Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The garment industry in bangladesh paragraph
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The garment industry in bangladesh paragraph
Key Facts A factory building collapsed in April 2013, killing over 1000 workers. The collapse happened due to the poor construction approved by the mayor and the building owner Sohel Rana. If convicted Sohel, along with the five other garment factory owners could receive life sentences. The collapse was one of the worst incidents the world has seen since the 1984 Bhopal disaster in India. Following the collapse Bangladesh’s garment industry designed an accord to help prevent reoccurring incidents such as this.
Ethical Issues There was an alarming number of ethical issues found in this case. To begin, there was the lack of honesty. When most people walk into a building, there first thought is not to consider the possibility of the building
…show more content…
The Employees: Employees are now expected to return to work in these under constructed factories and not be concerned about their safety? The trust issues the collapse has caused will undoubtedly cause trouble for these companies.
II. The companies renting out space: The collapse shed light on a lot of shady activities by some of the top brands renting out the spaces in that factory. Of course they do not want to be associated with poor employment care and management. In this age of technology “image” is everything. No one (consumers) will want to support (purchase products) a company with an image of employee abuse. There’s also the issue of the loss these companies have suffered. Losing an entire factory has to be a major setback and a costly one at that. Hopefully going forward, they will learn from this.
III. Other companies who own factories in Bangladesh: After the collapse there was the question of “what to do to prevent this from ever happening again”. Bangladesh’s garment industry released an accord for all companies occupying space in Bangladesh to agree to. Unfortunately there was some faults in the accord. It appeared to only benefit those who represented the employees of Bangladesh rather than the employees themselves. Companies such as Walmart have disagreed to sign the accord. They believe their system will work
…show more content…
Rana. “The ends justify the means”, is basically the mantra he was living by. It didn’t matter if he cut a few corners in the development of the factory, or that he was putting his employees at risk. All that mattered was the outcome, the money. He was maximizing profit. Unfortunately companies have found ways to cut corners since the beginning of time. There would be no way to uphold the rules, especially if you have people like Mr. Rana, paying off officials to “look the other way”.
Deontological view: It would be the “duty” of each company to come up with the BEST standards of safety for their factories in order to fulfill this approach. Morally driven, there would be no greed, or cutting corners. It would be the obligation of the companies to hold the safety of their employees to the highest standard.
Virtue Ethics view: Someone with who practices virtue ethics, would achieve this approach with ease. Each company has the freedom to decide on their own safety regulations all while keeping their personal integrity intact. It would be a good judge of character for those deciding upon the safety regulations to see the lengths that the companies will go to, to keep their employees safe and
Retrieved May 6, 2014, from International Labour Organization: http://www.ilo.org/safework_bookshelf/english?content&nd=857170498 Greenwald, J. (2011). The 'Secondary' of the 'Secondary' of the 'Secondary' of the 'Secondary' of the 'Secondary' of the 'Secondary' of the 'Secondary' of the 'Secondary' of the Triangle Shirtwaist fire brought safety changes. Business Insurance, 45(11), 1-18. Retrieved April 22, 2014, from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=59700942&site=ehost-live&scope=site Greer, M. E. (2001, October). 90 Years of Progress in Safety.
...being held accountable, the city officials themselves were also held accountable because of improper safety regulations. Showing that the city itself should be at fault for not enforcing safety regulations for such things as fire escapes, that were not in working order. These unprecedented circumstances just lay down the blueprint for what is now the correct way to set regulations for industrial factory conditions.
When it comes to safety most people think they are safe, and they have a true understanding on how to work safe. Human nature prevents us from harming ourselves. Our instincts help protect us from harm. Yet everyday there are injuries and deaths across the world due to being unsafe. What causes people to work unsafe is one of the main challenges that face all Safety Managers across the world.
This specific situation can analyzed to any extent that it allows. Theories and ethics can be applied to any problem but it goes to show that one must apply them carefully and orderly.
The documentary strived to show us how factories were corrupt that they couldn’t provide good working conditions for the workers until we lost people. This documentary is about the tragic fire that took place on March 25, 1911 in the Triangle factory. We can clearly see through this documentary that these people didn’t matter to the factory owners because their needs were not met. The documentary shows that the year before the fire took place the workers led a strike asking for better working conditions, but obviously their voices were not heard. After the fire took place this is when factories started improving working conditions. It is sad to learn that it took 146 lives of innocent people in order for factory owners to be convinced that they need to improve the poor working
The factory workers are stuck in a complicated position where they are taken advantage of and exploited. While “exploitation occurs on any level” these factory workers do not have the opportunity to exploit others because they are the ones being exploited (Timmerman 7). Tension is created between the corporations, factory owners and workers, because the factory owners force the workers into harsh labor and intense working conditions that they were told
The injustice that transpires within these workspaces evoke disparate responses from concerned citizens. From reading Bob Jeffcott’s article “Sweat, Fire, and Ethics,” the reader is challenged to urge their governments and educational institutions to condemn the exercise of exploitation of sweatshops be demanding evidence of improvements in working conditions. In Jeffrey D. Sachs excerpt “Bangladesh: On the Ladder of Development,” the working conditions of the women factory workers in Bangladesh is revealed yet the reader is persuaded to support these sweatshops because it is the only opportunity that these women have to gain a better life for themselves and their families. Upon reading both pieces, it is evident that sweatshops do not necessarily need to end completely, yet the business strategies employed within these facilities that negatively affect the workers must be monitored and addressed by the government in order for these companies to abandon labor
