Child labour -- it's all relative to me

I got a call over the weekend to reignite an old debate. It appears the post on boycotting Chinese products raised concerns over the effect these and other boycotts have on children (and their families). The concern was that a boycott (and thus a reduction in demand) would hurt these unskilled labourers as the reduction in demand would reduce the limited number of jobs available (and the limited amount of money they need for their survival).

In otherwords, it is a debate about relativism. According to those that worry about exploited workers the decrease in demand of a product (through boycotts, or even through 'regular' market conditions) can mean the reduction of labour and the removal of an income. As families that barely exist this downturn can literally mean life and death. Hence, the exploitation of the children (or the worker), though terrible, is justifiable as this exploitation is the only source of sustenance for families living in the margins of poverty.

Yet, the concept that there are no absolutes, no lines to be drawn, enables us to justify the actions -- actions of corporations, who employ and abuse this cheap labour source and our own actions as we purchase that cheap-labour produced toy or lace-covered panty.

While I do not, as a rule, subscribe to absolutes (no concept of Heaven or Hell here!), I do believe that the debate regarding the exploitation of marginalized workers in developing worlds can and should be defined.

To justify the use and abuse of these workers based on their own need to survive is inappropriate -- if, for no other reason, because we do not (overtly) accept this type of justification for substandards working conditions for people in our own society.

In otherwords, if we, in North America, will not tolerate slave or child labour on our own continent, then we cannot tolerate, accept or justify it on another continent. Now, before you argue that the economics of North America are different, may I remind you that we built our economy by exploiting women, children and the marginalized. May I also remind you that as we grew as a society, we began to grow and learn that this exploitation was unacceptable. Eventually laws were passed and standards created. These laws and standards, now, dictate what is acceptable and unacceptable in terms of working conditions.

Yet when these laws and standards were being created there were those that expressed concern over how these changes would impact the poorest workers who rely on the minimal wages produced by these unskilled jobs. They were concerned that the laws and regulations would diminish the ability of corporations to offer unskilled labour jobs and this, then, would impact the most vulnerable that rely on these jobs.

Yet, in reality, the opposite occured. While a minority did experience immediate hardship through loss of job and wages, the overall trend of increased standards and increased wages shows that regulations (when supported and enforced) help to improve conditions BUT do not reduce employment.

The fact is, corporations will always need unskilled labour. The fact is, this need SHOULD be used as a leverage point to demand better conditions and wages -- conditions and wages that increase the standard of living for ALL workers -- not just North American workers. The fact is, a demand for better wages and conditions is not new and HAS been accomplished SUCCESSFULLY in other regions of the world...therefore setting a precedence for those currently exploited by profit-driven corporations (the very same corporations that cry foul whenever issues, such as minimum wage, are raised).

The fact is there are enough (current) reports that clearly show how devastating exploited labour really is to the fabric of familial life and national standards. There is also enough (prior) evidence that standards and laws CAN and DO increase the standard of life for all, which does increase and support the economic standards of a nation.

As such, my suggestion is not to give in to relativism. Do not allow one set of standards for those that live in a developing world and another set of standards for those in a developed world. While unskilled labour and the wages it produces are often life-lines for the most marginalized, this necessity should not prevent better standards and justify inexcusable conventions. Rather, it should prompt all of us (consumer, producer and worker) to align standards, thereby elevating everyone's standard of living.


For more information on the impact of the exploitation of children go to:
http://www.unicef.org/protection/index_childlabour.html or
http://hrw.org/children/labor.htm
For more information on the industrial revolution go to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Revolution
or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Revolution#Social_effects