Blood, Sweat & A ; Shearss: A Closer Look At Sweatshops Essay, Research Paper
Blood, Sweat, and Shearss: A Closer Look at Sweatshops
How can you state if the merchandise you are about to buy was made by a kid, by adolescent misss forced to work until midnight seven yearss a hebdomad, or in a sweatshop by workers paid 9? an hr? The sad fact is & # 8230 ; You can non. The companies do non desire you to cognize, so they hide their production behind locked mill Gatess, barbed wire and armed guards. Many multinationals refuse to let go of to the American people even the list and references of the mills they use around the universe to do the goods we purchase. The corporations say we have no right to this information. Even the President of the United States could non happen out where these companies manufacture their goods. Yet, to shop with our scruples, it is our right to cognize in which states and mills, under what human rights conditions, and at what wages the merchandises we purchase are made.
Only $13.90 / page
This paper will be a behind the scenes look at what truly happens behind the closed door of sweatshops.
The footings & # 8220 ; sweatshop & # 8221 ; and & # 8220 ; sudating & # 8221 ; were foremost used in the nineteenth century to depict a subcontracting system where the jobbers earned their net income from the border between the sum they received from a contract and the sum they paid workers. This border was & # 8220 ; sweated & # 8221 ; from the workers because they received minimum rewards for inordinate hours worked under insanitary conditions ( Mason, 33 ) .
This construct of sudating comes alive once more in today & # 8217 ; s garment industry which is best described as a pyramid where big-name retail merchants and brand-name makers contract with run uping stores, who in bend hire garment workers to do the finished merchandise. Retailers and makers at the top of the pyramid order how much workers earn in rewards by commanding the contract monetary value given to the contractor. With these monetary values worsening each twelvemonth by every bit much as 25 % , contractors are forced to & # 8220 ; perspiration & # 8221 ; a net income from garment workers by working them long hours at low rewards ( Mason, 34 ) .
The U.S. General Accounting Office has developed a working definition of a sweatshop as & # 8220 ; an employer that violates more than one federal or province labour, industrial prep, occupational safety and wellness, workers & # 8217 ; compensation, or industry registration. & # 8221 ; More loosely, a sweatshop is a workplace where workers are capable to utmost development, including the absence of a life pay or benefits, hapless working conditions and arbitrary subject ( Department of Labor, 2 ) .
Despite hard-won Torahs for lower limit pay, overtime wage, and occupational safety and wellness ( and even authorities and industry pledges to crackdown ) sweatshops are platitude in the U.S. garment industry and are distributing quickly throughout developing states. In the U.S. , garment workers typically toil 60 hours a hebdomad in forepart of their machines, frequently without minimal pay or overtime wage. In fact, the Department of Labor estimations that more than half of the state & # 8217 ; s 22,000 run uping stores violate minimal pay and overtime Torahs. Many of these workers labour in unsafe conditions including out of use fire issues, insanitary bathrooms, and hapless airing. Government surveys uncover that 75 % of U.S. garment stores violate safety and wellness Torahs. In add-on, workers normally face verbal and physical maltreatment and are intimidated from talking out, fearing occupation loss or exile ( Department of Labor, 2 ) .
The Department of Labor defines a work topographic point as a sweatshop if it violates two or more of the most basic labour Torahs including kid labour, lower limit pay, overtime and fire safety Torahs ( Department of Labor, 3 ) . For many, the word sweatshop conjures up images of dirty, cramped, bend of the century New York tenements where immigrant adult females worked as dressmakers. High-rise tenement sweatshops still do be, but, today, even big, brilliantly illuminated mills can be the sites of rampant labour maltreatments. Sweatshop workers report atrocious on the job conditions including sub-minimum rewards, no benefits, non-payment of rewards, forced overtime, sexual torment, verbal maltreatment, bodily penalty, and illegal fires. Children can frequently be found working in sweatshops alternatively of traveling to school. Sweatshop operators are ill-famed for avoiding giving pregnancy leave by firing pregnant adult females and coercing adult females workers to take birth control or to abort their gestations ( Taylor, 52 ) .
Sweatshop operators can outdo control a pool of workers that are nescient of their rights as workers. Therefore, foremans frequently refuse to engage nonionized workers and intimidate or fire any worker suspected of talking with brotherhood representatives or seeking to form her fellow workers. In the garment industry, the typical sweatshop worker is a adult female ( 90 % of all sweatshop workers are adult females ) . She is immature and, frequently, losing the opportunity for an instruction because she must work long hours to back up a household. In America, she is frequently a recent or undocumented immigrant. She is about ever non-union and normally incognizant that, even if she is in this state illicitly, she still has rights as a worker ( Taylor, 66 ) .
