International Research Journal Of Interdisciplinary

International Research Journal of Interdisciplinary & Multidisciplinary Studies (IRJIMS)

A Peer-Reviewed Monthly Research Journal

ISSN: 2394-7969 (Online), ISSN: 2394-7950 (Print)

Volume-I, Issue-I, February 2015, Page No. 180-185

Published by: Scholar Publications, Karimganj, Assam, India, 788711 Website: http://www.irjims.com

Socio-Economic Analysis of Child Labor in Hyderabad City

Muhammad Abdullah Avais

Ph. D. Scholar, Dept. of Sociology, University of Sindh, Jamshoro, Pakistan& Saima Shaikh

Associate Professor, Dept of Sociology, University of Sindh, Jamshoro, Pakistan

&

Abdul Jaleel Mirjat

M. Phil Scholar, Dept of Sociology, University of Sindh, Jamshoro, Pakistan

Abstract

International Research Journal Of Interdisciplinary And Multidisciplinary Studies A Socio-Economic Analysis of Child Labor in Hyderabad City: This paper explores the hidden factors – pushing our future towards child labor. Sixty five child workers had been selected through the simple purposive sampling technique. All the respondents were male and having age 07-15 years. The result indicates that 49% respondents working at hotel/tea stalls. Albeit to work at hotel/tea stall comes in the category of the worst form of child labor. But, it’s unrevealed fact that the worst form of child labor noticed in Hyderabad city. 43% respondents related to Sindhi community and 54% were never ever enrolled for formal education. Fathers of 36% respondents being daily paid workers (Laborer) and 92% respondents initiated to work owing to poverty in other words to support their respective families and 05% initiated to learn skills in their own words. Monthly family income of 30% respondents is less than 6,000 Pakistani rupees. 30% respondents having 07 family members, 20% have 09 and 28% respondents have 08 family members. 49% respondents work 12 hours daily. Their honorarium is very low as compare to their services. Only 17% respondents get Pk Rs: 2,000 – 2,500 honorarium per month and 28% respondents get 1,000 – 1,500 honorarium per month. Only 26% respondents have their own homes and 74% respondents live in rented homes.

Key Words: Socio-Economic, child labor, Hyderabad city, Sindh.

Introduction: Broadly speaking; children are gift of ALLAH and represent the creation of ALLAH. They are not born to work. There are so many reasons like poverty, un-awareness,lack of resources, and negligence of governments in third world countries and so on. Such a gift is bound to work without knowing hazardous of labor. Boyden & Bequele (1988)1 concluded that children can be seen in different economic activities like wise in factories, mines orself-employed work activities either on shops or in street trades. Although child labor is violation of human rights throughout the world. Child labor is the very complicated andun-denial issue of being developed and developing countries. Hyderabad is the second largest and developing city of Sindh province. Where the banned child labor is still found in the center of city. In Hyderabad, both boys and girls child below age of maturity being present to earn their living hood to help their families or themselves. Mostly these children were from low economic areas of city as paid low wages being un-skilled workers (Dawn, 2013)2. The power full key factors to push the child in labor is poverty, lack of education, un-awareness of parents and socio economic conditions of family (Avais, Wassan, & Erum, 2014)3. Such an activity that disturbs the schooling of child, harmful for child health or impose bad effect on physical, psychological or social, spiritual development of child between the 05 – 14 years age, is called child labor (Article 32 of convention of right of Children)4. In this way, the child labor is profitable activity of children either in industrial or non-industrial sector. Children act5 1991of government of Pakistan strictly prohibit the

Volume-I, Issue-I

February 2015

180

Socio-Economic Analysis of Child …… Muhammad Abdullah Avais, Saima Shaikh & Abdul Jaleel Mirjat

employment of under age (05 to 14 years) and according to law the accused can be punished by fine or imprisonment and both. This is a problem in developing countries that parents are not aware regarding hazardous of child labor. They take it as child training and think that this training will helpful for their children in future to combat unemployment. Children work for multiple reasons and the most recognizable factor is poverty.

