Sweatshops in the Global Economy - Research Paper Example

Sweatshops in the Global Economy Introduction Definitions The 2013 article defines sweatshop as a term that describes a workplace, especially the clothing industry that has working conditions that are not acceptable socially. The work may be dangerous, difficult, or the wages paid are not satisfying. Sweatshop workers may work many hours for a low pay, regardless the overtime law pay. In many cases, the sweatshop conditions are like those of prison. They have characteristics like supervisor terrorization into submission and mandatory pregnancy test for the female employees. Sweatshops also implicate the trafficking of human. It is because some workers are tricked to begin working in the industry without an informed consent. In addition, some of the employees stay at work with mental duress or debt bondage. In most cases, these workers come from the rural or young illiterate children The fact remains that many items we buy from developing nations is manufactured or grown by employees whose rights are being ignored in important ways. For example, fruit grown in Mexico, China cell-phone components and Indian cotton for the shirts are mainly proceeded by these workers who get minimum wages. The workers are exposed to dangerous machinery; hazardous chemicals work overtime, and they are not allowed to negotiate for the changes in the conditions. Therefore should the companies care for the workers working condition and wages to avoid boycotts? A boycott is a voluntary act of abstaining buying, using or dealing with an organization, a person or country and a way to express protest, mostly for political or social reason. It normally considered as a one-time affair that is designed to solve the outstanding problem (Bender & GreenWald 25). It is part of moral purchasing if it extends to a long period or part of the awareness-raising overall program. Therefore, should people practice boycotts? First, boycotting sweatshops is a great business. Not only do the poorly treated employees typically produce poor-quality goods, but also the companies that are no careful on the sweatshops can face a costly job on reputation repair. That is if a group of watchdogs connects their brand to the workplace abuse (Bender & GreenWald 25). Furthermore, desirable employees want to work in companies where they share the values, like how customers want to purchase from firms that place the values into practice. Second, human rights respect leads to economic and social development. Some of the business advocates claim that the standards of labor raise cost and hence, limit the job numbers that might otherwise be there for the poor individuals. On the other hand, fair work is a critical underpinning for the social stability. Businesses that have respect for labor rights place more income to the employee's hands and help them live healthy lives, educate their children buy American brands. Boycotts negative effects. When the sweatshops boycott will have both the company and the workers will suffer from the problem. It is because the company depends from the sales to develop, and the workers depends on the company for their livings. Therefore, there are several effects due to boycotts. The workers will have a poor living. The workers depend on the little amount they got from the company to improve their living. Therefore, once there is a boycott to the company’s products, they will have less income to pay the workers, hence resulting to more poor families in the society. The children of the workers will not have enough education, and they may not have enough income to provide food for them and also good health services. Thus, it can also lead to deaths. Donnelly and Etzel argue that many workers will lose their jobs. Since the company will not do not have enough money to pay all the workers due to reduced supply of their products, it will have to sack some of the workers. For instance, now that there is fewer products supply, there will be a lot of inventories in the store. Hence, the workers who were responsible in producing more inventories will not have any job to do (Donnelly & Etzel 26). Hence, they the company will be forced to sack them from their jobs. Therefore, many workers can end up jobless due to boycotts and also lead to a poor society. The workers who will still be working in the company will have fewer wages. It is due to decreased revenue obtained by the company. Since the company is getting less income as expected or as it used to get before the boycott then, it would cut the worker's payment also to cater for other expenses. Therefore, the workers will be more oppressed since already they used to get small wages under the harsh conditions and yet again they will have a cut in their little salary. The company will lose its reputation. Due to the boycott, the company will be known to its harsh conditioned nature hence investors or other workers cannot associate with it. In addition, its products will not be consumed by the consumers hence posing a loss threat to the company. The company will, therefore, have extra costs to build its reputation. The company can suffer a loss in their production. Since the company has fewer workers then, it will produce less than it used to. Hence, as Powell confirms, there will be less output of products to the consumer (Powell 44). Further, due to the boycott, most people many people refuse purchasing the products hence they will fewer consumers to sell to, making the company get loss. In addition, there will be more inventories in the storage, which some of them can expire hence, leading to loss to the company. Boycotts can lead to extra expenses to the companies. Companies will increase their expenses in order to build their reputation. For example, they will pay the workers more salary than compared to the previous time before the boycott. The companies will also be forced to improve their environment so that workers can have good conditions in their working stations. In order to attract more consumer who would have boycotted or the investors and sponsor, the company will look for a way to improve the quality