Child Labour in Third World Countries for Fashion Industry - Report Example

Child Labour in Third World Countries for Fashion Industry Introduction In most of the developed nations, child labour is banned or at least strictlycontrolled and firmly regulated. On the contrary, it remains an accepted way of life, especially among the poor, in many of the developed countries. Consequently, efforts are continuously being made to regulate child labour laws and curtail employment opportunities for children within these countries. For instance, the U.S. Congress has, for a number of times, given consideration to legislation in order to ban imports of goods produced through child labour. In addition, support groups have managed to arrange boycotts by consumers to reprimand companies that employ children. In 2002, the U.S. Congress passed legislation ordering the Department of Labour's Bureau of International Labour Affairs to study the relationship between education and military expenditure in countries where child labour is recognized to be particularly common. The word child labour in general refers to any economic activity carried out by someone not above the age of 15. Not all work done by children is harmful or manipulative. Child labour does not normally refer to part-time work after school or rightful internship opportunities for young people. Nor does it refer to adolescent people helping out in the family business or on the family farm. Rather, the "child labour" of concern is general employment that prevents children from getting education, and which is often performed under conditions dangerous to the physical and mental health of the child. The International Labour Organization, or the ILO, defines child labour as "some types of work" done by children under the age of 18. The ILO also says that child labour includes full-time work done by children under 15 years of age that prevents them from going to school (getting an education), or that is dangerous to their health. More complete definitions of what child labour is in regard, age restrictions, job types, and exceptions can be found in convention 138, convention 182, and the convention on the rights of the child. (Child Labour) Other sources and organizations disagree on what child labour is. Some utter that it is merely perilous work or work that obstruct with a child's education, while others are broader and include any work done by children working for compensation. Some organizations, such as UNICEF draw a line between child labour and child work, which can consist of light work done by children above the age of 12. Child Labour in the Fashion Industry There are no reliable statistics on the rate of child employment in any particular economic activity, including the fashion industry. Most information on child labour in the garment industry comes from eyewitness accounts, studies by non -governmental organizations (NGOs) and academicians, reports by journalists, and studies by the International Labour Organization (ILO). Unreliable information obtained during the preparation of this report indicates that in some of the countries examined, fewer children could currently be working on garment exports for the U.S. market than two years ago. A striking example involves Bangladesh, where great numbers of children worked in garment factories as lately as 1994. Worldwide media attention and intimidation of boycotts and cancelled work orders led to the dismissal of thousands of child workers from the garment sector unfortunately without any backup support for them. Thus, it is possible that in the lack of government programs to help the children, the abrupt discharge of child workers can put them in danger, rather than protect them. More research is required so that governments, industry, international organizations, and others apprehensive of the welfare of children are better capable of designing suitable programs. It is obvious, though, those local and national assurances to collective and free education for children are instant and optimistic steps which can and should be taken. One cause for any possible downward tendency in the use of children in the fashion industry may be the widespread acceptance in the last several years of U.S. company codes of conduct barring child labour. This possible descending tendency may also be the result of (1) better public consciousness about child labour and its use in export industries; (2) changes in the fashion industries of exporting countries tending to get rid of subcontractors where the use of child labour is most likely to take place together with policies to the same consequence by U.S. importers. On the other hand, there remains progressing substantiation of child labour in the fashion industry of some countries, including the use of child labour in home work. Codes of Conduct in the U.S. Fashion Industry For the purpose of gathering information on the degree and implementation of U.S. garment importers' codes of conduct including child labour provisions, the Department of Labour performed a voluntary survey of the largest U.S. retailers and apparel manufacturers, on the basis of their level of sales in 1995 as reported in publicly existing documents. A questionnaire on import sourcing and child labour policies was sent to 48 companies, representing U.S. apparel manufacturers, department stores, mass retailers, specialty stores, and non-store direct marketers (mail order and electronic home shopping). Forty-five firms gave a response to the questionnaire, three of whom said that they regard all information provided as confidential. The remaining 42 companies all indicated that they obtain foreign-produced apparel, the bulk as direct importers (i.e., purchasing apparel directly from abroad for their own account), others as indirect importers (i.e., purchasing apparel domestically from U.S. companies that have imported the goods), or in both forms. Follow-up telephone interviews were conducted with respondents to obtain additional information. (Child Labour Apparel Industry) Scope of the Codes Corporate codes of conduct that tackle the issue of labour standards vary from