Literature Review: Child labor is a common social evil in developing countries. Unfortunately, the accurate current statistics of child labor is neither present at Hyderabad nor in provincial level. Rodgers & Standing (1981)6 divided child labor in four categories, 1. Domestic Work, 2. Non domestic & non monitory work, 3. Bonded Labor & 4. Wage labor. Ray (2002)7 argued that most of child labors of Asia belonged to 10 – 14 years age group. Khan (2008)8 defined that the work of school going children (05 to 15 years age) to earn for his/her self or for their parents either work in household enterprises or outside is called child labor. Poverty is not itself pushing factor to child in labor work (Fors, 2012)9. Child labor is a multi – dimensional social evil and many other factors contribute and having responsibility for its spread. Such factors like, poverty, illiteracy, ignorance of parents, large family members, less resources of income, old traditions (children are helping hands, educated people are job less), paralyzed laws,un-employment or under-employment, absence of education facilities and over-population and so on (Rao, 2004)10. In some cases children indulge in the worst form of child labor due to negligence of guardian. Because guardian does not care about profession and children are free to choose their work (Dessy & Pallage, 2005)11.

Demographic of Hyderabad: Hyderabad is 2nd big populated city of Sindh province in Pakistan. According to census of 1998, the 1.469 Million out of 2.891 Million people live in urban area. While remaining 1.422 Million people live in rural areas of Hyderabad district. 67% people belong to Sindhi community, 25% Urdu, 3% Punjabi, 2% Pashto, 1% Balouchi, 1% Saraki and 1% people belong to other communities (Gugrati/Memons)12.

Locale of Study: The study comprised of “Tower market” and its surrounding places of Hyderabad city. 65 respondents all boys were selected through the purposive sampling.

Objectives of the Study: The main objective of the study is to find out the pushing factors of child labor.

Results & Discussion:

Age of Respondents: All the respondents having 07 -15 years age. While the result supports the study of Mahmood, Javaid, & Baig (1994)13 that most of the nationwide working children having 05 – 15 years age.

Nature of Work of Respondents

Table I

Type of Activity

Respondents (%age) N=65

Auto Workshop/Garage

5

Juice Corner

29

General store

17

Hotel/Tea Stall

49

Source: Primary Data

Analysis: Table I shows the respondents type of work. It describes that 49% respondents work at hotel/tea stalls, 29% at juice corners, 17% at general stores and 05% respondents at auto workshop/Garages.

Cultural Background: 43% respondents related to Sindhi community, 22% Pakhtoon, 20% Urdu, 09% Balouchi, 04% Saraiki & 02% are from Punjabi community.

Respondents Level of Education: 54% respondents were never enrolled in school, 31% enrolled, but dropped out. While 15% respondents dropped out before the completion of 2ndclass. Thus the factors like wise unawareness regarding education, poverty and lack of interest toward education leads to disturbance of child schooling and push child in labor (Chand, 1983)14.

Volume-I, Issue-I

February 2015

181

Socio-Economic Analysis of Child …… Muhammad Abdullah Avais, Saima Shaikh & Abdul Jaleel Mirjat

Fathers’ Occupation of Respondents:

Table II

Fathers’ Occupation

Respondents (%age) N=65

Daily Paid Worker (Labor)

36

Gardner

2

Watch Man

22

Not Working

26

Deceased

14

Source: Primary Data Analysis: Table II shows the fathers’ occupation of respondents. It shows that fathers of 14% respondents are not alive. Fathers’ of 36% respondents are daily paid workers (Laborer), 22% watch man, 02% Gardner and 26% are not working. Through the results it is cleared that most of fathers’ of respondents are involve in labor work. Therefore they don’t know the hazards of child labor. While hazardous child labor can be eliminate through awareness (Rogers & Swinnerton, 2008)15.

Causes of Child Labor:

Table III

Reasons

Respondents (% age) N = 65

Poverty

92

I don’t like to study

3

To learn skills

5

Source: Primary Data

Analysis: Table III shows the reasons of respondents to initiate labor. It shows that majority of the respondents 92% initiated to work due to poverty. Only 03% respondents shared that they would not like the study therefore they initiated the labor work. While 05% respondents initiated labor to learn skills. Poverty is double edged sword. Due to poverty victim cannot fulfil his/her daily needs as well as he/she become poorer in the evening with empty hands (Hegde, 2009)16.

