COMMENTARY
Child Labour Law Amendment
Applying the Brakes on Social Mobility
Alex George, Sameet Panda
The proposed amendment to
the Child Labour (Prohibition
and Regulation) Act 1986 hopes
to align it with the Right to
Education Act, 2009. It prohibits
child labour up to 14 years and
regulates the employment of
children between the ages of 15
and 18 years. But the proviso that
children can help in the family
occupation after school hours
or in the fields, home-based
work, forest produce gathering
or attend technical institutions
during vacations, is bound to
be misused. Besides, it will also
lead to reinforcing the practice of
caste-based occupations.
The views expressed here are personal and not
necessarily that of the organisation.
Alex George (alex.george@actionaid.org) and
Sameet Panda (panda@mum.com) work with
Child Rights Focus, ActionAid.
16
A
ccording to the 2011 Census, the
total number of child labour up to
18 years of age in India, including
main and marginal workers, is as high
as 23.8 million. Of this, 10.1 million are
children in the age group of 5 to 14,
while 13.7 million are children in the age
group of 1517 years. Children up to 18
years constitute 5% of the total work-
force, with those up to 14 years being
2.1% and children between 15 and 18
years amounting to 2.83% (Table 1, p 17).
The actual figures would be still higher
as migrant children and children of mi-
grant families are unlikely to be includ-
ed in full measure in the census.
The participation rate of female chil-
dren in the total female workforce is
higher at 6.29% as compared to that of
male children within the male workforce,
which stands at a relatively lower 4.32%.
This trend is seen both in rural as well as
urban areas, demonstrating a gender
bias against girls though a substantial
percentage of boys are also engaged in
labour (Table 2, p 17). It is clear that a
higher proportion of girls among the
female workforce are put to work as child
labour as compared to boys.
SEPTEMBER 19, 2015
Among the occupational classifica-
tions in which age-wise employment
data of children is grouped in the cen-
sus, agricultural labour emerges as the
largest category. In the 5 to 14 years age
group, agricultural labourers constitute
3.34 million, that is, 33% of the total
child workforce; while in the broader 5
to 17 category their number swells to
8.97 million and as high as 38%. In urban
areas, other workers, that is, children
belonging to occupations other than
agriculture and household industry
amount to 1.69 million out of 2.03 mil-
lion child labourers signifying a very
high proportion of 83% in urban areas.
In the 5 to 17 years age group other work-
ers account for 3.74 million and 82% of
the child workforce. A large section of
child labour classified as cultivators in
the census would belong to the poor and
marginal peasant families who cultivate
either their own land or land leased from
others (Table 3, p 17).
To recapitulate, the main trends in
child labour, agricultural labour stands
out as the occupation in which the largest
number of children is involved, though
in urban areas the other workers cate-
gory is the counterpart. Along with this
a very high girl child participation in
work is also emerging. It needs to be
noted that this is apart from the unpaid
care work of girls, which is not captured
in these census categories. It is rather
surprising that the category of house-
hold industry workers report very low
vol l no 38 EPW Economic & Political Weekly
 COMMENTARY
Table 1: Number of Child Labour in Indian Workforce RuralUrban and MaleFemale* (in Million) force from 1 April 2010, guarantees educa-
(Census 2011)
tion to children between 6 and 14 years.
Age Group Total Rural Urban
Persons Males Females Persons Males Females Persons Males Females This act emerges from a constitutional
514 years 10.13 5.63 4.50 8.10 4.39 3.71 2.03 1.24 0.79 commitment arising from the 86th Con-
1517 years 13.65 8.72 4.93 11.12 6.89 4.23 2.53 1.83 0.70 stitutional Amendment (2002), which
Total child labour 23.78 14.35 9.43 19.22 11.28 7.94 4.56 3.07 1.49 enshrines education as a fundamental
Total workforce 481.89 331.94 149.95 348.74 226.84 121.91 133.15 105.10 28.04 right justiciable under the Constitution.
* Data includes main and marginal workers.
