Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Sweatshop practices and the effects
Influence of multinational companies on developing countries
Impact of multinational corporations
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Sweatshop practices and the effects
Where were your shoes produced? What do you think about sweatshops? I live in the United State where most of the things are not produced locally nowadays. Even though the famous known brand Apple is designed in California, but produced in China. Do you think that they produced from a sweatshop? In today’s world, Multinational Corporation is important which can benefit both developed country and developing country. The developed countries can make more profits by reduce labor and resources cost, and also developing countries can get more job opportunities in order to improve to a better lifestyle. “My point is that bad as sweatshops are, the alternatives are worse. They are more dangerous, lower paying and more degrading. And when I struggle to think how we can really make a big difference in the development of the poorest countries, the key always seems to be manufacturing.” People argue that whether the multinational factories benefit the developing countries or not, how to help the poor countries. Although multinational factories in developing countries are sometimes overweight the cost that workers work in a unsafe-working condition, people from developing countries still prefer to work in a factory because they can have better benefits than working outside.
Working in a “sweatshop” can lead the workers in dangers because they are working in a unsafe-working condition. Sweatshops have been constructed many buildings illegally without permit in order to make some more profits. However, it will bring some safety problems if the building has been built illegally which can get hurt or even get killed from an emergency. For example, according to Manik and Yardley’s article “Building Collapse in Bangladesh Leaves Scores Dea...
... middle of paper ...
... multinationals.
In conclusion, the example I provide have been proved that actually the multinationals are benefit the developing countries even thought they have something not too good, but in the long run, the developing countries will getting stronger. Sweatshops are actually better than alternative for developing countries, which can only work in the fields. Therefore, they want to work in a “sweatshop” instead of farming because of getting more money and working indoor. It also puts them in a higher-level lifestyle since they can earn morn money. “Sweatshops” are doing something to help the developing countries because they are providing jobs that pay better than other opportunities, and they are building economic development that has the potential to offer better living supplies. Do you still think “sweatshop” is bad, inhumane for developing countries?
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.
Is it only a sweatshop to earn more money for the multinational company? Second, what is the present status of workers in developing countries? Then the most important one is the wages that multinational companies pay employees and the multinational companies’ relationship with workers in developing countries.
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
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.
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.
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
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?
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
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
Most sweatshops have been known to be unlawful, but yet it doesn’t stop them to still be around today. Workers working in sweatshops are known to be getting paid small amount of money while working long tiring shifts, sometimes without being allowed to take a break. Many corporations have their products produce in third-world countries such as Guatemala, Pakistan, Vietnam, etc. where it costs them less to produce goods since they are paying their workers almost nothing. It is believed that it
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.
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 .