Respondents Monthly Family Income:

Table IV

Monthly Family Income (Rs.)

Respondents (%age) N=65

Less than 6,000

30

6,000 to 10,000

35

10,000 to 15,000

32

Above 15,000 & below than 20,000

3

Source: Primary Data

Analysis: Table IV shows the monthly family income of respondents. It defines that monthly family income of 35% respondents is between 6,000 to 10,000, 32% is between 10,000 to 15,000, 30% is less than 6,000 and only 03% is between 15,000 to 20,000.Due to low income children involve in hazardous labor. The result indicates that maximum respondents’ family income is not enough to maintain daily life. Therefore parents try to earn through other sources but due to unemployment and low wages they are being forced to send their children for work. Child labor is adverse effect of adult un- employment or under employment. Thus the result support that low family income may cause of child work or to force them to support their respective families even on the cost of schooling (Parikh & Sadoulet, 2005)17.

Family Size of Respondents:

Table V

No. of Family Members of Respondents

Respondents (%age) N=65

6

22

7

30

8

28

Volume-I, Issue-I

February 2015

182

Socio-Economic Analysis of Child …… Muhammad Abdullah Avais, Saima Shaikh & Abdul Jaleel Mirjat

9

20

Source: Primary Data

Analysis: Table V shows the family members of respondents. It shows that 22% respondents have 06, 30% have 07, 28% have 08 and 20% have 09 family members. The results of current study strengthen the results that most of child workers have not less than 07 family members (Ahmad 2012)18. Lloyd (1994)19 described that large house hold size increase the risk for child to involve in child labor.

Working Hours of Respondents

Table VI

Working Hours

Respondents (%age) N=65

08 Hours

17

10 Hours

34

12 Hours

49

Source: Primary Data

Analysis: Table VI shows the working hours of respondents. It shows that working hours of 49% respondents are 12 hours, 34% have 10 hours and 17% have 08 hours daily.

Honorarium of Respondents

Table VII

Honorarium (Per Month)

Respondents (%age) N=65

1,000 – 1,500

28

1,500 – 2,000

55

2,000 – 2,500

17

Source: Primary Data

Analysis: Table VII shows the per month honorarium of respondents. It shows that 17% get Pk Rs: 2,000 to 2,500 honorarium per month, 55% get 1,500 – 2, 000 and 28% respondents get 1,000 – 1,500 rupees per month as honorarium of their work. It must be keep in mind that minimum working hours of respondents are 08 per day. The result strengthen the study of Jomo (1992)20 & Khan (2001)21 that as compare to adult workers, children get low wages. Though child workers don’t get full pay according to their work but their little remuneration serve as a big financial aid to family monthly income.

Residential status of Respondents:

Table VIII

Residential Status

Respondents (%age) N=65

Own

26

Rented

74

Source: Primary Data

Analysis: Table VIII shows the residential status of respondents. It shows that only 26% respondents have their own houses. While remaining 74% remaining respondents have rented houses. The results supports the previous studies that the power full factors to push child in labor are large family members, rented homes, low family income, unemployment and un awareness regarding benefits of child education (Avais, Chandio, Shaikh, & Mirza, 2014)22.

Conclusion: According to law of land, child labor is prohibited. But the implementation of law is a questionable mark in our society. The ongoing research describes that intolerable financial ups & downs and political instability enforce the parents to push their underage beloved in child labor. It is multi – dimensional and complex issue of our society. Owing to socio-economic up and downs, it has deep roots in society. Due to multi-dimensional issue, there is need of an integrated approach to combat wit this issue. It is not easy, but with help of social awareness and attitudinal changes it can be possible. Government should launch a rigorous campaign against child labor on national level as well

Volume-I, Issue-I

February 2015

183

Socio-Economic Analysis of Child …… Muhammad Abdullah Avais, Saima Shaikh & Abdul Jaleel Mirjat

as provincial level. It requires honest efforts and strong commitment. Income generation activities may help full for families and their dependency on income of child may reduce. Government as well Non-government organizations (NGOs) may distribute soft loans for women to establish entrepreneurship. Women especially member of child worker families can be empower through vocational skills, sewing & stitching, beautician, arc work and other business management skills. There is need of nationwide survey to find out exact situation of child labor in country.

