
“…Modern arrangements for child protection are incorporated into a range of legislation and have undergone an intense period of review since 2001…” (Child Abuse, 2005).
Part of the improved laws and regulations is the Sexual Offences Act 2003 which aims to protect the children even on their most vulnerable times. This act was initiated because it was reported that more and more child abusers are now using different forms of technology to commit child abuse acts. Thus, the Sexual Offences Act 2003 also covers stricter laws and wide range of monitoring against sex offenders. This law also provides new lists of varied types of offences that can be made against the children plus the “harsher sentences for sexual offences against children and vulnerable people” (Child Abuse, 2005).
References
“Child Abuse” 2005. Web.
Crozier, William L. (1993). Lower Manhattan Project. Observations of Life in Lower Manhattan at the Turn of the Century. ILO (International Labor Office). Bulletin of Labor Statistics 1993-3. Geneva.
Lluncor, Ben. Gun Control In America. 2003. The Pen. Web.
Oberg, Cynthia G. 2000.”The Death Penalty – True Cause for Justice”. Web.
Savage, Charlie. 2004. “Supreme Court justices weigh limit on death penalty.” The Boston Globe. Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News.
“Thoughts on the death penalty” 2004. Web.
The Economist. Home on the Range. 1994. Web.
Trattner, Walter (1970). Crusade for the Children: A History of the National Child abuse Committee and Child abuse Reform in America.
Many European nations and the US are putting measures in place to ban the importation of goods produced with child labour to their territories.
In particular, in the US, through TVPRA (trafficking victims protection and reauthorisation act) of 2005, the US’ labour secretary coupled with other agencies and other departments are required to ensure that goods that are produced in violation to the set international labour standards are not sold in the United States of America.
Following the enactments made in 2008 to TVPRA, the labour secretary was required to compile a list of all goods produced through the inputs of child labour. In the year 2010, Hilda Solis compiled and forwarded the list.
Various US agencies and departments have also issued their guidelines on abolition of the importation of goods produced with child labour based on the list issued by the US labour secretary.
While the US and many other European nations accept that the banning of any illegal form of child labour is vital for enhancing observance of the rights for children, some nations, especially in the developing world, perceive child labour as one of the sources of economical sources of labour.
According to the statistics released by ILO (International Labour Organisation), approximately 18 percent of children falling in the age of 5 years to 14 years across the globe are active economically (International Labour office, 2002, p.43).
Thus, about 211 million children engage in works that earn wages in family’s farms and production process of primary products in firms. They also engage in family-oriented enterprises established to make primary products, which are offered in the market for sale besides engaging in barter.
Therefore, they are in a state of unemployment though they continuously search for these types of chores. The statistics are worrying amid the intense focus of the US and many European nations on the need to curtail the exploitation of children.
In this paper, the focus is on how the increasingly strict child labour policies affect children in the developing countries such as the Indonesia, India, Thailand, and Pakistan in which companies such as Addidas and Nike base their production.
These two brands have been heavily accused of child labour over the past decade. This paper will show how this has affected children in these developing countries. These companies are located in Asia where child labour, according to ILO, is most prevalent: it stands at 60 percent.
In India, for instance, Burke (2000) claims, “children as young as seven, were regularly used in the production of wide range of sports goods in which about 13 million pounds worth of these goods were meant for British markets” (Para.7).
The paper also focuses on the question of how the policies on child labour have influenced the GPD of developing nations due to lack of education and labour opportunities for the newly unemployed children.
Finally, this paper will investigate how Addidas tried to compensate this cheap and available labour after the enactment of even stricter child labour policies.
Impacts of Restrictions on the Import of Goods produced with Child Labour on Children Living in the Developing Countries
The policies banning the importation of goods made with child labour are attributed to the need of preventing children from being worked under dehumanising conditions for low incomes.
Brown (2002) appreciates that children have been worked throughout history by asserting, “the fact of children working and the difficult conditions under which children work occasionally become more evident…because of the increasing the number of children producing goods for export” (p.3).
From this perspective, two questions are worth giving some thorough treatment:
Why do children work?
Why do company’s such as Nike claim that they have shunned from employing children in Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Cambodia and other nations and yet they are caught up in the accusation for employing children?
Many theories have been put forward to explain the circumstances under which children work. Some of these theories are discussed by Brown (2002) in his work entitled “determinants of child labour: theory and evidence” (pp 1-83).
This work comprises of theories of labour markets, which can be grouped into two: demand side and supply side determinants (Burke, 2000, p.23).
Children may engage in paid labour for a number of factors such as budget constraits for households, failure of bargaining power, and where children act as “complementary inputs to household production” (Brown , 2002, p.22) amongst others.
Budget constraints in households hinder the parents‘ capacity to ensure equalisation of expenditure on edcuation across all their children. This occurs especially when parents possess minimal information on the value of borrowing for the sake of bettter income in some future time.
In such a situation,“ the level of spending on the first child and last born will be higher than family average” (Brown , 2002, p.6). This disparity is explained by the relationship between constraints of family liquidity and investiments on children.
Where families are liquidity-constrained, they cannot utilise the returns earned on investiments in bettering the life of children until they enter into the labour force (Brown , 2002, p.6). On the other hand, upon the entry into the labour force of the oldest child in a family constrained by budgets liquidity, the family budget is relieved.
Consequently, it bceomes feasible and possible to invest in the other siblings. Therefore, it is more likely that first borns in a family that is liquidity costrained would venture into child labour since a direct correlation exists between child labour and educational attainement among children: child labour being also in a direct correlation with budget liquidity constraints.
Failure of bargaining power is a significant contributor to child labour.Quoting Robinson (2000), Brown argues, “non-altruistic parents fail to invest in an efficient level of human capital in their children because the child cannot precommit to repay the loan made by the parent to the child while in school (2002, p.12).
On the other hand, in case of a purely artruistic parent, chances of the emergece of child labour cannot be rulled out since any bargaining with people employing the parents results into child labour.
