Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Negative impacts of fashion on sweatshop workers
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Negative impacts of fashion on sweatshop workers
When shopping the average consumer does not look beyond the physical product, ignoring the production process or considering what went into the creation of the product. Forever 21 is one of the world’s leading clothing stores, with it’s headquaters in Los Angeles, CA, it is considered the fifth largest retailer in the United States making $4.4 billion in revenues (projectjust.com). As of 2015, they had 723 locations, the company employs over 30,000 people (ProjectJust.com). Forever 21 is known for their inexpensive clothing attracting a wide range of consumers, however, what is not as well known is the process they goes into their clothing. To keep their prices low, Forever 21 buys their supplies from sweatshops, home and abroad. Forever …show more content…
The United States Labor department has been called in to investigate on more than one occasion based on claims of unfair working conditions. However, Forever 21 does not directly employ the workers in the factory, as a result they are able to avoid sort of penalty. The Labor Department is only able to penalize a company for breaking labor regulations when the company directly employs the workers (http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-wage-theft-forever-ross-20161116-story.html ). While Forever 21 does not directly employ the factory workers, their business supports and keeps the factories running. Without Forever 21 constantly buying from these factories, they would not be …show more content…
Their main audience is a younger audience from early teens to college age. These consumers are looking for the lowest prices and are willing to overlook the quality of the clothes because of that. Under Friedman Forever 21’s action are justified because the company is working to make the maximum profits by buying from these sweatshop factories. Conversely, Freeman would not justify Forever 21’s actions as a result of the low value of the product. The product is not only made from cheap products to increase profits but it is made from sweatshops and child labor driving the value to almost nothing. Moreover, Kant would also not be able to justify Forever 21’s actions. Kant believes that all people should be seen as equal by preying on the desperation of the immigrants and not paying fair wages the factories are diminishing their value as a human being. They are saying that they are not worth fair treatment or wages. In the end Forever 21 is a business, they are working to make money. By looking at their target age group and the fact that affordable prices keep the customers coming back it begs the question of if Forever 21 would be able to survive without buying from these sweatshop factories. If they were to buy from an ethical and fair factories their prices would begin to rise. The company would begin to lose their trademark of
Nordstrom and Nordstrom Rack are different retail operations in terms of their choice, pricing, store service, and store atmosphere customer intimate firms, which excel in serving the specific needs of the individual customer well. There is less emphasis on efficiency, which is sacrificed for giving more precisely what is wanted by the customer. Reliability is also stressed. Nordstrom is an example of this discipline. Nordstrom must meet some standards of cost-effectiveness. When customers evaluate the quality of a product, they commonly measure it against two kinds of attributes: those related to quality as excellence and those related to the quality of reliability. From a quality as excellence perspective, the important qualities are things such as a product’s design and styling, its aesthetic appeal, its features and functions, the level of service associated with the delivery of the product,
The other problem people face with many other online clothing retailers is the inconvenience caused if they need to return a product. With our service, the customer does not pay the price for the product and has considerable amount of time to come to a decision as to whether or not to buy the product. This removes any remaining doubt in the customer’s mind and increases customer confidence levels.
When you go to the mall to pick up a pair of jeans or a shirt, do you think about where they came from? How they were made? Who made them? Most consumers are unaware of where their clothes are coming from. All the consumer is responsible for is buying the clothing from the store and most likely have little to no knowledge about how it was manufactured, transported, or even who made the clothing item and the amount of intensive labor that went into producing it (Timmerman, 3).
J. Crew, also known as J. Crew Group Inc., is a private label company known for its preppy fashions that are fashionable yet costly. Essentially, the company was owned by the Cinader family for most of its history. Mitchell Cinader and Saul Charles founded the company in 1947. It was originally known as Popular Merchandise Inc. doing business as the Popular Club Plan, in which Mitchell’s son Arthur was the overseer. The company sold women’s clothing through in-home demonstrations. In the early 1980’s, Cinader and Charles observed catalog retailers such as Land’s End, Talbots and L.L. Bean reporting rising sales in revenue. With intentions to increase sales and duplicate success of these well known companies, Popular Club Plan began its own catalog (http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/j-crew-group-inc-history/).
Topman already has more than 309 fashion stores nationwide with another 50 stores outside the United Kingdom division. Topman boasts the worlds largest fashion store in London with over 200,000 shoppers per week, Topman gets twice deliveries per day and 7,000 looks per season. In the year 2006, Topman’s operating profit hits 110 million with its annual sales of 600 million now. It brings a strong brand image of Topman based on the successful achievement to consumer’s mindset. Strong brand image builds confidence and reliability towards Topman’s product. In a nutshell, expending Topman’s market in Vietnam has a strong potential to gain sustainable profit.
Jane Collins is currently a professor of rural sociology and women’s studies at the University of Wisconsin. She also has published a number of books and articles related to the apparel industry. Collins brought a great deal of knowledge to the writing of this book through her childhood experiences growing up in Virginia and her more then thirty years of research experience in Latin America. However, it could be said that having such extensive experience and narrowed knowledge of the industry may have affected the direction and perspectives found in this book.