In December of 1998, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights celebrated its fiftieth Anniversary. The authoritiess of the universe have pledged to honour the basic rights we are all born with. Unfortunately for excessively many people these promises have no significance. Hundreds of 1000000s of people are robbed of their basic human rights merely because of racial or economic position. Every individual has basic human rights such as adequate to eat, equality of chance, an instruction, freedom from force, and a support. Other human rights include clean H2O, a safe environment, wellness attention, a place, and say in our hereafters ( Mason, 88 ) .
The ill-famed sweatshops of the age of Big Business ( the tardily 19th and early twentieth centuries ) virtually disappeared after World War II because of increased authorities ordinance of monopolies and the rise of trade brotherhoods. Sweatshops began to re-emerge once more, nevertheless, during the 1980 & # 8217 ; s and 1990 & # 8217 ; s because of economic globalisation. Today & # 8217 ; s economic system is described as planetary because promotions in engineering have made it possible for big corporations that were one time confined to a specific geographic location to go big & # 8220 ; multi-nationals & # 8221 ; ( Mason, 77 ) .
The popularity of the & # 8220 ; free & # 8221 ; market following the autumn of Communism and a rise in anti-union sentiment, coupled with authorities plans ( like NAFTA and GATT ) designed to promote free trade, have hastened the globalisation procedure. Large corporations are now free to seek out low-wage oasiss: destitute states where corporations benefit from oppressive dictatorial governments that actively suppress workers & # 8217 ; freedoms of address and association. Even in North America, where the North American Free Trade Agreement is supposed to implement a minimal criterion for workers & # 8217 ; rights, corporations concentrate in maquiladoras, & # 8220 ; free trade zones & # 8221 ; that were created by NAFTA, where the workers & # 8217 ; rights commissariats of the Agreement merely do non use ( Co-op America ) .
Corporations have been flying states with comparatively comfortable economic systems and stable, democracies in droves non merely to take advantage of inexpensive labour, but to get away authorities examination and unfavorable judgment from human rights and workers & # 8217 ; rights organisations. Guess? Clothing Co. , for illustration, has ever produced the bulk of its goods in the U.S. but threatened to travel 75 % of this fabrication to Mexico last twelvemonth in response to Department of Labor commendations and extremely publicised human-centered runs about Guess? California contract sweatshops ( Department of Labor, 4 ) .
There are likely sweatshops in every state in the universe & # 8211 ; anyplace where there is a pool of desperate, exploitable workers. Logically, the poorer a state is the more exploitable its people are. Labor misdemeanors are, hence, particularly widespread in 3rd wor
ld states. Nike has been criticized for unethical labour patterns in its Chinese, Vietnamese and Indonesian shoe mills, and Haitian garment mills. Non-profit groups have documented the labour misdemeanors of retail merchants like Philips-Van Heusen and the Gap in mills throughout Latin America.
As mentioned above, nevertheless, developing states are non the lone 1s with sweatshops. Guess? Clothing Corporation, for illustration, has been cited legion times by the Department of Labor for the usage of contract sweatshops in California ( Department of Labor, 5 ) .
Many of the companies straight running sweatshops are little and don & # 8217 ; Ts have much name acknowledgment. However, virtually every retail merchant in the U.S. has ties to sweatshops. The U.S. is the biggest market for the garment industry and 5 corporations control about all the garment gross revenues in this state. These include Wal-Mart, JC Penney, Sears, The May Company ( owns and operates Lord & A ; Taylor, Hecht & # 8217 ; s, Filene & # 8217 ; s and others ) and Federated Department Stores ( owns and operates Bloomingdale & # 8217 ; s, Macy & # 8217 ; s, Burdine & # 8217 ; s, Stern & # 8217 ; s and others ) . The Department of Labor has cited several industry leaders for labour maltreatments. Of these Guess? Clothing Co. is one of the worst wrongdoers & # 8211 ; Guess was suspended indefinitely from the Department of Labor & # 8217 ; s list of & # 8220 ; good cats & # 8221 ; because their contractors were cited for so many sweatshop misdemeanors ( Department of Labor, 4 ) .
Other companies contract out their production to abroad makers whose labour rights misdemeanors have been exposed by U.S. and international human rights groups. These include Nike, Disney, Wal-Mart, Reebok, Liz Claiborne and Ralph Lauren.
Harmonizing to the Department of Labor, over 50 % of U.S. garment mills are sweatshops. Many sweatshops are run in this state & # 8217 ; s dress centres: California, New York, Dallas, Miami and Atlanta. Overseas, garment workers routinely make less than a life pay, working under highly oppressive conditions. Workers in Vietnam mean $ 0.12 per hr, and workers in Honduras mean $ 0.60 per hr. Sweatshops can be viewed as a merchandise of the planetary economic system. Fueled by an abundant supply of labour in the planetary market, capital mobility, and free trade, garment industry giants move from state to state seeking the lowest labour costs and the highest net income, working workers the universe over ( Department of Labor, 7 ) .