However, even the enrolment of all out-
Table 2: Percentage of Child Labour* in Indian Workforce by RuralUrban and MaleFemale
(Census 2011 ) of-school children, mostly working as
Age Group Total Rural Urban child labour will not be possible unless
Persons Males Females Persons Males Females Persons Males Females child labour at least up to 14 years is out-
514 years 2.10 1.70 3.00 2.32 1.94 3.05 1.52 1.18 2.81
lawed completely and the law imple-
1517 years 2.83 2.63 3.29 3.19 3.04 3.47 1.90 1.74 2.50
mented effectively.
Total child labour 4.93 4.32 6.29 5.51 4.97 6.52 3.42 2.92 5.31
* Data includes main and marginal workers.
Proposed Amendment
numbers compared to both agricultural line with this policy, the UNCRC, and the The Child Labour (Prohibition and Regu-
labour and other workers (Table 3). To Juvenile Justice Act 2000 (GoI, MWCD lation) Act (CLPRA) 1986 is being amended
put these figures in perspective: chil- 2013), which also define the child as with the objective of aligning it with the
dren belonging to poor and marginal being a person up to 18 years, the gov- RtE, by proposing to prohibit child labour
peasants as well as landless households ernment should prepare a road map to up to and including 14 years and regulat-
who form part of the excluded social prohibit employment of children up to ing employment of children bet ween 15
groups are the ones who are mainly ex- 18 years in any form of labour. and 18 years. The proposed amendment
ploited as child labour. A large section of The Right of Children to Free and is also aimed at conforming to the Inter-
children are already working as cultiva- Compulsory Education Act 2009, (RtE) national Labour Organization (ILO) Con-
tors in family-owned or leased farms. (Gazette of India 2009) which came into vention 138 on minimum age of entry
Table 3: Workforce Distribution of Children
in India in Million by Rural and Urban Areas WORK at EPW
(Census 2011)*
Age Category of Workforce Total Rural Urban Assistant Editor/Senior Assistant Editor
5 to 14 Cultivators 2.64 2.55 0.09 (Economics)
Agricultural labourers 3.34 3.24 0.10
The Economic and Political Weekly is looking to appoint an Assistant Editor/Senior Assistant Editor
HHI workers 0.52 0.38 0.15
who will focus on Economics.
Other workers 3.63 1.94 1.69
The position offers an opportunity to engage with a whole range of current research and writing
Total 10.13 8.10 2.03
on the economic issues of the day. The Assistant Editor/Senior Assistant Editor at EPW will be interacting
15 to 17 Cultivators 2.82 2.75 0.07 with writers from all over the world who seek to publish in the journal.
Agricultural labourers 5.63 5.43 0.21 The responsibilities will involve tracking research in Economics and commissioning papers for
HHI workers 0.67 0.47 0.20 publication. They will also involve reviewing and editing submissions, and collaborating in organising
Other workers 4.52 2.47 2.05 special issues in Economics. The selected candidate will have opportunities to write articles and
Total 13.65 11.12 2.53 book reviews, and draft editorials as well.
5 to 17 Cultivators 5.46 5.30 0.16 We are looking for someone who has research experience (MPhil essential but for a Senior Assistant
Agricultural labourers 8.97 8.66 0.31 Editor a PhD would be necessary) with some years of experience in teaching/journalism and with
HHI workers 1.20 0.85 0.35
publications (research writing/reportage). A command over English is essential since editing will be
an important part of the job.
Other workers 8.15 4.41 3.74
The candidate should have a working knowledge of current economic theory (mainstream and
Total 23.78 19.22 4.56
heterodox). She should also be aware of the main trends of research on Indian economic issues.
Apart from this, an awareness of contemporary debates in the social sciences and of current affairs
Right to Childhood would be valuable.
The United Nations Convention on the A familiarity with web applications and publication would be welcome.
Rights of the Child (UNCRC 1989), of The selected candidate will be based in Mumbai.
EPW tries to but cannot match the salary scales (Lecturer/Reader for this position) of the University
which India is a signatory, defines a child
Grants Commission. It makes up by offering the opportunity to work in Indias leading social science
as a person below the age of 18 years and journal in an engaging and friendly work atmosphere with encouragement to develop ones skills
prohibits children from being employed as and interests.
labourers, though India has not ratified House rent allowance, medical insurance and leave travel assistance are also provided.
