Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-02-13-Speech-2-080"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010213.4.2-080"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Unfortunately, the young workers of Britain are not likely to see a great improvement in their situation as a result of our adopting this resolution.
The directive will not meet the needs of young workers any better just because we have put an end to the scandal of this derogation for the English (as the United Kingdom did not fully comply with the directive limiting the work of children and adolescents). This debate should, instead, have provided an opportunity to amend the directive to remove all the derogations it contains, which prevent it from being properly effective.
There is no justification for authorising young people of 14 and even 13 years of age to work in any way whatsoever [Article 4(2c)], outside compulsory school attendance [Article 8(1b)] and during school holidays [Article 8(1c)]. Nor is there any justification for the derogations allowing young people of less than 18 years of age to work more than 40 hours per week, over 8 hours per day [Article 8(5)], and do night work [Article 9(2)].
There is no justification for applying any restriction to application of the directive in the case of domestic service in a private household or to work in a family undertaking [Article 2(2)]. There is no point in denouncing child labour in Africa or Asia if we do not protect our own young people against economic exploitation and work that is harmful to health, safety and development and if we do not ensure that they receive training leading to qualifications in a system quite separate from that of the employers."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples