Many People Believe That Sweatshops Are Unethical And Exploit

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.

Sweltering heat, long hours, and unfair working conditions are a few descriptive words that Americans use to describe a sweatshop. I believe our judgment is being misguided by the success of our nation, and it is imperative we redefine the word “sweatshop”. Individuals that endure life in third world countries know hardships that Americans could not imagine. If we were to recognize these economical differences it may shine a light on why these workers seek sweatshop jobs. In many of these cases, children must work to aid in the family’s survival. If these jobs are voluntary and both parties agree to work conditions, it results in a mutually beneficial arrangement. One of the worst things we can do as outsiders, to help these impoverished

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.

They often use child labor, lack workers’ benefits, and use intimidation as means of controlling workers (Boal, Mark). Typically, sweatshops are found in developing countries, however, they are also a prevalent problem in many first world countries including the United States. Many manufacturers claim that sweatshops exist in order to keep prices down for consumers, while allowing profit. On the contrary, there is also substantial evidence that goes against these beliefs. For instance, a study showed that while doubling the wage of sweatshop workers would increase consumer price by 1.8%, consumers are willing to pay 15% more with the assurance that the product was made with fair labor (11 Facts About). This, however, is a hard argument seeing as the circumstance was hypothetical and if prices were actually raised, there is no way to assure that consumers would react the same way. Either way, both sides of the argument can agree that the conditions are not good, it is just a matter of analysing the cost vs. the benefit to determine their necessity. This leads to several questions: Are sweatshops a necessary evil, how could they be abolished, and what realistic goals regarding the bettering of worker conditions can be met? Through the answering of these questions, it is easy to see that despite claims of sweatshops bringing opportunities to

Firstly, if sweatshops were not as low paid and the working conditions were not as pleasant compared to first world countries, then companies might as well employ citizens of first world countries, who would probably be healthier. This would not benefit the people in the third world countries, who would slip into poverty and starvation.

A reporter entered Bangkok, Thailand and interviewed the father of a girl who worked in a sweatshop. He said, ''I hope she can keep that job. There's all this talk about factories closing now, and she said there are rumors that her factory might close. I hope that doesn't happen. I don't know what she would do then.'' This man’s daughter was making 2 dollars a day. The man went on to say that most people want jobs like his daughter has, because they pay higher and let you work longer hours than most other available jobs (Wudunn). While people here in the states protest outsourcing to these sweatshops, those working in them are grateful for the jobs they have. Their economies grow because of the additional companies in the workforce, and the United States economy grows as

Some people who buy clothes just for the sake of buying clothes are impacting the sweatshop workers. People who just buy clothes for the sake of it are wasting resources. Average british women spend $285(euro) on clothes that they will never wear.

Sweatshops greatly impact the lives of people all across the world; people are forced into incredibly tough labor along with unbearable working conditions. According to the writer of English Blog, “22 million children die annually due to the hazardous conditions in the sweatshops.” (English Blog RSS) Besides the low pay and awfully long working hours, the

For example, many U.S jobs offer shift differential for employers who work the “graveyard shifts”. Of course, some may prefer sleeping at night but they take the alternative for the extra income. It is not out of the ordinary for workers in these developing countries to tolerate poorer working conditions for higher pay. It is important for activist to include the economy of these developing countries when considering the demolishment of sweatshops. Not only are the employees benefited with income, their economies gain and grow.

In “Where Sweatshops Are a Dream”, Nicholas Kristof states sweatshops may be too harsh in America’s eyes, but a dream for many families in poverty. Phnom Penh, Cambodia is a city where, in some places, the trash pile high and smoke fills the air. For the people who live there, scavenging through the trash, finding plastic and, selling it is just a way of life. Many Americans believe that labor laws should be improved to try to help them. However, what they do not see is that many want to work in sweat shops. To work in a sweatshop and get out of the trash collecting life is a goal for many people living there. Kristof defends his statement by saying sewing machine jobs would be a more preferable job then what people do in Phnom Penh. On the

Sweatshops are manufacturing facilities run by larger corporations where employees work under poor conditions, long hours, and are paid low wages. Workers in sweatshops often manufacture a majority of the products that consumers purchase in the Global North (This term refers to wealthier nations in the Northern Hemisphere, as opposed to the Global South, which refers to poorer nations in the Southern Hemisphere.) In a piece titled “Women Shopping and Women Sweatshopping: Individual Responsibility for Consumerism”, Lisa Cassidy describes three senses of responsibility that dictate a connected world such as ours today.

Sweatshops are factories that are used around the world that major brand companies use to make products. These factories have gained media attention and controversy for the long hours and low pay given to the workers. Many people say to boycott these factories because of the latter reasons, but consumers shouldn’t boycott companies that make sweatshop products. The first reason consumers shouldn’t boycott these products would be people actually deliberately take these jobs because in developing countries most jobs don’t pay that much. The second reason consumers shouldn’t boycott sweatshop products would be that it allows a lot of people in the developing worlds to rise out of poverty.

Sweatshops are not just beneficial to handicapped and uneducated people, but it is also advantageous for the unfortunate developing countries. As the number of sweatshops increase the country can become more industrialized and there would be less farming and more technological advances. Many economists who are pro-sweatshops believe that if a country is more industrialized then the conditions of the sweatshops will improve and the wages will increase therefore the workers

The article speaks of why sweatshops aren't the worst jobs poor people can take in developing countries. It even says that women are positively impacted by working in sweatshops as they are less likely to become pregnant or married off. School enrollment rates are also supposedly higher amongst young women between the ages of 12-18. The article is right, without the pay families wouldn't be able to support themselves. Children would starve and desperation drives people to new limits of survival. Still, there’s no justification for the exploitation that's allowed to continue against people in developing countries. The fashion industry is a multi-trillion dollar operation and while workers can work upwards of 70 hour weeks their pay is

In many sweatshops, however, the workers are there voluntarily. Even the meager wages earned are more than the undocumented immigrants workers would earn in their home countries. As long as there is a supply of willing workers, sweatshops will flourish.