Article 32, which deals with employment Interested candidates should send in their curriculum vitae along with a covering letter addressed
of children. Following the international to the editor at edit@epw.in. The last date for submission of applications is 16 October 2015.
The selection will be made in November based on interviews in person or over Skype. The selected
norm, the National Policy for Children candidate could join in early 2016.
2013 (GoI, MWCD 2013) adopted by the As always we will give preference to candidates from marginalised backgrounds who meet
Government of India also defines children our requirements.
as persons below the age of 18 years. In
Economic & Political Weekly EPW SEPTEMBER 19, 2015 vol l no 38 17
COMMENTARY
into employment, which is specified as
not less than 15 years and with ILO
Convention 182 on the worst forms of
child labour (ILO 1973; GoI, ML&E 2015).
However, the amendment is being in-
troduced by the government with an im-
portant rider; which is likely to be mis-
used by employers of children. The union
cabinets decision to approve the draft of
the CLPRA Amendment Bill with a provi-
so to allow child labour below the age of
14 years in family enterprises, including
agriculture, home-based work, artisanship
(GoI, ML&E 2015) will lead to the dilution
of the objective of the bill to ban child
labour up to 14 years of age.
Ignoring Recommendations
In this regard, it needs to be pointed out
that the Ministry of Labour and Employ-
ment and the union government have
ignored the recommendations of the
Parliamentary Standing Committee on
Labour (PSCL 201314) made in its 40th
report in December 2013. Responding to
Section 5 of the CLPRA Amendment Bill
2012, which had provided that the child
can help his/her family after school hours
or help in fields, home-based work, forest
gathering or attend technical institutions
during vacations, the parliamentary com-
mittee expressed its amazement and said
that it was not able to understand as to
how the Labour Ministry proposed to
keep a check on children working in
their homes. It pointed out that the min-
istry was providing loopholes with this
proviso since it would be very difficult to
make out whether children were merely
helping their parents or working to sup-
plement the family income.
It went further and stated that allowing
children to work after school was detri-
mental to their health as rest and recrea-
tion was important for the fullest physical
and mental development in the formative
years besides adversely affecting their
studies. The committee felt that the schools
where these children studied should
conduct sessions for their parents and
tell them about the needs of children. It
was of the view that there was no need
to insert a provision to expressly allow
some obvious things, in the Indian context,
such as children helping their parents in
domestic chores (PSCL 201314).
18
As mentioned in the parliamentary com- the point of competency to choose and to
mittees report there is no need to insert make his own career. This principle is vio-
lated in the Caste System in so far as it in-
an explicit section or clause to permit chil-
volves an attempt to appoint tasks to indi-
dren to help with their families work. It viduals in advance...(Ambedkar 2011).
is likely to lead to misuse with employers
insisting that the children working as la- He also argues for the need to choose
bourers belong to their (the employers) ones occupation in different times in
families and will defeat the purpose of order to make a livelihood. He says:
the proposed amendment. It needs to be Industry is never static. It undergoes rapid
pointed out that according to Article 31 and abrupt changes. With such changes an
of the UNCRC, children have a right to individual must be free to change his oc-
rest and leisure, to engage in play and cupation. Without such freedom... it would
be impossible for him to gain his livelihood
recreational activities appropriate to the
(Ambedkar 2011).
age of the child and to participate freely in
cultural life and the arts (UNCRC 1989). It is clear therefore, that both from the
The logic that working in family enter- perspective of individual choice in occu-
prises at an early age helps children to pations and to adjust to the livelihood
learn skills early in their life runs against needs arising from technological chang-
the process of social mobility through ed- es it is imperative that children are pro-
ucation to occupations outside the tradi- vided the fullest opportunity to choose
tional ones. This is a normal process in their occupation, rather than training
any modernising society. The move to them in their parents occupations dur-
give written legal sanction in the form of ing non-school hours and vacations.
the proposed amendment, in order to fa- The bogey that parents would be
cilitate the employment of children in penalised does not hold because the
family occupations will lead to reinforc- second part of Section 5 of the proposed
ing adherence to caste based occupations. amendment clearly mentions that labour
Emphasising the need to provide a involving a subordinate relationship is
choice in occupation, beyond the caste or- prohibited. As labour in a family does
dained ones, B R Ambedkar had observed: not involve a subordinate relationship,
Social and individual efficiency requires us the first part of Section 5, which expands
to develop the capacity of an individual to the scope of family-based childrens
Journal Rank of EPW
Economic & Political Weekly is indexed on Scopus, the largest abstract and citation database
of peer-reviewed literature, which is prepared by Elsevier NV (http://tinyurl.com/o44sh7a).
