Shifting Away From Sweatshops or the Manner in Which They Operate

Shifting Away From Sweatshops or the Manner in Which They Operate Sweatshops face longstanding stigmas and ethical issues regarding the treatment of its workers. Some groups highlight and exploit the atrocities that take place in modern day sweatshops while other groups either avoid the subject or go great lengths to cover them up. There are also groups that try to remedy the horrors that take place by invoking their own institutions to visit and analyze sweatshop complaints as they arise and on a prophylactic basis. In terms of globalization and international investment, when actors cooperate, sweatshops can produce a desirable bargaining interaction between multiple actors: the countries involved in the investment, the workers employed in sweatshops and the industries in which sweatshops are commonplace. Concurrently, when the same actors bargain, some groups (usually the countries and industries involved in the investment) become better off while the workers employed become worse off. Therefore, some interest groups strongly believe sweatshops should be eliminated completely while other interest groups tend to focus on restructuring the manner in which sweatshops operate and treat their workers.

It is no secret that sweatshops are sometimes the lesser of two evils for people struggling to survive. There are a lot of other jobs that have harsher environments and work loads that pay less. Therefore, people employed in sweatshops know that they are better off than alternative job opportunities that pay less and demand more. In this case, some developing countries and sweatshop workers welcome the foreign investment because it provides a multitude of unskilled labor jobs benefiting the hosting countries economy, the livelihood of employees and increased revenue for the investor. However, these few pros come at the cost of unskilled laborers back in the investors home nation. While the industry outsourcing this work is likely from an unskilled labor scarce economy, there are still people affected by the massive amount of outsourcing that takes place. In this scenario, these sweatshop jobs pay more than alternative jobs in the invested country, however the slightly higher wages are usually compensated later on in the form of miscellaneous fees invoked by sweatshop owners for food and shelter, negative work environments, and in some cases, coercion by taking employees legal documents and threatening to exploit illegal workers.

Higher wages working in sweatshops may be appealing to some who just wish to provide more for their families and increase the chances of better opportunities for them often comes at an incredibly negative and unethical cost. This cost often draws the attention of human rights groups whose mission is to seek necessary changes in the manner of which sweatshops operate. It has been proven that numerous sweatshops provide unsafe working conditions, require mandatory overtime without compensation, wage reduction to pay for housing and food, physical and emotional abuse among other things. Some workers still side with the belief they are better off in a sweatshop than at another job. Yet unsafe working conditions combined with a hefty amount of overtime hours is just a recipe for disaster, as the workers are undoubtedly physically and mentally exhausted. One could easily assume judging by all the negative connotation associated with sweatshops that companies would stay away from this method of labor, but they choose not to. There is a method to their madness.

Companies in nations with advanced economies with scare unskilled labor often choose to make foreign direct investments in countries that have an overabundance of unskilled laborers. This way, these companies can export their goods that make intensive use of the factors of production. These are usually developing countries so on top of saving astronomical monetary figures on labor costs, they also often times benefit from tax breaks from the government in which the investment is made. These countries often times also have lax safety protocols or protocols that are just largely ignored without ramifications. In the end, the fact still remains, many of these large companies are saving every penny they can. Moving labor intensive jobs to countries with an abundance of laborers is going to save an extraordinary amount of money. Sweatshops benefit large amounts of workers and companies. However, the conditions in which these sweatshops are run should not be overlooked. From an ethical standpoint, international capital should not be encouraging the creation of more sweatshops. At least, not until concessions are made by both governments and companies alike to alleviate the harsh and often illegal terms and conditions of employment, safety and security concerns and working conditions in these facilities.

Massive companies that outsource jobs to other countries no doubt save billions of dollars with this type of investment. What costs them two United States dollars (USD) a day per worker in foreign countries with weak labor unions would easily cost them at least the federal mandatory minimum wage of 7.25 USD per hour and they would also have to comply with strong labor unions in the United States. Therefore, they should have plenty left over from this savings alone to address safety and security concerns, poor and abusive management, and working conditions. Doing little things to make employees happy and boost moral can go a long way in boosting productivity which would offset the cost of changes. Making sure the facilities are safe to be in operation, addressing and holding managers accountable and providing management training from a Western perspective and giving workers a safe place to address and reporting violations can go a long way. While these concessions alone likely wont remove the sweat from sweatshops it would likely assure none of the sweat is coming from anxious and frightened employees concerned about losing their livelihoods just trying to make ends meet for their families. Perhaps an international institution would be beneficial to oversee changes of this manner. Yet governments and companies will both have to work together to monitor and fix such problems. Perhaps one day, if all the ethical issues and concerns regarding sweatshops are properly addressed and fixed, one could support the creation of more sweatshops. Maybe this time, they will be able to hold the less derogatory term of factories, instead.

References

Frieden, J. A., Lake, D. A., Schultz, K. A. (2016). World Politics: Interests, Interactions, Institutions. New York, NY. W.W. Norton Company, Inc.

Powell, B. (2013, May 2). Sweatshops In Bangladesh Improve The Lives Of Their Workers, And Boost Growth. Retrieved October 24, 2016, from http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/ 2013/05/02/sweatshops-in-bangladesh-improve-the-lives-of-their-workers-and-boost-growth/#1976ebdd3c34

Powell, B. (2014). Meet the Old Sweatshops, Same as the New. The Independent Institute. Retrieved October 25, 2016, from http://www.independent.org/pdf/tir/tir_19_01_08_powell.pdf

Roberts, D. (2000, October 2). Inside A Chinese Sweatshop: "A Life Of Fines And Beating" Retrieved October 24, 2016, from http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2000-10-01/inside-a-chinese-sweatshop-a-life-of-fines-and-beating

United States Department of Labor. (2016). Minimum Wage. Retrieved October 25, 2016, from http://www.dol.gov/general/topic/wages/minimumwage