IS IT THE CUSTOMER’S RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE MORAL CHOICES WHEN THEY SHOP FOR CLOTHING Manpreet Singh Bahre COMM 171 SEC 849 Imrana Safdar 21st August 2017 It is hard to think of a sweatshop more exhilarating for a labourer to work in than any other workplace. There is no legal definition for a sweatshop. But a common definition is that the sweatshops are the workplace where workers are treated poorly followed by unacceptable working conditions of the environment. This brings up the question to the customers that whether it is their responsibility to make moral choices when they shop for clothing? Disregarding of the conditions and work environment that we find acceptable for us, people who works in sweatshops considers as a best way of survival for them. In Clothing sweatshops, workers are …show more content…
Dependency on others such as parents, spouse, etc. seems to be vanishing day by day. Sweatshops seems to be the best way of earning for people of those small countries where no other source of income is there for them. Generally, it is seen that parents in small villages usually force their daughters to marry with someone who is earning so that they no longer need to live in poverty. With the industrialization of these sweatshops which gives opportunities to young girls or women to work and earn some good income, they no longer need to be dependent on their families or spouse. “Earning a salary gave them the opportunity to manage their own finances, have their own rooms, choose when and whom they want to marry and choose when they wanted to have children” (Garyfalakis, 2008). This leads to development of self confidence and hard working nature in them (especially women) to live their life independently. These circumstances made the customers to think that shopping for clothes proves to be the best source of income for the unclassified workers who wants to become financially self
In China, Kelsey Timmerman spent time with a couple who worked at the Teva factory, traveled to the countryside to meet the couple’s son, insert name, who hasn’t seen his parents in three years due to his parents working long hours and it being expensive to take a train ride. In the US, the author visited one of a few clothing factories in the US to talk to the workers about his shorts, and the decrease of American garment factories. Timmerman wants the consumer to be more engaged and more thoughtful when mindlessly buying clothes. By researching how well the brands you want to buy from monitor their factories and what their code of ethics details, you can make a sound decision on if this is where you would want to buy your clothes. The author writes about brands that improve employers lives like SoleRebels, a shoe company who employs workers and gives them health insurance, school funds for their children, and six months of maternity leave. Brands like soleRebels that give workers benefits most factory workers have never even heard of help improve the lives of garment workers and future generations. From reading this book, Timmerman wants us to be more educated about the lives of garment workers, bridge the gap between consumers and manufacturers, and be a more engaged and mindful consumer when purchasing our
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).
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.
Look down at the clothes you're wearing right now, chances are almost every single thing you are currently wearing was made in a sweatshop. It is estimated that between 50-75% of all garments are made under sweatshop like conditions. Designers and companies get 2nd party contractors to hire people to work in these factories, this is a tool to make them not responsible for the horrendous conditions. They get away with it by saying they are providing jobs for people in 3rd world countries so its okay, but in reality they are making their lives even worse. These companies and designers only care about their bank accounts so if they can exploit poor, young people from poverty stricken countries they surely will, and they do. A sweatshop is a factory
...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.
What are sweatshops? The Miriam-Webster dictionary defines sweatshops as: A shop or factory in which employees work for long hours at low wages and under unhealthy conditions. These factories are mainly located in Third-World countries, although there are still a few in the United States. Many popular, name brand companies like Nike, use sweatshops around the world. Today there is much controversy about sweatshops and whether they should be banned and closed. In reality, the conditions of these factories are terrible. The employees are paid very little, even after working long, hard hours. The supervisors of these shops are often cruel, malicious, and brutal. Sadly, these factories are often the only source of income for Third-World workers. As bad as these sweatshops might be, they have pulled many countries and individuals out of poverty. So, are sweatshops beneficial?
Mayer, Robert. "Sweatshops, Exploitation, and Moral Responsibility." Journal of Social Philosophy, vol. 38, no. 4, Winter2007, pp. 605-619. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1111/j.1467-9833.2007.00401.x.
