A sweatshop is defined as a factory where manual workers are employed at very low wages for long hours in unsafe working environments (Oxford Dictionary, 2011). Sweatshops are especially associated with clothing industries, such as Nike, Gap, Walmart, Primemark and other brand names. Sweatshop history begins in 1830 with clothing factories in New York City and London, even then the working conditions were poor, e.g. rat infestation. Since the 1850s worker unions have improved “sweatshops” conditions in the first world, and the term “sweatshop” is more associated with factories in the developing world. The statement that ‘sweatshops in developing countries are better than no jobs’ has many arguments for and against them, which will be explored in this essay. Wages are classified as being below “living wage”, and are not enough to support a family. Workers are paid less than 1% of the retail price of the product, for example, Honduran garment factory workers were paid US$0.24 for each US$50 Sean John sweatshirt (Sean John Setisa Report, 2003). We are often shocked at the wages in developing countries, but we must analyse the wage by the country standards in which it is being paid. In developing countries the main concern is food and shelter, so when the living standards are low, the money can go a lot further. “Sweatshops” provide the unemployed who struggle finding work a paying job, to provide food, shelter, and medicine, thus reducing (infant) mortality rates, and may even provide enough money to provide an education for family’s offspring. This gives the younger generation a chance to improve their future quality of life, with a wider variety of career opportunities with a better salary. ACIT (2000) writes that multination... ... middle of paper ... ...ssed 1 April 2014]. Stepp, W. (2001) ‘Nike is Right’, Mises daily, 14 March. Available at: http://mises.org/daily/628. [1 April 2014] http://everydayecon.wordpress.com/2006/05/18/the-economics-of-sweatshops/ - better than the alternative, agrees with sweatshops Academic Consortium on International Trade (2000) Letter to Presidents of Universities and Colleges. Available at: http://www.spp.umich.edu/rsie/acit/ [Accessed 1 April 2014] Zwolinski, M. (2012) Top 3 Ways Sweatshops Help The Poor Escape Poverty. Available at: http://www.learnliberty.org/videos/top-3-ways-sweatshops-help-poor-escape-poverty/ [Accessed 1 April 2014] Gillespie, L. (2013) ‘Outsourced by Children’, The Moulton Advertiser, 19 September. Available at: http://www.moultonadvertiser.com/opinion/columnists/columnist_one/article_75929e8c-2090-11e3-8756-0019bb2963f4.html [Accessed 1 April 2014]
The controversial issue of sweatshops is one often over looked by The United States. In the Social Issues Encyclopedia, entry # 167, Matt Zwolinski tackles the issues of sweatshops. In this article Matt raises a question I have not been able to get out of my head since I have begun researching this topic, “ are companies who contract with sweatshops doing anything wrong?” this article goes on to argue that the people who work in the sweatshops willingly choose to work there, despite the poor environment. Many people in third world countries depend on the sweatshops to earn what they can to have any hopes of surviving. If the sweatshops were to shut down many people would lose their jobs, and therefore have no source of income. This may lead people to steal and prostitution as well. this article is suggesting that sweatshops will better the economy by giving people a better job than what they may have had. Due to this the companies contracting with sweatshops are not acting wrong in any way. This was a deductive article it had a lot of good examples to show how sweatshops are beneficial to third world countries. Radly Balko seemed to have the same view point as Matt Zwolinski. Many people believe the richer countries should not support the sweatshops Balko believes if people stopped buying products made in sweatshops the companies will have to shut down and relocate, firing all of the present workers. Rasing the fact that again the worker will have no source of income, the workers need the sweatshop to survive. Balko also uses the argument that the workers willingly work in the current environments.
