Meyer's Argument Against Sweatshop Labor

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?

     As companies grow larger and more competitive, they are looking for cheaper ways to produce their wares and increase their profit. That is, after all, how companies are able to succeed, by giving their customers a comparable product for a cheaper price. This increases sales and the overall bottom line. Which seems to be a beneficial plan for both the companies and the consumers. That is, as long as the consumers don’t know how the product is being produced. The places that produce these products for an extremely cheap cost are called “Sweatshops”. A sweatshop is a small manufacturing establishment in which employees work long hours under substandard conditions for low wages. Sweatshops came about

In his opinion essay, “Sweatshop Oppression,” published in the student newspaper, The Lantern, at Ohio State University, writer Rajeev Ravisankar uses his article as a platform to raise awareness about the deplorable conditions in sweatshops. Ravisankar awakens his readers from their slumber and brings to light the fact that they are partly responsible for the problem. His first goal in the essay is to designate college students as conscious consumers who look to purchase goods at the lowest prices. Then he makes the connection between this type of low-cost consumerism and the high human cost that workers are forced to pay in sweatshops. His second goal is to place the real burden of responsibility directly with the companies that perpetuate this system of exploitation. Finally, he proposes what can be done about it. By establishing a relationship that includes himself in the audience, working to assign responsibility to the reader, and keeping them emotionally invested, Ravisankar makes a powerful argument that eventually prompts his student reader to take responsibility for their actions and make a change.

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

Almost everyone knows sweatshops are not acceptable places to work or support. Sweatshops, per definition from the International Labor Organization are organizations that violate more than two labor laws (Venkidaslam). There are several arguments against sweatshops. First, is that these organizations exploit their workers. They provide them low wages and some pay below the minimum wage of the home nation. Moreover, these workers are forced to work more than 60 hours per week and are mandated to work overtime. In addition, workers are subjected to unsafe environments and sexual abuse. Finally, sweatshops are known for their child labor, where children below the legal working age are paid extremely small wages. Anyone who is against sweatshops will say, choosing to partner with these organizations are unethical.

Sweltering heat, long hours, 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 working conditions, it results in a mutually beneficial arrangement. One of the worst things we can do as outsiders, to help these impoverished

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.

2) In the interview with the Mises Institute called, “Sweatshops: A Way Out of Poverty,” Powell talks about how living standards rise in areas with sweatshops as well as how sweatshops actually pay well in comparison to other jobs (Powell,

By definition a sweatshop is a “negatively connoted term for any working environment considered to be unacceptably difficult or dangerous. Sweatshop workers often work long hours for very low pay in horrible conditions, regardless of laws mandating overtime pay and or minimum wage”. Many corporations in the United States use sweatshop labor in countries over seas such as China to produce their products at a lower cost. As entailed in the letter from a man born in China, many citizens on these countries resort to factory labor to support themselves to escape other sources on income such as prostitution. Without these corporations usage of oversea sweatshops these employees would be forced to return to self-demeaning jobs such as these.

“I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived, and died in cotton fields and sweatshops.”- Stephen Jay Gould. Sweatshops exploit people, and children. They take advantage of their poverty, and there need for a better life. Sweatshops are one of the worst things that ever happened to the business world, and poor people around the world. Sweatshops should be stopped, and ended.

Globalization has become an international dynamics of today’s fast growing economy around the world. Multinational Companies (MNCs) get benefits which is important for the economic development because it is the international integration of world trade, and resources, labour, and technology of financial market (IMF, 2014). The labour market is the key distribution network to influence the developing counties through globalization (Rama, 2003). In the first part of the paper, to answer the question “does globalization harm workers’ interests?”, the form of globalization as average wages and hours, job destruction and creation, unemployment, child labour, working conditions, safety and security issues are discussed to understand the condition of sweatshop workers in developing countries; and benefits of globalization in the labour market

“My concern isn’t that there are too many sweatshops, but that there are too few” (Stossel, 586). This theory holds that developing countries improve their condition by charging less but do the same work. Also developed countries will be better off, because their workers can shift to jobs that they can do better at (561). These are the jobs that some economists say usually show a certain level of education and training that can be difficult to obtain in the developing world (579). Consequently, developing countries get factories that provide multiple jobs that they would not otherwise; therefore improving the technology and capital. With this situation occurring, developing countries try to keep low constant wages, because sweatshops tend to just get moved on to another location that is more willing, for fear of losing investments and boosting gross domestic product (GDP). This only means average wages will increase at a steady rate around the world; a nation gets left behind if it demands wages are higher than the current market price asked for (Ross, 566).

In his New York Times opinion column, “Where Sweatshops Are a Dream”, writer Nicholas D. Kristof uses his experience living in East Asia to argue his positive outlook on sweatshops. Kristof wants to persuade his audience, Obama and his team, along with others who are for “labor standards”, that the best way to help people in poor countries is to promote manufacturing there, not campaign against them. He uses Phnom Penh as an example to show why working in the sweatshops is a dream for the families there. They would rather work at a sweatshop than stay in the dangerous garbage dump, searching for something to recycle for change. The writer establishes credibility through his experience

A murky, dark room is filled with machines and workers. The employees have a worried look on their face, as they are well aware that one small mistake could cost them a limb or even their life. Some of the workers are not even ten years old, but they are still missing a few fingers. It is the Industrial Revolution, and the use of sweatshops has begun. One would think that over time, the use of sweatshops would decrease and the basic rights of workers would be protected, but they are still being used with little to no change in working conditions. They are not only in developing countries such as Cambodia and Vietnam, but in the United States as well. Sweatshops are unethical and should be shut down, but greedy companies keep them going so they can get more money. Governments aren’t doing enough to stop them, even though they have the most authority to do so.

Americans love to shop. With malls everywhere you go, shopping just might be America's favorite past time! When you are out shopping though, do you ever stop to think where all of those clothes and shoes come from? When I was younger, well, actually until recently, I always thought they were all made by machines. Shirt machines, pants machines…you get the picture. I have learned, however, that for the most part, clothes are still made on sewing machines, by people, and often under circumstances that we can only imagine.