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
Many people in our society today are constantly asking, "Why do sweatshops exist?" The answer to this question is that companies like Nike and Wal-Mart use sweatshops to produce their goods for a much cheaper rate, to reduce the cost of their products. The problem with sweatshops is that the workers are subject to hard work in often times poor conditions for minimal pay. But although many people may condemn sweatshops, there are some advantages that many people overlook when arguing against sweatshops and their practices.
Offering special products is marked under strengths and opportunity; however, long term sustainability must ease the weaknesses and threats posed by competitors and external markets forces. However, they are several other strengths of this company that outweigh the weaknesses but can easily be threatened. Lululemon has a great brand equity and knowledge in the market which has helped them development a customer loyalty. While Lululemon’s strengths is challenging, limiting their products to a special market, with higher than normal prices opens the markets for competitors. Lululemon has several weaknesses, they only offer a specialty product and it mostly aimed to attract woman. The company’s profitability has decreased over the recent years, showing the necessity for Lululemon to sustain its economic growth through product diversification and geographical expansion. Many of their competitors have grown, mostly likely due to their global growth and divarication. If Lululemon would expand their market growth this would open up so much more opportunity for this company to grow. One of their weaknesses is there is the dependence on suppliers. This opens a great opportunity for Lululemon, right now they are heavily relying on suppliers around the world and they do not have their own manufacturing facilities. This is causing the company to spend more money of vendors to
Across the globe, an estimated 168 million children from developing countries employed in sweatshops.(Rogue) Sweatshops have become an integral part of U.S business corporations in the modern age. These corporations use the cheap labor of overseas factories to generate massive profit margins in the states, while taking advantage of those in poverty elsewhere. Many large athletic clothing corporations, namely Nike, Adidas, and the Jordan brand, have come under fire for outsourcing a majority of their work overseas. The most common criticism has come from the horrendous conditions and barely any pay. This topic struck home with me not just because it is involved with my field of study in business management, but also because of how it affects me as a consumer of such products. My ethical question is “should businesses be forced to maintain certain standards for overseas workers?”. By examining the standards a business should maintain, the ethical dilemma of profit versus
Companies are to blame for the pain that is caused by sweatshops all over the world. The responsibility for ensuring that goods are ethically made lies predominantly on them. Their needs cause the rapid construction of the factories, and they have the final say in how they want the conditions in their factories to be.
The Silverman family first founded American Eagle Outfitters in 1977. They operated specialty clothing stores under the name Retail Ventures. In 1980 the Silverman’s encountered financial troubles when the Schottenstein family bought out 50% of the Retail Ventures. In 1991 the Schottenstein family bought the rest of Retail Ventures and opened 153 American Eagle Outfitters. By late 2000 the company had introduced 46 new stores in Canada. American Eagle had approximately $2 million in annual sales in 2003 and now operates over 800 stores in the United States and Canada (http://www.hoovers.com/american-eagle-outfitters/--ID__17231--/free-co-factsheet.xhtml).
H&M is the world’s second largest retailer, only behind its main rival Zara of Inditex (Petro, 2012). The company currently has 3006 stores in 53 countries. The company does not own any factories. H&M outsources production to network of 800 independent suppliers; 75% in Asia and 25% in Europe. In order to increase the efficiency and productivity of its supply chain, the company strategically locates its network of 20 to 30 production offices close to its suppliers. According to Stockholm Newsroom, the pretax profit of the company for the month of June to August of 2013 is $907 million, which indicates an 11 rise in turnover (Pollard, 2013). The company continuous development plan facilitates its goal for both brick and mortar, and online stores expansion worldwide. The target segments for H&M, a category specialist store, are trendsetters and fashion/money conscious males and females ranging from 16 to 40 years old with income ranging $15,000 to $60,000 annually.
I hope to use this article in essay to support the policy section of my claim. Finding solutions to fast fashion is one of the harder topics to write about, and this article gives good insight to how I can shape the policy portion of my claim. I will bring up the idea of organic cotton, and other sustainable fiber plants, as a way consumers can shop more ethically. This article has broaden my perspective to possible solutions of fast fashion.
In a 1996 congressional testimony, National Labor Committee executive, Charles Kernaghan, led an expose on Kathie Lee Gifford when he revealed “that child laborers in Honduras were making the Gifford clothing line sold at Wal-Mart” (Duke). This realization caused Gifford to dissolve into tears and, over time, use her brand in the fight against corporate practices. For a while, these protestors were able to make a difference as many corporations were began to specify which companies were making their clothes, adopted codes of conduct, and “relied on monitors who visited factories once every three months and conducted random inspections” (Colliver). However, these socially conscious changes aren’t structured “to make factories take better care of their workers. They’re designed to make factories look like they are” (Hobbes). In reality, the factory inspections and audits are essentially, as Hobbes describes it, a “paperwork exercise”, as inspectors usually spend two days maximum at each factory, mostly checking time sheets for shift lengths, birth certificates for child labor, and pay stubs for wages. In addition to this, most manufacturers, particularly those in China and Southeast Asia, are experts in bypassing regulations “by keeping multiple sets of books, hiding cramped