Articles, introduction, Vol. 136, No. 2, 1997, child labour, employment, international policy and regional integration - International Labour Review

INTERNATIONAL
LABOUR
REVIEW

VOLUME 136, NUMBER 2 1997/2

INTRODUCTION
Contrary to fashionable arguments in favour of cultural relativism there are some universal standards by which the present situation in very many countries, rich and poor, must be judged intolerable. Far too many people have fallen "below the line" in countries of the west, east and south. All is not well on either side of the north Atlantic, and complacency is unwarranted. Forced and hazardous labour by children is found in many countries, causing suffering and jeopardizing the future. Freedom of association, non-discrimination and other core labour standards are too frequently ignored. Civilized society should not - and need not - tolerate such fundamental "bads". Articles in this issue of the International Labour Review confront these fundamental issues.
The dilemma addressed by Amartya Sen concerns the difficult choices between desired social goals. Inequality is seldom sought - indeed, it may be considered "downright barbaric", but the real dilemma arises when the policies to reduce several inequalities that a society finds abhorrent conflict with each other. People's fundamental goals are well-being, freedom and the quality of life. In this issue of the Review Sen argues that reducing the massive unemployment prevailing in many European countries must be given priority because it entails many costs that impinge on all of these goals.
Mass unemployment constitutes a profound deprivation for the individuals concerned as well as an enormous social cost. Governments may think that providing a relatively high income floor and avoiding wide income disparities, as do most in Europe, is a largely sufficient remedy for unemployment. But economic inequality is a much broader concept than income inequality. And other inequalities - in access to adequate health care, for example, which is denied to many in the United States and in Russia - may be even more damaging. There are fundamental ethical and moral considerations that are too frequently overlooked. Unemployment is destructive of a person's identity and sense of self-worth. It is even perverse to proclaim a concern with social exclusion when the primary instrument of inclusion - employment - is given low priority. The unemployed in Europe are perhaps less deprived than are Americans in terms of income, but when account is also taken of overall well-being and political participation there is no reason to be smug, Sen argues. Ethnic tensions and gender divisions are exacerbated by high unemployment levels. In addition, high unemployment fuels technological conservatism as workers resist innovations that may render them unemployed, thus inhibiting the investments that would raise rates of economic growth and improve well-being in general. Expanding job opportunities would reduce dependency ratios and help absorb not only unemployed youth but also the able-bodied elderly who have been forced to retire prematurely. By demonstrating the relatedness of many European social problems to massive unemployment and thus its hidden costs, he is in effect pointing the way toward resolution of many social ills simultaneously. Societies are incurring enormous penalties of unemployment that they need not tolerate.
Eddy Lee points out that, while the prudential motivation for adopting international labour standards may have weakened with the collapse of communism, humanitarian concern over the existence of conditions of labour that cause hardship and privation to large numbers of people and the problem of negative cross-border externalities generated by countries that fail to observe humane conditions of labour are as strong as they were when the ILO was founded. In addition, overall economic gains since then have made possible a raising of the minimum acceptable standard.Yet, in this era of globalized financial flows and intensified international competition the role and value of labour standards have been put in doubt. The need to meet global standards of efficiency and to contain costs has been used as an argument for dismantling long-established social protections and as an excuse for not raising standards along with overall economic gains. Cultural differences are an added excuse used by some countries for giving low priority to freedom of association, the right to collective bargaining, non-discrimination and even the abolition of child labour. Anxious workers and the unemployed in industrialized countries tend to blame imports from countries of lower income for their plight, evidence to the contrary notwithstanding. "There is thus a deep fault line of distrust between industrialized and developing countries" The popular and often misguided arguments on both sides interfere with the design of relevant policy and force workers to bear an ever greater share of the burden of adjustment to trade liberalization. Nevertheless, as Lee explains, there is now an implicit consensus among governments on the core labour standards, so the question to take up is not whether but how to ensure that they are observed.
One of the immemorial battles of workers is against the introduction of new technology. Yet the gains which they have been able to reap - collectively and individually - are the obvious result of introducing such innovations. Given the fear of technological displacement, however, even if top priority is given to full employment and the observance of core labour standards is achieved, there would be some resistance to the adoption of technological innovations because they are seen to be destructive of jobs. In this issue, Samanta Padalino and Marco Vivarelli counter the argument of technological pessimism both theoretically and empirically. While their arguments and evidence may not fully convince anxious workers, technological innovation entails many chain reactions that compensate the direct labour-saving effects of such innovation, working through the production links, consumer prices, adjustment in relative wages and the development of new products. More importantly for the current debate, the authors show that technological change has not reduced the employment intensity of economic growth in the G-7 countries (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States). Much of the popular rhetoric that has fuelled fears is drawn from partial data on long-term trends in the manufacturing sector alone. But both in the short term and for economies overall, there is no such weakening. So the message is clear: it is not helpful to fight technological change; the reasons why workers may not reap a fair share of the gains from innovation lie elsewhere, as argued in this issue of the Review by Amartya Sen and Eddy Lee.
