Shopping+with+a+Conscience!

Name: Sarah Lim Si Ting Student Number: N8750998 Tutor: Steve Badman ** Shopping with a Conscience! **
 * Cultural Artefact **



In what is known as one of the largest anti-sweatshop movements, the Clean Clothes Campaign, Global Unions and Oxfam challenged the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and sportswear companies during the 2004 Athens Olympics to take greater responsibility to cease exploitation of workers producing the sportswear marketed throughout the Olympic Games. This campaign known as Play Fair staged a ‘factory’ on a hotel rooftop whereby women wearing masks worked behind the sewing machines. The aim of this is to bring to light the plight of the women manufacturing the sportswear, who are often hidden from public attention (“Play Fair at the Olympics”, n.d.).

The public health issue underlying this artefact is the mistreatment sweatshop workers have to endure in factories owned by Multinational Corporations (MNCs). They could be in the form of poor working conditions, unsafe environments and very low wages. Furthermore, despite the health and safety training provided, the safety knowledge among these workers is still insufficient (Moure‐Eraso, Wilcox, Punnett, MacDonald, & Levenstein, 1997). This often results in poor health, injuries and even deaths caused by accidents that could have been prevented.
 * Public Health Issue **

Hence, this essay discusses the importance of sweatshops as an urgent public health issue to be addressed, the social and cultural influences, as well as what can be done to minimize harm.

Sweatshop, as defined by the Oxford dictionary is ‘a factory or workshop, especially in the clothing industry, where manual workers are employed at very low wages for long hours and under poor conditions’.
 * Literature Review **

The existence of sweatshops is an important issue to be addressed and argued as it sits in opposition to our notions of justice, yet, they still continue to flourish. Sweatshops not only bring about adverse health effects but they also lead to the exploitation of labor and the violation of human rights. This causes us to question the ethnicity of businesses owned by the MNCs.

In a survey conducted on 267 sweatshop workers, almost 40% experienced chemical exposures through skin contact, resulting in numerous health symptoms such as headaches, unusual fatigue, dizziness, stomach pain and chest pressures. In addition, the uncomfortable positions for long hours caused musculoskeletal symptoms such as numbness in their hands, elbow or forearm pain and prevalently, shoulder pain (Moure‐Eraso, Wilcox, Punnett, MacDonald, & Levenstein, 1997). The inadequacy of safety measures such as the lack of fire-fighting tools and emergency exits pose as a constant threat to the workers. In Bangladesh, 60% of the factories have insufficient safety measures which resulted in more than 600 garment workers dying in factory fires and hundreds suffering from severe injuries since 2006 (International Labour Rights Forum [ILRF], 2012). The decline in health and increasing number of deaths and injuries of sweatshop workers is an important issue to be dealt with.

As the people are exploited for their labor, this violation of basic human rights breaches the simple Kantian principle that we are to respect humanity by treating one another as an end and not only as a means. Kant continues to argue that because we are all moral beings, we possess dignity which is then the reason we ought to be respected. He also states that as human beings, we are obliged to care for one another’s physical welfare and moral well-being (Arnold & Bowie, 2003). The Kantian approach is not only to be applied in the personal realm but also in the marketplace so that businesses in the global economy will operate more ethically.

Kant’s ideas of respect for persons are similar to the conclusions drawn by Amartya Sen, whom, over the past twenty years have been stressing on freedom rights of every employee and not solely raising the incomes and the country’s Gross National Product (GNP). This freedom involves being allowed to decline overtime work without being fired as well as the right to seek medical consultations due to illnesses especially caused by work related activities (Arnold & Bowie, 2003). Therefore, as employers of sweatshop workers, MNCs need to carry out their moral basic duty of exercising human respect.

Karl Marx analyzed and predicted that capitalists will exploit workers because of the improvements in technology which results in fewer requirements for labor. This forces individuals to choose between low wages or joining the increasing pool of unemployed workers. Of which, low wages proves to be a better option (Arnold, 2003).

The issue of sweatshops has been widely debated over the past decade and researchers such as Alan Wertheimer and Paul Krugman have argued that MNCs should not be entirely blamed for the exploitation of labor in sweatshops. This is because they do not have any ethical obligations towards their employees. They claim that low wages and poor working conditions are all inevitable outcomes of the fierce global economic competitions or one of the ways to improve the economy of the developing country (Arnold, 2003; Arnold & Hartman, 2006).

