Scanning the conforming, ephemeral trendy masses, a large percent of the attire donned by the populace is made by cheap labor under horrible conditions. Many of the stores that fill malls and line streets are stocked with morally tainted products. Various popular brand names and stores use sweat shops as a means of production to maintain a low manufacturing cost, and reap a higher profit. Not only do these socially irresponsible conglomerates exist, they thrive on the blinded, and complacent materialistic society. Outfitting popular sports teams, and celebrities, these businesses have immense control, and take a big part in not only the fashion industry, but foreign affairs, as well. Although providing labor to third world countries may at first seem acceptable, the circumstances under which these sweatshops run are not. There are lists of rules by the United Nations, that outline the requirements a corporation must meet to be a socially responsible company. There are many companies that are popular today, however, that don’t meet the criteria stipulated by the UN, and fall in the “sweatshop” category.
Hoards of people, distracted by catchy advertising and creative logos, fuel the machine that feeds on exploiting human beings. Addidas, Nike, Banana Republic, all just a few of the brand names that encroach on poverty stricken countries and exploit the people there. As a country, society contributes to the oppressi...
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.
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).
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). In my paper, I will utilize the book Where Am I Wearing? by Kelsey Timmerman and the textbook Cultural Anthropology: A Toolkit for a Global Age by Kenneth J. Guest to examine globalization in the context of the clothing industry.
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
Social responsibility is largely impacting today’s businesses, so this would lead one to believe that ethical issues in the supply chain of companies are no longer prevalent. This, however, is not the case. Even within the last five years, there are still social responsibility issues being reported. One recent example involves Patagonia, the outdoor, clothing and gear store and their supplier, VT Garment. In June of 2015, it was disclosed that Patagonia’s suppliers were involved in “erogenous employment practices, such as debt bondage” about three years ago (O’Connor, July 2015). The Taiwanese mills that supply the textile fabric to the sewing factories for Patagonia are being operated through forced labor. Debt bondage occurs when “brokers charge workers high fees to arrange for their work and promise an inflated salary, but once they start working, workers are paid even less and loan interest piles on” (“Factory Synopsis”). The workers are trapped in these mills attempting to pay off a debt that will never be reduced.
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.
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
“Sweatshops Are the Norm in the Global Apparel Industry. We’re Standing up to Change That.” International Labor Rights Forum. N.p., n.d. Web. 6 Feb. 2014. .
Materialistic things consume today’s society, whether it is cars, clothing, or jewelry, in a sense we rely on these objects for our happiness. Companies such as Nike, Gap, and Toms, have all had major success do to their loyal customers, who seek the name brand logo of their company. These companies have continued to grow tremendously, making billions of dollars; the companies strive to find ways to outsourcing its manufacturing, in hopes of making more and more profit. Profit is not the only thing that rises, many questions and investigations have occurred, exposing the poor ethical choices these businesses have made. Nike, one of the most well- known and profitable companies have experienced this heavy scrutiny first hand. Throughout this essay the reader will gain a better understanding of Nike’s poor ethical business decisions and what actions they took in order to repair their image.
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.
It has become impossible to avoid marketing and branding. Everywhere a consumer turns, they are being persuaded and influenced by all sorts of symbols, logos, slogans etc. These aspects of a brand create the culture we live in. “The effect, if not always the original intent, of advanced branding is to nudge the hosting culture into the background and make the brand the star. It is not to sponsor culture but to be the culture.” 30 no logo. Humanity has become one large sponsored event, making it impossible in order to escape.
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.
A stark comparison to that of American fashion companies like that of American Apparel who would seem bypass the same established laws in society with clever marketing loopholes. It has been detected, that even though American Apparel has a diluted image in European markets due to advertising regulation. They’re image and style is still being broadcast like a parasite across social media, which has no such regulations and social boundaries. Resulting in European markets being tainted by their ever growing brand. The analysis results from the research have enlightened the author the need to inform our generation to the fact our social idealizations are being raped by corporate greed.
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.
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.