company to company with consideration to the specific labour standards included. Some or all of the following essentials are found in various codes: (1) ban on child labour; (2) ban on forced labour; (3) ban on discrimination based on race, religion, or ethnic origin; (4) requirements to ensure the health and safety of the work place; (5) provisions on wages, usually based on local laws concerning minimum wage or existing wage levels in the local industry; (6) requirements regarding limits on working hours, including forced overtime, in accordance with local laws; and (7) support for freedom of association and the right to organize and bargain collectively. U.S. corporate codes of conduct in the garment industry in addition differ with respect to how the labour standards are defined. The guidelines used to describe child labour differ considerably from company to company. For example, a company's policy statement may: state a minimum age for all workers who make their products refer to the national laws of the host country regarding the minimum age of employment or compulsory schooling; refer to international standards (e.g., ILO Convention 138); or Use some combination of the three. In some instances, companies' policies restricting child labour in the manufacture of their goods do not hold any definition of child labour. (Child Labour Apparel Industry) Transparency A significant matter concerning performance of corporate codes is their transparency, or the extent to which foreign contractors and subcontractors, workers, the public, NGOs and governments are conscious of their subsistence and significance. Transparency strengthens the message of codes and leads to added plausible implementation. When transparency is absent, involved parties cannot benefit fully from a code of conduct. Generally the respondents with child-labour policies pointed that they had dispersed copies of their policies to every supplier, but not many assured that they had communicated their subsistence to a wider audience or occupied in educational efforts. Many respondents assured that they did not know whether labour were aware of the subsistence of their codes. A petite group of companies showed that they have tried to make sure that production workers in overseas facilities are acquainted with their code or policy by purposely requiring that copies of such a statement be posted in the foreign factories from which they purchase. Only a small number of respondents seek participation from international organizations, labour unions, NGOs, or government agencies in developing or implementing their codes of conduct. Monitoring Monitoring is significant to the achievement of a code of conduct; it also gives the code trustworthiness. Nevertheless, largely the codes of the respondents do not hold detailed provisions for monitoring and implementation, and numerous of these companies do not have a consistent monitoring system in place. Respondents indicated that they use a multiplicity of means to monitor that their codes of conduct or policies on child labour are respected by their suppliers. Some companies use a form of active monitoring, which involves site visits and inspections, by company staff, buyer agents or other parties, to verify that suppliers are actually implementing the importing company's policy on child labour. Some use contractual monitoring, whereby they rely on the guarantees made by suppliers, usually through contractual agreements or certification, that they are respecting a company's policy and not using any child labour in production. This may be seen as "self-certification" by contractors or suppliers. Companies that use contractual monitoring in some cases have no mechanism for ensuring compliance. Some respondents indicated that they use a combination of active and contractual monitoring. (Child Labour Apparel Industry) Active monitoring may be done through standard checks, proper audits or evaluations, or particular visits by corporate staff. The occurrence and concentration of visits vary significantly from company to company. For example, some companies may centre their site visits on their larger suppliers or suppliers where there have been supposed problems, or may only monitor those services from which they import directly or which produce their private-label merchandise. Monitoring on a contract basis shifts at least fraction of the burden of responsibility for certifying compliance with codes of conduct onto the foreign manufacturer, the supplier or the buying agent. Yet when monitoring is primarily contractual, there are occasions in which the U.S. corporations require documentary proof of conformity or reserve the right to hold out inspections over the site. Assessment of prospective contractors with regard to labour standards, even in principle not a monitoring activity, is becoming a central feature of code implementation. Seventeen of the companies that responded to the survey settled that they have a process in place to evaluate overseas facilities before they establish a business relationship with them. Such on-site evaluations or inspections have long been made primarily to verify whether the facilities have the physical capacity to meet quality and quantity specifications. Gradually, the working conditions and employment practices of potential contractors are also being evaluated, screening out companies that are violators or have the potential for being so in the future. Several of the companies that conduct such evaluations indicated that compliance with their policies on working conditions is an important factor in the decision to place a production program with a contractor. These evaluations, according to many, enable them to screen out contractors who do not com ply with applicable legal or company standards. A few respondents indicated that such pre-contract inspections had enabled them to avoid doing business with a facility that appeared to employ under -age children, but most reported that when facilities were rejected, it is usually for other reasons. Enforcement How U.S. companies respond to violations of their codes of conduct is what enforcement