However, Thomas Hill, Denis Arnold and Norman Bowie in their research all defended by arguing that MNCs should treat persons as ends and this is the basic respect for persons as how Kant explains. It requires them to follow the labor laws, ensuring that their workers are physically well, providing decent wages and acceptable working environment (Arnold & Hartman, 2006).

One of the methods used in studies to collect data on health-related problems as a result of working in sweatshops are cross-sectional surveys. However, most of these subjects are young and many who suffered from work-related injuries quit or change jobs frequently. Hence, the severity of health problems caused by a sweatshop job may be underestimated. Furthermore, the information gathered are based on self-reports and thus, it is difficult to access the accuracy and reliability of the data. This can cause biasness and an overestimation or underestimation of the associations between workplace exposures and health outcomes. Lastly, though the selection of subjects are based on well-established sociological methods, the general population of sweatshops workers of a particular country may not be well represented with regards to working conditions and the effects on health. This can be due to reasons such as the variations of working environments from factories to factories (Moure‐Eraso, Wilcox, Punnett, MacDonald, & Levenstein, 1997). Therefore, there’s only so much evidence that we can collate and put together but despite the limitations, we are all well aware of the treatments, be it in terms of health or humanity, sweatshop workers have to face.

Sweatshops still continue to exist in today’s culture not only because of the greed of businessmen but also because of the tacit approval from societies, governments as well as the sweatshop workers themselves. As Radin and Calkins (2006) described in their research, these stakeholders involved can be simply depicted in the diagram below.
 * Cultural and Social Analysis **



As illustrated in Figure 1, firms operating the sweatshops are interrelated to a network of other factors involving individual and organizational interests. Each factor has an influence on another be it directly, indirectly or collectively. Therefore, society and culture play a crucial role in our fight against sweatshops. This influence can be seen in our day to day lives when customers often take interest in firms they patronize (Radin & Calkins, 2006). Instead, consumers can exercise better consumer practices such as supporting the development of a market for sweat-free goods, using fair trade labeling schemes or becoming involved in non-government organizations (NGOs) that help people understand ways they can alleviate the problem of sweatshops.

Moreover, this can indirectly influence the practices and policies of corporations (Radin & Calkins, 2006; Micheletti & Stolle, 2007). For example, during the 1990s in Indonesia, anti-sweatshops activists focused on consumer awareness which led to a change in the minimum wage legislation. As a result of this change combined with anti-sweatshop campaigns, the real wages increased by more than 50 percent and nominal wages for unskilled workers at targeted exporting plants doubled (Harrison, & Scorse, 2006).

NGOs, trade unions and anti-sweatshop movements do exert a considerable amount of influence on firms owning the sweatshops. NGOs often have strong relationships between the firms, communities as well as the workers. Through these relationships, NGOs are able to identify and address the issues in relation to sweatshops and in turn provide assistance and guidance (Radin & Calkins, 2006). The anti-sweatshop movements had significantly raised public awareness of labor exploitation. For example, a campaign against Nike Inc. had resulted in more than 1000 newspaper articles in relation to the poor working conditions it provides to the workers. This caused more than 350,000 people to sign petitions to allow independent factory monitoring (Connor, 2004). Therefore, from the above example, we can see the influential ability public awareness can have on this issue.

Vulnerable sweatshop workers are the ultimate victims of this problem. They are often left with no other better alternatives but to work in these factories and because they are afraid of standing up for their own rights and fear offending those belonging to a different culture, they remain stuck in a stalemate that supports the perpetuation of <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">sweatshops (Radin & Calkins, 2006).

Indeed, the harm sweatshop brings about is an important public health issue to address. However, to eradicate it may be impossible and our only way is to improve the current conditions, in hope that the sweatshop workers can lead better lives. Therefore, public health experts should not only focus on implementing or changing the MNCs policies, but also work on developing the support NGOs can provide as well as raising awareness among the consumers so that they might be moved to stand against sweatshops.

The artifact represents how awareness put forth through the collaboration among NGOs and trade unions draw attention to the public and at the same time, influence the actions of companies. This initiative was very apt for the Olympic event occurring at that time as it shifts the public’s focus to the exploitative labor behind the production of sportswear. It was also through this movement that several sports brand such as Nike, Adidas, Reebok and Puma, responded to the proposals to bring labor abuses to an end.
 * Analysis of Artifact and Learning Reflections **

I felt that Play Fair was a clever move as it was held concurrently with and in response to the major internationally known Olympics in 2004. As everyone would anticipate for news about the Olympic Games through the media and newspapers, a campaign such as this in relation to the Olympics would inevitably be brought to light as well. As such, there will be an increase in awareness about sweatshops. I thought that the masks worn by the women was a unique and thought-provoking approach to help us come to a realization of how unaware we are of the working lives of sweatshop workers.