Sweatshops started around the 1830’s when industrialization started growing in urban areas. Most people who worked in them at the time were immigrants who didn't have their papers. They took jobs where they thought they'd have the most economic stability. It’s changed a bit since then, companies just want the cheapest labor they can get and to be able to sell the product in order to make a big profit. It’s hard to find these types of workers in developed areas so they look toward 3rd world countries. “sweatshops exist wherever there is an opportunity to exploit workers who lack the knowledge and resources to stand up for themselves.” (Morey) In third world countries many people are very poor and are unable to afford food and water so the kids are pulled out of school and forced to work so they can try to better their lives. This results in n immense amount of uneducated people unaware they can have better jobs and that the sweatshops are basically slavery. With a large amounts uneducated they continue the cycle of economic instability. There becomes no hope for a brighter future so people just carry on not fighting for their basic rights. Times have changed. 5 Years ago companies would pay a much larger amount for a product to be made but now if they’re lucky they’ll pay half, if a manufacturer doesn't like that another company will happily take it (Barnes). Companies have gotten greedier and greedier in what they’ll pay to have a product manufactured. Companies have taken advantage of the fact that people in developing countries will do just about anything to feed their families, they know that if the sweatshop in Cambodia don't like getting paid 2 dollars per garment the one in Indonesia will. This means that there is less money being paid to the workers which mean more will starve and live in very unsafe environments. Life is
With the continued rise of consumer "needs" in "industrial" countries such as the United States, and the consistently high price that corporations must pay to produce goods in these countries, companies are looking to "increase (their) profits by driving down costs any way possible... To minimize costs, companies look for places with the lowest wages and human rights protections" (Dosomething). Countries with lax or unenforced labor laws grant multinational corporations the leeway to use cheap foreign labor to mass-produce their commodities so that they can be sold in countries like America. These inexpensive, sometimes borderline illegal, establishments are known as sweatshops. In his book Timmerman discusses the topic of sweatshops in great detail. Originally in search of "where (his) T-shirt was made(;) (Timmerman) (went) to visit the factory where it was made and (met) the people who made (it)" (Timmerman5).
He inquires, “Isn’t it a little presumptuous of us to think that we can end sweatshop abuses by just changing our individual buying habits?” (“Sweat, Fire, and Ethics). As Jeffcott provides the reader with the entirety of the background information on the Fairtrade-certification, he enables the reader to realize what really needs to be done in order to end the use of sweatshops. Another ineffective strategy that Jeffcott mentions is when society attempts to exert the guilt towards large brand name companies, as these companies only address these issues to the extent which it will not affect their productivity. Jeffcott explains that, “Conflicting pressures make suppliers hide abuses or subcontract to sewing workshops...The name of the game remains the same: more work for less pay” (“Sweat, Fire, and Ethics”). By clarifying how ineffective people’s current efforts are in influencing the abuse in sweatshops, Jeffcott challenges the reader to assess if their own efforts are sufficient for the cause. Jeffcott then concludes his argument by proposing to the reader to exceed traditional means of resistance to sweatshops by urging the government to intervene on these reprehensible practices, and perhaps then a solution may be achieved. Contrarily, Jeffrey D. Sachs argues in his excerpt “Bangladesh: On the Ladder of Development,” that despite the injustice that
"Nike." Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th Edition 1. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed November 6, 2009).
Some people of North America know about these sweatshop workers, they feel bad and some also protest. They set up NGOs, send funds and donations but they never try to break the tradition of sweatshop working. They all assume that this is best for the society. An Idea can be drawn from William
It is often said that products made in sweatshops are cheap and that is why people buy those products, but why is it behind the clothes or shoes that we wear that make sweatshops bad? In the article Sweat, Fire and Ethics by Bob Jeffcott is trying to persuade the people and tell them how sweatshops are bad. Bob Jeffcott supports the effort of workers of the global supply chains in order to win improved wages and good working conditions and a better quality of life of those who work on sweatshops. He mentions and describes in detail how the conditions of the sweatshops are and how the people working in them are forced to long working hours for little money. He makes the question, “we think we can end sweatshops abuses by just changing our individual buying habits?” referring to we can’t end the abuses that those women have by just stopping of buying their products because those women still have to work those long hours because other people are buying their product for less pay or less money.