This argument is evidenced by a case whereby an empoyee earns a suboptimal income, and the employer engages in bargaining with him or her in the attempt to increase the productivity of that employee through the increment of wages.
While this extra earnings may be meant for increasing the buying ability of the employee, in case he or she has a family, the range of commodities that the employee can buy may not increase, as it may be offset by increased consumption by his or her family.
Theoritically, to seal off this gap, the employer may consider hiring even the spouse and the children. This way, child labour results.
Where chidren serve as complementary sources of inputs for increasing household prodcutivity, child labour comes in. The figures released by ILO indicate that the prevalence of child labour is highest in developing economies.
However, this does not imply that, in such nations, all the children involved in child labour come from poor families since, according to Brown (2002), “there are a number of assets that require a complementary input of labour, and families may expect to get that labour from their children” (Connor, 2001, p.21).
Thus, putting in place measures to curtail accessibility to capital markets may not reduce child labour in the short run. For instance, in a family, irrespective of the the available wealth, the chances of eangagement of younger chidren in labour are reduced by the presence of older children within the family.
Also crucial to note is that, other than reasons pegged on inputs of education attaiment on the productivity of the parents, edcaution is a significant asset that may reduce child labour.
Demand is a subtle factor that contributes to the maganitutes of child labour in different nations. This factor is critical especially in the developing world in which industries have not mechanised fully.
In economic terms, the demand for child labour can be explained from the perspectives of demand for unskilled labour in comparison to skilled labour.
For the production technolologies, which require high levels of skilled labour, child labour is minimal. On the other hand, in production technologies that require unskilled labour, immense opportunities exist for meanial chores.
The correlation between the state of technology of a production system and child labour is evidenced by Admassie who argues, “there is a strong correlation between the incidences of child labour and agricultural’s share of GDP Ethiopia” (Brown, 2002, p.25).
The more technology systems are backward, the greater the magnitude of child labour. The prevalence of child labour in such production systems does not imply that children are more precise in their work than adults. Rather, children can work for lesser wages in comparison to adults.
For instance, Nike has been accussed over several years that it employs children in its Cambodia plants. He argues, “fake evidence of age could be bought in Cambodia for as little as $5” ( Boggan, 2001, Para 8).
While the stalemate of the company’s accusation for employment of children remains unresolved, according to Boggan (2001), there are immense concerns that the company will make use of a very minimal portion of the cost of production of its pair of shoes (70 pounds) in the payment of labour.
Nevertheless, amid the high call for Nike to ensure that workers within its Asian production plant are remunerated accordingly, the company “treated sweatshop allegations as an issue of public relations rather than an issue of human rights” (Boggan, 2001, Para. 21).
Measures to provide good working conditions at the Nike plants in the Asian countries face challenges both emanating from the managers and the employees. For instance, When the Jobs Inspector Calls (2012) claims that managers bribe auditor so that they can report on lesser working hours and higher pay rates (Para.9).
On the other hand, workers, particularly the immigrants, are normally willing to work longer hours so that they can maximise their savings. However, When the Jobs Inspector Calls (2012) does not report any issues related to employment of children and or factors that may make the company tolerate child labour within its factories.
Through the company’s watch, Tom Connor, the company holds, “finishing work in a Nike contract factory, the great majority of Nike workers will go back to rural areas marked by extreme poverty” ( Boggan, 2001, Para 10.). Due to this poverty, employees have a little bargaining power with the employers.
Their budgets are thus likely to be liquidity-constrained. Stemming from the earlier discussions, these constraints lead to an increase in child labour atleast for the first child in a family. For the Cambodia’s Nike plants, this may happen in the attempt to garner more financial security in case the contracts are over.
Indeed, according to Boggan (2001), the company accepts this arguement when it argues that employees‘ future “economic security is very much tied up with what they earn now” (Para.11).
A survey results of three factories based in Philippines, Indonesia, and Srilanka amplify this arguement in the sense, “not one of them paid living wages to their combined 100,000 strong workforce” (Bunting, 2008, Para. 5), and yet people reported to work on a daily basis.
In Indonesia, about 25 percent of all the workers were placed on temporary contracts while, in Philippines, the number hiked to 85 percent. Worse still, the emplopyees who were subjected to a compulsory overtime were supposed to meet high production targets only to recieve low wages later (Bunting, 2008, Para.7).
In Indonesia, at the Sukabuni factory that makes converse shoes, workers complained that they had experienced encouters of direct abuse from the supervisors, something that Nike does not deny. However, the company is quick to argue that it can only do little to stop it (Daily Mail Reporter, 2011, Para. 2).
All these have the capacity to subject employees to budget liquidity constraits thus giving rise to instances of child labour to increase household incomes.
Arguably, instances of families willigly permiting their children to engage in paid labour are an attempt to maximise the family‘s wealth before Nike‘s constracted factotries are closed often making the employees to go back to their poor rural areas. This phenomenon is an exemplification of the supply side factors that may contribute to child labour.
The supply side factors for increased child labour may be explained in three models. The first model is based on the argument that parents settle on decisions on child education and or labour through the consideration of the need to maximise the wealth of their families.
Accodring to this model, “child labour arises when the rate of return on an education falls below the market rate of interest” (Brown, 2002, p.41). Such families are essentially constrained by credit. In model two, child labour surfaces to enhance transferability of household assets into the present from the future.
Cosequently, child labour occurs in situations where the assets of the household are zero. Lastly, according to the third model, “parents are selfish but cannot control the incomes of their children once they become adults” ( Brown, 2002, p.41).
Therefore, parents would place their children for labour in the desire to ensure that they are able to control their incomes at an age when it is possible to control them. Over the years, scholarly evidence has resulted into rejection of the first and the second models.
The supply side and demand side factors that attract opportunities for children to work pose immense impacts on the measures to boycott the consumption of products produced with child labour on children in the developing countries.
