History of Child Labour in the UK - Essay Example

?History of Child Labour in the UK This article investigates the issue of child labour throughout the of history in the United Kingdom. Long before the ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC, 1989), children have been found to be exploited in the most dire conditions, threatening their optimal growth and development. In the Industrial Revolution of the 1800s, many have been forced into labour at their very fragile stage of development. Advocates of children have worked hard to rescue child labourers from such predicament, and although at present, it has substantially been reduced, it is not entirely diminished. This article will chronicle the movement of child labour issues from the 1800’s to contemporary times and critically analyse children’s place in society over time. Keywords Child labour, Factory acts, child employment, society’s view of children Society has viewed childhood in various perspectives throughout history. Mayall (2006) theorised that initially children were not considered part of a society but only inhabit a preparatory stage before they are considered contributing members as adults. However, the onset of child labour has changed this perspective. Because children have shown that they were capable of work, they have been treated like “little adults”. Since they were already earning money and were being useful to their families and society, the fact that they were still developing their bodies and minds was overlooked. The International Labour Organization (ILO, 2012 para 3,) defines child labour as “work that deprives children of their childhood, their potential and their dignity, and that is harmful to physical and mental development”. This was conceptualised after studying how society viewed child labour during certain periods in history. The United Nations established the Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) in 1989 and had several nations ratify it to ensure that children all over the world are not deprived of their rights. Cunningham and Viazzo (1996) contend that child labour may have had a long history, even before the industrial revolution. However, due to lack of statistical information, they assume that it became more pronounced and exploitative during the start of the Industrial Revolution. Heward (1993) explains that child advocates and reformists were outraged at the predicament of young children who worked heavily for very long hours. They called for the abolition of child labour but factory reformers called for its regulation rather than its abolition. They reasoned that families could not afford to give up the wages that these children brought in and admitted that textile factories could not function well without child labour (Wistanley, 1995). Implementation of such regulation was not expected to be carried out without proper legislation. Nardinelli (1980) reports that in 1832, the first Factory Act was written limiting the working hours of all children below the age of 18 to 10 hours per day. This was backed up by a report on child labour with harrowing tales of overwork, exploitation and physical deterioration of children as young as four years (Hopkins, 1994). Although the report was met with shock and indignation, a compromise was reached in 1833 prohibiting employment of children under the age of nine in all textile mills except silk mills powered by steam or water. Children from 9-12 years of age could only work for nine hours a day or 48 hours a week provided they were also being schooled, and their working hours did not interfere with their schooling hours. This derived from the idea that although children who were schooled may still be subject to child labour, the number of hours should be limited and minimised (Nardinelli, 1980). In 1842, the Coal Mines Act marked the success of Lord Ashley’s Children’s Employment Commission with a recommendation to forbid all women and children under the age of 10 to be employed under the ground. This was to prevent their corruption and exploitation by men who mostly worked naked due to the intense heat of the work environment underground (Cunningham, 1995). Child workers’ income went directly into the family funds as their contribution to the family economy (Cunningham and Viazzo, 1996). The implication for this was that children were viewed as “little adults” capable of earning income for the family without any regard for their developmental needs. At that time, there was no welfare state thus children’s needs were not prioritised (Bolin-Hort, 1989) Education was given attention in 1844 when children in textile mills were expected to work half days and attend school during the other half. However, it was reported that the schools the factories endorsed provided inferior education for the children (Tuttle, 1999). Cunningham (1990) adds that this mandate for children to be schooled lowered the minimum age for employment to eight. Perhaps the justification that schooling opportunities were available for child workers strengthened factory owners’ intentions to employ more children for their businesses to flourish. In 1874, the Factory Act increased the age limit for employment from 8 to 12 to 10 to 13 (Nardinelli, 1980). By 1880, school became compulsory. Cunningham & Viazzo (1996) explain that the reasons for compulsory education were to compel unemployed children to attend school and to oblige schools to make their standards acceptable to the government. Bolin-Hort (1989) argues that parents and the government were at odds with this move as they had different viewpoints regarding the