Marshaling Trade Unions and Community Resources to Fight Child Labor

By Sonia A. Rosen

The East Africa Plantation Pilot Project The AFL-CIO Solidarity Center’s East Africa Plantation Pilot Project, trains local and national union members, as well as parents, teachers, employers and others, in the hazards of child labor and the importance of education. Working through the union structure, the project identifies children working on coffee, tea and sisal plantations, and helps them to return to school and continue their education. Download the full report [ MS Word Format - 136 KB ] [ PDF Format, v5.0 - 104 KB ] Download PDF Reader

Introduction

For Martha W. and thousands of other children in the agricultural areas of Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda, autumn is the most dangerous time of the year.  For Dennis Ojigo and hundreds of other parents, autumn is the most tempting time of the year.  And for James Wachira and other schoolteachers like him, autumn is the most frustrating time of the year.

Autumn in East Africa is when two of the region’s primary agricultural crops, coffee beans and tea leaves, are harvested.  These crops bring enormous profits to the companies that own the plantations and help ensure some level of economic stability to the governments of the host countries.

But East Africa is also rife with grinding poverty; not primarily a poverty of financial resources, but a poverty of options, that prevents people from conceiving a better life and developing their full potential.  There are also serious health problems, notably a rapidly increasing number of HIV/AIDS orphans.  Finally, there is a tradition of rural family units that have practiced a hand-to-mouth existence for as long as anyone can remember.  These realities of rural life provide many of the ingredients that spawn and perpetuate child labor.

Autumn, therefore, is the time when poor, hungry children, already working on plantations, alone or next to their parents, labor longer hours for a few extra shillings. It is a time when children fortunate enough to be in school are tempted, or urged by their parents, to drop out and earn a little something extra for the family.  Many never return to the classroom. The reasons are clear to primary school teachers like James Wachira:

“When the peak season arises, [parents] want their children to come and help with the coffee-picking so that they can earn a little bit of money. Some parents are illiterate, so they do not know the importance of education, and that is why they encourage these children to pick to raise something for the housekeeping.”[1]

The reasons for child labor may be as numerous as the plantations that spread across the fertile uplands, but the result has always been the same.  The cycle of child labor in the agricultural sector of East Africa has remained as constant as the annual monsoon rains that sustain all living things in the region.

This paper highlights aspects of one particular program that is helping to stem the tide of hazardous child labor in Kenya’s agricultural sector.  The AFL-CIO Solidarity Center’s East Africa Plantation Pilot Project, working with the Kenyan (CENTRAL) Organization of Trade Unions (COTU-K) and the Kenya Plantation and Agricultural Workers Union (KPAWU), trains local and national union members, as well as parents, teachers, employers and others, in the hazards of child labor and the importance of education.  Working through the union structure, the project identifies children working on coffee, tea and sisal plantations, and helps them to return to school and continue their education.  The project establishes regional child labor committees and also works with local communities to create self-help groups, income-generating schemes, and small loan programs to enable families to survive and keep their children in school.   Some aspects of this program are highlighted here as best practices in the hope that they can be replicated by trade unions in other countries.

The Environment

In Kenya, where half the population is under 18 years of age, many do not go to school or attend only part time. More than three million children aged 6-14 work, a large percentage of them in the potentially hazardous agricultural sector, and children constitute some 20 to 30 per cent of the casual labor force. It is estimated that most of the children tend to work on smaller estates and family owned farms, while  most children associated with the large tea estates are working as domestic servants for tea workers.

On the Kenya coffee plantations during the peak harvest season, as many as 30 per cent of the coffee pickers are under 15 years of age.[2]  By one estimate, children comprise 58 percent of the coffee plantation workforce during peak seasons, and 18 percent of the workforce during the rest of the year.[3] Many families believe that sending their children to work or keeping them at home to take care of younger siblings while one or both of the parents work is of greater benefit than sending them to school.[4]  The payment structure of the plantation system also encourages families to bring their children to work because workers’ are paid a piece rate rather than an hourly or daily wage.  Under this system, the more one can pick, the more money one earns.  Given the inability of families to pay for schooling, the large size of poor families, and the lack of day care, children often end up working in order to help their parents increase the meager family income. 

 Schooling in Kenya was free until 1982, when the government cut spending on education to repay loans from the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. Until the new government passed an ordinance in December 2002 abolishing school fees, parents had to share much of the cost of educating their children.  While the government pays teachers’ salaries, parents must come up with money for their children's books, school supplies, exam fees, some tuition fees, uniforms, extracurricular activities, building maintenance fees, food, etc. With so many parents unable to pay, school enrollment rates dropped over the last two decades-from nearly 90 percent to less than 50 percent in some regions. [5]

Levels of education for boys and girls differ greatly. Although the number of boys and girls in school is roughly equal in the first few years of primary school, some boys start to drop out to work in the fields during these early years. However, boys substantially outnumber girls in higher education. Rural families are particularly reluctant to invest in educating girls, especially at the higher levels. Seventy percent of illiterate persons in the country are female.[6]  Girls also drop out of school in order to marry or take care of younger siblings.