of codes of conduct is all about. The huge majority of respondents affirmed that they have never found any violation of the child labour provisions of their codes; some companies accredited this to their hard work to assess and cautiously select suppliers before entering into contracts with them, while others point out that child labour violations of their codes are less ordinary than other kinds of violations, such as safety and health. Facing an allegation of violation of their code of conduct, most respondents stated that, they would first investigate to confirm the use of child labour and then impose enforcement measures. Enforcement policies range from the more severe immediate termination of the business relationship to more tempered responses, including demand for corrective action (e.g., dismissal of under-age workers), cancellation of specific orders, and placement of the violating supplier on probation. Child Labour in the Fashion Industry of Third World Countries The consensus of government officials, industry representatives, unions and NGOs interviewed by the Department of Labour in the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras is that child labour is not now prevalent in their garment export industries. In the very few cases where child labour was mentioned, the children were 14 or older. However, the use of workers 15 to 17 is common and there may be extensive violations of local laws limiting the hours for workers under 18. (Child Labour Apparel Industry) There was subjective information concerning the preceding use of child labour in the fashion industry in Central America. Labour union representatives assured that about two years ago, the garment export industry began to dismiss young workers to avoid adverse publicity in importing countries. Often plant managers no more hire young workers (14-17 years of age) even if they meet domestic labour law or company code of conduct requirements. Yet, there are also some reports of deceptive proof-of-age documents being used by child workers to seek jobs in the garment industry. Accusations continue to grow in Guatemala of children working for small subcontractors. For now, it is clear that children continue to work for subcontractors and in homework in the Philippines, India and Pakistan. They carry out sewing, trimming, embroidering and pleating tasks. It is also the case that children are not prevalent in the larger factories in the Philippines, and that recently plant managers in India have become more concerned about not using child labour. (Child Labour Apparel Industry) While most survey respondents showed they have disseminated their code of conduct to all suppliers, many said they were not certain if workforce knew about their code. Field visits in six countries revealed that: Managers of two-thirds of the plants visited showed that they were aware of codes of conduct prohibiting the use of child labour, particularly of the codes issued by their U.S. customers. However, not all of the companies that indicated they were aware of codes of conduct had available a copy of the code of conduct (or contractual provision) that they could show and discuss with the visiting Department of Labour official. Training and development of plant managers and supervisors about the codes of conduct was not common in the six countries visited. About 30 percent of the facilities visited where managers indicated awareness about codes of con duct stated that they had received some formal training regarding the U.S. companies' code of conduct. However, more than half of these facilities produced for just two companies. Also, it was evident that the intensity of the training varied widely from company to company. Posting of a U.S. garment importer's code of conduct is not commonplace in most of the countries visited. In all, 21 of the 70 plants visited by the Department of Labour officials had posted a code of conduct of a U.S. customer; 7 of such plants (out of 8 visited in that country) were in El Salvador. The number of plants visited in each of the other countries where codes of conduct were posted was: Dominican Republic, 2; Honduras, 1; Guatemala, 2; India, 2; and the Philippines, 7. Although a significant number of suppliers knew about the U.S. corporate codes of conduct, and codes were posted at 30 percent of the plants visited, meetings with workers and their representatives in the six countries suggested that relatively few workers are aware of the existence of codes of conduct, and even fewer understand their implications. Department of Labour officials found a mixed record regarding the extent to which host governments, NGOs, and business organizations were familiar with codes of conduct and their implications. (Child Labour Apparel Industry) The sweatshop problem has been recognized by the government as an explicit problem in today's society. President Clinton shaped a Task Force and signed a conduct code to help lessen the situation of those ensnared in the sweatshops. The Congressional Mandate encourages a sense of 'social responsibility" in order to eliminate "hazardous conditions to the physical and mental health of the child" (Child Labour and Sweatshops in the Fashion Industry) Tradition of Child Labour in Pakistan Pakistan has a per-capita income of $1,900 per year, meaning that a distinctive person survives barely on $5 per day. Pakistan has a traditional culture where earning of one person goes on feeding 10 mouths; and with the high rate of inflation it becomes difficult for a low income population to survive. Child labour is spread all over Pakistan but has the greatest impact in the north-west of Punjab province. Pakistanis an important centre for the production of goods for export to international markets, particularly sporting goods. In 1994, exports from Sialkot brought income of almost US$ 385 million into the Pakistan economy. Sialkot is thus one of the world's most important centres for production of sporting goods. (Silvers 2004) Child labour exists in the export sector and the domestic sector. This fact has been well documented and reported by the international media for several