Posts tagged with: Child labour

childlaborImagine you are given three choices — A, B, or C. In the ranking, A is much preferred to B and B is exceedingly preferable to C. Which do you choose? Obviously, all else being equal, you’d choose A.

Now let’s add the following restrictions to your choice:

• You, your family, and your friends will all get A. But you must make the choice of A, B, or C, for other people who you will likely never meet.

• If you choose A, no one gets B and some (perhaps many) other people will be stuck with choice C.

• If you choose B, few people will get A but even fewer will get stuck with C.

Which do you choose now?

Before you know what the choices entail, you’d likely select B as the least bad option for the people you are choosing for. It’s not as good as the choice you yourself got but it’s still better than C.

But what if I told you A is a ban on child labor in Bangladesh and B is allowing children to work in a garment factory earning 53 cents per day. Does that change your decision?

Blog author: ehilton
Wednesday, December 17, 2014

grow upChildren have always worked in our country. On farms, in factories, in family-owned businesses, children have worked and continue to do so. However, we know that children face increased risks for injuries and fatalities in many jobs, and that working often means that children are not in school.

In a Minneapolis suburb where a school is under construction, a union boss stops by the non-union work site to check on things.

He saw something surprising: a boy, who appeared to be about 12 or 13, wearing jeans and a fluorescent work vest, smoothing mortar on a brick wall. It was a clear violation of child-labor laws, which prohibit 12 and 13-year-olds from working most jobs, except on farms, and also say that youths aged 14 and 15 may not work in hazardous jobs, including construction.

When others in the Laborers Union went to the site, they saw a boy too, this time driving a bobcat and cutting concrete with a saw. (more…)

The Locust Effect: Why the End of Poverty Requires the End of ViolenceOver at the Kern Pastors Network blog, Greg Forster uses The Locust Effect – Gary Haugen’s new book on violence, poverty, and human trafficking – as a springboard for discussing the reach and interconnectedness of various Christian commitments.

“The moral commitments that mobilize evangelicals to fight human trafficking have much broader application,” he writes, “and point to the possibility of a larger Christian vision for the public square.”

Yet, for whatever reason, we continue to stall when it comes to expanding, integrating, and applying things such a direction:

These days, trafficking is the only public issue evangelical leaders are comfortable identifying as a gospel imperative. As a result, our people are highly mobilized and accomplishing a lot. On every other public issue, however, we’re paralyzed by endless debates. There are no shared commitments, nothing we’re allowed to agree on; there is only division between the Right and the Left. So we produce a lot of heated rhetoric, and nothing gets done…

…This perpetual division over everything has to change if the gospel is going to speak to the culture, if Christians are going to have an impact in the public square, and if local churches are going to be forces for flourishing in their communities. The human trafficking issue proves there is a way out of this dilemma, because it shows that we do have shared moral commitments. “The Locust Effect” is a good example of how to apply those commitments beyond just trafficking. The Kern Pastors Network, the Oikonomia Network, and others who are working to integrate faith, work, and economics can carry these principles even further.

Forster proceeds accordingly, applying such commitments to the realms of work and economics. (more…)