As a result of a new government elected in Kenya in December 2002, new policies affecting child labor and education are being enacted.  One of the first acts of the new president was to abolish primary school fees, previously an enormous impediment to school enrollment and retention.[7]  It is not clear, however, whether the new government will reinstitute a desperately needed school meals program for the children.  Many poor children attending school are unable to stay awake or concentrate on school work because they are hungry, and only able to afford one meal a day.  A nutritious school meal program, once the norm in Kenyan public schools, is an important element in attracting and retaining children in school, as well as allowing them to learn and to engage in school activities more effectively.

“It is not fair for a child to have to abandon school to go and work to support the family. Why don’t the parents work and support the family and let children go to school? In these cases, the family is not operating properly -   that family should be helped to operate properly.  Some argue that in many situations the pay for adult work is very low and that’s why the children work.  I think the government should intervene and provide assistance.  The adults should be paid decent salaries so they would not be tempted to exploit the labor of children.”[8]

 Children working in the coffee, tea and sisal plantations often wake before sunrise, perform household chores and have a cup of hot tea for breakfast, before walking from their homes to the plantations.  Depending on whether the children live on the plantation or in shanty towns surrounding the farms, they can have a long walk - six days a week - in rain, cold, or sunshine, in order to start work by 7:00am or 8:00am.  They have no breaks, are not allowed to talk to others, and rarely have time to eat.  On the coffee farms, the children pick the red coffee berries. On the vast tea plantations that blanket the Kenyan landscape, the little children’s heads are barely visible while they move as quickly as possible to pick the tea leaves.

The work is physically demanding, requiring bending, kneeling, climbing ladders, and carrying heavy bags or buckets. In addition to these traditional chores, children also weed and cultivate the soil, fix irrigation canals, and apply dangerous pesticides. They often use dangerous tools and sometimes run unsafe farm machinery they don't know how to operate.

Many activities, like carrying heavy and oversized loads, result in permanent disabilities and injuries. Fatigue is an ever-present problem because children can work 8-12 hours, and children as young as six years old work in the fields beside their parents during the harvest season. Because they are outside all day, these children are particularly susceptible to heat exhaustion, disease-carrying insects, and illnesses caused by unsanitary drinking water.

Benta A. is all too familiar with the poisonous chemicals sprayed on crops to keep pests away. On Saturdays, when she is not in school, Benta reports to the coffee fields by 7:00 a.m. There, she earns less than $1 for 10 hours of work.

"It's not good," says Benta, a fifth-grader at the Kia-ora Primary School in the Ruiru District. "I don't like it at all because your hands are very painful. The chemicals that are applied burn your face as if hot water has been poured on your face."

Exposure to pesticides puts children like Benta at greater risk of developing skin irritations, breathing difficulties, and long-term health problems, including cancer. Young pickers also suffer from snakebites, back strain, and other injuries.[9]

The official minimum age for work in Kenya is 16; however, the law does not apply to the agricultural sector, where approximately 70 percent of the labor force is employed.  Ministry of Labor officers nominally enforce the minimum age statute, and the Government makes some effort to eliminate child labor, primarily working with the ILO's International Program for the Elimination of Child Labor. A number of NGOs and trade unions have ongoing programs aimed at the elimination of child labor, including the teachers’ union (Kenya National Union of Teachers - KNUT), the Undugu Society, and the Africa Network for the Prevention and Protection Against Child Abuse and Neglect (ANPPCN), to name but a few. Kenya ratified ILO Convention 182 on the worst forms of child labor in May 2001 and ILO Convention 138 on the minimum age for work in 1979.

The Program

In April 1999, the AFL-CIO American Center for International Labor Solidarity[10] (Solidarity Center) regional office in Nairobi began a four-year child labor pilot project with approximately $362,000 from the U.S. Agency for International Development (AID).  The project operated in 11 target areas located in nine districts in Kenya, as well as one in Uganda, and one in Tanzania.  In addition, approximately $11,000 was made available from the Maida Springer Kemp Fund to assist some of the most needy cases, including AIDs orphans.  The project’s ambitious goals included changing attitudes towards child labor at the village level and stemming the tide of children going to work rather than to school.  The Solidarity Center had been working in the area since 1995, primarily with the 110,000-member Kenya Plantation and Agricultural Workers’ Union to teach them action-oriented planning, negotiating and bargaining skills with the goal of increasing union membership.[11]

Before the program began, union leaders did not bother to deal with child labor issues, although it was increasingly clear that families in rural areas were finding it difficult to survive due to unemployment, poor wages and lack of options available to them for keeping their children in school and supporting themselves.  These families were both current and potential members of KPAWU. Clear information on child labor issues or alternatives to child labor was not readily available.  In any case, most unions believed that child labor had little or nothing to do with union issues except that those under 18 years of age could not join the union. 

