While "sweatshop" economics is a highly multifaceted and complicated issue, it is significant because it highlights the clashes between the benefits and maximizing profits of using these labor tactics and providing the human rights promised globally to all humans. It, thus, highlights concerns that because something can be done, should it be done? As I read and listen to the news, it is not unusual for there to be headlines and stories of multinational companies earning record breaking profits. Given the billions of dollars earned each year by these multinational corporations, I would argue that providing workers safe working conditions and paying them enough to earn a living wage is not unreasonable and should be a priority.
Through the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, governments around the world have agreed to what rights all individuals have as human beings and it is long past time that governments work with other world leaders to fulfill these promises. It seems to me the days of dog eat dog competition should be put behind us, and in a world where governments and business leaders promote globalizing trade a more humane approach to how all humans interact and are treated is necessary.
I realize that it would take significant cooperation of governments, multinational companies, and manufacturers to work together to prioritize human profits over financial profits and to ensure fair labor practice standards were mutually agreed upon, put into place, and enforced. However, A 2006 study published in the American Sociological Association’s journal found that the majority of shoppers were willing to pay $1 to $5 more for garments made in humane conditions (Blumgart, 2013). Thus, indicating that a compromise between maximizing profits, satisfying consumers materialistic hungers, and providing better working conditions for factory workers around the world is desirable and should be seen as a possible and worthy goal. With these thoughts, questions such as "what safety standards should be identified as being fair labor?"; "what are effective means of enforcing fair labor laws where enforcements are weak?"; "how are fair wages determined?"; and "how can safety standards be implemented in the most cost effective means?"
Through the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, governments around the world have agreed to what rights all individuals have as human beings and it is long past time that governments work with other world leaders to fulfill these promises. It seems to me the days of dog eat dog competition should be put behind us, and in a world where governments and business leaders promote globalizing trade a more humane approach to how all humans interact and are treated is necessary.
I realize that it would take significant cooperation of governments, multinational companies, and manufacturers to work together to prioritize human profits over financial profits and to ensure fair labor practice standards were mutually agreed upon, put into place, and enforced. However, A 2006 study published in the American Sociological Association’s journal found that the majority of shoppers were willing to pay $1 to $5 more for garments made in humane conditions (Blumgart, 2013). Thus, indicating that a compromise between maximizing profits, satisfying consumers materialistic hungers, and providing better working conditions for factory workers around the world is desirable and should be seen as a possible and worthy goal. With these thoughts, questions such as "what safety standards should be identified as being fair labor?"; "what are effective means of enforcing fair labor laws where enforcements are weak?"; "how are fair wages determined?"; and "how can safety standards be implemented in the most cost effective means?"