Government &: Politics
Child labour row
Textiles minister prepares strategy to counter US pressure
C hild labour charges have always
haunted India's trade ties with
the prickly West. In fact, these
charges are already coming in the
way of the India-EU free trade agree-
ment (FT A). Now, ahead of a review
by the US government of the alleged
use of child labour in the textiles sec-
tor scheduled later this year, India is
trying to get its act together. India
has already initiated a process to
defend itself through a three-
pronged strategy of using diplomatic
channels, hiring a lobbying firm and
trying to adhere to a common com-
pliance code.
The interesting aspect of the strat-
egy is to use the lobbying skills of
global law firm, Sidley Austin LLP.
Sidley has approximately 1,700
lawyers in 17. offices around the
world. The company serves its clients
across the entire spectrum of law,
from complex transactions to 'bet
the company' litigation to cutting-
edge regulatory issues. The .idea
appears to have come from Union
textiles minister Dayanidhi Maran,
though the tab will be picked up by
the Apparel Export Promotion Coun-
cil (AE,PC). Back home, the case of
Indian apparel makers is being pre-
pared by eminent advocate K.K.
Venugopal.
Instances of use of child labour in
the Indian garmenting industry have
not gone down well with the US, a
country that accounts for 30 per cent
of India's total apparel exports worth
$10 billion. In September 2009, the
US department of labour listed
Indian garments under the Executive
Order 13126 List (EOL) and Traffick-
ing Victims Protection Reauthorisa-
tion (TVPRA) list. These are perceived
trade barriers that could emanate
from the US. While the US federal
government does not procure any-
thing from India currently, an EOL
label could hamper India's chances
of trade with the US in future.
Likewise, a TVPRA listing is a huge
reputation risk for the Indian apparel
BUS
Maran: mooting a lobbyist
industry that supplies to global retail-
ers and brands like Wal-Mart, Gap,
Diesel and Levi's, all of which swear
by strict policies on child labour. In
2007, an Indian supplier to clothing
retailer Gap Kids, a successful arm of
the high street giant Gap, was found
using child labour to produce
garments. In response, Gap has now
withdrawn these garments from sale
and ordered an investigation into
reports that its garment suppliers in
New Delhi have used child labour.
Impact on exports
While trade linkage with labour issues
is not immediately enforceable in
the absence of a legislation, the likeli-
hood of a legislation in the coming
months can impact Indian apparel
exports.
With the next TVPRA list expected
in September 2010 and the EOL list
13126 being finalised in the next few
months, an Indian delegation
I N E S SIN D [A • June 28-July 11, 2010
comprising joint secretary (exports) at
the textiles ministry V. Srinivas, AEPC
chairperson Premal Udani and gen-
eral secretary Vimal Kirti Singh were
in Washington recently to meet US
lawmakers and present a case for
exclusion of Indian garments from
the two lists. Indian apparel makers
also hope to engage US secretary of
state Hillary Clinton, when she comes
to India next to prepare the ground
for President Barack Obama's Novem-
ber visit, to present a case for exclu-
sion of India from the list.
While India insists that there are
isolated cases of child labour (which is
not reflective of the entire garmenting
sector) and none of forced child
labour in the Indian garment indus-
try, it is trying to convince the US of
its commitment towards eliminating
child labour wherever it exists in the
value chain. India also insists that the
situation is far better than the likes of
Bangladesh or Pakistan, where child
labour is rampant.
AEPC has issued an advisory to all
its members against the use of child
labour. India has already conveyed to
the US its policies against the use of
forced child labour. Also, the textiles
ministry has conveyed to the AEPC
that it is an offence and a violation of
the law. It expects the Northern India
Textiles Research Association to sub-
mit a report on forced child labour in
the industry shortly. Udani maintains
that his organisation is committed to
guaranteeing non-use of child labour
in any factory in India and also to see
that Indian factories follow the best
labour practices.
With the US in no mood to relent,
AEPC has initiated a process of formu-
lating a Common Compliance Code
to guide the industry, SMES in particu-
lar, with regard to environmental
laws and regulations, labour reforms,
wage differentiation and discrimina-
tion, overtime, flexible working
hours, health and safety issues and
working conditions. In 2008, days
after Tirupur drew international
attention to the alleged use of child
labour, the Tirupur Exporters Associa-
tion made its members sign a
self-declaration decree against the use
of child labour in their units.
• RAKESH jOSBI