In the first place, restricting the importation of Nike and Addidas’ products on the basis that they are produced with child labour input will result to laying off all chldren labourers in the attempt to retain the market share of these two global bands within the European nations and the US markets.
Third-world nations have been depending on donors‘ aid to fund their budgets due to the low productivity levels. This implies that third-world nations are consumer markets. For the citizens to satisfy their demands, they have to operate under the constraints of budgets liquidity.
Restricting the selling of goods produced with child labour would imply that, in such nations, families and households would even suffer more budget liquidity since the portion of household incomes generated by children will be shut off.
Even though the main goal of boycotting the consumption of products produced with child labour is to increase the levels of educational attainment among third-world children, such a measure may not ammount to the realisation of this endevour.
This is because, by simply laying off the children labourers, it does not outlightly mean that companies such as Addidas and Nike, which base their production in the third-world nations, especially Asia (Burke, 2000, para. 11), would increase the incomes earned by their parents.
However, restriction of the sale of products that are produced with child labour would truncate into a reduction of the output capacity of many companies whose labour markets are open to hiring children.
In the nations where many of the factories are operated by contractors who, upon making products, are supplied to the European markets and the US such as Nike products, a total restriction of the importation of products that are produced with child labour implies that the nations would have a reduced flow of money within their territorie.
This translates to a slowed economic growth. According to Dagdemir (2010), “economic growth increases the demand for child labour, especially during the lack of goverment intervention, labour markets becomes open to child labour ” (p.1).
From this position, it is essential to note then that economic growth in nations that exploit children to provide labour is in a direct proportion with child labour. Slowing econimc growth by restricting the importation of products produced with child labour would result to a reduction of child labour globally.
Families that rely on these children to generate incomes would suffer from reduced buying power atleast in the short run.
However, in the end, in an economic sense, the families would gain since the reduction in child labour translates to an increase in education attainement and hence the availability of a more skilled labour, which is remunerated better than the unskilled labour because educational attainement is negatively correalted with child labour.
Many of the economic researches that look into the causes of child labour in the developing nations cite poverty among households and government polices as the main factors that fuel the increase of incidences of child labour.
Boycotting products that are produced with child labour translates to sanctioning of governments whose production plants hire children to alter their policies if they have to participate in international trades.
This leads to an increase in the rate of economic development in such nations since, according to Dagdemir (2010), “use of child labour is negatively related to economic development” (p.39). In the developed world, there are standardised labour laws, which are strictly adhered.
This makes workers in the developed world to have better working conditions. Boycotting the consumption of products made with child labour would result to a reduction of the incidences of mistreatment of workers in general.
This follows because, when the developed nations sanction trades with developing nations, a mechanism for enforcing labour policies may be obtained, which, according to Dagdemir (2010), “governments in developing countries often lack resources to enforce child labour claims” (p.39).
In the attempt to comply with requirement for non-engagement of children to supply labour in factories imposed on plants situated in the developing world, governments may opt for a compulsory placement for children in schools.
They may also result to subsidising education through programs such as the stipend programs deployed by the Brazilian government to reduce child labour to boost school enrollment (Vawda, n.d, pp.1-3).
While this measure may help the developing world’s governments to ensure compliance with the imposed trade sanctions seeking to curtail the importation of products produced with child labour, the measure may make many children have accessibility to education and hence better jobs in future.
In the deployment of measures to fight against child labour through the restriction of importation of products produced with inputs of child labour, the assumption is that adult labour may replace child labour.
In this dimension, child labour may be argued to create unemployment to adults. Indeed, child labour deterrence act of the US states, “the employment of children under the age of 15 years…ignores the importance of increasing jobs, aggregate demand, and purchasing power among adults as catalyst to development in many developing countries” (Doran, 2010, p.2).
This argument is consistent with the ILO that holds that incidences of child labour result to low job accessibility rates to adults coupled with poor wages (Doran, 2010, p.2).
Essentially, then, restricting the importation of products that are produced with child labour would not only make parents seek for alternative ways of keeping their children busy but also protect the children from exploitation by capitalistic companies seeking optimal profits.
This impact of restriction of importation of products produced with child labour is enhanced by Doran (2010) who, through the utilisation of data generated from a schooling experiment in Mexico, finds out, “decreasing child farm work is accompanied by increasing adult labour demand” (p.1).
This means that a decrease in the supply of child labour leads to an increase in demand for adult labourers.
Arguably, therefore, by imposing sanction on products that are produced with child labour, a decrease in supply of child labour would result to an increase in demand for adults labour accompanied by an increment in the provisions of better working conditions, reduction in working hours, and even an increase in the wages paid to adults.
This way, the loss in welfare incurred by laying off children workers is offset by this increase of household incomes earned by adults.
Impacts of Increasing Strict Child Labour Policy on Children Living in Developing Countries
Many of the laws that necessarily help in elimination of child labour are enormously borrowed from the developed nations’ experience with child labour during their industrialisation age. Great Britain was transformed into the present-day industrial state from an agricultural nation.
In this process, Great Britain underwent immense social and economic changes. Amongst the most regretted experience is employment followed by the overworking of children in textile factories.
Nardinelli (1980) is also inclined to this line of thought by supporting Edward Thompson’s argument, “the exploitation of little children, on this scale and with this intensity, was one of the most shameful events in our history” (p.739).
Tantamount to the situations faced by workers in the Sukunami plant in Indonesia, the great Britain textile factories’ masters (supervisors) were brutal and often garnered effort to oppress children working in industries in a manner that was comparable to “ that of west Indian slaves” (Nardinelli, 1980, p.739).
Arguably, even without the imposition of any rules to curb child labour, the Great Britain’s industries evolved through the development process to appreciate and respect the rights of children. For the case of the developing nations, they are in a similar stage experienced by the developed world in their industrialisation age.