As a result of the project, the union leaders and their rank and file became aware that child labor was not wanted by their members, was hindering economic development in rural areas and could be dealt with through a union-led program.  Leaders became aware that activists, particularly women, can recruit workers into the union while eliminating child labor because returning children to school directly benefits poor families working in agriculture.[12] The East Africa Plantation Pilot Project would take many of the skills, improvements in knowledge, and experiences gained by the Solidarity Center in working with local trade unions and employ them, with appropriate modifications, in the cause of breaking the cycle of child labor.

The Process

Successful child labor projects mobilize a broad alliance of partners practicing interventions at the local level.  The Solidarity Center’s East Africa Plantation Pilot Project followed this model.  The aims of the project were to: 1) create a community-based approach to monitoring, awareness raising, and the withdrawal of children from work; 2) reduce child labor abuses, and 3) create an anti-child labor culture among adult union members and their families.[13]

The process for accomplishing these goals was multi-faceted and flexible.  However, there was a clear vision of how to structure a sustainable grass roots project supported by all the stakeholders.  Briefly, the project first held training workshops at regional and national levels to educate high-level stakeholders, such as government officials, union leaders, employers, international organizations and others, about child labor and to encourage their participation.  Obtaining the buy-in of the leadership paved the way for the Solidarity Center to work with representatives of unions and government at district, village and estate levels.

The Solidarity Center, together with COTU-K and KPAWU, then held several training workshops at district, village and estate levels to develop clear plans of action for educating and engaging local community members.  These training sessions, like the trainer workshops, had specific goals in mind.  For example, the Solidarity Center was able to create child labor committees composed of diverse local leaders, to administer local activities.  As a result of the local level workshops, workers, teachers, estate managers, union representatives, social workers, and parents all learned to work together to discuss child labor, its causes and consequences, and jointly create precise, realistic action plans for community awareness, identifying working children and returning them to school. With a focus on the elimination of child labor, participants set their own priorities and developed their own strategic plans to deal with the underlying causes of child labor and poverty.  When regular follow-up sessions were added, the result was real community-based commitment to the project. The CCLCs, in their various stages of development, continue to display a high degree of commitment and enthusiasm.

The local community members participating in the workshops were taught to identify conflicts and ideas for working with families to help them send their children back to school.  These strategies included setting up community based self-help groups, revolving micro-credit societies to help out the most needy children and their families, and ideas for income generating schemes. Participants also discussed how to teach simple money management so families could better budget for education - as well as negotiate with teachers to be able to pay fees on a sliding scale over the course of the school year.  Finally, during the 90 day implementation plans, local union representatives frequently went door to door to discuss child labor and education with families, held community meetings to discuss solutions and, where necessary, served as mediators between families and teachers and employers.  This alone helped to begin changing an unbalanced power structure in the community by teaching parents to work with people in authority on a more equal basis. 

Every quarter, following the end of the 90 day action plans, Solidarity Center staff and workshop trainers from the trade unions traveled to the remote rural areas to meet the Child Labor Committees, teachers, parents, etc., discuss their accomplishments and their roadblocks, and create new and revised plans based upon lessons learned.  In some cases, additional follow-up workshops were held, to enable the participants to regroup and develop new plans.  In most cases, union representatives and child labor committees were able to provide detailed documentation on each working child, their school history and their return to school, as well as information on the work of each of the local community groups established following the training seminars. All participants reported feeling greatly empowered as a result of their training and the continued support given by Solidarity Center and trade union staff, and found themselves emboldened and proud to be able to make a real contribution to the lives of their community and their children.

The project also took a more strategic approach than just removing children from work and returning them to school.  It sought a fundamental cultural change within the community by transforming its traditional views of childhood and child labor.  The project taught that any work that deprives children of the right to a childhood is harmful child labor.  The project also sought to establish among parents and community leaders a shared belief in the value of education.  Only after the core values are understood and accepted can a community begin to develop creative ways to make sure that its children are protected from abusive child labor practices and given every opportunity to attend school.  Almost every aspect and activity of the project was based on raising awareness before developing specific programs geared to returning children to school.[14] 

In addition, families were made aware of practical ways of reducing poverty and increasing family well being.  Many of these efforts dealt with making the best use of family incomes, the establishment of micro-finance groups, self-help groups, income generating activities and bursary schemes.  These activities were included to help families cope with the loss of income, however meager, experienced when their children no longer worked on the plantations. The Solidarity Center believes that making a direct financial intervention to return children to school should be used only as a last resort.[15]

By insisting on local ownership and development, the project built a solid foundation on which to grow.  It also generated a number of “best practices” which can be modeled and replicated in other areas by sound, motivated, well organized and financially disciplined groups which have already identified a real need.