Scopus has indexed research papers that have been published in EPW from 2008 onwards.
The Scopus database journal ranks country-wise and journal-wise. It provides three broad
sets of rankings: (i) Number of Citations, (ii) H-Index and (iii) SCImago Journal and Country
Rank.
Presented below are EPWs ranks in 2014 in India, Asia and globally, according to the total
cites (3 years) indicator.
Highest among 36 Indian social science journals and highest among 159 social science
journals ranked in Asia.
Highest among 36 journals in the category, Economics, Econometrics and Finance in the
Asia region, and 36th among 835 journals globally.
Highest among 23 journals in the category, Sociology and Political Science in the Asia
region, and 15th among 928 journals globally.
Between 2008 and 2014, EPWs citations in three categories (Economics, Econometrics,
and Finance; Political Science and International Relations; and Sociology and Political
Science) were always in the second quartile of all citations recorded globally in the
Scopus database.
For a summary of statistics on EPW on Scopus, including of the other journal rank indicators,
please see http://tinyurl.com/qe949dj
EPW consults referees from a database of 200+ academicians in different fields of the social
sciences on papers that are published in the Special Article and Notes sections.
SEPTEMBER 19, 2015 vol l no 38 EPW Economic & Political Weekly

work from workshops in the principal
1986 Act (GoI 1986) to specifically
fields, home-based work, forest gather-
ing and attending technical institutions
as in the CLPRA amendment bill 2012 or
agriculture and artisanship as stated
in the present amendment (GoI, ML&E
2015) is not really required. Retaining
this clause will amount to employing
children under the guise of family labour
by employers, particularly in agriculture
which has emerged as the largest cate-
gory of child labour in our analysis of
census data, in forest produce collection
and also in the household industry. Seen
against the context of the labour law
amendment to exempt factories employ-
ing less than 40 employees from the
purview of monitoring and regulation
under an array of labour laws it appears
that these factories would be deemed as
family enterprises, which will open the
doors to employing child labour using
the approval for child labour in family
enterprises (Live Mint 2015).
Other Key Features
The government has been drawing
attention to the clause in the amend-
ment that provides for compensation
from the employer and the government,
for the rehabilitation of each rescued
child labourer. The amendment also
proposes increase in the minimum term
of imprisonment for employing child
labour from three months to six months
and the maximum term from one year to
two years. While these are welcome
steps, it is necessary to enhance the low
prosecutions and convictions that are
made under CLPRA.
The 40th report of the parliamentary
committee responding to the 2012 amen-
dment bill had pointed out that the bill
did not fully identify hazardous occupa-
tions and processes prohibited for emp-
loying adolescents and recommends in-
cluding them in the amendment bill.
The Schedule under Section 3A to be in-
serted into the original CLPRA 1986 as
per Section 6 of the 2012 bill mentioned
only mines, inflammable substances and
hazardous processes as per the Factories
Act 1948 as being hazardous for children.
Only minor additions have been made to
this list in the present amendment. We
Economic & Political Weekly EPW SEPTEMBER 19, 2015
are of the view that a detailed list of
hazardous occupations and processes
initially to be based on the present list of
such occupations and processes under
the principal act of 1986, should be men-
tioned in the amendment bill itself as an
annexure. This list should however be
reviewed and updated based on its
applicability to children as the Factories
Act 1948 concerns adults and also keep-
ing in mind newly emerging occupa-
tions on account of urbanisation and
technological changes such as handling
of e-waste. The implementation mecha-
nism regarding the existing list of
hazardous occupations needs to be
tightened as children are employed with
total impunity in several of the prohibited
occupations and processes quite openly.