Thus, it is possible for the developing world to arrive to the same state as the Great Britain, the US, and the European nations at some time in the future to respect the rights of children.
There is the need to utilising the experiences of the developed world’s instances of the abuse of the child right through overworking them in industries coupled with the set out rules and principles to guide in the embracement of policies subtle for protection of children rights.
Therefore, with globalisation, developing nations may take lesser time to refrain from employing children as a cheap source of labour.
Advocating for stricter child labour laws to control child labour produces myriads of impacts on children living in the developing world. Consistent with the argument of the previous section, a total restriction of children from participating in paid labour may increase the school enrolment rates.
Oonk (2008) supports this argument. He further argues that an increase in child labour impairs the acquisition of human capital (Oonk, 2008, p.7). What this statement means is that education attainment is inversely proportion to child labour.
In the developing world, apart from the challenges of poverty, which have been often associated with an increase in child labour (Edmonds & Pavcnik, 2005, p.199), imposing strict laws on child labour so that parents can only choose to send their children to school as opposed to work faces some challenges associated with the quality of learning provided in schools.
The argument here is that, declining child labour may only lead to an increase in human capital acquisition if schools are available and parents consider the available schools as affordable and accessible coupled with having a paramount quality of learning such that parents consider such schools as useful.
Increment in child labour is viewed to influence trade from the contexts of the increment of availability of unskilled labour. The more the unskilled labour, the more the shift of the production systems deployed towards being labour intensive.
Therefore, even with sophistication of production systems, lesser opportunities are created for skilled labourers.
Imposing stricter laws on child labour may thus help in shifting this pattern so that, for companies such Nike and Addidas, which rely on easily available labour in the Asian nations to make mega profit margins (Marks, 2012, Para. 8), may focus more on automation of plants so that more skilled labour may be required to run the factories.
Creating a ‘no room’ for unskilled labour will make parents consider looking for mechanisms of giving their children the capacity to work in factories requiring higher levels of skilled labour. This can only be achieved through an increased enrollment of children in schools.
In the short run, households that depend on the incomes earned by children to boost their budgets would suffer budgetary.
However, the improved remuneration accompanied by the possession of higher skills levels may account for these deficits in the end so that imposition of stricter laws on child labour may raise the living standards of household, which is an indicator of the GDP of the nations, in the end.
Apart from violation of children rights, child labour results to various damages on the growth and development of children.
For instance, the International Labour Office informs, “child labour is clearly detrimental to individual children preventing them from enjoying their childhood, hampering their development and sometimes causing lifelong physical or psychological damage” (2002, p. 2).
Apart from individual detriments, child labour is also a problem to various communities and societies as a whole in places where it is prevalent. It leads to the exaggeration of the magnitudes of poverty, although poverty is amongst its causes, besides fostering social exclusion of children.
Child labour also slows national developments through denying children an opportunity to attend schools to gain education, which helps them garner skills, which lead to higher economic growths while fully utilised in adulthood and hence the GDP of the nations.
It is for this purpose that it is necessary to abolish child labour to ensure the availability of both skilled and high quality labour in the future. However, not all forms of works performed by children need to be abolished.
ILO sets out three groups of works that are worth abolishing so that children may become more productive in the future. The first group comprises of works that are executed by children who are below the minimum age that is stipulated under the national legislation through agreements with the international standards of labour.
Such works impede the development and child education (International Labour Office, 2002, p.9). The second group is called hazardous works, which include all works that jeopardise moral, mental, and physical well-being of children.
This category comprises of the worst forms of child labour, and takes into account tasks such as trafficking, slavery, and debt bondage coupled with other forms of forced works including engagement of children in prostitution, armed conflict, and even pornography amongst others (International Labour Office, 2002, p.9).
From the perspective of the works that are declared by ILO as worth abolishing, imposition of stricter laws on children labour particularly where children engage in the third group of works will have an overall effect of creating an educationally fit workforce.
These personnel will be more moral, ethical, and industrious in the future of the developing nations (Zagel, 2005, p.1). This workforce would be more cognisant of its rights and ways of claiming for the children so that the situations involving overworking of employees, denial of good pays among other negative treatments claimed by Nike workers in Sukunami factories in Indonesia are not experienced.
In Bangalore, India, not just general employees of all ages who are subjected to negative wok experience such as working extra time with no pay: children have to endure this challenge also. According to Ullas (2012), Bangalore has an approximately 14,980 child labourers (Para. 1).
Of this figure, boys account for 11,267. 90 percent of these boys engage in hazardous jobs, “which includes construction, garage mechanics, hotel and bar boys, butchers, scavenging, granite works, blacksmiths and agarbatti manufacturing” (Ullas, 2012, Para. 4).
When a sample of 1,594 boys was picked in an attempt to study the gravity of the challenge, it emerged that 67 percent were between 13-14 years old while 10 percent were between 9 to 10 years old. On the other hand, girls began to work at a lesser age compared to boys.
All these age groups fit into the definition of child labour offered by ILO. In the major-cited reasons for engagement in these jobs, poverty took an immense share while parents’ decision to withdraw them from school to help in supplementing households incomes was the second (Ullas, 2012, para.5).
Additionally, about a third of the children surveyed worked for 8 hours in daily with no extra wage given. This example depicts the impacts that stricter laws on child labour would have on children in the developing countries since its abolishing could lead to all these children being placed in schools.
Attempts by Addidas to Compensate for Cheap Labour
Addidas is a big brand that represents a sports people’s status. However, amid its recognition and brand equity, the company faced a mega controversy in the year 2000 related to mistreatment of employees in the Indonesian factories, which supplied conglomerates to Germany (Burke, 2000, Para.1).
The European parliament heard that the company made clothes that had child labour inputs. These children were in some instances forced to work overtime without extra pay. At times, they were sexually harassed.
The Indonesian workers’ representatives testified before the European parliament that, in Tuntex and the Nikoma Gemilang factories situated in the capital of Jakarta, children of 15 years and below worked for 15 hours in a day and 70 hours within a week for only $60 in a month besides being punished for failing to work overtime.
