No Cheer From Toys Made by Child Labor : Imports: 46 million children make goods for the U.S. market. How can consumers discourage this pitiful commerce?

On Christmas morning, millions of American children will play with the latest toys and hottest sports equipment and dress up in new clothes to celebrate the season’s festivities.

But for many of the world’s children, the true spirit of Christmas will have long been buried in the drive for increasing corporate profits and the search for cheap labor. Few Americans realize that many of the presents enjoyed on Christmas morning are made by children, some as young as 7 or 8, who toil long hours and at low pay, often in hazardous conditions.

With Americans’ attention so recently focused on the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, as well as the perennial debates surrounding China’s most-favored-nation status, we must consider trade issues with a moral--not just a monetary--dimension: the commercial exploitation of children.

The United States prohibits the importation of ivory, endangered species such as the spotted-turtle and goods made with prison labor. In other words, we protect animals and prisoners, but not children, from exploitative labor.

Last year I directed the Department of Labor to investigate the use of abusive child labor in American imports. That study targeted 19 countries where at least 46 million children work, many making goods for the U.S. market. The report reveals a horrid picture of how children contribute to their nation’s exports.

In South and Southeast Asia, where it is estimated that at least half of all child workers live, children work 14-hour days in crowded factories and knot carpets for hours in dusty huts. U.S. consumers buy more than 40% of India’s carpet exports and account for more than 50% of Bangladesh’s earnings from garment exports.

Perhaps more disturbing, reports indicate that 10 million of the 55 million child workers in South Asia are “bonded” laborers--either they were sold into slavery or they inherited the debt of their parents.

In Colombia, nearly 800,000 children, ages 12 through 17 years old are exposed to toxic substances while they process and harvest flowers for export.

The tragedy of child labor is of global proportions. According to the International Labor Organization, the number of children at jobs instead of school is increasing throughout the world. Children under the age of 15 constitute 11% of the work force in some Asian countries and up to 26% in many Latin American countries.

Children in developing countries--for the sake of their future and that of their economies--should be in schools and not in factories. That’s why I introduced the Child Labor Deterrence Act, which would prohibit the importation of any product made in whole or in part by children under 15 who are employed in industry or mining. This is the same general prohibition outlined in Convention 138 of the ILO, which has been adopted by 30 countries.

I do not believe that American consumers would knowingly buy products made with child labor. But they don’t know. Likewise, I know of no importer, company or department store that would willingly promote the exploitation of children or have their image tainted by having it publicly known that their wares are produced at the hands of child labor.

But the winds of change are in the air.

Last fall, the Child Labor Coalition, which is composed of more than 32 non-governmental organizations, launched a U.S. consumer education campaign for the “rugmark.” The rugmark is a label affixed to carpets from India, Pakistan and Nepal assuring consumers that the product is not made with child labor.

The Swedish retailer Ikea recently decided not to carry carpets unless they can be certified as made without child labor.

Some companies, such as Levi Strauss and Reebok, have already demanded that their contractors overseas hire only workers over the age of 14. The Bangladesh garment manufacturers and exporters association, along with UNICEF and the ILO, has agreed to place working children in an education program and implement an immediate ban on the further hiring of children under the age of 15.

Contrary to those who defend the status quo, developing countries do not have to wait until poverty is eradicated before eliminating the exploitation of children. Some countries in Asia--South Korea, Sri Lanka and some parts of India--have successfully concentrated on sending children to school rather than to factories.

At this time of year, the least we can do is to step back and take a good look at who is making the toys and garments we enjoy. If we can save the spotted pond turtle, can’t we also do a better job of looking out for the world’s children?