Ethical Issues Of The Workplace

Sweatshops have been around for centuries, beginning around the late 1880’s. Sweatshops are classified by three main components, long work hours, very low pay and unsafe and unhealthy working environments. Sweatshops are usually found in manufacturing industries and the most highlighted production is clothing corporations, who take full advantage of the low production costs of their products. Many may think sweatshops are a thing of the past but they are still affecting many lives across the nations. There are many ways sweatshops affect lives, but a recent article titled “New study finds ‘more sweatshops than Starbucks’ in Chicago” explains that there are many low wage industry jobs that are violating labor laws in the United States alone. The article also reports how employees who are working in such conditions won’t speak up in fear of the retaliation employers will implement. Analyzing Sweatshops through the lens of the Sociological perspectives will help us better understand the illegal conditions of workplaces that still exist today.

A majority of the clothing worn and purchased today in the United States has been manufactured overseas in sweatshops. Since the beginning of factories and businesses, owners have always looked for a way to cut production costs while still managing to produce large quantities of their product. It was found that the best way to cut costs was to utilize cheap labor in factories known as sweatshops. According to the US General Account Office, sweatshops are defined as a “business that regularly violates both wage or child labor and safety or health laws”. These sweatshops exploit their workers in various ways: making them work long hours in dangerous working conditions for little to no pay. Personally, I believe that the come up and employment of these sweatshops is unethical, but through my research I plan to find out if these shops produce more positive than negatives by giving these people in need a job despite the rough conditions.

Time and time again, there have been opposing views on just about every single possible topic one could fathom. From the most politically controversial topics of gun control and stem cell research to the more mundane transparent ones of brown or white rice and hat or no hat—it continues. Sweatshops and the controversy surrounding them is one that is unable to be put into simplistic terms, for sweatshops themselves are complex. The grand debate of opposing views in regards to sweatshops continues between two writers who both make convincing arguments as to why and how sweatshops should or should not be dealt with. In Sweat, Fire and Ethics, by Bob Jeffcott, he argues that more people ought to worry less about the outer layers of sweatshops and delve deeper into the real reason they exist and the unnecessariness of them. In contrast, Jeffrey D. Sachs writes of the urgent requirement of sweatshops needed during the industrialization time in a developing country, in his article of Bangladesh: On the Ladder of Development. The question is then asked: How do sweatshops positively and negatively affect people here in the United States of America and in other countries around the world?

Ravisankar begins his essay by relating to his audience with a connection of being poor college students, who look for the bargain deals. The problem he identifies is that consumerism and the obsession for low priced goods caused the demand for sweatshop labor. He assumes readers have some familiarity with the term sweatshop, but do not fully understand how horrible the conditions and hours in a sweatshop truly are. His purpose is to convince students at Ohio State University to take action against Sweatshop labor. In order to accomplish this purpose, he mainly appeals to readers sense of ethics.

This assignment is going to mainly discuss the existing of sweatshops and the related ethical issues about it. Ethical theory will be applied in the study about the topic and personal reflection is also going to displayed in the assignment. An understanding of it may be not interesting but can be helpful to do research or run firms or organizations related in the future.

There are many views with the problem of utilizing sweatshops in developing economies. Many insist that utilizing sweatshops in developing economies composes exploitation. In certain circumstances, this may be true, but not all. It is an ongoing controversy of demolishing sweatshops and changing the laws of labor. Many anti-sweatshop activist supports the idea of demolishing sweatshops. Activist commonly focus on work conditions and low wages causing them to be ill – formed of the economy as a whole. Taking a deeper look into these developing countries, it is with out of doubt that these countries benefit from sweatshops. Sweatshops should not be demolished because the employees are benefited with income, their economy receives growth and

Ben Powell’s “In Defense of ‘Sweatshops’” article offers an uncommon point of view regarding the necessity of sweatshops. Powell knows that people know about sweatshops, but he offers another angle to the topic. The point he tries to get across is how sweatshops can actually be beneficial to the people in the third world countries, rather than them being a terrible thing. Throughout the article, he brought up some relatively good points, but not all he had to say was backed up with evidence. Therefore, Powell’s article was semi-effective.

As readers judge the article by its title, they see significance of it and see the author trying to convince the audience that sweatshops are ineffective. Bob Jeffcott, wrote and published “Sweat, Fire and Ethics,” in which he argues that citizenship is more likely to get rid of rather than shopping. Jeffcott’s purpose is to convey the poor working conditions of factories that ends in death of hundreds in which, no one is doing much to end them. Moreover, he describes what is really taking place in the manufacturing industries as well as what it actually mean to us consumers. In “Sweat, Fire and Ethics,” Bob Jeffcott effectively argues his opinions as to what should be done to protect unethical working conditions.