years but nothing has been done about it. In Pakistan it is evidently documented that child labour is against the law, but the government carries lack of enthusiasm to do anything about it. Provision for education is fairly inadequate, due to the fact that very low priority is given to education in the national budgets. Education receives around 3% of the total gross domestic product when compared to over ten times of this amount spent on military. Gender and other forms of discrimination plus adding to the lack of political will, gives the clear picture of the existence of child labour in Pakistan. This problem not only pertains to Pakistan but is worldwide. More than 200 children, some as young as 4 and 5 years of age, are involved in the production of fashion related goods like garments, shoes etc. Majority of these children work in Asia in the nations of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia. Nike is known to be manufacturing its goodsin countries which are in the developing phase due to very cheap labour, having an atmosphere of authoritarian government and lack of human rights appeal and union movement. In doing this it has made greater margins on the cost of mere cents to its workers. In this manner, Nike's success story is not only based on good reputation and strong advertising alone but also related to it is the tears of tormented workers and child labour. (NIKE and Child Labour) Child Labour in Russia Russia's laws for childhood employment are very precise. The Labour Code prohibits employment of any children under the age of 16. Any positions that would require an employee to work nights or overtime cannot be filled by anybody under the age of 18. Under certain specific conditions with parental approval, a child may work as soon as age 14. Forced or bonded labour by children is prohibited. Many children are involved in illegal drug sales. (Child Labour) Conclusions and Recommendations The Department of Labour found that codes of conduct can be a constructive factor which can solve the global child labour problem. A number of the large U.S. fashion related goods importers responded to the voluntary questionnaire have adopted codes which restrict child labour in garment production and some are clearly committed to their implementation. This is a remarkable change in a matter of just a few years. Codes of conduct are not a panacea. Child labour remains a serious problem, with hundreds of millions of working children around the world. Nevertheless, the rate of children in the garment export industry may be reduced by the implementation of codes of conduct. It is also probable that changes induced by codes of conduct could have positive spill over effects for children more generally, e.g., a greater commitment of a foreign country to compulsory education for children. Nonetheless, this relationship requires further study. Finally, because codes of conduct seem to be tools used by large apparel importers, there may remain smaller importers without codes of conduct still willing to overlook the working conditions of the plants in countries from where they purchase their garments. This question also deserves further study. (Child Labour Apparel Industry) All players in the apparel industry, including manufacturers, retailers, buying agents and merchandisers, should consider the approval of a code of conduct. If all rudiments of the apparel industry have a comparable commitment to eliminate child labour, this would have a supported impact on the efforts that the leaders in the industry have made. Trade associations should consider whether they could increase their technical assistance to help assure that the smaller companies in the industry can achieve this objective. All parties should believe whether there would be any additional benefits to adopting more standardized codes of conduct. There is a proliferation of codes of conduct. Some foreign companies and producer associations are even drafting their own codes. The definition of child labour differs from code to code, thereby creating some uncertainty for business partners and workers as to what standard is applicable. U.S. apparel importers should consider further measures to monitor subcontractors and home workers. Since most of the violations of labour standards, including child labour, occur in small subcontracting facilities or homework, U.S. apparel importers should consider further measures to monitor subcontractors more closely. U.S. garment importers particularly retailers should consider taking a more active role in the monitoring/implementation of their codes of conduct. The implementation of codes of conduct is a complex matter, and a relatively recent endeavour. Implementation seems best and most credible when U.S. companies get directly involved in the monitoring. There is little incentive for foreign companies to comply with a U.S. importer's code of conduct if there is no verification of actual behaviour. All parties, particularly workers, should be adequately informed about codes of conduct so that the codes can fully serve their purpose. In the supplying countries, managers of enterprises are generally familiar with the codes of their clients. Workers, however, are seldom aware of codes of conduct of the U.S. corporations for which they make garments. NGOs and foreign governments are also not fully informed about codes of conduct. (Child Labour Apparel Industry) References Child Labour and Sweatshops in the Fashion Industry by Kirsten Wong http://www.public.asu.edu/jvanasu/vcai/wong/ Accessed 14 April, 2006 Child Labour Apparel Industry - Clothing Industry - Fashion Industry Accessed on April 14, 2006 http://www.apparelsearch.com/Education/Research/Child_Labour_Clothing/CHILD_LABOUR.htm Accessed 13 April, 2006 Child labour issue http://www.empereur.com/DOC/Child_Labour.html Accessed 14 April, 2006 Child Labour: Home http://library.thinkquest.org/03oct/01908/800/whatisit_childlabour.htm Accessed 13 April, 2006 Jonathan Silvers (2004) Child Labour in Pakistan. The Atlantic Monthly: pp79 NIKE and Child Labour http://www.american.edu/TED/nike.htm Accessed 13 April, 2006 Read More