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
Ravisankar concludes his expository essay by informing his audience about organizations like the University Students Against Sweatshops who are forcing corporations to source their clothes from respectful factories or they will not purchase their products.
Americans do not realize the amount of clothing we wear on a daily basis is actually made in Cambodia, such as Adidas and even the Gap. The women that work for these sweatshops in Cambodia sew for 50 cents an hour, which is what allows stores in America, such as H&M to sell inexpensive clothing (Winn, 2015). The conditions these Cambodian workers face are a noisy, loud, and extremely hot environment where people are known for having huge fainting attacks. When workers were on strike a year ago, authorities actually shot multiple people just because they were trying to raise their pay. There is plenty of evidence of abuse captured through many interviews of workers from different factories, and is not just a rarity these places see often or hear of. Factories hire children, fire pregnant women because they are slow and use the bathroom to much, scream at regular workers if they use the toilet more than two times a day, scam hard working employees with not paying them their money they worked for and more, and workers are sent home and replaced if 2,000 shirts are not stitched in one day. Expectations are unrealistic and not suitable for employees to be working each day for more than ten
Contrary to what many people believe, sweatshops actually improve the lives of workers and the surround community. Kristof is a personal witness to this phenomenon. In his words, “My views on sweatshops are shaped by years living in East Asia, watching as living standards soared… because of sweatshop jobs” (Kristof). Its one thing to notice a change in living standards, but how do sweatshops cause this change? In an interview with the Mises Institute on March 20th, 2017, Benjamin Powell reasoned, “Sweatshops bring with them the proximate cause of economic development- capital, technology, and the opportunity to build human capital” (Powell, “Sweatshops: A Way Out of Poverty”). He goes on to talk about how historically living conditions have risen rapidly in countries due to industrialization. Because of lower living conditions already, a sweatshop is no where near as harsh to its workers as it would appear to an outsider. Even
Sweatshop is a common term used to refer to factories that typically produce apparel; that have very low wages by modern U.S. standards, long working hours, and unsafe or unhealthy working conditions; that often don't obey labor laws; and that would generally be considered
Sweatshop is a term for makeshift factories where poverty-stricken people- mostly women and children- work at top speed for 12 or more hours a day in an effort to earn a living wage (library). Often called the sweating system, which began when the factory system developed in the early 1800’s. Factories were not always large enough to house all the workers, instead the owners would sublet contracts for part of the work. Then the other subcontractors set up makeshift factories in dimly lighted, poorly ventilated buildings. They hired workers for low wages and long hours on a work when needed basis. Americans began to object to this almost right away, as early as the 1830’s. In 1880, large numbers of immigrants began to come to America, and the problem became serious. The owners of sweatshops took advantage of the immigrants’ ignorance and poverty to get them to work for low wages. During the 1900’s, many states began to pass laws prohibiting products from being manufactured under sweatshop conditions. A fire at the Triangle Shirtwaist Company in 1911, in which 146 women died, urged many states to pass anti-sweatshop laws. States then began passing laws on wages, hours, child labor, making it impractical for factories to sublet work. Sweatshops became illegal in most countries. But not all, such as Asia and Africa, the less developed countries .
This paper will give a brief introduction about the history of Nike Sweatshops which will shed the light on their public image and their manufacturing process. It will further move to the suggested alternatives, what facts impact them, their stakeholder and their impact on the economic as well as social basis. In the end, it will discuss if the given choices are legal and ethical or not.
Historically, the word "sweatshop" originated in the Industrial Revolution to describe a subcontracting system in which the middlemen earned profits from the margin between the amount they received for a contract and the amount they paid to the workers. Today a sweatshop is defined by the government as any business or factory that violates one or more of the federal or provincial labor laws which are as follows: minimum wage and overtime, child labor, industrial homework, occupational health and safety, workers compensation, or industry registration. Originally when the garment industry went global it was all about the positive effects it was having on the developing countries in which the factories were located and about all the jobs that were introduced to those who once could not ever imagine getting paid to work.