Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Negative Impact Of Child Labor
Analysis about sweatshops
Case study on child labor and sweatshops
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Negative Impact Of Child Labor
Sweatshops are factories where workers are working in unsafe conditions, work long hours, and get paid very little. We should boycott sweatshop made products because they are unethical. The conditions that the employees have to work in are harsh and violates multiple human right laws. In the BBC news video it said that employees had to work about 60 hours a week in an Apple factory. Apple says when employees are being hired they are given a ‘choice’ if they want to work nights or work standing up, but the undercover reporter they had went to apply for a job at the factory and they were told to not check off the options that say unwilling. This violates articles 23 and 24 of the UDHR. Another reason is that these people working in sweatshops are paid way less than minimum wage while they’re doing more work than the …show more content…
In “The power of protest” article it states that “...Walt Disney's Chinese factory employees work 16-hour days, 7 days a week, for wages as low as 12-1/2 cents an hour.”. This means that not only do these employees have to work in unsafe conditions for 112 hours a week, but they only make about $56 dollars, minimum, in a week. Plus the big companies hiring these workers are extremely wealthy and can pay the workers more, but choose not to. The final reason is that It should be our right as consumers to let big companies know this is wrong. It’s unethical that children and young adults are being put to work for big companies in below average conditions for many hours and only making a few cents per hour. We can stop this by boycotting companies who use sweatshops, forcing them to fix the working time, wage, and safety issues in these factories if
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.
Some of the arguments against sweatshops raised by Americans is the they take jobs away from the American people. In the job force it is becoming harder to find an open position any where. Instead of keeping the factories here the companies are shipped over seas, causing millions of job opportunities for Americans to be lost. Some arguments raised by the United Students Against Sweatshops (USAS) are the poor working conditions, low wages, long hours, and children in the factories. The damp, dark, and cold environment can depress the workers even more than they may be, causing rates in suicide to increase. Low wages is another concern USAS have. The workers barley get enough money to survive.
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.
...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.
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
Various groups support or embody the anti-sweatshop movement today. The National Labor Committee brought sweatshops into the mainstream media in the 1990s when it exposed the use of sweatshop and child labor to sew Kathie Lee Gifford's Wal-Mart label. United Students Against Sweatshops is active on college campuses. The International Labor Rights Fund filed a lawsuit[20] on behalf of workers in China, Nicaragua, Swaziland, Indonesia, and Bangladesh against Wal-Mart charging the company with knowingly developing purchasing policies particularly relating to price and delivery time that are impossible to meet while following the Wal-Mart code of conduct. Labor unions, such as the AFL-CIO, have helped support the anti-sweatshop movement out of concern both for the welfare of people in the developing world and that companies will move jobs from the United States elsewhere in order to capitalize on lower costs. For example, the American labor union UNITE HERE, which represents garment workers, has only approximately 3,000 garment workers remaining in its base, because some of the larger garment making operations have already been transferred o...
The lack of ethics concerning global issues can be found in the sweatshops of underdeveloped and third world countries. This issue has developed from the indiscretion of industries and employers. Industries treat their employees poorly; moreover, employees are subjected to extremely poor working conditions, poverty wages, and little to no benefits or union representation. The competition of industries has created these oppressive practices. According to research done by Jay Mandle at Cambridge, in countries such as Bangladesh, sweatshop workers are paid only 13 cents per hour in US money. These workers are subjected to extremely overpopulated sweatshops, being that an astounding 3.5 million workers make up the workforce of 4,825
Some companies have made strides in abolishing sweatshops in their business. Fruit of the Loom is one of those companies taking the strides. They are “the fourth college-logo apparel company to sign the Bangladesh Safety Accord, an agreement between unions and brands that will transform the Bangladesh garment industry from deathtraps to safe work places” (Fruit of the Loom). Adidas is another company who signed the same deal. Even though Fruit of the Loom is no Gucci or Prada, hopefully people will start to realize that some companies are taking the extra step to help people while others are merely taking advantage of those less fortunate.
In the article, “Where Sweatshops Are a Dream,” Nicholas Kristof describes the dumps in Cambodia, “The miasma of toxic stink leaves you gasping, breezes batter you with filth, and even the rats look forlorn” (Kristof). This garbage dump is where many people in Phnom Penh, Cambodia are forced to scrap together a living. When compared to life in a dump, sweatshops are actually considered safe and clean. Kristof goes on to explain the local view of sweatshop work as, “[A] cherished dream... the kind of gauzy if probably unrealistic ambition that parents everywhere often have for their children” (Kristof). The second important thing to note is that people are not forced to work at a sweatshop. This fact alone implies that a factory job is no where near the worst working situation. As Matt Zwolinski points out in “Sweatshops, Choice, and Exploitation” published by Business Ethics Quarterly, “For the most part, individuals who work in sweatshops choose to do so. They might not like working in sweatshops, and they might strongly desire that... they did not have to do so. Nevertheless, the fact that they choose to work in sweatshops is morally significant” (Zwolinski 2). One of the major reasons people believe sweatshops are harmful is because they pay very little for grueling labor. From the perspective of most Americans, the equivalent of two dollars a day seems cruel, but when compared
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
Apple is a company facing a lot of ethical dilemmas. Since it is such a large and rapidly growing company, they face a lot of scrutiny from the media. Apple also faces a lot of pressure to be competitive in the technology market. As a result of this, companies tend to cut costs in as many ways as possible, some of which aren’t always ethical. One of the most typical ways businesses cut costs is by lowering production costs, which entails outsourcing for cheap labor. However, in order for labor to be made cheaper many sacrifices have to be made, which tend to be forced upon the workers by lowering wages, making working conditions unfavorable, and often by employing child labor.
In this system, a powerful country such as the U.S., negotiates trade agreements with poorer developing countries" (women and sweatshop labor, 2014). While both offering money and jobs this type of work degrades the employee, and if the speak up the get fired, sweatshop workers (and any low wage worker in general) are easily replaceable so they tend to keep their heads down and do the work. “On a global scale, the reign of free market ideology has wrought deep changes. Manufacturing jobs in the developed nations are rapidly shrinking while abroad there has been a rise in sweatshop manufacturing, with conditions reminiscent of the worst of the 19th century. The effect has been to widen the gap between the living conditions of the wealthy and those who labor for them.”
These concerns typically include the rights of the children, the responsibility of the parents and employers, and the well-being and safety of the children. In Stefan Spath’s “The Virtues of Sweatshops,” it is made very clear that he, like many others, feel that the general public is highly misinformed on what sweatshops are and what they actually contribute to their respective communities. In the eyes of someone from a developed country, sweatshops and child labor that takes place in them seem primitive and are interpreted as simply a means by which companies can spend less money on employers. He states that when labor unions claim that companies which establish operations in developing nations create unemployment in America, they aren’t really explaining the whole story. The author claims that those who are adamantly protest sweatshops are only telling half the story with a claim like this. He points out in this part that the American people can rest assured that high skilled jobs will not be taken over to developing countries because “– high-skilled jobs require a level of worker education and skills that poorer countries cannot