functions of education. Whilst parents mostly viewed education as a means for their children to learn basic skills such as reading, writing and arithmetic to prepare them for the real goal in life which is earning a living, the government saw schools as venues to teach the values of individual competitiveness, Christianity and imperialism. Aside from this conflict, the compulsion of schooling did not entirely stop child labour as most children still held part time jobs outside school hours (Thomas, 1976). Nonetheless, education did appear to play a positive role in the reduction rates of child labour. This came about as educational professionals, such as the class teachers, noticed the considerable effects the work had on the children, and reported it. The report that pushed for the drafting of the first Factory Act in 1832 included children being fatigued and as a consequence, their education was disrupted and their health was also affected due to the children being manipulated into working the hours and conditions similar to that of adults, and as a result, they became sick and physically unfit (Cunningham and Viazzo, 1996). Attitudes towards children shifted in the late part of the 19th century as the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) was established, ensuring more humane treatment of children (Wistanley, 1995). NSPCC’s initiatives to moderate child labour practices reflected society’s changing views about children during that time. Society was beginning to realise that treating children as little adults was not appropriate (The National Archives, 2012). The following table shows the rate of decline of child labour over the years as society perceived a clearer view of how it adversely affected children. Table 1: Child Employment, 1851-1881 (Source: Booth, 1886, 353-399). Tuttle (1999) offers plausible explanations on the decline of child labour in the UK from the British Industrial Revolution period. One explanation is the rise of domestic ideology wherein fathers were regarded as breadwinners, mothers as homemakers, thus exempting children from such roles. This traditional view upholds the patriarchal belief that fathers should be the main providers of the family, and mothers the nurturers of the home. Children should be on the receiving end of the duties and responsibilities tasked to their parents. Also, since there were more opportunities to earn available, it was evident that the standard of living of families was also bound to rise. This allowed parents to be less reliant on their children for bringing in income for the family. Parents shifted their priorities to their children’s needs and recognised the importance of education and sent their children to schools voluntarily. To understand where children and adolescents are coming from with regards to child labour, it is essential to understand their nature and their perspectives during the different developmental levels they go through. As a person, the child worker has needs that should be satisfied. This could be manifested using Maslow’s (1970) Hierarchy of Needs where he explains that there are five levels which must be met in hierarchal order to eventually reach the top level and acquire self-actualisation. Once one basic need is fulfilled, he moves on to a higher one, with the need serving as his motivation. Children in this period of history were driven by their physiological and safety needs as they were hungry and needed to keep their shelter. They were doing what they felt was required of them to fulfil the basic needs of their families; however it meant that they spend more time working and less time socialising with other children, and consequently reducing the likelihood of meeting the next stage of hierarchy. Moreover, young school aged children in Erikson’s “Industry vs. Inferiority” stage, usually have goals of expanding their understanding of the world and developing appropriate gender-role identities as well as learning the skills necessary for educational success (Erikson, 1963). This implies that they need to develop a sense of industry, hence they can be open to employment at their young age. Their jobs keep them focused on their goals. However, should they fail to set and attain the personal goals they have set for themselves, it results in a sense of inferiority or inadequacy (Erikson, 1963). Hence it is but natural for them to do everything to please their employers. In some ways, this need for approval may easily be exploited by adults. Employers can demand more from their child/ young workers before giving them the much-anticipated approval. Adolescents, on the other hand, being in transition between childhood and adulthood, are identified to be in Erikson’s “Identity vs. Identity Diffusion” stage of Psychosocial development. Adolescence becomes a challenging time of testing limits, gaining more independence and establishing a new identity. Being able to earn their keep gives them a sense of independence and have less reliance on their parents or significant others (Erikson, 1963). With this sense of identity, they need to clarify their life’s goals and life’s meaning. Failure to achieve a sense of identity results in role diffusion or confusion (Erikson, 1963). In terms of Maslow’s theory, adolescents may have reached the level of need for belonging and love, esteem needs and eventually, fulfil their need for self-actualisation (Maslow, 1970). Understanding this nature of adolescents implies that they should be given enough opportunities to show their responsibility and independence. In acknowledging and respecting the nature of children and the