move to stop child labor, by Anuj Chopra, Christian Science Monitor: On a
rainy night, ... Raju is busy at work. This timid 10-year-old works 12-hour days
serving customers and scrubbing mountains of utensils... After a full day, he
often pockets less than a dollar. If there's food left over, he gets a meal. If
not, he goes home on an empty stomach.
Concerned about the future of children like Raju, India Tuesday begins
implementing a country-wide ban on children below 14 working as domestic help or
in the hospitality sector. And punishment for those who choose to defy it is
stringent: imprisonment for up to two years and a fine as high as $430.
Children in India are already banned from working in factories, mines, and
other perilous jobs. India's Child Labor Act, first passed in 1986, will now
carry two more in a list of 57 professions deemed "hazardous" for children.
Child rights activists in India say it's an important step in the battle to
stop child labor. But some worry that the government is still not doing enough
to provide alternative options for families that depend on income from their
children. And many are skeptical about how effective enforcement of the ban will
"It is important to remember that the problem won't disappear by just
introducing a ban," says Shireen Miller, head of policy at the India branch of
the US-based Save the Children organization. "Legislation is a start," she says
pointing out that previous legislation hasn't been stringently enforced.
"Now there's a clear signal that [no one] can get away with employing and
exploiting children as workers," says Shantha Sinha, an anti-child labor
activist who in 2003 won the prestigious Ramon Magsaysay Award. Ms. Sinha
recalls how all 34 cases of domestic child labor that she took up last year ...
couldn't stand up in court. All of the accused wriggled out of blame, she says,
as employing children as domestic help wasn't then prohibited by law. She hopes
this ban will reverse such tendencies.
India has the largest number of child laborers on the planet. ... According
to the New Delhi-based, National Sample Survey Organisation, nearly 16.4 million
Indian children aged 5-14 years are engaged in economic activities and domestic
or non-remunerative work. The World Bank puts that figure at 44 million. ...
Ingrid Srinath, the CEO of Child Rights and You (CRY), a New Delhi based NGO,
calls the ban notification "insular" and is skeptical that it will do much good
in its current form. The ban, he says, does little to address the reasons that
compel children to work: backbreaking poverty, family debts, marginalization,
and migration of their parents.
A recent study conducted by the International Labour Organization found that
"children's work was considered essential to maintaining the economic level of
households, either in the form of work for wages, of help in household
enterprises, or of household chores in order to free adult household members for
economic activity elsewhere."
Raju's father, a daily wage laborer, frets that the ban will only exacerbate
his family's financial woes. "At least now, he doesn't steal. He earns his meals
with dignity," he says. "If the ban is enforced, he might be forced to beg for
alms, or the family might go hungry."
India's Ministry of Labor and Employment hasn't yet spelled out any coherent
rehabilitation and education plan for children who they lose their jobs. The
Ministry assures that a blueprint to ensure self-sufficiency for the kids will
Activists also say that the ban won't work unless mindsets change. Children
are widely employed in the homes of India's affluent and middle classes.
Raju's employer, a coarse, burly man who calls himself Pappu, employs two
other kids, 12 and 14. Pappu intends to retain his young employees despite the
ban. And if cops pester him, he unabashedly says, he'll do what many Indians
often do to give the law a slip - offer a bribe.
He says he doesn't see anything wrong in employing the children. "I give the
best I can offer," he says. "I do take care of them. I give them food. The kids
won't survive if they don't work."
This notion of benevolence often masks the exploitation and the long-term
harm for children, says Ms. Sinha. "Just because children are given food or
money doesn't mean that they're benefiting," she says. "They're cheap and work
long hours without any question. That's exploitation. The ban now gives weight
when we say: 'That's wrong!' "
I believe that, to the extent that there has been a reduction in child labor,
international trade has helped to force the changes that brought it about. Of
course we shouldn't overlook child labor for the economic benefits it might
bring us. But if improvement is fueled by the demand for change as a condition
of trade, then closing the doors to trade is not the solution. As much as we'd
like to say "stop this before we trade at all," the reality is that economic
conditions don't allow the change, at least not easily, and trade coupled with the
insistence on steady improvement is a means to overcome this constraint.