Finally, to help extremely needy children return to school, the child labor committees have used small direct cash donations (usually $10 - $15) from the Maida Springer Kemp Fund. The Solidarity Center administers this small charitable fund - named after a distinguished African-American labor and civil rights leader known for her work in Africa in the 1960s supporting African trade unions as an international representative of the AFL-CIO - to help nearly 1000 children obtain uniforms, books, and other necessities.  The Maida Fund also encourages locally based employers and religious organizations to assist the work of the child labor committees by developing their own means of providing direct assistance to needy children.

Initial results of the pilot project can be measured quantitatively and qualitatively. The following statistics give a glimpse of how many people were reached in a relatively short period of time.  The best practices mentioned in this paper provide a window into some of the qualitative changes resulting from the pilot project.

Starting in 1999 with policy and trainers’ workshops on child labor and strategic planning in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda, the project trained 1,500 participants in 63 three-day workshops to establish and work with child labor committees in agricultural areas. Making use of chiefs’ “barazas” (village meetings), union meetings, rallies and other gatherings, the Solidarity Center office in Nairobi estimates that the extension work of the 1,500 participants reached well over 100,000 East Africans with a significant child labor message. Individuals and groups related to the child labor committees have become committed to the eradication of child labor because they have been provided with relevant information, along with planning and motivational skills.  The spreading of this information continues, along with HIV/AIDS awareness creation.

By December 2002, the Solidarity Center estimates that at least 1,563 working children had returned to school, with a retention rate of over 80%.  It is also estimated that the project was responsible for keeping a larger number of children in school and out of the illegal workforce.[16]

Best Practices

While the Solidarity Center’s East Africa Plantation Pilot Project worked on many levels to accomplish its goals, a few of their strategies stand out as replicable best practices.  These are:

• Use existing local trade union structures as the primary change agent to mobilize grass roots involvement to take children out of work and put them in school
• Teach strategic planning to those who will be integral players in activities to eliminate child labor
• Representatives of the groups that will be working together on child labor issues must be trained together
• Conduct regular, on-site, follow up sessions

In order to better understand the qualities of these strategies, they are detailed below.

1.   Use existing local trade union structures as the primary change agent to mobilize grass roots involvement to take children out of work and put them in school. 

The idea of using a coalition of local trade unions to carry the child labor message was the foundation on which the success of the other East Africa Plantation Pilot Project activities depended.  Using experiences gained by working with the unions on more traditional labor issues like wages, hours of work, and fringe benefits, the Solidarity Center modified its established training modules to make them applicable to the problem of child labor.  The key unions were the Central Organization of Trade Unions (COTU-K), the Kenya Plantation and Agricultural Workers’ Union (KPAWU), Kenya National Union of Teachers (KNUT), Kenya Union of Domestic, Hotel, Educational Institutes, Hospitals and Allied Workers (KUDHEIHA), and the Kenya Local Government Workers’ Union (KLGWU).[17]   The participating unions include among their members most of the vital players in the child labor issue - agricultural workers, teachers, hotel and restaurant workers, local government workers, university staff, and others.  They represent sections of the community that must be energized and committed to eradicating child labor.

The strategic importance of making unions the primary change agent is that unions already have avenues of communication and influence with almost all the sectors of society that need to be brought on board.  These include families of union and non-union members, employers with whom they negotiate collective bargaining agreements, local and national government entities, academic and financial institutions, and even regional and international labor and social service organizations.  Unions bring to the issue of child labor a recognized voice in the community, an established organizational structure, and a strong commitment to improving social policy.

The next hurdle that the project faced was to convince trade union representatives that the problem of child labor was relevant to them.  The “what’s in it for me” issue must be dealt with before an organization can marshal its resources to pursue any course of action energetically.  Anna Karume, acting regional director of the Solidarity Center’s Kenya office and coordinator of the pilot project, described the challenge and the answer:

“It was quite challenging for the trade unions to convince members why their children should go to school and not to work.  It took us quite some time to really explain to them the importance of children going to school…Labor unions realize that the more we have children working, the less members they have, and the weaker the unions become.  So if the trade unions are involved in child labor and eliminate child labor on the plantations, the more adults will get employment.  This will increase the number of organized people.   An increase in membership strengthens the power of trade unions.”[18]      

The Solidarity Center skillfully linked the union’s economic self-interest with a genuine humanitarian program for long-term social improvement.  This strategy helped persuade a powerful and strategically positioned organization to champion the cause of taking children out of work and facilitating their enrollment in school.  In fact, trade unions that participated in the East Africa Plantation Pilot Project have become permanent partners in the struggle against child labor.  Child labor issues are now an important part of their education programs.  In Uganda and Tanzania, some collective bargaining agreements included child labor clauses.  And, according to statistics gathered by the Solidarity Center, more than 15,000 new union members have joined the participating labor organizations since the project began.