youth and knowing their needs at their particular developmental stages, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) (1989) strives to ensure children’s rights are met, and aims to protect children and their welfare. States are mandated to keep children safe from harm and avoid circumstances that may adversely affect their development into well-adjusted and well-rounded adults who are contributing members of society. Children’s best interests should be of primary consideration and that the state has a responsibility to ensure that each child is protected and cared for especially in terms of health and safety. The Welfare State established by then Prime Minister Clement Attlee in 1945 ensured that the government will look after everyone from “womb to tomb” or “cradle to the grave” (History Learning Site, 2012, para 1). This included free medical treatment and social security in the form of unemployment insurance, health insurance and pension schemes. During the 21st century, child employment is associated with the child’s attendance in school (Cunningham, 1990). Child employment refers to the “employment of children under the school leaving age” (McKechnie et al., 2010, p.1). It was found that in the early 1990s, many young people were employed in part-time jobs while being full-time students before they finished compulsory education (Pond & Searle, 1991; Lavalette, Hobbs & McKechnie, 1991). With regards to child employment, children have protection of their rights as written in Article 32 of the UNRCRC (1989). They are now protected from economic exploitation and performance in hazardous work which may adversely affect their education and overall health and well-being. As a result, the government has set some guidelines for prospective employers of children and adolescents which include, yet not limited to, age of admission to work, minimum wage, allowed number of hours for work and appropriate work conditions for the children and adolescents. Failure to abide by the set guidelines will merit sanctions and penalties to the employers (UNCRC, 1989). This is one way to ensure that employers take serious consideration of their young workers’ welfare while under their employ. In the document for Every Child Matters, Working Together to Safeguard Children (HM Government, 2006), children are safeguarded and their welfare is promoted to ensure that they grow up in circumstances consistent with the provision of safe and effective care (HM Government, 2006). Thus, contemporary society mandates local authorities to issue work permits to registered child workers to ensure compliance with legislation. The work permit system protects children from entering employments that may be potentially harmful to them, so prospective employers need to be conscientious of their policies with regards to the child workers (Directgov, 2012). In addition, the young worker should also be ensured of maintaining good health and safety (McKechnie et al., 2010). Currently, children are able to work, outside school hours, in various roles providing it is not deemed harmful and unsafe. Common examples include sports, advertising, modelling, entertainment (plays, films, TV, shop work and tourism and hospitality (hotels, guest houses, tea shops). As long as these do not pose risks to their health and safety and do not conflict with their schooling, then such employment is appropriate for young people. Odd jobs for parents or neighbours, babysitting or delivery rounds are also common in contemporary society, and often undertaken to earn extra pocket money (Directgov, 2012). In the past, children were regarded as “little adults” in terms of employment but not in terms of their rights to express themselves and be taken seriously for their opinions. This was why children were readily employed to do jobs which may be too menial or mechanical for adults. Most employers and even parents viewed their children as instruments of income-generation and had little consideration for their health, safety and welfare (Cunningham and Viazzo, 1996). Contemporary society has gone a long way in terms of its perception of children. Presently, children are being re-instated in a position where their well-being and welfare are recognised and prioritised as they are regarded as valuable to society (Library of Congress, 2012). Because of their clarity of thinking, unobstructed by pressures put on by society, they may even surpass the learning abilities of adults (Mayall, 2002). The growing awareness that children are indeed capable of becoming contributing members of society (Mitchell & Wild, 2004) has prompted the UK government to consult children themselves on things that matter to them most in order to be the basis of proposals for change (Page & Clark, 1977). Hence, such action of society to trust children’s opinions regarding their own welfare is a sign that a huge transformation has happened regarding society’s views of childhood. Concern for children’s rights have increased upon society’s realisation of how valuable they are and how much more productive they can be if they are allowed to grow and develop their knowledge and skills in developmentally appropriate conditions (Brewer, 2001). The term “little adult” has changed its meaning from being a child that meets expectations accorded to adults by financially contributing to the family income to someone who independently thinks for himself and easily emulates the attitudes, behaviours, language and even perspectives of adults (Mayall, 2000). Child employment is not totally abolished, as long as it brings more benefits than harm to children, and yield