The prohibition of child labour and the protection of youth in the workplace through the lens of the European Social Charter and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union
In Europe, more than one organisation coexists, each with its own structure, bodies, rules, and obligations for its member states, with the aim of, however unrealistic it may sound, defending human rights. Despite the paradox and the lurking danger of conflict, it appears that coexistence is viable. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (hereinafter: CFR-EU) and the Revised European Social Charter (hereinafter: RESC) serve as a practical example of this coexistence, as the former is a creation of the European Union while the latter belongs to the Council of Europe. However, the RESC pertains to all working citizens of the member states of the Council of Europe, while the CFR-EU covers the entirety of the EU’s citizens. Nevertheless, the preamble of the latter explicitly states the significance of the RESC in shaping Articles 27 et seq. of the CFR-EU. This text will focus exclusively on analysing Articles 7 of the RESC and 32 of the CFR-EU.
Prohibition of child labour in articles 7 and 32
Both articles focus on the prohibition of child labour. At the same time, they introduce specific restrictions and guarantees to protect youth employment and eliminate the exploitation of young workers by employers. Their difference lies in the extent of the protection they provide. Specifically, Article 7 of the RESC establishes the rule that no minor may work before the age of 15. Employment is permitted only if it ensures the unimpeded enjoyment of compulsory education. However, employment is allowed for those under 15, provided it involves mandatory tasks by law that do not adversely affect their health, morals, or education. Only adults may be employed in hazardous work. At this point, it should be clarified that while Article 7 refers to the term “work,” it could be accepted, in order to ensure the effective protection of young workers, that this pertains to all forms of employment, including those for which no employment contract has been signed.
On age limits and legal provisions
In contrast, Article 32 of the CFR-EU does not set an age limit, as it stipulates that a person may work once they reach the age “at which compulsory schooling ends.” This is specified by each member state individually. Nevertheless, based on the RESC, the Community Charter of Fundamental Social Rights for Workers, and Directive 94/33, it can be reasonably argued that, at the EU level, the age limit is set at 15 years, in order for a person to be able to work legally. At the same time, the aforementioned rule may be relaxed in cases where more favorable legal provisions further protect young workers. Additionally, Article 32 refers to the term “limited exceptions” without further clarification. With a view toward more effective protection of young workers, it could be argued under Articles 1, 14(1), 31(1), and 32(2) of the CFR-EU that employment by individuals who do not exceed the required age limit is permissible, provided it concerns non-hazardous professions, is necessary for a decent livelihood, and does not hinder access to education. This interpretation aligns with Article 7 of the RESC.
On internships and employment conditions
Furthermore, Article 7 of the RESC addresses the case of internships for minors, stipulating that total working hours must be limited and that remuneration should be fair. The working hours are determined based on the needs of young people for vocational training and personal development. In the case of mandatory employment by law, the state is obliged to specify the working hours for minors in relation to the provided work. Conversely, if the work is not legally mandated, the hours are determined by mutual agreement of the parties. The protective rules applicable to adult workers are, of course, applied proportionally. Simultaneously, beyond the declarative tone of prohibiting the economic exploitation of minors in Article 32 of the CFR-EU, there are specific provisions of both EU and national character through which the effective regulation of issues related to child labour is pursued.
On night work and medical checks
One such issue, also highlighted in Article 7 of the RESC, is night work and medical checks. For minors under 18, night work is permitted only in specific professions outlined by national legislative or regulatory provisions. It is at the discretion of each state to define these professions. According to cases 1 and 2 of Article 7 of the RESC, these specific professions should not be dangerous or unhealthy, as children under 18 cannot work in such roles, for instance, in construction or quarrying jobs. For these mentioned professions, there is an explicit obligation for regular medical checks. Additionally, there is a need to establish special protection from physical and moral risks, provided these arise from the workplace. In this way, the necessary medical checks are extended to all professions indiscriminately. Thus, the more limited scope and concise wording of Article 32 of the CFR-EU is evident when compared to Article 7 of the RESC.
Conclusion: harmonising social and economic rights
In summary, Article 32 of the CFR-EU is confined solely to setting an age limit, prohibiting economic exploitation, and restricting employment in hazardous professions, while Article 7 of the RESC addresses several specific aspects of child labour, such as internships, night work, remuneration, and regular medical checks. This specific choice by the EU legislator has understandably faced criticism as it suggests a prioritisation of economic freedoms over social rights. The weaknesses of the CFR-EU are somewhat mitigated, as noted, through the consistent application and interpretation of Article 32 of the CFR-EU in accordance with Article 7 of the RESC, e.g., in the case of the age limit. Based on the latter, it can be reasonably asserted that the Union could successfully overcome the limitations imposed by the CFR-EU on social rights with the unconditional ratification of the RESC.
by Stavros Martinakis, Editor-in-Cheif of the law journal “Ypagogi”
If you want to read more articles like these, visit the ELSA Law Review Blog (ELR Blog)! You can find it here.