It is frequently cost effectual to make concern in other states where there are non as many limitations and ordinances to protect the environment. For illustration, the disposal of contaminated waste and pollution of incinerators ; the workers, their safety, wellness and good being ; and the sense of duty to the host states and their people. Corporate duty is a subject environing the issue of sweatshops. With regard to corporate resettlement, the industries are lending to the prospective states economic systems ; nevertheless, they are taking advantage of the deficiency of ordinance and without turn toing the long-run effects of the future economic and environmental concerns to the hurt of these states. It is true at the same clip that economic development of these states will lend to the universe economic system and uplifting economic systems and populations will ensue in more stable planetary markets.
Large corporations about ever use contract-manufacturing houses to bring forth their goods. In this manner, corporations separate themselves from the production of their ain goods and attempt to claim that the working conditions under which their goods are produced are non their duty.
In fact, it is the corporations that dictate the conditions of their workers. Corporations squeeze their contractors into paying sub-minimum rewards. Large retail merchants and retail ironss force per unit area contract makers by declining to pay more that a reduced monetary value for fabricating orders. They besides demand that their fabrication contractors guarantee them a net income by purchasing back unsold ware at the terminal of each season. Manufacturers deal with this fiscal squeezing non by cutting their ain net incomes, but by cutting workers & # 8217 ; rewards and benefits, and by compromising workers & # 8217 ; physical safety. Many corporations besides refuse to contract to brotherhood stores. So, even if a contractor does desire to pay their workers a sensible pay and let them their freedom of association, he/she will likely be run out of concern. In the terminal, it is the workers who pay for corporate greed.
Unfortunately the Department of Labor does non hold adequate forces to inspect every workplace for labour misdemeanors. The Department of Labor merely requires companies to hold an internal monitoring policy, as opposed to an external monitoring policy where site reviews and ratings would be unheralded and conducted by impartial parties. With internal monitoring there is no manner to cognize whether companies are stating the truth about the conditions in their ain mills. Many companies, like Nike, pay private accounting houses to come into their mills and measure the on the job conditions as & # 8220 ; independent & # 8221 ; proctors. Even when companies are caught go againsting workers & # 8217 ; rights, the penalty is frequently nominal. Fines that may look hefty to us are undistinguished to companies harvesting multi-million dollar net incomes ( Co-op America, 6 ) .
The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 officially prohibits sweatshops. However, because of understaffing at the Department of Labor and corporations & # 8217 ; schemes for distancing themselves from the production of their goods by undertaking production out to many different makers, enforcement is slack. Earlier this twelvemonth Stop Sweatshops Bills were introduced in Congress that would amend the Fair Labor Standards Act to keep companies responsible for the labour misdemeanors of their contractors ( Department of Labor, 6 ) .
Corporations set up sweatshops in the name of & # 8220 ; competition & # 8221 ; . In world these corporations are non facing net income loses or bankruptcy, merely excessively small net income! During this century, workers existent rewards have gone down while CEO & # 8217 ; s wages have skyrocketed. In 1965 the norm CEO made 44 times the mean mill worker. Today, the mean CEO makes 212 times the wage of the mean worker.
Corporations have skewed precedences. Many are seting disbursals like CEO wages and advertisement costs before the well being of their workers. For illustration, Haitian workers run uping kids & # 8217 ; s pajamas for Disney would hold to labor full-time for 14.5 old ages to gain what Michael Eisner makes in one hr! Here & # 8217 ; s another astonishing statistic: Nike could pay all its single workers plenty to feed and dress themselves and their households if it would merely give 1 % of its advertisement budget to workers & # 8217 ; wages each twelvemonth! Corporations falsely claim that they are victims of the planetary economic system when, in fact, corporations help make and keep this system ( Femininists Against Sweatshops, 5 ) .
It would be really easy to assail the job by working the issue and conveying it to the attending of the populace in a derogative mode. By raising the issue and educating people about the world of sweatshops, as the issue enters their consciousness and they realize how it effects their every twenty-four hours lives, a motion can get down to be made.
Co-op America. The March to End Sweatshops. hypertext transfer protocol: //www.sweatshops.org,
Department of Labor. No Sweat & # 8211 ; Help End Sweatshop Conditions for American
Workers. hypertext transfer protocol: //www.dol.gov/dol/esa/public/nosweat/nosweat.htm, 2001.
Feminists Against Sweatshops. Frequently Asked Questions About Sweatshops and
Women Workers. hypertext transfer protocol: //www.feminist.org/other/sweatfaq.html, 2000.
Mason, Ryan H. Sweatshops in the Twentieth Century. Dame Publications, San
Taylor, Johnathan P. A Global Look at Sweatshops. Burns and Rogers, New York,