SECTION II
:
Importance of the social mobilization in the fight against the child
work
The social mobilization has undoubtedly a key role to play in
the fight against the child work in the world. Indeed, the abolition of the
economic exploitation could not be done without a broad consensus in the world
opinion. Nevertheless, this mobilization, as sincere as are its reasons, can
sometimes have perverse effects, in particular as regards boycotts of products
manufactured by the products (Paragraph I). It remains however, an essential
factor to make evolve/move the situation of these children (Paragraph II).
Paragraphe I :
The boycott of
the products resulting from the child work :
a false solution
The boycott of the products manufactured by the children is an
undeniable tool of pressure. International engagement and the pressures which
accompany it are without any doubt useful. However, the sanctions touch only
exporting industries which do not exploit, contrary to certain generally
accepted ideas, which a relatively small percentage children. Exporting
industries are the most visible sector in which the children work. The soccer
balls manufactured by the children in Pakistan to be used by the children in
the industrialized countries are without any doubt emblematic. Nevertheless,
one should not forget tens of million children who work in the sectors not
centered on export. In fact, only a very small percentage of the hard-working
children are employed in industries of export, probably less than 5%.
Nevertheless, the testimony of small Iqbal Masih, former Pakistani slave
assassinated in 1995, had revealed the true face of the manufacture of carpet
in Pakistan. The result had been immediate : the sales turnover of the
export of the carpets in Pakistan fell vertiginously. For this case, the effect
of the boycott had been very interesting, since under the international
pressure, and especially of the fall of the sales turnover, the Association of
the manufacturers and exporters of carpet of the country agree to sign in 1998
an agreement with the ILO, concerning the withdrawal of 8.000 children of work.
Of course, it is not a question of saying « let us
buy French » or « especially let us not buy as soon as one
sees made in Clouded or made in Bangladesh ». It is not a question to
boycott Chinese products to sanction second once of the Chinese workmen who,
not only do not have freedom on the place of work, but which moreover would
lose their employment because they would not have any more outlets.
The boycott is indeed a weapon with double edge which it is
necessary to use with much prudence. The long-term consequences of these
sanctions are not always foreseeable and one is then likely to make more evil
than good with the children. The history of the bill Harkin is completely
revealing dangers of the boycott. This project, presented at the American
Congress in 1992, of which the goal was to prohibit the importation of products
manufactured by the children of less than 15 years, had caused a true panic in
the industry of clothing in Bangladesh which exports 60% of its production
towards the United States. Before even the adoption of this text, the factories
returned day to the following day the 500.000 hard-working children, who were
for the majority of girls. A study sponsored by international organizations
sought some of these children to learn what had arrived to them after their
dismissal : a great part of them were devoted to other activities often
more dangerous and less better paid, even with the prostitution. This project
is the perfect illustration of the good intentions of the international
community which can make much more evil with the children than of good. This
example should be included/understood that because of the potential danger that
any sanction contains, it is each time advisable to evaluate of them the
short-term and long-term effects on the life of the children.
It seems more suitable, and less dangerous, to conclude with
the companies from the charters from good control. Campaigns, going in this
direction saw the day in the middle of the years four twenty ten in Europe, on
the initiative of organizations of consumers, trade unions and nongovernmental
organizations (ONG). These campaigns, called « Ethics on the
label » in France, prefer with the boycott, the public interpellation
of the marks so that they adopt a code of conduct, together with independent
controls, which implies necessarily the end of the relations with the
subcontractors who violate the social rights. In connection with these
campaigns, of the surveys showed that the consumers were ready to pay a
possible overcost to avoid the child work. However, it is not obligatorily to
the consumers to pay expensive, but with the intermediaries to gain a little
less. If one studies the composition of the cost price of a shoe of Nike sport
for example sold 53 euros, the price of labor is established to 1.72% is 1
euro. On the other hand the expenses of publicity represents 4.58% either 2.5
euros and the share of the retailer to 39.88% or 21 euros48(*). It is thus seen that while
reducing this would be only third the share publicity, and by transferring this
third in the form of wages, one would double the versed wages.
However, even if many companies included/understood the
interest of such a charter for their image, they did not accept all the same
rules. Some adopted a code written by ONG, but of others chose internal
charters suspected by ONG of partiality and whose controls comprise sometimes
important gaps. The ILO analyzed 215 codes of conduct and only half approached
the child work, and a quarter the forced labor. Moreover the adoption of a code
of conduct its effective application does not guarantee at all. The public
engagement of the companies is thus still lacunar and for this reason ONG have
creates the social labels.
The social labels constitute alternate circuits of
consumption : ONG select products manufactured under respectful conditions
of rights social and bought to small producers of the Third World at a
reasonable price, which enables them to leave poverty. The goal is to reverse
the current trade founded on the exploitation of the Third World, to establish
relations of equitable trade aiming at supporting its development. These
products are then marketed in the rich countries under specific labels. This
type of policy is spreading itself throughout the world. The Abrinq foundation,
group of almost 2.000 homes of businesses and manufacturers of toys which was
constituted in 1990 to defend the rights of the child, decree a special label
« friend of the children » at the companies which prove
that with any stage production did not have recourse to the child work. During
the first ten months of the program, 150 companies deserved the approval of
Abrinq. Mr. Magri, coordinator of the programme of granting of the label is
astonished itself by the success of this label : « We did not
hope only in if little time, the companies not only would agree not to employ
childish labor, but would also exert pressures on their suppliers so that they
make some in the same way ».
From now on certain multinationals developed strategies to
improve the practices of employment at the local level, asserting in certain
cases the right to cancel, without allowance, of the orders carried out with
childish labor. The question of the child work thus becomes impossible to
circumvent for industries making trade with the developing countries.
It is at the international level that one is likely the most
to influence the behavior of these companies. A debate currently makes rage on
the advisability of integrating in the rules of the world Organization of the
trade a social clause setting the minimal standards of behavior to open with
the companies the right to make deals on a worldwide scale. In the number of
the conditions prohibition would appear to employ children. However, one should
not which this social clause generates the same perverse effects as the
boycott. The children should not have to suffer from the goodwills of the rich
countries. It is necessary thus that these social clauses are generalized, but
that true alternatives are proposed to the families and the children so that
the child work can disappear one day. Nevertheless, these sanctions or these
incentives, even if they do not attack the essential cause of the child work
who is poverty, are directed against the contractors profiting from the
economic exploitation of the children. They thus have the advantage of
attacking one of the principal causes of the child work : the search for
profits increasingly larger on behalf of not very scrupulous contractors.
However, the social mobilization necessary to any action
against the child work is not limited to financial or commercial sanctions.
* 48 source CFIE, quoted in the
booklet, « Play the game, save the humans right »,
published by the Collective « Ethics on the label »,
January 1998.
| 