References:

1.Boyden, J., & Bequele, A. (1988). Combating child labour. Geneva: International Labour Office.

2.Dawn, A. (2013). The Forbidden Social Crime of Child Labour: A Case Study of Its Existence in the City of Kolkata, West Bengal. International Journal of Current Research and Review, 5(24), 01-09

3.Avais, M. A., Wassan, A. A., & Erum, M. (2014). Socio-Economic Causes of Child labor in Carpet Weaving Industry: A Case Study of Union Council Ali Wahan. Journal of Social Welfare and Human Rights, 2(1), 251-264.

4.Convention on the Rights of Child. United Nations human rights. http://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx (Accessed on 27-11- 2014).

5.Pakistan Employment of Children Act (1991). National Laws on labour, social security and related human rights. http://www.ilo.org/dyn/natlex/docs/WEBTEXT/22707/64834/E91PAK01.htm

(Accessed on 27-11-2014).

6.Rodgers, G., & Standing, G. (1981). Economic roles of children in low-income countries. Int’l Lab. Rev., 120, 31.

7.Ray, R. (2002). Simultaneous Analysis of Child Labour and Child Schooling: Comparative Evidence from Nepal and Pakistan. Economic and Political Weekly,5215-5224.

8.Khan, R. E. A. (2008). Gender analysis of children’s activities in Pakistan. The Pakistan Development Review, 169-195.

9.Fors, H. C. (2012). Child labour: A review of recent theory and evidence with policy implications. Journal of Economic Surveys, 26(4), 570-593.

10.D.Venkateshwar, Rao. (2004). Child Rights – A perspective on International and National Law, New Delhi: Manak Publications Pvt. Ltd., p.5.

11.Dessy, S. E., & Pallage, S. (2005). A Theory of the Worst Forms of Child Labour. The Economic Journal, 115(500), 68-87.

12.Demography of Hyderabad. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyderabad_District,_Sindh.(Acessed on 27-11-2014).

13.Mahmood, M., Javaid, T., & Baig, A. (1994). Why Children do not go to School in Pakistan Some Estimates and a Theoretical Framework. The Pakistan Development Review, 33(4), pp. 1231-1248.

14.Chand, R, (1983). “An Explanatory Study of Fifty Children Working in Auto Workshops”

Department of Social Work, University of the Punjab, Lahore.

15.Rogers, C. A., & Swinnerton, K. A. (2008). A theory of exploitative child labor. Oxford Economic Papers, 60(1), 20-41.

16.Hegde B.N. (2009). Hungry Mouth’s Day, Mumbai: Bhavan’s Journal Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan. Vol.55, No.12.

17.Parikh, A., & Sadoulet, E. (2005). The effect of parents’ occupation on child labor and school attendance in Brazil.

18.Ahmad, A. (2012). Poverty, Educational and Child Labor in Aligarh City-India. Stud Home.

Volume-I, Issue-I

February 2015

184

Socio-Economic Analysis of Child …… Muhammad Abdullah Avais, Saima Shaikh & Abdul Jaleel Mirjat

19.Lloyd, C. B. (1994). Investing in the next generation: the implications of high fertility at the level of the family. Research Division Working Paper # 63. New York Population Council, New York.

20.Jomo, K. (1992). Child Labour in Malaysia Varlin Press. Kuala Lumpur.

21.Khan, R. E. A. (2001). Socioeconomic Aspects of Child Labour – A Case Study of Children in Auto Workshops. The Lahore Journal of Economics. Vol 6. No. 1.

22.Avais, M. A., Chandio, R. A., Shaikh, N., & Mirza, A. (2014). Socio-Economic Causes of Child Labor in Domestic Work: A Study of Sukkur City. International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR)(2014).