Through this assessment, I’ve come to realize the hard work sweatshop workers have to go through before the products were put on the shelf. To a certain extent, it also puts me to shame of how I had unknowingly supported sweatshops whenever I patronize a certain brand. It then motivates me to be more careful of what I purchase in hope that my actions as a consumer can, in some way, help the workers. In conclusion, I feel that everyone can play their part, whether big or small, to alleviate the problem of sweatshops.


 * References **
 * 1) //“Sew-In” Near Acropolis// [Picture]. (2004). Athens, Greece: Play Fair.
 * 2) //Play Fair at the Olympics -// //“Sew-In” Near Acropolis// (n.d.). Retrieved October 21, 2013, from [|__http://www.fairolympics.org/countries/greece2.html__]
 * 3) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Moure‐Eraso, R., Wilcox, M., Punnett, L., MacDonald, L., & Levenstein, C. (1997). Back to the future: Sweatshop conditions on the Mexico‐US Border. II. occupational health impact of Maquiladora industrial activity. //American Journal of Industrial Medicine//, 31(5), 587-599.
 * 4) Sweatshop. (n.d.). In //Oxford Dictionaries online//. Retrieved from [|__http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/sweatshop__]
 * 5) International Labour Rights Forum. (2012). //Sweatshop fires in Bangladesh//. Retrieved from [|__http://www.laborrights.org/sweatshop-fires-in-bangladesh__]
 * 6) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Arnold, D. G., & Bowie, N. E. (2003). Sweatshops and respect for persons. //Business Ethics Quarterly//, 221-242.
 * 7) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Arnold, D. G. (2003). “Exploitation” and the “Sweatshop Quandary”.
 * 8) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Arnold, D. G., & Hartman, L. P. (2006). Worker rights and low wage industrialization: How to avoid sweatshops. //Human Rights Quarterly//, 28(3), 676-700.
 * 9) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Radin, T. J., & Calkins, M. (2006). The struggle against sweatshops: Moving toward responsible global business. //Journal of Business Ethics//, 66(2-3), 261-272.
 * 10) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Micheletti, M., & Stolle, D. (2007). Mobilizing consumers to take responsibility for global social justice. //The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science//, 611(1), 157-175.
 * 11) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Harrison, A., & Scorse, J. (2006). Improving the conditions of workers? Minimum wage legislation and anti-sweatshop activism. //California Management Review//, 48(2), 144.
 * 12) <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Connor, T. (2004). Time to scale up cooperation? Trade unions, NGOs, and the international anti‐sweatshop movement. //Development in Practice//, 14(1-2), 61-70.

__A 'Firey' Awakening – By Gemma Young (N8831912)__ Great piece of work, Gemma! A very well-written and detailed write-up about the conditions of the factories as well as the mistreatments the sweatshop workers have to put up with. Your artifact also helped me come to realize the harsh reality of this issue. For a sweatshop worker to go to the extent of setting herself on fire as a protest clearly shows how much they had put up with. From this, I sense the urgency to quickly address this problem and through your essay, I understand the importance of anti-sweatshop campaigns, full public disclosure, accountability and responsible action. Like you, I’ve also become more aware of what I purchase and am now more careful so as not to unknowingly support sweatshops. Let’s hope for a positive change among the lives of these workers! Once again, good job! J
 * Learning Engagement and Reflection **

http://healthcultureandsociety2013.wikispaces.com/A+%27Firey%27+Awakening

__The Dirt on Sweatshop Labour – By Zoe Calleja (N8862516)__ Interesting artifact! I thought it was rather thought-provoking to view the issue of sweatshops from a different angle. Yes, I agree to a certain extent that sweatshops may be good for them but the question then is whether it does more harm than good? You’ve written a broad and well-researched literature review and analysis of what theorists and researchers have to say about this issue! Indeed, efforts should be focused on improving the conditions and minimizing inequalities rather than eradication of sweatshops. I enjoyed reading your reflections especially when you mentioned ‘never judge a book by its cover’. I thought that that was a good reminder for me as I think about this issue as well as other public health issues I may come across in the future.

http://healthcultureandsociety2013.wikispaces.com/The+Dirt+on+Sweatshop+Labour