of their product (Powell 44). The process will obviously cost the company because it can be forced to buy other machines that can make the work easier for the workers and hence, produce good quality products. Alternatives used to end sweatshops boycotts. The consumers can organize locally for the products. They can work throughout the local society to end the sweatshops. For instance, the school board can start a policy of free-sweat purchasing or propose a law of sweatshop-free purchasing in the state or local government. For example, students in U.S were convincing their institutions to purchase items like sporting equipment and uniforms from companies that manage the conditions in the supply chain. In addition, those that guard against workers abuse at every level of production. The consumer can also support the campaign of Co-op America’s Wal-Mart. The Co-op America mostly has consumer caimpgns to stress on corporate accountability. Wal-Mart, the biggest retailer in the world, has been majorly criticized having its products sourced from sweatshops and mistreating employees (Donnelly & Etzel 24). Currently, Co-op America is asking Wal-Mart to adopt a conduct vendor code on standards of International Labor Organization of using the third-party auditors to monitor their supplier’s compliance. Therefore, all customers should join this campaign to reduce sweatshops. In addition, the consumer can also join other campaigns for the consumers. The Co-op America allies mostly call other consumers to action to the job for greater corporate accountability or human rights. For instance, Oxfam International, human rights nonprofit, launched “Play Fair at the Olympics” campaign so as to use the 2004 Olympics as a spotlight to employee’s abuses behind the sport wears (Flynn 191). Therefore, all consumers should make sure they information on any anti-sweat campaigns via Co-op America. They can also use the shareholders clout. The consumer own stock in an individual companies, they should check the mail proxy ballots and vote to support any shareholder resolution of improving labor policies. Also, if they put their money in the mutual funds, the investment can work in improving how the workers are treated by the industry. Some of the mutual funds refuse to invest in firms that have indifference to employees’ welfare. However, the others practice the shareholder action to influence companies they have invested in, to improve the practices of labor. Therefore, the consumer can use the shareholder power to reduce boycott. The consumer should also investigate the company before purchasing their products. They should investigate on the company’s labor issues and the environment. In addition, if the consumer is out shopping they can ask the salesperson if his store has a conduct code for vendor’s products manufacturers. Also, they should ask how the company deals with infractions and checks vendors’ compliance. If the company has no procedures or codes for implementing it then, they let them know that they wish to adopt one. For instance, some Greenwood Village students decided to highlight RUGMARK job to put an end to child labor in the industry of carpets for their presentation. Therefore, consumers can pressurize companies on changing their unfair practices to stop boycotts in sweatshops ((Bender & GreenWald 28). Flynn argues that consumers can also buy on a fair trade. It is an economic system that confirms self-determination, healthy working conditions and fair workers’ wages. Worker's organization is in democratic cooperatives that produce products like cocoa or coffee (Flynn 191). Companies that purchase from the fair trade cooperatives do pay prices that can sufficiently provide for employee’s families and maintain their businesses. Therefore, when a consumer buys from the fair trade they assist to ensure a good sustainable farmers livelihood and workers. The consumer can buy local, union-made or secondhand products. For household items and clothing, they should check on their local consignment stores or secondhand. When purchasing new clothes they can check for the union label or buy from socially responsible businesses. They should also support the local food retailers like the farmers so that the income goes the individuals who grow food instead of the middlemen. Therefore, the consumers should support the local market. Lastly, the consumers can spread the campaign (Powell 63). The people around them should be aware of the sweat-shop fighting and its significance. The people should also know the resources like Co-op America’s web where they can use to get anti-sweat campaigns and sweat-free products. They can use collective actions such as community organizations, alumni associations or office sports teams to work together and aim in ending sweatshops. Conclusion From the discussion, it is evident that boycotting is a good way to end workers abuse. It pressurizes the improvement of their working condition, but it also affect the production of the company and the workers livelihood. Therefore, consumers should come up with alternatives that would reduce boycotts and also improve the worker's conditions. Alternatives such as, organizing locally for the products, joining anti-sweatshops campaigns, supporting local products, buy on a fair trade and use shareholders clout. Work Cited. Benjamin Powell. Out of Poverty: Sweatshops in the Global Economy New York: Free Market Institute, Texas Tech University 8-23 2014. Daniel Bender E & Richard GreenWald A. Sweetshop USA: The American Sweatshop in Historical and Global perspective. New York. Routledge. 2013. pp. 23- 26 Donnelly J.H. and Etzel M, 2004, “Retail store performance and job satisfaction; a study of anxiety stress and prosperity to leave among retail employees”, Journal of retailing, 53(2), 23-28 Gabriel Flynn. Journal of Business Ethics, 7, 337–9. “The apparel industry response to “sweatshop” concerns: a review and analysis of codes of conduct”, Journal of Supply Chain Management, 35(3), 51–57. Entine. 2008. pg 191 “Leading Article: The Gruesome Reality of Sweatshops”. Independent.co.uk October 1, 2010. Retrieved April 2, 2013. Read More