The documentary effectively utilizes a logos and pathos approach to highlight the unsafe working conditions of the Bangladeshi garment workers. The positive aspect of this documentary is the firsthand accounts of the hazardous conditions and the focus on what has been done to better the situation, and where the large retailers are still lacking in their ethical responsibility to ensure safe workspace. Thus, CBC’s documentary is an educational piece that brings forth the current state of the Bangladesh garment factory after Rana Plaza, and implores for heightened responsibility from the government and the retailers in
They’re a lot of cattle anyway.” This reflects negatively on the neglect and passivity of factory owners and inspectors because of their unwillingness to protect the safety and wellbeing of factory owners.Within the same document, it Mr. H.F.J Porter mentioned that “There are only two or three factories in the city where fire drills are in use. In some of them where I have installed the system myself, the owners have discontinued it.” This is yet again another example of how neglectful factory regulators can be to employees and that they pay little attention to their health just to earn money in an easier but cruel way. Employees on the other hand, form unions to rebel against poor conditions, low pay, and long work hours. The employees also went on strike. They knew that they needed to prevent themselves and other employees from falling into the trap of harsh conditions of factories. The owners eventually raised their pay and shortened hours, but did not improve the working conditions of the
We have been investigating the Bangladesh factory fire that occurred on November 24, 2012 and have found that managers had exits blocked, doors locked, and refused to let workers escape the factory after the fire alarms began due to a deadline they had for a big order. This big order was partially for Walmart, who claims Tazreen was no longer supplying to them at the time of the fire. Also, the fire hydrants at the factory were not working properly and the factory did not have proper equipment to fight or prevent a fire. This nine-story building was only authorized to be a three-story building. Fire drills were performed in the factory during lunchtime, which is the majority of the workers were outside. The managers did this to avoid cutting into work time. During this fire on November 24, 2012, many died and many were injured. Some had no other choice than to jump out of windows. All the people who are injured and all the families that lost loved ones are not receiving any compensation. Some have to sell their belongings. Many of them cannot afford medical care and can no longer work due to injuries (“Human Rights Watch,” 2014). Now, we need to take action and talk to Tazreen’s consumer companies to hopefully reach agreements and get both sides of the story. We also ne...
Not only is the pay and work hours bad, the jobs are dangerous too. One man lost two of his fingers in a machine and after being taken to the hospital, his boss furious for having to pay for the bill, is expected to go back to work in excruciating pain to pay off the medical bill (Lee-Potter 2007). In a Chinese sweatshop in Italy a fire broke out and killed 7 people. Because of all the dust and fabric on the floor, the fire spread quickly trapping workers inside due to iron bars on windows to keep them in (Aloisi 2013). The reason for those 7 workers to still be at the factory is that they were sleeping in “cardboard cubicles” (Aloisi 2013). Most workers cannot afford to have homes outside of the factories and sleep where they work. When factories are shut down, its inhabitants are
Management has to comply with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s regulations, or risk getting fined. There are many cases where companies try to cut costs, violate rules made by OSHA, and hide any unsafe conditions or ask their employees to lie about it. Putting employees in danger to make a greater profit goes against their corporate responsibility and makes their company lack integrity. Upper level management should make policies against using unsafe practices and lower level management lying about work conditions. They should also promote that employees report unsafe conditions to management and not penalize employees for “whistle-blowing”. Johnson & Johnson’s credo states, “…working conditions [must be] clean, orderly, and safe” (Code of Business Conduct, 2015). Johnson & Johnson implemented a variety of programs to make sure their employees are safe within the workplace including: machine, electrical, contractor, warehouse, and office safety, hazardous processes, and fall prevention (Workplace Safety, 2013). Johnson & Johnson works to reduce their workplace injuries each year and even gets employees and their families to help come up with new programs to further reduce unsafe situations in the workplace. All this contributes to why Johnson &
Bangladesh has been working to improve its country because it is one of the poorest ones in the world (Islam, 1992). It is one the world’s most densely populated countries with 161 million people. Forty-three percent of the people there still live there and it till has one of the highest prevalence of child malnutrition in the world at 41% (Bangladesh, n.d.)). Foreign aid has been given to the country to try and help get them out of poverty. From the period of 1971 to 2012, Bangladesh received about $56.5 billion in foreign aid (Hossain, 2014). The annual flow ranges from $1.0 billion to $1.5 billion (Quibria, 2010). The United States contributes about 6.29% of the foreign assistance to Bangladesh as bilateral donors (Hossain, 2014).
Although workplace accidents are very common, the majority of them can be prevented. As a company, you are obliged by the law to protect your employees, so it is important to take the necessary actions that will minimize the risk of accidents (Intelligent HQ, 2015).
In the early 1900s industrial accidents were commonplace in this country; for example, in 1907 over 3,200 people were killed in mining accidents. At this time legislation and public opinion all favored management. There were few protections for the worker's safety. Today's industrial employees are better off than their colleagues in the past. Their chances of being killed in an industrial accident are less than half of that of their predecessors of 60 years ago. According to National safety Council (NSC), the current death rate from work-related injuries is approximately 4 per 100,000, or less than a third of the rate of 50 years ago. Improvements in safety up to now have been the result of pressure for legislation to promote health and safety, the steadily increasing cost associated with accidents and injuries, and the professionalization of safety as an occupation. When the industrial sector began to grow in the United States, hazardous working conditions were commonplace. Following the Civil War, the seeds of the safety movement were sown in this country. Factory inspection was introduced in Massachusetts in 1867. In 1868 the first barrier safeguard was patented. In 1869 the Pennsylvania legislature passed a mine safety law requiring two exits from all mines. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) was established in 1869 to study industrial accidents and report pertinent information about hose accidents. The following decade saw little progress in the safety movement until 1877, when the Massachusetts legislature passed a law requiring safeguards for hazardous machinery. In 1877 the Employers' Liability Law was passed. In 1892, the first safety program was established in a steel plant in Illinois, in response to the explosion of a flywheel in that company.