The most obvious example of this is urban
waste handling and sanitation, despite
both rag picking and scavenging being
included in the prohibited list (GoI 1986).
The proposed amendment also permits
employing children in the audiovisual,
entertainment and advertising industries.
Children are being used in a range of
such occupations from street circuses
to films and live shows. They are also
subjected to hazardous as well as trau-
matic situations in these industries in
order to enhance the thrill and suspense
of such shows. However, this arena
needs to be strongly regulated keeping
in view the rural/mofussil as well as the
urban settings and also the hi-tech and
low-tech industries.
Recommendations
As the government is committed, accord-
ing to the national policy on children, to
consider persons aged less than 18 years
as children, it is expected that it will
draw up a road map towards a complete
ban on child labour (up to 18 years).
However, for the present, based on the
above discussion we make a few recom-
mendations which are in line with the
objective of the proposed amendment
to ban child labour up to 14 years and
regulate the employment of children
bet ween 15 and 18 years.
(1) Amend Section 5 of the CLPRA Ame-
ndment Bill 2012 which legalises use of
child labour in family-based enterprises
as it will be misused by employers of
vol l no 38
COMMENTARY
such enterprises under the guise that the
children belong to their families.
(2) Formulate regulatory laws governing
employment of children between 5 and
14 years and 15 and 18 years in the enter-
tainment, audiovisual and advertising
industries, with particular emphasis on
prohibiting their employment in hazard-
ous tasks and traumatic situations.
(3) Reinstate the original longer list of
hazardous occupations with regard to
the children between 15 and 18 years
and update the list with occupations and
processes, which are hazardous, based
on an assessment of the newly emerging
occupations on account of urbanisation
and technological changes.
References
Ambedkar, B R (2011): Annihilation of Caste,
Pradeep Gaikwad, Nagpur: Samata Prakashan,
Reprint (Based on the third edition, 1944)
Government of India (1986): The Child Labour
(Prohibition and Regulation) Act, http://clc.
gov.in/Acts/shtm/chla.php, viewed on
12 August 2015.
(2013): Ministry of Women and Child Develop-
ment (MWCD): National Policy for Children
2013, p 2, http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/
npc2013d td29042013.pdf, viewed on 12 Au-
gust 2015.
Government of India, Ministry of Labour and Em-
ployment (ML&E) (2015): Press Release 13
May, Approval to Move Official Amendment to
CLPRA Amendment Bill 2012, http://
164.100.47.134/lsscommittee/Labour/15_La-
bour_40.pdf, viewed on 12 August.
International Labour Organisation (1973): C-138,
Minimum age Convention 1973, (No138) http:
//www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=
NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_
CODE:C138, http://www.ilo. org/wcmsp5/
groups/publiced_norm/declaration/ doc-
uments/publication/wcms_decl_fs_46_en.
pdf, viewed on 12 August 2015.
Live Mint (2015): Government Plans Big Labour
Reform Push in Monsoon Session of Parlia-
ment, 8 July, http://www.livemint.com/Poli-
tics /7iDANGIDKz 9pDj6cO4TJEL/Govt-plans-
big-labour-reform-push-in-monsoon-session-of-
Parl.html, viewed on 12 August.
The Gazette of India (2000): Act No 56, Juvenile
Justice (Protection and Care of Children) Act
2000, http://khoyapaya.gov.in/ mpp/resourc-
es/Juvenile%20Justice%20Act%202000.pdf,
viewed on 12 August 2015.
(2009): No 39, Right of Children to Free and
Compulsory Education Act, http://ssa.nic.in/rte-
docs/free%20and%20compulsory.pdf, viewed
on 12 August 2015.
Parliamentary Standing Committee on Labour on
Child Labour Prohibition and Regulation Act
Amendment Bill 2012 (PSCL) (201314): 40th
Report, pp 3839 http://164.100.47.134/lss-
committee/Labour/15_Labour_40.pdf, viewed
on 12 August 2015.
United Nations Convention on the Rights of the
Child (UNCRC) (1989): pp 2 and 9, http://
www.ohchr.org/Documents/ProfessionalIn-
terest/crc.pdf
19