Download file to see previous pages...
While this might appear to make sense on paper, a deeper analysis proves otherwise. Those who make this assumption fail to understand that some of the sweatshop workers are skilled and educated. In addition, when workers are paid poorly, it only helps grow a society filled with illiterate and unskilled individuals. The cycle of poverty then continues. Should the poor continue to be poor just because they are poor?
First, sweatshops expose the workers to indecent working and housing conditions and strip them off their human dignity. For instance, in the documentary titled Nike Sweatshops: Behind the Swoosh, Jim Keady highlights the pathetic life of Nike sweatshop workers in Indonesia. Workers are forced to share a small house with poor basic facilities. For instance, Jim and his partner were asked to live in a small 9 by 9 cement box, with no air conditioner and without furniture. The bathroom and toilet are shared, and the sewer lines are open. Under such conditions, workers are exposed to various diseases like cholera and typhoid. It becomes difficult for such workers to offer their families a descent life, and this also exposes their children to diseases and other dangers. As described by Jim, such living conditions strip one off his or her dignity. Furthermore, the working conditions in the sweatshops are not friendly. Most of the workers are subjected to all forms of abuses in the factories, including sexual, verbal and physical abuses. Women, who are the majority of the sweatshop workers, are forced to take birth control and pregnancy tests so as to stop them from having children. They are denied the right to have families. This is also particularly the case for the vocal workers who attempt to fight for their rights or form independent labor unions. Overall, the working and living conditions of sweatshop workers are discouraging and violate basic human rights.
Secondly, sweatshop workers are poorly paid. For instance, in the
...Download file to see next pagesRead More
The author analyzes a lot of debate for a reason; there is no clear answer as to the manner of removing the negative characteristics, which make the workplace a sweatshop. He believes that customers are willing to pay for the name recognition. The most important factor is the costs they are willing to pay for the products from the sweatshops.
Here, the two companies major in product designing and marketing but rely on a number of contractors to build shoes and sew clothes that suit their specifications. One of the chief expectations by the two companies is high quality goods
This standard would be very welcome for local workers in an international sweatshop but may be prohibitive for the international company and removes the incentive for setting up shop in a developing country. When that happens then the job opportunities for local workers are lost.
Consumer thinking in western democracies can be dangerous. Young people started killing each other for a pair of Nike shoes which led to a public outcry. Nike is well known for Physical and verbal abuse of workers, hazardous working condition, extremely low wages and
People appear reluctant to work and lively chatters and laughter are amiss. Everyone is looking down at their tasks like chicken thrown in their cages, pecking at the feed. As much as we can sympathize with people who suffer from the
At this point, it is necessary to ponder on this question; would the existence of sweatshops result in more harm than the harm that would result from the closure of all sweatshops globally? In this respect, this discussion holds the argument that sweatshops are good.