The Problems Found in Sweatshops in Bangladesh

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.

The ratio blasting; cruising down the highway in our recently purchased red Ford Flex heading for a haven of clothing. My eyes fixed on getting a new pair of Nike sneakers, that I must have. Although, my vast collection has every color and style in the spectrum, I must have more. It's sort of an addiction; a love-hate relationship with me and shoes. Love to have them, hate to buy them. My mom finally pulls into the Rivertown Mall covered parking ramp. Feelings of excitement and suspense is hanging over me like children on monkey bars during recess. As we make our way into the Haven of Clothes, we chat about our route around the mall. Next thing I know I'm staring into the soul of the up-to-date, fashionable, grey and white Nike sneakers. Investigating

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.

Prior to the collapse of the Rana Plaza conditions of the Bangladesh sweatshops can only be described as a prisons for helpless, innocent humans. Conditions that no human should be forced to work within, that wasn't the case though. Many workers say that to meet demand they were locked in their factories past working hours. Not only being overworked and having to use dangerous machinery without breaks but also being abused verbally, physically and emotionally by their corrupt managers. There's no ethical standard upheld by the employers of these workers all they cared about was the products produced.

Women get saddled with the farm work as well as their domestic chores when men leave their villages for better-paid jobs in cities or abroad. Usually women get expelled before male, when huge state en¬terprises rationalise their workforces. Women are the first to be recruited when sweatshops seek underpaid casual labour.

A sweatshop is a workplace that violates the law and where workers are subject to extreme exploitation (including the absence of a living wage or long work hours), poor working conditions such as health and safety hazards, arbitrary discipline such as verbal or physical discipline or fear and intimidation when they attempt to stand up for their rights or attempt to form a union.1 This paper explores the working conditions in sweatshops mainly located near the US-Mexican border and the results the production of sweatshops have caused. US companies import American parts into Mexico to assemble the parts in ‘maquiladoras’. Maquiladoras are best described as assembly plants run by foreign-based multinational corporations, most of which are headquartered in the United States and export the products back to the United States. The produced goods are then usually stamped ‘Assembled in Mexico or US Materials’.2

Imagine a small child from a third world country working in a unventilated hot room, making garment and shoes without any safety equipment, and working 12 to 15 hours shifts just to make about $1.25 a day. This perspective is what average U.S. citizens have of sweatshops, and most are horrified by the idea of people working in these conditions for extremely low wages. Contrary to this perception, people from third world countries see sweatshops as an opportunity for employment and a good source of income. Even though third world citizen see sweatshops as a good thing, it doesn't change the fact that these workers face disastrous working condition. While there is much controversy surrounding the implementation of sweatshops in third world countries, closing these factories is not always the best solution, as it can lead harmful outcomes. As it stands, reforming the structural management of sweatshops so that they provide a more humane environment may be the best solution for all parties involved.

Many people in developed countries find working conditions in sweatshops unacceptable because of low wages and underage workers. For example Ahmed Zia a 14-year-old Afagan refuge who earns only $2 a day and 8-year-old Kamis Saboor, an afghan refuge who should be going to school instead of working long hours in a manufacturing establishment. The conditions in sweatshops are also known to be terrible, because of the chemical hazards, the lack of ventilation and so on. But we still do not have enough evidence from theses two kids to make a clear judgment.

Sweatshops have always portrayed a negative image due to the mass media of how dangerous the factories are. Yes, sweatshops do not provide favorable work conditions however in relation to the work conditions that exist in alternative jobs, sweatshops are by far the best option available. Columnist Nicholas Kristof, writer of “Where Sweatshops are a Dream,” recognizes this issue and provides reasonable information explaining why the sweatshops conditions are desirable and “worth-it” to those in developing countries. Looking into places where sweatshop proliferate, such as Phnom Penh, Cambodia, one of the most common jobs, aside from sweatshops, is at a mountain of waste described as a “Dante-like vision of hell. It's a mountain of festering

“Hours are long. Wages are pitiful. But sweatshops are the symptom, not the cause of shocking global poverty. Workers go there voluntarily, which means - as hard as it is to believe - that whatever their alternatives are, they are worse. They stay there too; turnover rates of multinational-owned factories are low, because conditions and pay, while bad, are better than those in factories run by local firms,” Tim Harford, English economist and journalist, said. International buyers search for cheap labor and find it in countries like Bangladesh; people desperately need jobs in these countries, but the factory employees undertake appalling conditions and little pay.

They are complications in international trade. Classical views promise the benefits to both countries from trade but the complications are when you look closer at how that trade might actually hurt our country, their country, and both of our countries. For example, sweatshop labor can benefit manufacturers and customers but what about the people working in them, some of them would consider their labor exploitation by force and others consider it exploitation by choice. This is the division, their views. Another complication is “wolves in sheep’s clothing” meaning someone or something that tries to appear appealing to you under a certain circumstance is actually the exact opposite. So, opposition to having sweatshops in poor countries come from

and social future by encouraging child to work. I believe child labor is wrong. Although, I

In the story, a man who lives out in the middle of nowhere, with his two-year old son and dog, runs out of food in the middle of the coldest winter season. The trapper, then is forced to hunt some food for him and his family. He leaves his son and dog behind, hoping they will watch out for each other. When he comes back in the morning, he found his house with the door open and the furniture overturned. There was no sign of his son, but his dog was sitting guiltily on the floor, with blood all over his mouth.

Even though some arguments had proven the positive impacts of sweatshops in developing countries, there are also arguments that support otherwise. Sweatshops allow workers to experience inhuman working conditions and led to exploitation of natural resources in developing countries.

Bangladesh has been fortunate to share in the unintended consequences from an explosion in international trade and multi-national agreements on trade, most notably the Multi- Fibre Agreement (MFA) signed in 1973.