These wages were much below the par value set by the international labour organisation’s wage levels that are necessary to make workers live a decent life (International Labour Office, 2002, p.67).
Furthermore, according to Burke (2000), the workers’ representatives also alleged that these young children were “penalised for taking leave during medical difficulties and had illegal deductions taken from wages as punishments for minor misdemeanors” (Para.5).
These accusations were seen as a fresh re-emergence of the 1998 claims that the company produced footballs that contained the crest of Manchester United through child labour in India with the children labourers earning as little as 6p in an hour.
Most of the goods manufactured by Addidas are made through tenders that are awarded to factories located in the developing nations where labour is cheap, and where the company faces milder workers’ relation regulations in comparison to the US.
In Thailand, a woman in the Addidas factory who was later sacked in 1998 claimed that the company, through its management, deployed brutality to ensure that orders were finished within minimal time and cost of labour.
Workers were denied their rights such as sick pays and even statutory holidays to meet factory targets (Burke, 2000, Para.9).
In the light of the above accusations, the company maintained that it had strict labour codes of conduct that were adhered to in a bid to ensure that such oppressions of workers did not occur while also ensuring that labour wages were constantly monitored (Burke, 2000, Para.13).
Peter Csanandi, the Addidas spokesperson, reinforces this company’s stand by stating that the company had very good factories characterised by good working conditions. Hence, the management of the company was incredibly serious about the issue of workers’ complains.
He further defended the company by claiming, “we work closely with factory management and demand that they ensure good working conditions for workers and we also have a team of our own people who go to factories to sort out problem” (Burke, 2000, Para.15).
However, the company accepted that, in some situations, the claimed complains may occur with the company having a little control over them especially in the locally contracted factories. In particular, in Britain, Addidas admitted having problems with the shoe factories located in Indonesia.
However, the company never stated the problems it faced with the two factories: it was quick to note that it had embarked on increasing workers pays besides taking pragmatic strategies to settle the overtime demand coupled with holding identity cards for labourers within the Nikomas factory to ensure that no person under the age of 18 years worked there.
This last defense measure indicated the likelihood of the company to have been making use of child labour in the two Indonesian factories.
Conclusion
The US, many European nations, and many other countries that are signatories of the international labour standards set out by the international labour organisation seek to restrict the importation of goods produced with child labour into their territories.
In Economic terms, this amounts to boycotting the consumption of such products. Should such sanctions be imposed, companies such as Nike and Addidas would suffer since they have been accused of selling goods with inputs from child labour in their third-world locally contracted factories.
In the paper, it was argued that these companies might not be willing to give up on the European and the US markets. Hence, they would embark on putting in mechanisms of ensuring that ILO provides good working conditions to the employees who meet the accepted working age.
Consequently, if children work in their factories, as stated, the companies would consider laying them off. Such children would be incapacitated to supplement household incomes. The likelihood is that parents would send these children to school, something that would increase the availability of skilled human capital.
Education attained is directly correlated with higher economic growth. Therefore, restriction of importation of goods produced with child labour and putting in place stricter rules on child labour, the developing nations would experience a growth of their GDP.
These two aspects that help in reducing child labour would boost the enrolment of children in schools. This outcome relates to economic growth, which raises any nations’ gross domestic product (GDP).
Reference List
Boggan, S. (2001). Nike Admits to Mistakes Over Child Labour. Web.
Child labor refers to the participation of children in work that harms their well-being, affects their schooling and normal development, as well as prospects for their future. The International Labour Organization (ILO) has developed laws that protect children from child labor.
The Minimum Age convention No. 138 and the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention No. 182 have established guidelines that govern national laws on practices that are both acceptable and unacceptable about employment (O’Toole & Mayer, 2013). For example, they have set a limit for the minimum age allowed for employment. The conventions describe the minimum employment age as that above the age for completing obligatory education.
The ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work advocates for the abolishment of child labor around the world. In the recent past, many businesses and international organizations have been accused of engaging in child labor.
Businesses prefer child labor because it is cheap and readily available. Also, there are no clear guidelines to regulate the terms of employment (O’Toole & Mayer, 2013). Nike, Victoria Secret, Firestone, Hershey, and Walmart engage in child labor because it is cheap and thus enables them to reduce costs of production and maximize profits.
Nike
Nike has been accused severally of promoting child labor in its production factories in Pakistan and Cambodia. For example, it uses children to produce balls in its production factory in Pakistan (Boggan, 2001). The Pakistani government has stringent laws that protect children against child labor. However, it has done little to enforce the laws and curb the illegal activity.
In Pakistan, many people survive barely on five dollars per day because of its low per-capita income. Also, their culture involves sharing the earnings of one person with the entire family. The high rate of inflation has exerted great economic pressure on poor people, thus pushing children to work in factories to earn money to support their poor families (Boggan, 2001).
According to O’Toole & Mayer (2013), “more than 200 children are involved in the production of balls in Pakistan. These children are as young as 4 and five years of age”. Nike has been found guilty of child labor mainly in Asian countries that include Indonesia, Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh (Boggan, 2001). The reason for Nike’s use of child labor is the reduction of production cost and maximization of profits.
Research has revealed that Nike sets up production factories in countries that tolerate child labor due to their weak labor laws. It also uses child labor in its factories in China and Vietnam. Nike has taken advantage of its internationally recognized brand to conceal its involvement in child labor practices (O’Toole & Mayer, 2013).
Also, it has used its well-developed methods of marketing and advertisement to absolve itself of any involvement in illegal practices. To hide its illegal practices, Nike promotes charity work and donates equipment to poor neighborhoods in developing countries. In Vietnam, it contracts factories that violate the minimum wage required for employment (Boggan, 2001).
Also, these factories violate laws that regulate the length and remuneration of overtime. Contractors establish factories in free trade zones and hire children to work for them. Working conditions are poor, and children are forced to work long hours.