This best practice could be replicated wherever an established trade union movement exists, although many of the trade unionists acknowledged that the project was also distinctive because it made us of a permanent Solidarity Center office staffed by persons qualified to design, plan and implement the program. It is essential that the relationship between on-going child labor and basic union strength and potential growth be established at the outset.  The union must also commit to be engaged for the long haul; this means providing educational, financial, and staff support.  A key objective in using the trade unions as primary change agent is to take the process out of the hands of an outside non-governmental organization and firmly place it within the local communities.  Union negotiators also increase their strength at the bargaining table by adding child labor issues to the traditional issues of wages, hours, and working conditions.

If a union is unable or unwilling to commit to active, intensive, and long-term participation in efforts to eradicate child labor, the program will ultimately promise more than it can deliver.  This can lead to disillusionment and, because of its failure, discredit the importance of eliminating child labor and weaken the influence of the trade union at local, national, and regional levels.

2. Teach strategic planning to those who will be integral players in activities to eliminate child labor. 

The Solidarity Center knew from the outset that it did not have the financial or staff resources to remain permanently engaged in efforts to end child labor in the agricultural areas of East Africa.  If the program was to become self-sustaining, it had to be managed by local participants and evolve to meet changing social, economic, and political realities.  Learning how to plan, carry out, and revise activities to end child labor requires the ability to plan action-oriented activities with a long-range view of the goals being sought.  In essence, the participants had to understand the value of strategic planning and how to carry it out.

Working with the Institute of Cultural Affairs - Kenya (ICA) and the East African Trade Union Council, the Solidarity Center simplified its existing strategic planning training course and made it applicable to the problems of child labor.  The process was taught in a workshop setting to encourage participation, group decision-making, team building, and a more collective form of management.  Because of the large number of people who needed this training - and their geographical dispersion - the Solidarity Center first conducted a comprehensive “train-the-trainer” workshop to train a cadre of local union personnel.[19]  Once firmly grounded in strategic planning and other important issues specific to the problem of child labor, these trainers fanned out into the countryside to conduct workshops on-site where the people lived and worked.

Each workshop begins with a brainstorming session to generate data, organizing the data to look at the new relationships formed, and charting the data to discern the consensus of the participants.  The data brings out the practical vision of the organization that is both evolutionary and dynamic.  The group is asked where it wants to be in one year’s time.  Next, the underlying contradictions that block the group from moving towards its vision are discussed.  The group devises innovative practical actions that will deal with the contradictions and move the group toward its vision.  Finally, and crucial to the entire process, the group creates a 90-day action plan with specific activities, priorities, timelines, and assignments.[20]  It is critical for a group or organization to draw upon its own collective ideas, experience, and expertise to plan its own strategy for the future.

Strategic planning is a “best practice” that can be replicated by any group seeking to create a flexible blueprint for reaching its goals.  To be successful, it must be based on broad-scale information gathering, exploring wide-ranging alternatives, and must emphasize the future implications of present decisions.  If properly used, strategic planning can facilitate communication and participation, accommodate divergent interests and values, and foster orderly decision making and successful implementation.

For strategic planning to be successful, a dedicated and fully trained cadre of local trainers must be available and willing to travel into the hinterlands to conduct workshops.  Local personnel are more successful at communicating at the local level than outsiders.  They should be fully equipped with support materials such as workbooks and demonstration equipment.  Local trainers must be trained in active listening so they can take in the ideas offered by the participants and help them apply these ideas to real problems.  Local participants should not be judged or “talked down” to.  A simplified process does not necessarily produce simplified outcomes; in fact, the outcomes produced are often uniquely suited to the everyday problems of child labor experienced at the local level.  Finally, the strategic planning process must be dynamic, not formulaic.  The outcome is not a document or a blueprint that must be followed or which can be rendered ineffective by a change in priorities or circumstances.  Rather, what is created is a flexible, adaptable framework that serves as a guide for future progress.

3.  Representatives of the groups that will be working together on child labor issues must be trained together. 

Joint training is critical to the success of any enterprise that depends on the cooperation and interaction of individuals or groups coming to a problem or issue from different perspectives.  This “best practice” added employers to the coalition the Solidarity Center built to fight child labor problems in the agricultural sector of East Africa.  Including employers essentially “closed the circle” for the inclusion of all the affected parties. 

Before the project, employers (in this case, primarily estate managers) saw child labor as traditional and resulting from poverty.  Some took advantage of it to augment their work force with cheap labor and to weaken the influence of the local unions.  Others used the humanitarian excuse by convincing themselves that they were doing the families a favor by allowing children to work alongside their parents. 

