In several countries, like India and Brazil, the full opportunity for each worker to be considered for a job for which he is well-suited irrespective of race, color, sex, religion, or political opinion became a fundamental right by virtue of constitutional provisions. Economic research on labor rights shows that these and other labor rights lead to significant increases in economic growth in nations where they are implemented and enforced. This is particularly true of child labor and forced labor, which in theory increase the supply of cheap labor. Easy access to cheap labor removes incentives for firms to invest in new technologies and consequently, as children are deprived of an education, nations lack a good stock of human capital. In the future, they will even face a potential decrease of productivity.

According to the World Bank there are two justifications for Core Labor Standards (CLS): they are an important mechanism for poverty reduction and social and economic development. Indeed, access to safe and productive work is a critical factor in reducing poverty, and the legal, executive, and judicial framework surrounding employment is a central means of job creation and worker protection. CLS thus have a human rights explanation and an economic justification. The first human rights explanation relies on the claim that work is the central activity of human life and is associated with the improvement of human beings’ dignity. This argument justifies the ILO’s role in social adjustment, including a focus on social policy and the appropriate institutional framework for delivering social protection. The ILO program on decent work is in perfect agreement with this view. The program has regional arms to promote “opportunities for men and women to obtain decent and productive work, in conditions of freedom, equity, security, and human dignity” in various regions.

The second justification is concerned with the inclusion of CLS in trade agreements. By analyzing intellectual property rights and their relation to the global economy, economists see CLS as a self-justified case. According to some, including economist Thomas Palley of American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO), CLS should be made a central element of the system of global governance that is now being constructed, and all countries should be pushed to conform to these standards. Unfortunately, labor standards are frequently accused of being a form of hidden protection for industrialized countries because they allegedly ruin the comparative advantage of workers in developing countries. This

claim is fundamentally wrong. Labor standards are good for both developing and developed countries, and exemplify how good economic policy can promote

win-win outcomes.

Eliminating Child Labor and Forced Labor

Of the five rights embraced by the 1998 ILO Declaration, the eradication of child labor and the elimination of forced and compulsory labor are the two issues that most influence economic growth and investment, because of the claim that they produce cheap labor. Child labor is a widespread phenomenon. The legal age limit for work is being violated constantly, especially in instances of hazardous work. According to the 2003 ILO Report, A Future Without Child Labor, there are at least 17.4 million children working in Latin America and in the Caribbean. It is also estimated that 50 percent of child labor is located in rural areas and that 90 percent is on an informal basis. In Ecuador, there are 500,000 children from 5 to 14 years old currently employed. In Peru, there are 1.8 million children between the ages of 10 and 14 working, in Colombia, 700,000 children between 10 and 14, and in Argentina, 252,000 children between 10 and 14.

Studies have revealed a positive correlation—in some instances a very strong one—between child labor and poverty. Poverty itself has underlying determinants, such as class. When analyzing the caste composition of child laborers, International Institute for Population Sciences researcher Parveen Nangia observed that if these figures are compared with the class structure of the country, a comparatively higher proportion of lower class children work at a younger age to support themselves and their family. Nangia found in his study that 63.74 percent of child laborers said they worked to contribute to family income. For many families, there is no other alternative.

Research on poverty and worklessness by economist Steve Nickell of the London School of Economics shows that the connection between poverty, worklessness, and child labor is strong. If two or more people in a household work and at least one works full-time, poverty is unlikely. And over 53 percent of poor children live in workless households, whereas only around 20 percent of children overall live in workless households. If there were not poverty, there is a strong likelihood that would not be child labor. An additional study done by Marcelo Neri and his colleagues at the Brazilian Institute for Economics suggests that the father’s income has a significant negative correlation with the child’s probability of beginning to work, dropping out of school, and repeating a grade. Evidence collected from Brazil seems to suggest that child labor tends to trade off with both school and leisure. Although the majority of children who work in Brazil are also enrolled in school, the comparative rates of enrollment between those who work and those who do not illustrate the impact of child labor on educational outcomes. Among children aged 10 to 14 who are working, 86.7 percent are enrolled in school, while 96.4 percent of those who are not working are enrolled in school.

Richard Young of United Nations Childrens’ UNICEF India argued that no economic argument justifies child labor, saying that if there is no money in the family, it is not the fault of the child; it is because the adults have failed them. If a child starts working to support the family, then by the time he is legally old enough to work, he may no longer be in a position to work because of serious work-induced ailments. The vicious cycle continues with the younger siblings being forced to work in order to support their parents and sick older siblings.

The significant impact that early entry into the labor market has on a child’s future earnings and educational outcomes is only one of the many problems of child labor. One problem with the elimination of child labor is the subsequent decrease in family income. Simply cutting off this income would make needy families poorer. This is why a mechanism to facilitate the transition away from child labor needs to be developed. Education has been used as the central tool to achieve the goal of the much larger problem of poverty.