They are mistreated if they disobey their supervisors (Boggan, 2001). In 2001, a documentary produced by the British Broadcasting Corporation highlighted the plight of children working under poor conditions in Nike’s Cambodian factories.
Victoria Secret
In 2011, Victoria Secret was accused of using child labor to produce cotton in Burkina Faso (Krupnick, 2011). In 2007, the company made a deal with the government of Burkina Faso to buy cotton from local farmers as a way of improving the lives of poor people in the country. Reports indicate that children who work in cotton farms are physically abused, denied food, and forced to do strenuous work (Krupnick, 2011).
The company said that they were not aware of the problem because they use contracted companies to buy the products from the country. They claimed that child labor practices were against the precepts of their company and international labor laws. Fairtrade International admitted that they were informed of the allegations of child labor in the cotton farms.
According to Krupnick (2011), “foster children are forced to work in the farms and denied their right to attend school.” Many of them evade school so that they can work on the farms and make some money. Accusations against Victoria Secret for child labor emerged as early as the year 2008 in a report that highlighted the proliferation of child labor in cotton production fields (Krupnick, 2011).
The United States of America’s government found it difficult to investigate the claims because the company colluded with the government of Burkina Faso to bar investigators from visiting the farms. In their defense, Victoria Secret said that by buying cotton from farmers, they improved the quality of their lives tremendously.
Children were told to desist from giving information to people who wanted to know about the working conditions in the farms (Krupnick, 2011).
Walmart
Walmart is one of the businesses that have been severally accused of promoting child labor. In 2005, Walmart was exposed for using child labor in two of its largest factories in Bangladesh (Foley, 2009). According to reports, children between the ages of 10 and 14 worked in the two factories for a monthly payment of less than $50. The products made in the factories were exported to countries like Canada and the United States.
According to Wal (2006), “Walmart uses child labor because it is cheap and enables them to set low prices for their products to gain a competitive advantage in the market.” Child labor is common because Walmart subcontracts other companies to handle the large volumes of products processed daily.
Many of these companies use child labor as a means of cutting cost (Foley, 2009). A study conducted on the labor practices of Walmart revealed that the company violates international labor standards by employing children as young as 14 years of age and overworking them (Foley, 2009). Children who work in their factories work for 72 hours every week. In other locations, children are forced to work overtime without remuneration.
They suffer hunger and dehydration because they are denied food and water. In 2005, Walmart paid $200,000 in fines for violation of 1,436 child labor laws in its factories (Wal, 2006).
Before issuance of the fines, the government had warned Walmart against promoting child labor practices. However, they persisted and made children work for ten days concurrently without breaks. The violations were reported in several locations, including New Hampshire, Connecticut, and Arkansas (Foley, 2009).
Hershey
Hershey is a chocolate production business based in the United States. The company was accused of using child labor in its cocoa fields (Bloxham, 2012). In 2012, Grant and Eisenhofer filed a lawsuit against Hershey for contracting suppliers that promoted child labor practices. Another lawsuit was filed by an investor group that accused Hershey of overlooking reports of child labor practices among its West African suppliers (Bloxham, 2012).
The group accused the company’s management of buying products from farms that used child labor to produce cocoa. In defense, the management denied the accusations and revealed its mission of buying products from certified suppliers by the year 2020. The management also said that it was working hard to eradicate child labor in cocoa-growing communities.
According to Hershey (2010), “the company did not take the initiative to stop the practices because that would affect its operations, lower its profits, and shrink its market share.” Eradication of child labor will be possible if businesses take responsibility, establish stringent policies, and implement labor laws that fight child labor.
Firestone
Firestone is one of the most successful tire production companies in the world. However, behind its success are accusations of child labor practices. Firestone runs a large rubber plantation in Liberia where workers work for long hours and low remuneration. Newman (2007) stated, “parents bring their children along with them to the plantations to increase their earnings and meet their daily production targets.”
Children are forced to carry heavy loads and work for more than 12 hours per day. They encounter health risks by coming into contact with pesticides used to protect the cotton plants against attack by pests (Newman, 2007). Reports have revealed that children as young as ten years work under poor work conditions and face the risk of intoxication by harmful chemicals used in the plantations.
Also, they are exposed to the risk of injury because of poor implementation of safety measures (Newman, 2007). They are overworked and underpaid. These children drop from school to work in the plantations with their parents.
In Liberia, child labor is rampant mainly due to the reduced financial abilities of families that cannot sustain themselves. Firestone uses child labor because it is readily available and cheap (Newman, 2007). Parents come with their children to work and do nothing to ensure that they are not forced to work.
Conclusion
Child labor is an international problem that affects many children, especially in underdeveloped countries. Businesses promote child labor because it is readily available and cheap. It helps them to reduce production costs and maximize profits to gain competitive advantages in the market. Businesses that engage in child labor include Nike, Victoria Secret, Walmart, Hershey, and Firestone.
These businesses target countries that have free trade areas and weak labor laws — some of the contract companies that use child labor in their farms and factories. Several international conventions have been formed to fight against child labor.
For example, the Minimum Age convention No. 138 and the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention No. 182 have established guidelines that govern national laws on practices that are acceptable and unacceptable about employment.
Some businesses employ children as young as five years of age. These children are overworked, underpaid, denied food and water, and exposed to health hazards that affect their health. Also, they abandon school so that they can work in these factories and earn money.
References
Bloxham, E. (2012). Chocolate and Child Labour: A Hurdle for Hershey. Web.
Foley, S. (2009). Walmart Embroiled in Child Labour Scandal. Web.
Child labour can be described any form of economic improving activity for children under the age of 12 depending on the individual state that compromises the child’s right to health, quality education and all work which would compromise the normal growth of the child.
The rights of the child under the United Nations convention on the rights of the child have not been described per se but it has left such description to particular states to come up with their own descriptions.
