Read Editorial with D2G – Ep (335)

In Read Editorial With D2G
June 16, 2017

With ratification of conventions on child labour, we must have assessment of violations

READ BEFORE YOU PROCEED:
D2G wears no responsibility of the views published here by the respective Author. This Editorial is used here for Study Purpose. Students are advised to learn the word-meaning, The Art of Writing Skills and understand the crux of this Editorial.

MEANINGS are given in BOLD

In a welcome move this week, India has ratified (sign or give formal consent) two key global conventions meant to keep children away from work, decades since they were originally adopted by the International Labour Organisation. Nonetheless, the skepticism (doubtfulness) aroused (induced) by the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2016 over the government’s commitment towards complete abolition (scrapping or ending) of child labour will persist (continue). The ILO treaties are about the minimum age at which a person may begin work and the hazardous (dangerous) industries where she may not.

Crucially, conventions 138 and 182 of the United Nations body leave it to the member-states to determine what constitutes acceptable or unacceptable work for children at different ages. Such flexibility has given the Indian government wiggle room (capacity or scope for negotiation or operation) in adopting the international standards in question, even though the 2016 legislation falls several notches below a comprehensive prohibition of child labour.

The Act contains the controversial provision that condones (accept) the employment of children below 14 years under the rubric of family enterprises and the declassification of several industries as hazardous occupations. The detrimental effects on the ground from these dilutions of the original 1986 Act could be widespread. With roughly 90% of the workforce continuing to remain outside the ambit (scope) of the organised sector, protecting vulnerable (unsafe) children from exploitation (misuse) is difficult.

The rules notified by the Ministry of Labour and Employment for the enforcement of the 2016 amendment include some small concessions. Under these stipulations (conditions), children may work in domestic enterprises only for three hours after school, and not between 7 p.m. and 8 a.m. These restrictions are intended (planned or purposeful) to ensure attendance at school. But given the sensitivities involved in monitoring activities within traditional households, effective enforcement will pose (cause) a challenge, and the rescue of vulnerable children will remain an uncertain proposition.

India’s ratification of the two conventions, after more than 165 countries have legally bound themselves to their obligations, is itself a sad commentary on the priorities of successive governments, cutting across party lines. The ILO’s Minimum Age Convention of 1973 entered into force in 1976 — and the instrument pertaining (related to or applicable to) to the elimination of the worst forms of child labour in 2000.

While policymakers are no doubt alert to the inequities (lack of fairness) that perennially (in a way that continues for a long or apparently infinite time) plague Indian society, the practical realities are too painful for the millions who languish (decline or weaken) on the margins. Any genuine enforcement of a minimum age at work will elude (avoid or evade) governments so long as a universal minimum wage of subsistence (support or maintenance) for the adult workforce is not implemented scrupulously (in a very careful and thorough way). On this score, the record of different States is at best patchy (happening or existing in small areas).

This scenario is unlikely to improve in the absence of a vibrant mechanism of collective bargaining among stakeholders. Without this, the total elimination of child labour will remain a difficult task.

Also Read :

Read Editorial – The rot in farming: on farmers agitation and sustainable pricing for their produce

Read Editorial – Where the jobs are: on the unemployment rate