In this society, businesses have an immense amount of control; they are depend on for items that are needed and desired for example, food and clothing. In order for society to buy these items: prices must be kept low, locations accessible, and inventory constantly stocked. Joe Fresh, a clothing company made by Loblaws, is just one of those many companies. In order to keep costs low and keep up with demand, Joe Fresh has their clothes made in a sweat shop in Bangladesh (Canadian Press, 2013). The choice to have clothing made in sweat shops is one that many consumers do not agree with, which is why functionalism is a favorable perspective to look at this controversy. A functionalist’s perspective determines that society maintains order in the …show more content…
For those on a budget, it is necessary - if the price is not right, they will not purchase the products (The Canadian Press, 2013). The price of clothing manufactured in Bangladesh is significantly cheaper than in Canada or The United States of America (The Canadian Press, 2013). By keeping expenses low, it allows Joe Fresh the chance to offer consumers a lower cost. On account of the prices being affordable to most, Joe Fresh makes a profit that allows them to keep doors open at their many locations. If Joe Fresh stopped having merchandise manufactured in the sweat shop, it would result in much higher prices, which means less consumers. Less consumers means that there will be a lower profit, which could result in Joe Fresh closing stores and off setting the stabilization of the economy. The sweat shops ensure Joe Fresh continues to make an income as well as an income for their employees all over the …show more content…
In Bangladesh, Joe Fresh had the opportunity to have their merchandise manufactured for less, by doing so, they were capable of keeping prices in store lower (Watkins, 2013). Being cost effective keeps Joe Fresh in business and generating a profit which adds to our economy. In consequence of that choice, the latent function of Joe Fresh’s sweat shop is that the conditions their workers were in was inadequate (Canadian Press, 2013). Maclean’s reporters disclosed that there were deep visible cracks in the walls, very poor working conditions, and very low wage. Though unintended, by over looking the severity of the buildings damages, it cost over 200 people their lives (CTV, 2013). The loss of life would contribute towards the society being dysfunctional. A society is considered to be dysfunctional when there is a negative impact on society (Merton, 1968). When the building collapsed, the employees and their families involved suffered greatly. The tragedy also brought a great deal of negative attention towards Joe Fresh and their decision to endorse sweat shops from the media and
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.
Large corporations such as Nike, Gap, and Reebok and many others from the United States have moved their factories to undeveloped nations; barely pay their employees enough to live on. Countries such as China, Indonesia, and Haiti have readily abundant cheap labor. There should be labor laws or an obligation of respecting workers to provide decent working conditions, fair wages, and safety standards.
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
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.
Functionalism is a theory in which various social institutions and processes in society serve a significant function in order for society to continue
Many societies face the much overlooked problem of child labor and sweatshops in the fashion industry. Recently, Americans were stunned to learn that their apple pie sweetheart, Kathie Lee Gifford was associated with the exploitation of underage workers in Honduras. Gifford's story began the resurgence of knowledge of the growing problem of sweatshops in today's society. Contrary to popular belief, sweatshops still exist across the world in both third world countries and super powers such as America. Sweatshops incorporate the inhumane exploitation of workers, many of whom are underage, by providing extremely low wages as well as expecting unrealistic time commitments. In addition, the workers lack benefits and very few sweatshops abide by the required health codes. Sweatshops are obviously a growing problem that will not disappear with out change. Although the United States government has begun to take steps to alleviate the problem, there must be an increase in both awareness and legislation.
The General Accountability Office defines a sweatshop as a “multiple labor law violator.” A sweatshop violates laws pertaining to benefits, working hours, and wages (“Toxic Uniforms”). To make more money, companies move their sweatshop factories to different locations and try to find the cheapest locations with the least regulations (“Sweatshops”). There are not as many sweatshop factories in the United States because the industries have been transferred overseas where the labor is cheaper and there are weaker regulations. In the United States, sweatshops are hidden from the public, with poor immigrant workers who are unable to speak out against the injustices (“Subsidizing Sweatshops”). Workers in sweatshops are forced to work overtime, earn below a living wage, do not earn benefits, and encounter verbal, physical and sexual abuse. Macy’s, JCPenney, Kohl’s, The
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
"The functionalist perspective is a sociological approach which emphasizes the way that parts of a society are structure to maintain its stability,"(Schaefer & Lamm, 1998). This perspective looks at a society in a positive manner and sees it as stable, with all the parts working together. Under the functionalist view every social aspect of a society contributes to the society's survival, and if not, the aspect is not passed to the next generation.
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?
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
The foundations of Functionalism are built on food, shelter, clothing, and money. Which as stated before functionalists believe gender roles serve to maintain social order because they stabilize these four foundations.
Functionalism is the oldest and most commonly used theoretical approach used to understand social issues. Functionalism is a macrosociological perspective that presents the idea that society consists of different components working together to help a society function as one. Sociolog...
Nowadays there are a lot of laws around the world that protect employees from employers, however in some countries those laws are less regulated than other countries. While I was reading the Bangladesh case, the garment factories in Bangladesh have issues when it comes to enforce their laws. The ethical and social responsibility issue in this case is mostly relate with the cheap labor. Since Bangladesh garment industries depends on the export of textile products to generate income as a result necessity makes them sell their products at a lower cost which later these products are sold through different retailers like Gap, H&M, Nordstrom at a higher price.
On April 24 2013, a building housing several garment factories collapsed in the capital of Bangladesh, leading to the deaths of more than 1,100 textile workers. These factories supplied clothing for many western retailers, such as Walmart, H&M, Gap and others. Bangladesh is the world’s second largest garment exporter, depending on low wages. "Sweatshop" sometimes is not enough to describe the working conditions of labor in less developed areas. In Bangladesh, clothing enterprises are as frightening as ruins and fires.