Question
The Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Amendment
Act, 2016, passed by the Parliament is a welcome move as it imposes a fine on anyone who employs or permits adolescents to work Below is given a passage followed by several possible inferences which can be drawn from the facts stated in the passage. You have to examine each inference separately in the context of the passage and decide upon the degree of truth or falsity. Mark answer At first glance, the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2016, passed last month in Parliament, seems progressive. It prohibits “the engagement of children in all occupations and of adolescents in hazardous occupations and processes” wherein adolescents refer to those under 18 years; children to those under 14. The Act also imposes a fine on anyone who employs or permits adolescents to work. However, on careful reading, the new Act suffers from many problems. One, it has slashed the list of hazardous occupations for children from 83 to include just mining, explosives, and occupations mentioned in the Factory Act. This means that work in chemical mixing units, cotton farms, battery recycling units, and brick kilns, among others, have been dropped. Further, even the the ones listed as hazardous can be removed, according to Section 4 — not by Parliament but by government authorities at their own discretion. Two, section 3 in Clause 5 allows child labour in “family or family enterprises” or allows the child to be “an artist in an audio-visual entertainment industry”. Since most of India’s child labour is caste-based work, with poor families trapped in intergenerational debt bondage, this refers to most of the country’s child labourers. The clause is also dangerous as it does not define the hours of work; it simply states that children may work after school hours or during vacations. Think of the plight of a 12-year-old coming home from school and then helping her mother sow umpteen collars on shirts to meet the production deadline of a contractor. When will she do her homework? How will she have the stamina to get up the next morning for school?Solution
The inference is 'probably false' in the light of the facts given. While it is true that the Act imposes a fine on anyone who employs or permits adolescents to work, the passage highlights several flaws in the Act that make it less effective in addressing child labor in India. Therefore, it cannot be said that the Act is a welcome move based on this single provision alone.
6 years ago, the average age of a family of five persons was 38 years. In between these 6 years the family adopted a girl. Now at present the average ag...
Present age of ‘A’ is 40% more than that of ‘B’. If 11 years hence from now, ‘B’ will be 5 years younger than ‘A’, then find the sum of ...
In a classroom there are 15 boys and 13 girls. Average age of each boy and each girl is 21 years and 17 years respectively. The sum of ages of all the b...
Present age of Sunita is 3 times the present age of Nita. 4 years hence twice the age of Sunita will be equal to thrice the age of Nita. Find the prese...
The current age ratio of Akash to karan is 7:9, and the current age ratio of karan to Chetna is 3:5. If the average of their present ages is 62 years, d...
The sum of ages of 4 children born at the intervals of 3 years each is 62 years. Find out the age of the youngest child.
The present age of A is 7/4 times to that of his marriage age. Present age of his brother is 1/4th of his present age. If A was married 36 years ago the...
Five years ago, Virat was 20 years older than Shami. Fifteen years from now, the ratio of their ages will be 2:3. Calculate the average of their current...
Three years ago, Ritu was twice as old as Rajni, and currently, the total of their ages is 36 years. What will Ritu's age be four years from now?
The current age ratio of Rohit and Varun is 9:7. If 6 years back, the total of their ages was 120 years, what’s the gap between their present ages?