Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Challenges caused by immigrants
Sweatshop practices and the effects
Sweatshop practices and the effects
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Challenges caused by immigrants
Sweatshop Abuse and MIT’s Prospective Actions in Pursuit of International Labor Justice
The term “sweatshop” refers to those factories relying on the exploitation and abuse of workers. Often (although not always) located in developing countries, these factories have been frequented by independent university researchers, who have published numerous accounts of worker imprisonment and physical abuse, as well as economic evidence revealing that many of these factories pay wages so small that their workers cannot live outside poverty. Several factories use horrific labor practices, and many factory workers have also been severely burned or mutilated in the workplace, while women among the labor population have often been forced to take birth control or abort their pregnancies (Given, 1997; Fernandez, 1997). The health burdens placed upon sweatshop workers have been extensively documented, and include exposure to noxious fumes, organophosphate compounds, and silica dust, resulting in record high cancer, asthma, bronchitis, pneumoconiosis, and leukemia rates in many regions because workers aren’t provided with masks and gloves (Kim et al., 2000).
These abuses are neither just nor irreconcilable, but many people believe that sweatshops are an economic necessity and will come to pass on their own with economic development. Closer examination of both the social and economic dimensions of sweatshop labor, however, reveals this presumption to be far from the truth.
Most objections to anti-sweatshop action stem from the idea that sweatshop jobs are the best opportunities available to people living in poor conditions. “They keep coming back day after day, so they must want these jobs.” Trying to make the jobs better will simply me...
... middle of paper ...
..., February). Sweat Shop Workers Struggle in New York’s Chinatown. Z Magazine.
Kim, Jim Yong et al. (2000). Dying for Growth: Global Inequality and the Health of the Poor. Cambridge: Common Courage Press.
Meyer, Karl (1997, June 28). Editorial Notebook. The New York Times.
Mort, Jo-Ann. (1996, Fall). Immigrant Dreams: Sweatshop Workers Speak. Dissent.
Richburg, Keith B. & Swardson, Anne. (1996, August 5-11). Sweatshops or Economic Development? Washington Post National Weekly Edition.
Rosen, Sonia A., Jaffe, Maurren, & Perez-Lopez, Jorge. (1997). The Apparel Industry and Codes of Conduct: A Solution to the International Child Labor Problems. Upland, PA: Diane.
Ross, Andrew. (1997). No Sweat: Fashion, Free Trade, and the Rights of Garment Workers. New York: Verso.
Salomon, Larry. (1996, September/October). Sweatshops in the Spotlight. Third Force.
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. We can’t control and tell what you can buy or what you can’t because that’s up to the person...
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.
He inquires, “Isn’t it a little presumptuous of us to think that we can end sweatshop abuses by just changing our individual buying habits?” (“Sweat, Fire, and Ethics). As Jeffcott provides the reader with the entirety of the background information on the Fairtrade-certification, he enables the reader to realize what really needs to be done in order to end the use of sweatshops. Another ineffective strategy that Jeffcott mentions is when society attempts to exert the guilt towards large brand name companies, as these companies only address these issues to the extent which it will not affect their productivity. Jeffcott explains that, “Conflicting pressures make suppliers hide abuses or subcontract to sewing workshops...The name of the game remains the same: more work for less pay” (“Sweat, Fire, and Ethics”). By clarifying how ineffective people’s current efforts are in influencing the abuse in sweatshops, Jeffcott challenges the reader to assess if their own efforts are sufficient for the cause. Jeffcott then concludes his argument by proposing to the reader to exceed traditional means of resistance to sweatshops by urging the government to intervene on these reprehensible practices, and perhaps then a solution may be achieved. Contrarily, Jeffrey D. Sachs argues in his excerpt “Bangladesh: On the Ladder of Development,” that despite the injustice that
The belief that the archaic-like prisons known as sweatshops have been abolished, has been proven false. They do, in fact, exist in not only foreign countries but also in America. The abuse of human rights is demonstrated as more than half the 22, 000 garment contractors in the United States don't pay workers minimum wage, according to the Labor Department, and working conditions are deplorable...Americans were horrified to learn last August of 72 Thai laborers imprisoned in El Monte, Near Los Angeles, who were forced to work up to 22 hours a day, seven days a week at $1.60 an hour" (Yeh).
