This question has been raised before, but I would like to pose it all the same.
-----What is the rationale behind setting the 14 year age limit for a person to be considered a child laborer?------
Is it the body which at age 14 is deemed fit to start absorbing the rigors of life while seeking economic sufficiency?
Is it the mind which at age 14 is deemed to have acquired the maturity to make informed decisions about seeking a vocation/career path? In that case how do the laws make accomodations for individuals with limitations in mental abilities to safeguard their rights?
-OR-
Is it more philosophical where the soul has crossed over into the realm of reality from that of make believe?
---------Can this age limit be questioned? How?---------
Friday, July 6, 2007
Body, Mind or Soul?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
The laws in most countries are similar in terms of the 'permissible age'.
Here is more on child labor laws in US:
http://www.stopchildlabor.org/USchildlabor/fact1.htm
More interesting is the history of child rights movements in the US :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children%27s_rights_movement
We should research on what led to the 'permissible age' i.e. the argument behind it when first laws against child labor were framed.
Its hard to say how exactly the number was arrived at. There are lots of categories of child labor, with different age limits for different kinds of work. There is even a category of "worst form" of child labor, and many forms of child labor which are actually condoned by the ILO.
I know the first laws behind the age scene were passed at the Minimum Age Convention of the ILO in 1973. The full details of the resolution passed at that convention can be found at the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. http://www.ohchr.org/english/law/ageconvention.htm
The resolution talks a lot about minimum age for different kinds of labor etc. In fact, the resolution gives a history of all previous resolutions which catered to specific industries --
Minimum Age (Industry) Convention, 1919
Minimum Age (Sea) Convention, 1920
Minimum Age (Agriculture) Convention, 1921
Minimum Age (Trimmers and Stokers) Convention, 1921
Minimum Age (Non-Industrial Employment) Convention, 1932
Minimum Age (Sea) Convention (Revised), 1936
Minimum Age (Industry) Convention (Revised), 1937
Minimum Age (Non-Industrial Employment) Convention (Revised), 1937
Minimum Age (Fishermen) Convention, 1959
Minimum Age (Underground Work) Convention, 1965
To answer the original question, the laws framed have more or less seemed to be a combination of Body and Mind. A physical (post-puberty) maturity to be able to work for economic gain, and a mental readiness for the same. To me, its not clear if 14 is the right age or 15, but it seems like the laws were framed thinking more along the lines of what is acceptable in a society, given past history and nature of jobs.
Over nearly a century of debate, communities part of ILO have come to these conclusions. It need not mean that these numbers should be true for an Indian context as well. It would do well for India to let all of its gram panchayats to discuss and decide on this. Agreed that the minimum age is contextual dependant on the kind of labor. But it is also contextual depending on social and environmental situation in the geographic location.
Besides, given how these laws are in such contradictions so often, the Soul doesnt even enter the picture here.
To add to the previous comment. I found more information about the protocols and conventions regarding the decision of minimum age and forms of labor from Elizabeth Jensen's webpage at Indiana University.
In 1973, the ILO adopted Convention 138, commonly known as the Minimum Age Convention, which sought to regulate the minimum acceptable age for different categories of work ranging from light work to work that is hazardous to a child's growth and development. In most cases, 15 is the minimum acceptable age, but in some underdeveloped countries age 14 is
allowable (ILO 1973).
For years after Convention 138 was adopted, scholars and activists debated its effectiveness to progressively eliminate child labor and began working toward a more effective solution. Eventually, the ILO adopted a new convention. ILO Convention 182 on the Worst Forms of Child Labor, unanimously adopted by ILO member countries in June 1999, was aimed at the
immediate elimination of intolerable forms of child labor (ILO 1999). Convention 182 has focused the attention of the ILO, various national governments, and civil society organizations' resources on working toward eliminating child labor.
The United Nations also adopted the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) in 1989. The CRC is the most widely ratified convention in the history of the United Nations. Two specific protocols related to the CRC that deal with the worst forms of child labor were also adopted one dealing with prostitution and pornography and the other addressing the
issue of children in armed combat situations (United Nations 1989).