to education as the children’s main priority. Due to these positive developments initiated by the government, parents no longer need to push their children to work since they have the government to rely on for their needs in case they lacked the resources for decent living. Child and adolescent workers have been relieved of the pressure to earn income for their families. If all well-meaning government plans for today’s children are realised, it is envisioned that by 2015 each child will remain in compulsory education until the age of 18. Schools and universities are therefore instrumental in facilitating the youth’s transition into adulthood. That is why they need to prepare them well in order to realistically achieve such vision. By then, it is fervently hoped that they do find several opportunities to help them build bright futures with fulfilling adult lives, lucrative employment, good health and total independence. Over time, society has come to be more understanding of children’s perspectives and gained respect for their rights. The UNCRC was instrumental in returning childhood back to children and giving them their rightful place in society as individuals needing safety and protection. Whereas in the past, child labour highlighted children as contributors to the family income, now, they are regarded as contributors to the family’s emotional stability, as they are known to be the life force that cements their parents’ relationships to be stronger. Being reliant on their parents’ love and support, they give back by being the inspiration, hence, the strong motivator for their parents to strive harder in order to provide them all their needs. When children are provided all the opportunities to optimize their potentials, there is more hope for a better future for all! References Baxter, J. & Frederickson, N., (2005) “Every Child Matters: Can educational psychology contribute to radical reform?” Educational Psychology in Practice,Vol 21, No. 2 Bolin-Hort, P. (1989) Work, Family and the State: Child Labour and the Organization of Production in the British Cotton Industry,1780-1920, Lund: Lund University Press. Booth, C .(1886) On the Occupations of the People of the United Kingdom, 1801-81., Journal of the Royal Statistical Society (J.S.S.) XLIX : 314-436. Brewer, J.A. (2001) Introduction to Early Childhood Education. Allyn & Bacon Cunningham, H. (1990) “The Employment and Unemployment of Children in England, c. 1680-1851”, Past and Present, 126, pp. 116-150. Cunningham, H. (1995) Children and Childhood in Western Society since 1500. London: Longman. Cunningham, H. & Viazzo, P.P.(eds.) (1996) Child Labour in Historical Perspective 1800-1985: Case studies from Europe, Japan and Colombia, UNICEF. Directgov (2012) Child Employment, Retrieved on June 30, 2012 from http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/parents/parentsrights/dg_4002945 Erikson, E. H. (1963). Childhood and society (2nd ed.). New York: Norton. Heward, C. (1993), ‘Reconstructing Popular Childhoods’. Children and Society, 7, pp. 237-254. History Learning Site (2012) The Labour Party and the Welfare State, Retrieved on July 5, 2012 from http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/labour_party_welfare_state.htm HM Government (2006) Working Together to Safeguard Children: A guide to inter-agency working to safeguard and promote the welfare of children. Every Child Matters Change for Children. London: TSO Hopkins, E. (1994) Childhood Transformed: Working-class Children in Nineteenth-Century England, Manchester: Manchester University Press. International Labour Organization (2012) What is Child Labour, Retrieved on June 24, 2012 from http://www.ilo.org/ipec/facts/lang--en/index.htm Library of Congress (2012) Children’s Rights: United Kingdom (England and Wales), Retrieved on June 29, 2012 from http://www.loc.gov/law/help/child-rights/uk.php Maslow, A.H. (1970) Motivation & Personality. Harper & Row Publishers. Mayall, B. (2000) “The sociology of childhood in relation to children’s rights”. The International Journal of Children’s Rights 8: 243–259, Mayall, B. (2002), Towards a Sociology for Childhood: Thinking from Children’s Lives. Buckingham: Open University Press. Mayall, B. (2006) “Values and Assumptions Underpinning Policy for Children and Young People in England” Children’s Geographies, Vol. 4, No. 1, 9–17 McKechnie, J., Hobbs, S., Simpson, A., Howieson, C. & Semple, S. (2010) The Regulation of Child Employment and Options for Reform, Retrieved on June 23, 2012 from https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eorderingdownload/dfe-rr124.pdf Mitchell, H. & Wild, M. (2004) “Placing the child in childhood. “British Educational Research Journal Vol. 30, No. 5 Nardinelli, C. (1980) Child Labor and the Factory Acts, The Journal of Economic History, Vol. 40, No. 4, 739-755. Page, R. and Clark, G.A. (1977) Young People’s Working Group: Who Cares? Young People in Care Speak Out, London, National Children’s Bureau. The National Archives (2012) Child Labour, Retrieved on June 23, 2012 from http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/citizenship/struggle_democracy/childlabour.htm#top Thomas, K. (1976) Rule and Misrule in the Schools of Early Modern England, Reading: University of Reading. Tuttle, C., (1999) Hard at Work in Factories and Mines: The Economics of Child Labor During the British Industrial Revolution. Oxford: Westview Press United Nations (1989) Convention on the rights of the child (Geneva, United Nations). Wistanley, M. (ed.) (1995) Working Children in Nineteenth-Century Lancashire, Lancaster: Lancashire Country Books. Read More