As a major contributor to the global economy, Mexico’s sweatshops have contributed to the United States’ wealth and economic growth. It is the unfortunate truth that many individual workers have suffered as a result of this prosperity. The sweatshops, known as maquiladoras, are in debate because of the ethical and lawful reasoning behind their existence and conditions. How can we, as a First-world nation, allow such industries to exist where people are denied basic and fundamental human rights? What, if any, laws and regulations are put into place for the maquiladoras? Are these laws and regulations hindering, harmful, or helpful? Are they enforced emphatically? If not, how does this affect development? After finding an answer to the first question, I began to realize why it is so important to answer the latter questions. As a First-world nation, we allow such industries to exist because as consumer-citizens, we benefit greatly from such industries as the maquiladoras. Subsequently, it is imperative that individuals understand the point of views of the Mexican and United States Governments on such industries and what is being done, or not being done, to stop or prevent the existence and growth of the maquiladoras. From the stance within a pro-worker discourse, the conditions in the maquiladoras are dangerous, hazardous, and harmful to the safety, well-being, happiness, and development of these workers- the majority of whom are female.
Kirk, John A. "Crisis at Central High." History Today (London, England) Vol. 57, No. 9. Sept. 2007: 23-30. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 24 Apr. 2014.
When people think of a sweatshop, images of people assembling items in a hot and crowded factory somewhere in a “Third World” country tend to come to mind. However, the first few sweatshops were located in both New York and England, becoming established in the late 1800’s. The term “sweatshop” originated from the term “sweating”, which described the contractual agreements between workers and designers to produce clothing. In these workshops, there was a “sweater”, an individual who monitored garment making (“Origins Of Sweatshops”, 2017). The term sweatshop is more so currently used to describe the working conditions rather than the type of workplace itself. Even back then, these workplaces were unsanitary, were sources of safety hazards and extremely crowded. Throughout the years, poor people and immigrants filled up the sweatshops in desperate search for work. This eventually spread beyond the United States and U.K., and became a commonplace practice in developing countries ruled by dictators. With this spread quickly came the employment of child workers, especially in places such as Indonesia, and India. Like the adults, they are subject to treatment that violates their human rights. They are left without protection from any other adults, making them more susceptible to abuse. Despite this, major corporations and brands such as Wal-Mart, Adidas, Aldo, Victoria’s Secret, Urban Outfitters and so on use sweatshops for affordable labor. One of the more prominent cases is the incident involving Kathy Lee Gifford and Wal-Mart, in which both Gifford and Wal-Mart “suffered as a result of the negative press surrounding the manufacturing of Gifford’s clothing line distributed by Wal-Mart” (Radin & Calkins). Gifford’s clothing was produced in a factory in Honduras, where female workers constantly suffered “cruel and inhumane treatment” (Radin &
...ce on a journey to sweatshop factories and the lives of an everyday garment worker. Labor laws need to be enforced. The people should help, and the owners need to be more respectful. Laws should be created to protect the workers, sweatshop conditions should be improved, and workers need to speak up for themselves.
Sweatshops may be viewed by many as unethical, however, they hold lots of valuable potential like providing thousands of people with jobs that pay higher than others offered in their country. Sweatshops also provide economic growth by companies investing in underdeveloped countries by building factories and providing income to people which help the economy expand. Many protesters try to end sweatshops but it will do more harm than good. For example, laying off thousands of people from their jobs would keep the world poverty even lower. Unfortunately, we cannot overlook the fact that some sweatshops do pose a threat to the lives and health of the employees but overall the dangers of working in a sweatshop are the best option many will have as opposed to other more dangerous jobs or no job at all. Sweatshops factories may seem unethical and immoral but it provides more good than people seem to
“I am, somehow, less interested in the weight, and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived, and died in cotton fields, and sweatshops.”- Stephen Jay Gould. Sweatshops exploit people, and children. They take advantage of their poverty, and there need, for a better life. Sweatshops are one of the worst things that ever happened to the business world, and poor people around the world. Sweatshops should be stopped, and ended.
From the perspective of a business owner, sweatshops are lucrative since they exploit on low-wage labor in developing countries which leads to significantly lower business cost and in turn increase profit margins. Although many major clothing and footwear companies, have been linked to sweatshops, brands such as Gap, Nike, and so on , have all been guilty of numerous violations of reasonable working conditions in their production facilities in most parts of Asia. All of their headquarters and customer bases are located in the developing world, while the manufacturing and production processes are executed in developing countries(mostly Asia). Although majority of people believe that sweat shops are clothing companies, the rise of the digital and...
Imagine a worker receiving their paycheck after excruciating hours of hard labor and discovering that they have only made enough for their rent. This is an event that is repeatedly lived and witnessed by those who work in sweatshops. Globally sweatshops, which are factories in which workers are paid low wages for extensive hours, have been seen as a nightmare which is justified. Sweatshops are the industrialized slave labor with abuse, exploitation, and government neglect.The only way to confront this practice is awareness.
Powell, B., & Skarbek, D. B. (2004, September 27). Sweatshops and Third World Living Standards: Are the Jobs Worth the Sweat? . In The Independent Institute. Retrieved June 5, 2011, from http://www.independent.org/publications/working_papers/article.asp?id=1369