After the project, many managers learned, through the process of joint training, about the destructive nature of child labor.  They also learned that coordinated efforts could eliminate, or at least dramatically reduce, child labor.  Employers came to see that unions, far from being only adversaries that negotiated for better pay, shorter hours, and more benefits, could play a significant role in ameliorating a serious social problem and help bridge the gap between employers and workers.[21]

“We are involving the managers,” said Anna Karume, “because we realized that as much as we would like to run the programs, we run them at the plantations.  If we do not involve the employers, they may not understand why shop stewards would keep on campaigning against the evils of child labor.  So we realized the need to involve management and also other local leaders within the vicinity.”[22]      

Each of the workshops lasted for three days and included trade union leaders, teachers, local government officials, estate managers, religious leaders, representatives of NGOs and other opinion leaders.  Participants consisted of groups of about five persons from each plantation.  The curriculum included basic information about the causes of child labor, identifying what governments and international organizations are doing about fighting the most abusive forms of child labor (including national labor laws and ILO conventions). It also identified how employers can support efforts to end child labor without jeopardizing productivity or efficiency, linking child labor issues to other community concerns such as health, education, local economic and financial growth, and the role of women in both trade union advocacy and child labor activities.[23]

Joint training is an excellent way to provide all the parties with greater confidence in dealing with child labor issues and the skills and insight required to be effective in resolving the problems.   It helps the parties develop and enhance their skills together, in an environment where they can share ideas and solve problems.  It provides an opportunity for all parties to understand and respect the other's point of view and to build a constructive relationship.  Joint training enhances the ability to acknowledge and understand other points of view; to develop more positive, constructive relationships; to gain a better understanding of the restrictions the parties face; to identify common interests and engage in joint problem-solving, jointly dealing with minor problems before they become major issues; and to recognize and respect the rights, roles and responsibilities of everyone involved.

Bringing all the parties together for training sessions is a very cost-effective method that can be replicated wherever coalitions of groups are organized to fight child labor.  However, it requires significant flexibility and advance planning to succeed.  The training sessions should be held in locations convenient to the participants; many cannot afford to travel and spend three days at an expensive hotel in a major city.  All the participants must commit to being available for the entire training period; substitutes only break the group’s cohesion and slow the entire information sharing process.  Joint training is an accepted and proven methodology that can bring people of diverse perspectives together “on the same page.”  It can ensure that child labor projects start successfully and that the participants remain engaged.

4.  Conduct regular, on-site, follow up sessions. 

This was the most labor intensive “best practice” used by the East Africa Plantation Pilot Project.  It provided the critical link to the other best practices, making it more likely that they could be supported and sustained.  The Solidarity Center sent its workshop facilitators to revisit the local committees to discuss the 90-day action plans in light of experiences gained.  The form and timing of the follow-up sessions was determined by the groups themselves in order to increase the group’s sense of ownership.  While the standard recommendation was to do follow-ups at least quarterly, it was more important for the local committees to decide for themselves.  The follow-up sessions were also seen at the local level as a sign of continuing support from the Solidarity Center.

The most important features of the follow-up sessions were that they were done on-site and that they occurred at regular intervals.  Interacting with the committee members face-to-face is much preferable to receiving regular written reports and conducting teleconferences.  There is a synergy generated by in-person conversation that is very difficult to duplicate through the written or spoken word, especially among newly formed working coalitions.  Sending the facilitators to the communities also showed respect for the work being done by the local committees.  The regularity of the follow-ups allowed for timely revisions of existing action plans in  light of newly discovered or changing situations.

The follow-up sessions began by looking back at the period since the original plans were made or since the previous follow-up session.  The group reviewed both the achievements and the activities that had not been accomplished.   By discussing specific achievements, the group gains a sense of accomplishment and progress.  By discussing what has not been accomplished, and not characterizing this as failure, the group learns to understand why the activities had not been done and to focus their efforts on overcoming barriers to success. 

The second phase of the follow-up sessions focused on analyzing the information gathered and comparing what had and had not been achieved with what was on the plan for that period.  The group discussed what had not been done but what they still wanted to do; what they had not done and should be dropped from the plan; and what was now seen as necessary but had not been originally planned.  This process allows the group both to review the past and plan for the future.

The final step was for the group to create a new 90-day action plan.  This completes that classic strategic planning cycle of reflect, plan, act, learn, and re-plan.  It emphasizes the concept that an action plan is a living document, not a rigid blueprint to be followed no matter what the realities at the local level.[24]

Organizations embarking on regular, on-site follow-up sessions must be prepared for the costs of sending representatives to the locales where child labor committees are operating.  Staff must be designated, preferably the same personnel revisiting the same committees over a period of time.  Familiarity engenders trust, ease of communication, and expertise in the specific issues facing specific committees.  In addition to Solidarity Center staff dedicated to this project, COTU-K funds two full time personnel to work on child labor - a child labor officer and a secretary. The head of the KPAWU Education Unit regularly participates in training and other parts of the project, while KUDHEIHA makes headquarters personnel available, as does the KLGWU.  In fact in the sisal estates in the Rift valley, the union official works full-time as a child labor officer. 

Sustainability

An important aspect of a best practice is its sustainability, in whole or part.  Using the trade union structure to mobilize a broad alliance of partners practicing interventions at the local level forgeslinks between parents, teachers, employers, shop stewards, and local government workers.  By stressing worker education and advocacy, developing plans of action supported by sustained and intensive follow-up, creating project ownership at the local level, and focusing on prevention as well as rehabilitation, the project helped to change community attitudes and behavior regarding child labor and education. 

