Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on whether sweatshops are ever acceptable with ethical theory
Essay on whether sweatshops are ever acceptable with ethical theory
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
There are lots of sweatshops established in developing and less developed countries such as China and India. The main reason is the labor costs in those countries are much lower than developed countries. Due to the huge population in China and India, the wages will stay low in long term. Most of the workers are uneducated and unskilled, and they have to accept the low wages in order to pay for their daily necessities. The multinational companies like Apple Inc., IBM, H&M, Nike opened factories or outsourcing their products in China. These are unethical factories. A lot of people criticize the owners of these factories. However, all things are created by the demand. If sweatshops were useless, then they wouldn’t develop. Corporations want low …show more content…
Setting up sweatshop can help developing countries improve their technology level through the process of production. Developed countries usually transport modern technology such as machinery to their sweatshops in less developed areas, it gives the opportunities to sweatshop workers to access the advance technology. Also, they might use same or similar leadership styles and management methods as their home countries. For example: Laissez-Faire (To lacks direct supervision of employees and fails to provide regular feedback to those under his supervision), Autocratic (Allows managers to make decisions alone without the input of others. Managers possess total authority and impose their will on employees) and Participative (values the input of team members and peers, but the responsibility of making the final decision rests with the participative leader). The opening of sweatshops is also benefit the supply chain in developing areas. Sweatshops are usually used to produce variety components for technology and retail companies. In the production process, sweatshops have to purchase raw materials, transportations and installation services from local supply chains. For example, Apple’s sweatshops produces the components of iPhone and MacBook, the factories have to purchase steels and plastic from local firms. It will boost the revenue of the whole supply chain, and also help to increase …show more content…
The factors of production include land, labor, capital, and enterprise. Sweatshops must extract natural resources during the production process, which refers to one the factors of production: Land. Land not only including soil, but also means gas, river, oil, coal, and so on. Running a factory must involve all those things. When a country has plenty of factories, then the natural resources in that country will be overexploited. Moreover, heavy industrial will cause air pollution because they combusted large amount of coal. Usually factories occupy huge place, therefore company will cut down all the trees in the forest. For example, Shanghai has very serious smog problem. According to “Aqicn”, a real-time Index of air quality website for over 60 courtiers, the PM2.5 index in Shanghai is between 100 to 169in the last two
Some of the arguments against sweatshops raised by Americans is the they take jobs away from the American people. In the job force it is becoming harder to find an open position any where. Instead of keeping the factories here the companies are shipped over seas, causing millions of job opportunities for Americans to be lost. Some arguments raised by the United Students Against Sweatshops (USAS) are the poor working conditions, low wages, long hours, and children in the factories. The damp, dark, and cold environment can depress the workers even more than they may be, causing rates in suicide to increase. Low wages is another concern USAS have. The workers barley get enough money to survive.
Some companies have acceded to public pressure to reduce or end their use of sweatshops. Such firms often publicize the fact that their products are not made with Anti-globalization activists and environmentalists also deplore transfer of heavy industrial manufacturing (such as chemical production) to the developing world. Although chemical factories have little in common with sweatshops in the original sense, detractors describe them as such and claim that there are negative environmental and health impacts (such as pollution and birth defects, respectively) on workers and the local community.
In today’s world, increasing big companies open factories in developing countries but many people said it is unethical and the factories are sweatshops. Most of the sweatshops were opened in east Asia and third-world countries and regions. The companies open the sweatshops in order to get more benefits is a kind of very irresponsible behavior. For example, Apple's factories in China are not good and unethical. Audit finds
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).
...e their product. Sweatshops are found usually all over the world and need to make a better decision as in more labor laws, fair wages, and safety standards to better the workers' conditions. It should benefit the mutually experiences by both the employers and the employees. Most important is the need to be educated about their rights and including local labor laws.
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.
I don’t necessarily agree with people working their butts off, basically for nothing. The people that work in these sweatshops are under paid and over worked but that is why US companies send their business over to these foreign countries because they make more product for less labor. In some cases, it is a very sad situation. Companies do not operate ethically in these areas that condone human right abuse. Is it right, no but they still do it because it makes the company a profit along
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.
Sweatshops are factories that violate two or more human rights. Sweatshops are known in the media and politically as dangerous places for workers to work in and are infamous for paying minimum wages for long hours of labour. The first source is a quote that states that Nike has helped improve Vietnamese’s’ workers lives by helping them be able to afford luxuries they did not have access to before such as scooters, bicycles and even cars. The source is showing sweatshops in a positive light stating how before sweatshops were established in developing countries, Vietnamese citizens were very poor and underprivileged. The source continues to say that the moment when sweatshops came to Vietnam, workers started to get more profit and their lives eventually went uphill from their due to being able to afford more necessities and luxuries; one of them being a vehicle, which makes their commute to work much faster which in turn increases their quality of life. The source demonstrates this point by mentioning that this is all due to globalization. Because of globalization, multinationals are able to make investments in developing countries which in turn offers the sweatshops and the employees better technology, better working skills and an improvement in their education which overall helps raise the sweatshops’ productivity which results in an increase
Personally, I am on the middle ground. I can see both sides of the argument. I feel as if the statements that are made to support sweatshops are valid as are the ones to appose them. I do not feel as if this has to do with the differences between China and Cambodia/ Bangladesh. We are from a wealthy economy, and we are privileged in the sense that we have ethics and rights for the workers.
Nicholas D. Kristof and Sheryl Wudunn are Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times journalists who spent fourteen years in Asia doing research on the country as well as the sweatshops of that country. In their article "Two Cheers for Sweatshops" they sum up clearly the misunderstanding of sweatshops by most of the modern world. "Yet sweatshops that seem brutal from the vantage point of an American sitting in his living room can appear tantalizing to a Thai laborer getting by on beetles." The fact of the matter is that sweatshops in the eyes of the actual workers are not as bad as they are made out to be, by many activists. Though many organizations that oppose sweatshops and their labor practices try to make the point that sweatshops do not have to exist. But one must consider the fact that, the companies that use sweatshops are creating at least some type of jobs for people that gladly accept them.
Globalization and industrialization contribute to the existence of sweatshops, which are where garments are made cheaply, because they are moving production and consumption of those cheap goods. Industrialization has enabled for global distribution, to exchange those goods around the world. They can also set apart the circumstances of consumption and production, which Western countries as mass consumers, are protected from of producers in less developed countries. These factories are usually located in less developed countries and face worker exploitation and changes in social structures. Technological innovation allows for machines to take the place of workers and do all the dirty work instead of workers doing hours of hard work by hand.
From the perspective of a business owner, sweatshops are lucrative since they exploit on low-wage labor in developing countries which leads to significantly lower business cost and in turn increase profit margins. Although many major clothing and footwear companies, have been linked to sweatshops, brands such as Gap, Nike, and so on , have all been guilty of numerous violations of reasonable working conditions in their production facilities in most parts of Asia. All of their headquarters and customer bases are located in the developing world, while the manufacturing and production processes are executed in developing countries(mostly Asia). Although majority of people believe that sweat shops are clothing companies, the rise of the digital and...