These conventions and protocols are only a handful of the international human rights instruments that are relevant to child labor. In addition, Articles 23 and 26 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights seek to guarantee "just and favorable conditions of work" and the "right to education," both of which are violated constantly and globally through the exercise of the worst forms of child labor (United Nations 1948).
Despite the widespread adoption of these international conventions, declarations, and protocols, child labor continues in our global society. Given the nexus between international human rights and the worst forms of child labor, students need to know and understand the international laws and conventions that protect them and other students around the world from unfair, harmful, and cruel child labor practices. As citizens of the twenty first century, students should be prepared to recognize and evaluate the conditions and situations under which approximately 180 million of their peers work and live each day.
The ultimate goal of such learning experiences is for students to become motivated to act on behalf of all the children of the world in abolishing the violations of human rights found in the damaging and harmful practices associated with child labor. Failure to abolish child labor in general, in particular its "worst forms," has led to the suggestion that the issue of child labor is not simply an issue of worker rights or child rights, but an issue of basic human rights which apply to all human beings.
Thus, any curriculum that addresses human rights as a national or international imperative would include child labor as a pertinent topic.
Levels of income, forms of democratic constitutionalism, and cultural regard for education are all determinants in the plight of children in the workforce. Data show that in places where working parents are able to improve working conditions and establish acceptable labor standards (such as adequate salaries), children are much less likely to have to work and, therefore, are much less likely to become victims of harmful labor practices that deny them the essentials of education that underpin a democratic society (Swinnerton and Willcutts 2000, 17).
Hajjar informative! Thanks!
All this information now makes one think, if I am walking in the streets in India, there are some jobs that children do that clearly puts them in a hazardous environment, but how do we make a call on what work by a child below the age of 14 is acceptable and not considered child labor?
Is there a list of jobs that is available anywhere in the Child labor laws in India that allow children under the age of 14 to engage in?
How is 'A child out of school is a child laborer' applicable?
Is a child collecting twigs to burn in the stove a child laborer?
I am probably not too coherent here but if you get the general idea, comments are appreciated. :)
Here is clear info on the ban and its implications
The latest move by the government goes beyond earlier 'hazardous' definitions, but there are still gaps.
With regards to mental disabilities - laws exist
not sure how in spirit, they are implemented.
For e.g. this article focuses on the right to education for children with disabilities
ILO defined four points as "Worst Forms of Child Labor" in a special convention. The last point was a place holder. The points first --
[1] all forms of slavery or practices similar to slavery, such as the sale and trafficking of children, debt bondage and serfdom and forced or compulsory labour, including forced or compulsory recruitment of children for use in armed conflict;
[2] the use, procuring or offering of a child for prostitution, for the production of pornography or for pornographic performances;
[3] the use, procuring or offering of a child for illicit activities, in particular for the production and trafficking of drugs as defined in the relevant international treaties;
[4] work which, by its nature or the circumstances in which it is carried out, is likely to harm the health, safety or morals of children.
ILO, in the same convention also resolved that each country needs to ratify this, and during that process, depending on the socio-economic-environmental-geographic situation of the country, each country needs to expand and expressly state what will fall under "worst form of child labor" point 4.
All this happened in 1999 (Convention 182 of the ILO), and India is yet to ratify this resolution. However, India has loosely defined hazardous industries. These were the violations I was talking about earlier. First we had a law which listed "beedi making", "construction work" and a few more such (including "carpet making") as hazardous industry for children. Then we had a more comprehensive ban on all industries for children under 14. Subsequently, a new law violated that, and expressly added more hazardous industries to the older list.
Finally, I am not sure where to find such a list by the Indian govt. now. However, that is the list which is followed during the national census data collection. Such data is the basis for India to declare that less than 5% of its children are engaged in labor.
The ILO also provides a more abstract resolution saying the ratifying countries are free to define labor as something that conflicts Right to Education. Maybe that is something to think about in India.
>>The ILO also provides a more abstract resolution saying the ratifying countries are free to define labor as something that conflicts Right to Education. Maybe that is something to think about in India.<<
Could you please expand a bit more on the above?
Post a Comment