The strong arguments for fixing full, productive and freely chosen employment as a primary goal of government policy must be understood to exclude child labour. Surely, the good life, community, society or world cannot encompass the exploitation of children. There are powerful moral arguments against child labour, which destroys both childhood and the subsequent opportunity for fulfilment as adults. There is no longer a need to set out the case for eliminating child labour. The discussion now is about the array of instruments and their direct and indirect effects on the achievement of the desired outcome.
One type of instrument for combating child labour entails using the leverage of consumers' moral sensibilities: affixing social labels to particular products. In this issue of the International Labour Review Janet Hilowitz briefly explains the role of social labels. An early example was that used nearly a century ago to assure consumers in the United States that the garments they were buying were made with unionized labour and in accordance with fair labour standards; for many years virtually all garments sold carried that ILGWU label. Non-governmental organizations with good intentions have been behind this and most other social labelling initiatives over the years. Partly as a result of the information and communications revolution people are now made vividly aware of many abuses and, once informed, wish to avoid contributing to their perpetuation. This has led to a renewed interest in social labelling - not just on the part of unions and well-intentioned charitable groups but also of those producers, exporters, importers and retail establishments which see a market advantage in signalling the absence of exploitation in the products in which they trade. Social labels inform consumers about conditions of production, often going well beyond child labour to cover equitable working conditions, a fair share of the world price of a commodity for the small-scale producer, or even environmentally benign production techniques. Their increasing popularity raises a whole set of issues which need to be disentangled if labels are to play any significant role in combating child labour in the longer term. That is the task addressed by Hilowitz, who explains the typical features of labels, how they aim to have an impact, the uses of fees charged; their sources of support and objections; and how they relate to company codes of conduct. Supporters "are attempting to initiate change by starting with the consumer and moving back through the marketing chain so as to affect modes of production and improve the lives of working children." But there are pitfalls all along the way. Consumers react only to a blanket assurance, and if deceived, may react against a product. Traders and even producers have difficulty in monitoring where the costs of doing so are high and incentives to deceive great. Highlights she presents of the present labelling initiatives focusing on child labour (Rugmark, Care & Fair, STEP, DIP, Abrinq and others) are instructive: they make it easier to understand the value and limitations of these small-scale voluntary actions, and how they attempt to deal with the important issues of monitoring, inspection and the fate of the targeted children. The main point, she argues, however, is that significant progress in combating child labour requires a broad range of actions and policies, "including appropriate labour market legislation and oversight, the availability of educational and other alternatives for working children." Social labelling initiatives may help some children and also play a useful role in raising awareness which, in turn, would increase popular support for the broad range that is required.
The perspective in this issue (prepared by Mark Lansky, an editor of the Review), is devoted to the subject of combating child labour in an international context, including the law, direct intervention, and market-based schemes. The problem, with us since at least the industrial revolution, requires for its solution adequate and remunerative employment for adults, but immediate and direct action can also be taken to reduce the most objectionable forms of child labour, pending its elimination. The International Labour Conference adopted the first of its many Conventions concerning child labour at its very first session in 1919, though that and those following up to 1971 dealt with specific sectors or occupations. Then in 1973 it adopted the key Minimum Age Convention (No. 138), which remains the defining statement of child labour, and its provisions are briefly explained. The adoption of new instruments is foreseen in 1999, to "both consolidate the legal position on slavery-like practices and child prostitution and serve to advance the practical commitment to ensuring that children enjoy protection at least against many forms of hazardous work as part of the transition towards the elimination of child labour as called for in Convention No. 138.". But there are also other international legal instruments: the Geneva Declaration on the Rights of the Child, adopted in 1924; the 1959 UN Declaration on the Rights of the Child, and the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Highlights of these and other related instruments are given and the nuances in definition of child labour indicated. Drawing on an ILO report on national law and practice, the perspective then takes up the extent of application of standards, and a few statistics on child labour are offered. Difficulties in drawing lines as to what is hazardous, what is intolerable, are also discussed.
In terms of direct action, since 1992 the ILO has been coordinating the International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour, which has attracted some $87 million from 14 donors and the direct involvement of 27 developing country governments. Highlights of that programme are also presented here. Market-based initiatives, such as social labels and codes of conduct, tap additional resources and can apply effective leverage against the employment of children in certain economic sectors. In some cases they contribute to raising the wages of adults so that child labour becomes less critical to family income. But they are on a very small scale. Their main significance may lie in raising awareness and thus increasing the constituency for national and international action on a broad front, including the provision of universal access to education and adequate terms and conditions of employment for adults.
This issue of the Review concludes with an extended books section, with reviews and notes on books concerning forms of international cooperation, new patterns of collective labour law in central Europe, social exclusion in the United Kingdom, fairness in international law, the future of work, the informal sector, social dialogue in the European Union, and industrial relations, as well as new ILO reports for the International Labour Conference. Of particular interest to some readers may be a new book on the ILO's first Director-General, Albert Thomas. It draws extensively on his correspondence to provide fresh insights into the personality and activities of the man whose dynamism ensured that the new Organization, with its tripartite composition, quickly established its pre-eminence in the field of workers' rights.

Updated by MCN. Approved by MFL. Last update: 8 July 1998.