A review of the child labour and experience reveals four highly generalised lines of thinking that can be thought to amount to child labour.
The Labour Market Perspective
This perspective is governed by the Trade unions, industrial and employers associations who maintain that it is the responsibility of the state to keep children out of the work place until they are of the recommended age of working. They are of the view that once a child is below the minimum age he should not be allowed at the work place their reason is that employment is for adults its pressure and stress are evils which the child can not withstand.
The labour market perspective view children as completely innocent and ignorant of the world and completely unable to recognise their own interests.
Human Capital Perspective
This perspective looks at the consequences of employing children in the overall career development including the capacity and potential of every child depending on the upbringing thus if a child is employed and unable to be educated it is detrimental to the child and if a child is to work instead of going to school it is then child labour. I consider where a child would work over school holidays as not to amount to child labour.
Social Responsibility Perspective
This perspective looks at child labour in the social context rather than economic development. It defines child labour as work which exploits, alienates or opposes children and separates them from society’s normal protection. Such exclusion result from government neglect of the poor and inadequate social compassion and responsibility.
Child Centered Perspective
This has its origin from section 3 of the convention on the rights of the child which states;
“In all action concerning children, the best interest of the child shall be a primary consideration”
The perspective considers what the child says and if the child is of the view that the work given to him amount to child labour then that is child labour.
The worst form of child labour includes;
All forms of slaver e.g. sell and trafficking of children
Procuring and offering children for prostitution
Procuring and offering a child for illicit activities e.g. for the production and trafficking of drugs.
Work which by its nature or the circumstances in which it is carried out,
Is likely to harm the health, safety or morals of the child.
Causes Of Child Labour
Some of the demand factor for child labour includes;
Socio economic status; the economic statue of a country if very low will encourage child labour.
Pressure from culture where people from certain cultures do not value the rights of children and go to the extend of encouraging the child o get in activities that amount to child labour.
Extreme source of poverty and an example would include Bangladesh where due to poverty children have been forced out of school to the working sector.
Most countries in Africa due to the increase if AIDs most adults in the family have past away living children with no one to take care of them and this has led to such children becoming victims of child labour.
Dysfunctional families have also due to neglect led to the increase of child labour.
In countries like Somalia children have fallen prey of armed conflict where at an age as early as 8 years children have been trained and are competently able to use fire arms.
Child Labour In Brazil
Statistics on child labour in Brazil has shown that despite the presence of laws that have been passed to curb child labour in the country, child labour is still so rampant in the country.
Brazil has over 5000 children who are working illegally and who are said to be between the ages of 7 and 12 years of age and receiving a salary of 25 reais which is about 22.30 pounds a month. The main cause of child labour in Brazil includes;
Poverty; in the country half of the families cannot afford three meals a day and it has been due to this high rate of poverty that has encouraged children to get in to the working sector in search of livelihood.
Unemployment; the high rate of unemployment has led to many children opting for any source of money which includes prostitution and drug trafficking.
Economic self interest of the companies; many companies have realised what cheap and easy labour children can provide and have taken advantage of this and resorted to employing children.
Social cultural beliefs have also discouraged children from attending school and instead encouraged them to look for easy opportunity of making money.
Child labour Bangladesh
The degree of child labour in Bangladesh depicts the extend to which poverty can affect the rights of children. Due to lack of education and social protection children in Bangladesh have been left under the mercies of factory production and backstreet workshop employers who have come to realise that children are a cheap and flexible source of labour and have no one to fight for them.
According to UNICEF’s Asian child labour report[1999], there are forty industries in Bangladesh which use child labour often under hazardous conditions and with little regard to health and safety. In many cases children have been injured while involved in underground mining, in maritime work and while operating or cleaning machinery in motion. Child workers are regularly exposed to dangerous level of dust, glass, fumes, heat and noises.
In the country a number of children have been forced with hardly any salary or fixed salary the employer only promising a better job in future.
In such industries the majority of children are unable to write or read meaning they have not been to school or nor have they learned anything from home. Such children are thus not able to recognise their rights today as children and in future as adults.
At the place of work children are exposed to all sorts of violence which range from verbal abuses and physical abuses.
Children are also exposed to immoral adult behaviour which they risk copying into their adulthood.
Research has shown that at the age of 10 a child in the said country can completely be asked by his parents to leave school and look for work, to this parents have also taken advantage where they use children to work in order to feed the rest of the family.
Although there are laws that govern the rights of a child in such a country, such laws have merely become paper laws due to lack of enforcement and the government as much as it is aware of the in human activities that children have been subjected to it has taken no step whatsoever to ensure that such activities are done away with.
Recommendations
The international labour organisation has been of the view that to confront child labour governments must strive to introduce free and compulsory basic education so that instead of children staying at home due to school fees are encouraged to attend school.
Governments should offer some assistance where the family is too large and the parents are unable to meet the costs of the children. In china the government has discouraged overproduction by putting forth sanctions that ensure the rate of birth is low hence manageable to the family on the contrary in South Africa the government has come up with a child support fund that assist up to six children and this has discouraged high rate of birth.
Civic education; this entails educating the society on the effect of child labour and the rights of the child and mobilising the society to totally reject child labour and exploitation.
Another solution is to allow children to work in circumstances that do not violate their rights under this approach children should not be excluded from the work place but the working conditions should be improved to accommodate them.
Bibliography
Article: In Brazil, Working 10-Hour Days, a Kid Can Earn $1.50 a Week.
Erick Edmonds looks at the current definitions of child labor with references to politicians and economists. Politicians refer to child labor as works that weaken the welfare of children. On the other hand, economists see child labor as economic activities where children participate. He also notes that child labor is a world phenomenon with the majority employers of these children being their parents.
Erick also looks at the reasons why children work. He observes impoverished situations in developing countries force children to engage in paying labor to supplement the meager family income. However, in some cases, child labor may not end even if the living standards improve because parents want to see their children earn. In developing countries, parents would want to see their children go to school. These studies across countries reveal that child labor develops out of poverty.
