...Would you know it if you did?
Child labour, and specifically hazardous child labour, remains an inherent part of our global supply chain, whether you like it or not. The reality is, despite international conventions and widespread corporate social responsibility (CSR) measures, thousands of businesses around the world continue to indirectly employ children and young workers. The key word here is indirectly.
The complex expansiveness of our global supply chain makes this a piece of cake for businesses. Decrease the cost of production by using child labour while maintaining a reputable name with publicized CSR agreements....it's easy, and ultimately, it works.
A rice company in India follows a strict CSR practice, and vehemently states that they "do not employ minor labour and observe fair trade practices." However, earlier this week, 25 child labourers, between the ages of 8 and 14 were rescued from the company, forced to stitch rice bags under hazardous conditions. One child stated he worked from 9am to midnight, stitching 50 to 100 bags per day, receiving no pay at the end of his month's work.
So, where exactly did the "no child labour" thing get lost in translation? Contractors. Worked sourced out to contractors. Plain and simple. How can a business be responsible for hundreds of contractors that create components of their final product, like rice bags for example?
Phillip Morris uses the same argument. Human Rights Watch documented more than 72 cases of hazardous child labour on tobacco farms in Kazakhstan, where Phillip Morris remains the sole purchaser. Phillip Morris is "committed to prevent child labour, forced labour and other labour abuses in the tobacco supply chain," though in reality, the conglomerate buys its tobacco from hundreds of different farms in various global regions. How can they ensure that the tobacco that is rolled in your cigarette hasn't been picked by an 8 year old child- a child that has been deprived from a decent education and potentially afflicted by conditions such green tobacco sickness?
The corporate response: Well, how can we be responsible for the moralities of our contractors and subcontractors? We follow international regulations and CSF standards, our hands our clean.
My response: By accepting this argument, businesses perpetuate the cycle of hazardous child labour by reinforcing social and economic inequalities within vulnerable communities. Just a quick glimpse of the annual revenue figures of some of these businesses makes a clear case of the feasibility of interventions. How about hired labour inspectors for contracting companies? Systematic inspections of subcontracted plants and factories? Dependence on local contractors rather than distant ones who may be harder to monitor? Specific CSR registry systems for the contractor or subcontractors?
Whatever the decision, the options are there. Whether businesses continue to bemoan their helplessness or move to action remains their own prerogative. A disheartening matter, however, remains the deception for consumers. For you and for me. Because we really cannot be sure what we are and what we are not supporting.