Some forms of work falling outside a narrow definition of employment may lead to indirect forms of exploitation by a person who, without being their legally recognised employer, gives them orders, determines their working conditions and draws a profit from their work. This includes, in particular, children helping their parents or other adults and so benefiting the parent’s employer (by increasing productivity) and, possibly, their parents.
The following kinds of adult work encourage hidden forms of child work:
-
Piece work — where employees are paid per piece of work done (for example, per basket of tomatoes picked);
-
Task work — where payment is for a specific task done (for example, per field harvested);
-
Home work — where work is contracted out to people working in their own homes;
-
Subcontracting work — where the person benefiting from the work does not carry the legal responsibility to comply with labour laws.
All of these forms of work encourage adults, including parents, to use the services of children to increase output and therefore income. These forms of work are relatively common in sectors such as commercial agriculture and manufacturing of clothing.
It was recommended that the following be done regarding these types of work:
-
The BCEA's blanket prohibition of employment of any child under the age of 15 years should be maintained, even where such work is not necessarily detrimental to the development to such child. The high level of unemployment in South Africa justifies the prohibition in the latter cases. Jobs need to be reserved for adults, thereby improving household income. Lead institution: DL. New Policy? No, confirmation of existing policy. Once off cost: nil. Recurrent cost: nil. Time line: within two years of adoption of policy.
| -
Adult work that encourages child labour should be regulated. This should be taken into account when the ECC makes recommendations to the Minister of Labour in respect of particular sectors or groups of workers. Lead institution: DL. Secondary institution: ECC. New Policy? Elaboration of existing policy. Once off cost: nil. Recurrent cost: nil. Time line: within two years of adoption of policy.
| -
Businesses using child labour, and adult work encouraging child labour, should be encouraged to change such work practices. Where businesses receive financial and other assistance from government, and such practices do not change, assistance should be terminated after fair warning. To police this, there should be a requirement to supply employee age information in all application forms and reports from these businesses. Lead institution: DTI. New Policy? Yes. Once off cost: minimal (investigating existing practices; recommending changes). Recurrent cost: minimal. Time line: within four years of adoption of policy.
| -
A provision [in the BCEA?] to the following effect should be considered: 'An employer may not pay less favourable remuneration per unit of time, or offer less favourable conditions of employment, to workers doing piece work than is received by other employees of the employer performing similar or comparable work.' Lead institution: DL. New Policy? Elaboration of existing policy, since sectoral determination usually set a standard minimum wage. Once off cost: nil. Recurrent cost: nil. Time line: within four years of adoption of policy.
| -
The Minister of Labour should in terms of section 83 of the BCEA deem the person benefiting from the work of the child to be the child's employer, where such a person is reasonably able to take steps to avoid the use of children. This deeming provision should stand alongside the responsibility as employer of the person directly using the child, such as the child's parent. Lead institution: DL. New Policy? No Elaboration of existing policy. Once off cost: nil. Recurrent cost: nil. Time line: within four years of adoption of policy.
|
Other related actions steps include:
-
The national awareness campaign on child labour should highlight the disadvantages and dangers of adult work that encourages child labour. See (23).
| 7.3Children working on the streets
Street children comprise two distinct groups: children ‘of the street’ (i.e. living there), and children ‘on the street’ (i.e. working there but not living there). The former are not members of households and would therefore have been missed by the SAYP, while the latter should have been captured in the survey. The available evidence suggests that there are more boys than girls living on the street.
It is estimated that about one third of ‘street children’ are ‘of the street’, while the rest are ‘on the street’ i.e. working there but not living there. Only a small proportion of these children are formally orphans or homeless, but many are functionally homeless because of cruel and disinterested parents or step-parents, alcoholism, cruelty, and eviction.
Homeless children – both girls and boys – are vulnerable to rape and to being forced into survival sex for money or protection. They are also used by drug dealers to ‘carry’ drugs. Many of their other income-earning activities are very marginal. Among Cape Town street people – both adults and children – recycling and casual jobs together account for 44% of the total means of survival.
Rehabilitation of children living on the street involves long-term work. This can only begin when a child is in a secure environment with stable and loving caregivers. The work currently being undertaken by the non-governmental sector in terms of street shelters is a first step but remains constrained by serious lack of resources and /or the development of minimum standards of intervention. Efforts are being made in the direction of building capacity of personnel in shelters but unless these shelters can access greater resources they are not likely to keep highly qualified staff to provide rehabilitation services or to plan for long term interventions. In addition there is a need for greater public awareness about children living and working on the streets to stem the tide of negative public opinion.
Appropriate measures to address the situation of such children include:
-
Facilitating the reunification of children living in the street to their families or extended families, provided that circumstances would be caring. Lead institution: DrSD*. Secondary institution: LG. New Policy? Existing policy, although difficulties with implementation are sometimes experienced. Once off cost: nil. Recurrent cost: moderate, but forms part of existing budget. Time line: ongoing.
-
Reintegration of street children through shelters and homes, with increased state support to such shelters. Lead institution: DrSD*. Secondary institution: NGOs. New Policy? Elaboration of existing policy. Once off cost: moderate. Recurrent cost: moderate. Time line: within two years of adoption of policy.
-
Giving support while the child is on the street, including the provision of at least basic education to ensure minimum-level literacy and skills. This could possibly be done through halfway houses where children could gradually be phased into or back to the education system. When implementing Education White Paper 6 on inclusion, programmes can be adapted in this regard. Lead institution: DrE. Secondary institution: NGOs. New Policy? Elaboration of existing policy. Once off cost: moderate (further design). Recurrent cost: moderate. Time line: plan to expand to be in place within three years of adoption of policy.
-
Children working on the streets are also exposed to much higher levels of risk, ranging from violence against them, traffic accidents, exposure to drugs etc. Street children should therefore be prioritised for action. Lead institution: DrSD. Secondary institution: DL. New Policy? Elaboration of existing policy. Once off cost: moderate. Recurrent cost: moderate. Time line: within wo years of adoption of policy.
Share with your friends: |