The author notes that globalization and child labor interact in two ways. Globalization is most likely to increase child labor in developing countries due to increase in demand for labor. On the other hand, improved household earnings can also reduce child labor if the main cause is poverty within the family.
Rich nations may also use their trade policies to curtail child labor by influencing the export of products from nations known to engage in child labor for productions. Erick demonstrates by study in Vietnam where increased earnings from rise led to reduction in child labor.
Erick’s study shows that parents in developing nations use extra incomes to move their children out of the labor market. He further highlights that restricting exports from the developing nations to curtail child labor may not create the desired results. The best way to control child labor is through supplementing supports for household incomes, and probably to offer incentives for children to stay in school.
In short, the challenge for countries concerned about child labor is not to fight globalization and international trade, but rather to ensure that gains from the trade reach to the poor households. Evidences show that child labor can almost disappear if the living standards in poor households improve.
Worst forms of child labor
People concerned with the child labor have long recognized it as a general practice in developing nations. However, in the recent past, it has attracted the attention of economists. In this regard, the economists’ view of child labor is generally new. There are several abominable exploitations of children.
These are what constitute worst forms of child labor: child prostitution, bonded labor, child soldering or works with extremely hazardous, unhealthy or personally dehumanizing. According to the International Labor Organization (ILO), these are the worst forms of child labor (Wiener, 2009).
Economists are disassociating themselves with the worst forms of child labor. They do not try to defend their existence or justify them. Conversely, they believe that the worst forms of child labor are on the decline. Currently, they have shifted their attentions to look at the child work around family farm, local farms, domestic works, in service industries or in an office environment. They argue that the term child labor is a catchall, which includes even the acceptable forms of child work.
Economic theory of child labor
Economists believe that most family would not like to see their children work. Conversely, most families who send their children to work do so because of pressing financial needs. They believe that it is the family responsible for the supply of child labor but not demand for it. This is because the prevailing adults’ wages are too low to support a household.
Therefore, families would prefer their children do not work, but the prevailing wage circumstances force them in labor to supplement the family income. In this context, if the parents’ earnings are adequate to support a household, then parents can afford to cater for their children school fees and keep them out of the labor market. This also implies that wages must remain high in order to restrict the supply of child labor because children are low earners (Hugh, 2009).
Historical
Historically, the developed nations once depended on child labor in conditions similar to these we observe in emerging nations. Historians point out that developed nations took time to resolve their child labor problem, but they are now impatiently pushing for immediate, and rapid solutions in developing countries.
Today’s child labor condition has acquired a new feature. There is a global drive to eradicate child labor. The movement has its roots in the developed nations in the late 1970s. The UN supported the movement through adoption of its UN convention on the Rights of the Child. The program further gained momentum in the year 1992 through adoption of the IPEC.
Governments are adopting strict measure to curtail child labor because people believe that they are the generation of tomorrow. Therefore, their future must be safeguarded for a better future. There have been emphases on scholarship from donors, governments, and private persons on child labor studies. These studies are developing the significant insights that highlight the causes, effects and remedies for child labor.
We are certainly aware of the issues surrounding child labor. Employers who seek access to the global consumers are careful not to involve child labors in production of their products. The community is making progress in eradication of child labor. However, the achievements are uneven and vary from country to country particularly in countries experiencing political instability and extreme poverty.
Certainly, complete eradication of child labor may not be possible, and many children will continue to experience worst forms of child labor. However, we might be able to eradicate the worst forms of child labor after a life time.
Social
Social scientists support child works in the lives of children. However, they dwell on a balanced view whereby the work is not harmful and does not deter a child from accessing a good-quality education. They agree that children themselves tend to articulate these views well.
However, there is a challenge to universal worst forms of child labor. Children have tended to elaborate their views on child work. These views seem to reflect that the community should protect children from exploitations. At the same time, they have ideas of normal and appropriate childhood with the right to education, right to work and earn from their works. That is if they need extra income or if they want to make their own money (Corsaro, 2005).
These constitute part on normal childhood. The developed nations such as the US, the United Kingdom and Netherlands have adopted these views of child work. This view regards child labor as a problem and not children’s work but as an abuse of children’s capacity to work (Liebel, 2004).
Addressing the problem of child labor
Industrialized nations took steps of ending child labor in the 20th century. There are emerging cases of child labor in the third world nations. Governments and several NGOs have taken measures of curbing child labor. There is a growing trend whereby human rights bodies and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) have joined the fight against child labor.
The problem with the child labor is that it is so ingrained and extensive in the society to the extent that penetrating it becomes a challenge to the government as well as the NGOs. The nature of child labor in the society has forced governments, and NGOs to adopt different methods. For instance, the Rugmark strives to curtail child labor through certification that carpets are not productions of child labor.
The UN’s ILO has been tirelessly and effectively working through its International Program on the Elimination of Child Labor (IPEC) in advocating the rights of children. These are just but a few examples of combating child labor. However, every government and other bodies, at least in every state, have at least some mechanisms in place to combat child labor.
Conclusion
Child labor is a concern of immense economic and social considerations throughout the developing nations. Though, observers have noticed a number of encouraging trends to curtail child labor in areas such as Mexico, Vietnam, Brazil and Turkey, the problem still persists in most countries. Several children work absolutely in unpleasant conditions and many more work out of necessities or circumstances. Child labor has robbed off these children their childhoods and their futures.
References
Corsaro, W. (2005). The Sociology of Childhood, 2nd Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
Hugh, H. (2009). The world of child labor : an historical and regional survey. New York: M.E. Sharpe, Inc.
Liebel, M. (2004). A Will of Their Own: Cross-cultural Perspectives on Working Children. London: Zed Books.
Wiener, G. (2009). Child Labor: Global Viewpoints. New York: Greenhaven Press.