Through this project, the Solidarity Center helped to change attitudes about child labor at the village level by working to stem the tide of children going to work rather than school.   Ultimately, it is here that the sustainability of the project should be judged. Through the unions, the project reaches individual families and empowers them to create partnerships and strategies to combat child labor on and around the plantations.  This approach is sustainable, in large measure, because it promotes local ownership.

Another key to the sustainability of the project is a shared philosophy that children have a right to an education and to a childhood.   Work that deprives them of these rights is harmful child labor.  As parents, shop stewards and others acknowledge these rights, they begin to develop creative ways to work with teachers and others to return their children to school. Almost every aspect and activity of the project at the plantation, estate and village level is based upon raising awareness before developing specific programs geared to returning children to school.

Sustainability may also be evaluated by whether or not the project becomes self-sustaining.  The reasons may have little to do with project design, and more to do with financial and personnel capacity, politics, and priorities of funding agencies.  Since the project has only been in existence for a couple of years, it is premature to determine whether it will be continued, and if so, in what form. 

 The AFL-CIO Solidarity Center provided the seed funding for the East Africa Plantation Pilot Project in order to learn whether this model of trade union activism in the area of child labor was practical and feasible.  From the beginning, it was clear that the funding - for about  2 ½ years - was a one-time only grant.  The limited funds were spent to administer the program by trained Solidarity Center staff, as well as to begin training local trade union leaders to take over the project.  None of the funds went directly to any other organization.  Throughout the project, the Solidarity Center and the local trade unions (COTU-K and KPAWU) invited key child labor organizations to participate in the workshops and trainings - particularly ILO-IPEC, the Labor Ministry, and Unicef.  This was done to better coordinate and share information and resources with others implementing child labor programs in the agriculture or education sectors.

The Solidarity Center pilot project is an excellent model for grass roots based child labor programs.  It reaches the local level through the trade union structure.  The workers and their families benefit.  The community is treated with respect and trained to help itself.  Working children go back to school and others are dissuaded from dropping out.  The programs are flexible and responsive to local community needs.  This, ultimately, is the best test of a sustainable child labor program.

Unfortunately, it is not clear whether there has been sufficient program coordination and collaboration between the key national actors.  For instance, ILO-IPEC’s program working with teachers unions to reduce child labor in agriculture in Kenya ought to be closely working with the COTU/KPAWU program in the districts where they overlap.  There should also be ongoing coordinating meetings between the groups to create a plan of action for sustaining the East Africa Plantation Pilot Project once the Solidarity Center’s seed funding runs out.  Due to the Solidarity Center’s initial investment of money, personnel, and strategic vision, the program has matured into a successful and cost efficient child labor program.    Transferring financial and administrative ownership of the project to ILO-IPEC and the Kenya National Child Labor Committee would be an important element in its ultimate sustainability.  Finally, sustainability will also be judged by the degree to which the trade unions themselves commit financial and personnel resources to ensure continuity and growth of the project.

Future Work

Participants in the East Africa Plantation Pilot Project continue to meet to evaluate the project, identify areas for further work, and explore ways to keep the project relevant and sustainable.  For example, it became clear that a greater emphasis should be placed on teaching the proper use of family income, and creating groups to mobilize funds to meet school and household expenses.

The program received additional limited funding to increase the number of estate level CCLCs in the ten target areas in Kenya, and to expand to a few new areas. The KPAWU agreed in principle to provide direct financial assistance to the CCLCs in the ten target areas of the project.  The Solidarity Center continues to explore more formal collaboration with ILO-IPEC, particularly to coordinate with the new IPEC education program. With the cooperation of others the project hopes to participate in an international effort to harmonize child labor efforts at the East African Community level. The Grassroots Newsletter  - a local publication in English and Swahili describing the project in the words of the children, parents and teachers - was slated to continue nationally.   The Solidarity Center intends to forge closer links with the Kenya National Union of Teachers (KNUT) and others to promote economic growth and good governance; both are necessary to achieve free and compulsory primary education.  The stakeholders also recommended that more emphasis should be placed on the sustainability of CCLCs and micro-finance efforts. An internal evaluation of the program conducted in April 2001 showed that participants in the program recommend: more counseling for children and their parents; better communication and transportation arrangements at the estate level; the inclusion of more religious leaders in the program; and improved monitoring at the estate level.  The provision of written materials in Kiswahili; of information on HIV/AIDS to members of the CCLCs; of ILO Conventions and detailed child labor material to teachers; and of identity cards for child labor facilitators on the estates are all seen as important additions. Stakeholders also recommended that provision be made for direct intervention to get extremely needy children, particularly AIDS orphans, into school.[25]

Conclusions

The East Africa Plantation Pilot Project was designed to develop activities and approaches that did not necessarily depend on financial, technical, and other support from outside sources.  The project sought to find and train local individuals to assume leadership of the campaign against child labor and to recognize their efforts as a critical element in the struggle to solve local problems at the local level.  The project aimed to work through the existing local trade union structure, to work at the local level, involving and mobilizing all stake holders to solve problems as a team, and to integrate child labor activities into existing family, union, and community development activities.