Nicholas D Kristof begins his essay by exploring the ideas that factory jobs in poor countries are actually a means of reduce poverty. As noted in his article, “sweatshops are only a symptom of poverty, not a cause” (paragraph 8, pge 110). Although sweatshop may be harsh, present a better alternative for workers for in poor countries than what is already available to them. The problem he identifies in his article is the fact that many families would rather work at a sweatshop than stay in a dangerous garbage dumps, searching for something to recycle for a change (Kristof). He assumes that his readers know little about sweatshops; furthermore, how difficult and awful the living conditions are. He goes on to say that some of those workers have

Sweatshops. The image the word provokes isn’t a pleasant one. A factory where people work long hours for only a small amount of money isn’t something we like to think about. The article published by The New York Times in 2009 entitled “Where Sweatshops Are a Dream” however, proposes a different view of these grueling working conditions. The article seeks to transform the view of most Americans from disgust to support for so called sweatshops. When the article was first published in 2009, the Obama administration was considering labor standards, something the author Nicholas Kristof believes is detrimental to undeveloped countries. As he argues, “Sweatshops are only a symptom of poverty… and banning them closes off one route out of

“A modern form of slavery,” many anti-slavery organizations claim, however exaggerated this image may be for many, it is a cruel reality faced by the individuals who have to work in sweatshops (Yesilevsky). Sweatshops are notoriously known for using brutal force against their workers as well as making them labor under dire conditions, often causing various forms of physical and emotional trauma (Yesilevsky). Charles Jacobs in his article “Slavery: Worldwide Evil” comments on how sweatshops are extremely detrimental to the individuals involved, writing, “Such conditions are not only tragic, they are an affront to human dignity and an extensive violation of human rights” (qtd. in Yesilevsky). The human rights violations associated with sweatshops are undeniable, and much proof exists as to the conditions these workers have to labor under. Lack of safety equipment coupled with the use of dangerous machinery in these sweatshops is only a small example of the many human rights violations committed in these factories (Yesilevsky). Sweatshops are unarguably a violation of mostly every humane rights policy available. In the end, exposing these humble laborers through hellish working conditions for meager unjust payment compensations (Yesilevsky). Working conditions, which in parts

In his New York Times essay, “What Sweatshops Are a Dream,” writer Nicholas D. Kristof argues that the best way to help people who live in the poorest countries is not to campaign against sweatshops but instead promote manufacturing. (PA 109-111). Kristof’s opinion was influenced by the years he spent living in East Asia; he was able to personally observe how sweatshops affected people’s lives. His purpose was to inform the readers about the importance of sweatshops in other countries. Also, promoting manufacturing in sweatshops and how sweatshops can benefit the people and the economy.

To begin with, this report will examine sweatshops and how international organizations approach the issue. The International Labour Organization broadly defines sweatshops as a place or a work environment where workers are subject to extreme exploitation and are being rejected of their basic human rights with regards to working and living conditions. In this regard, the workers are given no insurance or health benefits and their daily wages are up to 90% lower than the required legal minimum. In addition, workers are daily exposed to chemical and toxic products without any

Marisa Schultz, Amy Lee, and Eric Lacy of the Detroit News quoted Wendy Wagenhiem of The American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan who stated, "At least two dozen other states prevent lifestyle discrimination, and that's possible in Michigan as well if people are concerned about their privacy, as well they should be" (Lacy, E., Lee, A., and, Schultz, M 2005). Additionally, according to Schultz, Lee, and Lacy, there are 29 other states that have laws regarding smoker's right, yet the 1.9 million smokers in Michigan do not have any laws to protect or help them. Furthermore, Michigan smokers feel they pay enough since they pay "one of the highest cigarette taxes in the nation" (Lacy, E., Lee, A., and, Schultz, M 2005). Now they may have to pay by losing their job and their income.

We as a society are faced with ethical dilemmas virtually every day. How we handle these situations shapes our culture. But what are ethics? According to the Miniature Guide to Ethical Reasoning, ethical reasoning entails doing what is right even in the face of powerful selfish desires. To live an ethical life is to develop control of our own egocentric tendencies. It is not enough to be able to do the right thing when we ourselves have nothing to lose. We must be willing to fulfill our ethical obligations at the expense of our self-centered desires and vested interests. (Dr. Richard Paul & Dr. Linda Elder, 2003) In short, ethics is doing what is right even when no one is looking. A society with a strong