In his article “Sweatshops, Choice, and Exploitation” Matt Zwolinski attempts to tackle the problem of the morality of sweatshops, and whether or not third parties or even the actors who create the conditions, should attempt to intervene on behalf of the workers. Zwolinski’s argument is that it is not right for people to take away the option of working in a sweatshop, and that in doing so they are impeding on an individual’s free choice, and maybe even harming them. The main distinction that Zwolinski makes is that choice is something that is sacred, and should not be impeded upon by outside actors. This is showcased Zwolinski writes, “Nevertheless, the fact that they choose to work in sweatshops is morally significant. Taken seriously, workers' consent to the conditions of their labor should lead us to abandon certain moral objections to sweatshops, and perhaps even to view them as, on net, a good thing.” (Zwolinski, 689). He supports his argument of the importance of free choice by using a number of different tactics including hypothetical thought exercises and various quotes from other articles which spoke about the effects of regulation business. Throughout the article there were multiple points which helped illuminate Zwolinski’s argument as well as multiple points which muddle the argument a bit.
All of my life I have considered myself as a person who loves children. I enjoy playing with them, helping them, and just being around them. So when I first agreed with corporations who use child labor I shocked myself completely. After examining two articles; one “The Case for Sweatshops”, by David R. Henderson, and two “Sweatshops or a Shot at a Better Life”, by Cathy Young, I came to the conclusion that in some cases when young children work under proper conditions it can keep them out of the streets and be helpful to them and their families.
The first perspective, or source, is a short paragraph that can be described as a pro-globalization view. It goes to say that Sweatshops are adequate enough for the moment, yet soon will expire because of better job choices and economic awareness. The writer compares sweatshops with mines and mills from the 19th century, as to bring public to the view that sweatshops will eventually be overruled by better options such as higher paying jobs, and human rights such as child protection and reasonable working hours.
In the New York Times essay, “ Where Sweatshops Are A Dream,” writer Nicholas D. Kristof declares that how people in the poor countries such as The Kingdom of Cambodia (in Phnom Penh) are working in the harsh situations, and they all have dream to work for sweatshops. I chose this article because as long as I began to read this article I felt so sorrowful for children who are living in the undeveloped countries and because they deserve a better life. Although most of the people special American disagree with sweatshops, after reading this article, now I do agree. This article has three points for a classical argument piece such as ethos, pathos, and logos. Moreover, in this article Mr. Kristof explains to the readers why sweatshops can provide great opportunities for people in Phnom Penh than searching for old
Low Wages, Strong Backs also proves that factory workers in U.S. receives less wages for their hard work. Author speaks about the heavy weight lifting jobs which pays only “$8 an hour” (Meagher, par. 4). Author Meagher (2011, par. 6) gives an example of minimum expenditure that an individual needs for meeting all daily essenti...
Sweatshops provide pay for the poor in many of the developing countries. Many people need a job at a sweatshop, to help produce goods for those in developed countries, so they can get by and put food on the table. Even though big companies who run sweatshops pay small wages for those working, it provides enough for them to eat and sleep. This means workers treasure the time and pay they get from
Sweatshops are an unfortunate part of our global economy. The workers are paid extremely low wages, receive little to no benefits (such as health insurance, sick leave, etc.), and more often than not work under difficult or dangerous conditions. The benefits of sweatshops (if any) is a hot-button issue in today’s society. Sweatshops do not treat their workers well (as mentioned above), yet at the same time, they bring jobs that help many people escape the horrors of extreme poverty. This issue begs the question: are sweatshops improving lives? Or are they another form of abuse?
So I believe that the issue of child labour is not simple. As Unicef’s 1997 State of the World’s Children Report argued, children’s work needs to be seen as having two extremes. On one hand, there is the destructive or exploitative work and, on the other hand, there is beneficial work - promoting or enhancing children’s development without interfering with their schooling, recreation and rest. ‘And between these two poles are vast areas of work that need not negatively affect a child’s development.’ My firm belief is that there is a difference between child labour and child work and that in both cases the issue is whether or not the child is deliberately being exploited.