The potential of the project and the value it can bring to local participants can be heard in the voice of Dennis Ojigo, father of four, and a local committee member. 

“Solidarity has taught me, in the seminars we go to, that it’s not right for children to be in the village and it’s not right for them to go into the plantation and not to go to school.  That’s what they taught us in the beginning, and that’s what we have taught the parents whose children are working on the farms, and we have removed those children and brought them to school…I have learned a lot from them.”[26]

Frances Atwoli, currently the President of COTU-K and Secretary General of KPAWU, summarized the project at a conference on child labor best practices sponsored by the US Department of Labor:

Parents and Guardians

Before the project, the largely illiterate parents and guardians believed that it was acceptable for children from poor families to work in order to increase family income. Parents were not interested in sending children to school for many reasons, including the lack of employment opportunities for educated children.

After the project, parents in the ten target areas are aware that children have little chance for success in modern day Kenya unless they have a basic education. Parents are proud of the fact that their children are in school and will be able to compete for more rewarding jobs. With the assistance of the program, several groups of parents decided to establish literacy classes at the estate level. Working Children

Before the project, with an estimated three to four million primary aged children in Kenya not attending school, it seemed normal to boys and girls in the ten target areas that they too were not going to school. It was normal to work, and nice to have some money for the family or for a few things that money could buy. Their highest aspiration was to get a permanent job on the local coffee estate, perhaps even become a driver.

After the project, children are aware that they can become a teacher, a pilot, an accountant or even a medical doctor. Children are aware that community-based efforts can lead to an education and a bright future. Former child laborers have formed support groups, and have joined the campaign against child labor. Some older youths have decided to follow in the footsteps of their parents, and have also begun literacy classes.

The Community

Before the project, the communities accepted child labor as a necessary evil due to poverty.

After the project, as a result of awareness raising by CCLCs, attitudes have changed, and many efforts are made to enroll children in schools or to keep them from dropping out.

Teachers

Before the project, overworked and underpaid teachers had little time or energy for hungry children who didn't come to school. The problem was overwhelming.

After the project, teachers are aware that community-based efforts can effectively put many children into schools. Teachers have taken up leadership positions in the CCLCs, and are active in promoting self-help groups to generate income. In one town, a teacher helped a group of AIDS orphans and others begin a rabbit project to help meet school expenses.

Union Leaders

Before the project, union leaders did not bother dealing with the “necessary evil”. Clear information on child labor issues was not available. In any case, it was felt that child labor had little or nothing to do with the union except that those under 18 years of age could not join the union.

After the project, all union leaders are aware of the project and are talking about it.  It is now very clear that child labor is not wanted and can be dealt with through a union-led program. Leaders have become aware that activists, particularly women, can recruit workers into the union while eliminating child labor. During the first year of the project, over 10,000 workers joined the union. Negotiators in a stronger KPAWU are now aware that child labor issues can be put on the bargaining table along with wages, hours and working conditions. Union leaders and workers are now more aware of the health hazards from pesticides, particularly for children.

Participants

Before the project, participants in the grassroots workshops were concerned but gave little thought to the “unsolvable problem”.

After the project, most participants are aware that community groups can become forces in the fight against child labor and in the improvement of family life.

Estate Managers

Before the project, members of management saw child labor as traditional and resulting from poverty. Some saw it as a form of cheap, non-union labor. Others believed they were doing the families a favor by allowing their children to work.

After the project, many management personnel are aware of the destructive nature of child labor, and know that coordinated efforts can go a long way to eliminate it. Management is aware that unions can play a significant role in solving problems such as child labor. Management is aware of their tremendous influence for good when they help bridge the gap between management and workers.

Others

Before the project, an attitude of acceptance toward child labor was held by numerous persons, including government officials, politicians, opinion makers, religious leaders, workers in the informal sector and others.

After the project, the attitudes of all have not changed, but significant improvements have been made in raising awareness about the disadvantages of child labor and the importance of education.

At its heart, however, the East Africa Plantation Pilot Project is about Paul M. and thousands of children like him.  He is 14 years old and both his parents work on a coffee plantation:  “Being at school is better than at home . . . because when you come to school, you learn how to read and write.  When you stay at home, you don’t learn . . . I would like to work as a doctor.”[27]   Another young worker describes the importance of education: “It is important for me to go to school for my future.  With education, I can know my rights.  I don’t have to be just a coffee picker . . . . . I can be a foreman and a shop steward on the plantation one day . . . . and I need to have an education for that, otherwise I will not be able to promote myself or negotiate with my employer.”[28]  And Martha W., aged 13, who wants to be a nurse; and Benta A., aged 12, who dreams of being a doctor, and Benad O. who would like to be a teacher; and Lucy N., and Luciana B., and . . . .

Notes: