Summary

The United States has made shopping for clothes easy and inexpensive. But at what cost? The human rights of people all over the world are constantly exploited and violated. They work for U.S. companies in factories known as sweatshops. In these sweatshops, employees are given long work hours, measly wages, and horrible working conditions. In order to prevent these sweatshops and change the way companies manufacture their clothing we have to take action and stand up for the people who cant do it themselves. In order to protect their rights we have to advocate and demand for sweatshop free products from the companies we buy from. We have to educate and be educated about this issue. We CAN change how these companies function; we just have to take act as a community and take the first steps to end this era of sweatshops.

Literature Review


Capitalism and Its Effects on Human Rights: A Review of Literature
Anthony Duong
The University of Texas at El Paso

Abstract
            In the battle for human rights, people have fought against prejudice, discrimination, and above all the government. However, a new opponent for human rights has appeared: capitalism. Employees of many companies are faced with conditions that either benefit their rights or violate them to the most extreme. This literature review provides an understanding of how capitalism got involved with human rights as well as its effects on them. It will also provide statistical data on how the public views this issue and policies that aim to protect and prevent employees from the harmful effects that capitalism may bring.

Capitalism and Its Effects on Human Rights: A Review of Literature

            Ever since the founding of the United States in the 18th century people have fought over human rights, whether it be voting rights, ethnic rights, or women’s rights. People today are still fighting for their rights. The opposite also remains the same; people’s rights are constantly being violated. These fights do not only occur in the United States, but through out the entire world. However, the opponent this time is not the people of government, but by the country’s economic system: capitalism. Companies, both in the U.S. and abroad, use capitalism to gain profit and employ people to make their products. Some people feel that these companies trample on their human rights and others believe that it create opportunities for them. To get a better understanding of how capitalism affects human rights questions such as:
1. How did capitalism get involved with human rights?
2. What effects does capitalism have on Human Rights? Are they limited to the United States?
3. Are there policies that protect people from sweatshops?
Must be answered.
How did capitalism get involved with human rights?
To understand how capitalism got involved with human rights we first have to know what human rights and capitalism are. Human rights are the principles and freedoms that all humans are entitled to. Capitalism is an economic system that is based on the production of goods and services for exchange and profits. It also stresses that the control of economic goods in a society resides in those who invest in the capital for production such as private corporations or individuals (Becker, 1999). As a system of profit, capitalism got involved with human rights as early as the 1900s when then larger companies began mass-producing products. During the early 1900’s companies in the U.S. Companies paid their employees low wages and gave them long hours. The earned money was not enough to support their families, which in turn forced the children to work (Reich, 2007, p.21). Humans are entitled to proper working conditions. The capitalistic economy denied these and began its involvement with human rights. The time between the early 1900’s till 1950, regulations were put on these companies so that the employees could the power to fight for their rights. This allowed labor unions to form. The formation of the labor unions resulted in employers, of both large and small companies, providing their employee’s with decent wages, health benefits such as life insurance and labor rights (Reich, 2007, p.35).
 It would seem that the battle for human rights ends there in the 1950’s due to the raise of wages and benefits but what now? Decades have passed since the 1950’s. Regulations on companies have been stopped, capitalism has intensified, and the battle for human rights continues among employees and the companies. In the present day, capitalism has an even greater effect on human rights. Back in the 1950’s there were not many large companies in the same business, so there was no need for competition for consumers. People just bought products from those companies without having to worry about prices. Now in the 2000’s there are many companies that are forced to compete for the consumer. For example, in the 1950’s the major car companies were General Motors and Chrysler (CNN, n.d.). People bought cars from these two companies and there was no need for competition. As capitalism intensified, so did the competition. New companies such as Honda and Toyota were made and they sold cars at lower prices, thus driving consumers towards them. This created a fierce competition between the companies. The competition then led to companies lowering the prices of their products and the need of gaining maximum profits. This consequently resulted in the lowering of employee wages and benefits. The requirement for maximum profits also led to a different kind of factory, one where human rights and capitalism would be profoundly exhibited, the sweatshop.

What effects does capitalism have on Human Rights? Are they limited to the United States?
Capitalism has many different effects on human rights. Some argue that capitalism has negative effects on human rights, while others say the opposite. An unscientific survey was done by Duong (2011) to observe how the public perceives sweatshops on human rights. The results are shown below in figure 1.
Figure 1:

 As shown in figure 1, 69 percent of the public who took the survey found that sweatshops had a negative effect on human rights, while 31 percent found it to be a positive effect. The public was also asked why they believed the sweatshops had the effect they do on human rights. Many of the participants of the survey answered, “I don't think that the conditions they work under as far as pay and other conditions are right. I am okay with the fact that they give job opportunities to other countries, but if Nike is going to be giving jobs, I would assume they make way more money to only be paying cents to their workers.” Although more people believe that sweatshops have a negative effect, sweatshops have both a positive and negative effect on human rights.
As the competition between companies intensified, companies began lowering prices and “squeezing their suppliers” of goods at extremely low prices (Reich, 2007, p.91). In order for the suppliers to keep business with the companies they have to “squeeze the wages and benefits of the millions of people who work for them in the United States and abroad” (Reich, 2007, p. 91). At the same time various sweatshops appeared within the U.S. These sweatshops brought working conditions that violated the basic rights of having a safe working environment, wages that meet the basic cost of living, and acceptable working hours (“Sweatshops,” 2004). Many of the employees at these sweatshops often work long hours, up to 17 hours a day, for wages that are often $0.10 or $0.20 an hour (“Women and Sweatshop Labor,” n.d.). The employees also work in crowded, and rat-infested environments. While working in these conditions, they are often subject to harassment and do not receive health benefits (“Women and Sweatshop Labor,” n.d.).
These sweatshops are not limited to the United States. Many are spread out across the poorer areas of Asia, and South America. Conditions outside the U.S. are more severe due to the lack of reinforced labor laws. Employees in sweatshops abroad receive similar wages, hours and treatment to those in the U.S. However, those in sweatshops abroad are not allowed to move freely and are kept behind barbed wire fences and are guarded by armed men (“Women and Sweatshop Labor,” n.d.). Clinical researcher Mahmood Bhutta, of the UK Medical Research Council recalls a recent trip made to Pakistan and states “I found most workers toiling 12 hours a day, seven days a week, for less than a dollar a day, exposed to noise, metal dust and toxic chemicals. Thousands of children, some as young as 7, work in the industry”(Bhutta, 2010).
Advocating groups such as Green America (2004-2009) stress that sweatshops are problematic for human rights and state “No one should have to work 17-hour days just so Americans can save a few dollars on clothes” (“Sweatshops,” 2004). However, people like Nicholas D. Kristof of the New York Times see sweatshops and the expansion of capitalism as a positive effect on human rights. Many people often only see the horrible exploitation that sweatshops bring, but when in fact there are hidden positive effects to them. People in the poorest countries do not have job opportunities and are often in worse conditions than in sweatshops. Kristof (2009) states, “ the central challenge in the poorest countries is not that sweatshops exploit too many people, but that they don’t exploit enough.”
 In countries such as Cambodia, many people find work in large garbage dumps finding recyclable bottles and the like for $.05 per pound. They walk barefooted through mountains of filth, are exposed to toxic smells, and some even live in shacks among the garbage heaps. Some children are even run over by garbage trucks. These people see working in sweatshops as an improvement to their current situation. They see employment in sweatshops as a dream and a way out of poverty, as well as safer and more pleasant (Kristof, 2009). One important fact that many people do not take into account is that the people are not forced to take the job. They choose to work in these sweatshops because it is superior to the other alternatives (Millman, 2009). Sweatshops can provide millions of jobs as well as better wages for the families in these countries. According to Jack Millman (2009), a Lantern columnist, “Sweatshops have been shown to reduce poverty and malnutrition while steering workers away from occupations such as prostitution or begging.”


Are there policies that protect people from sweatshops?
There are many enforced policies that protect people from the conditions of a sweatshop. For those in the United States there policies such as the Fair Labor Standards Act require employers to pay no less then the federal minimum wage for each hour worked and time and one-half for ever hour worked in excess of forty hours within the work week for non-exempt workers (“Wages and Hours Worked,” n.d.). The Immigration and Nationality act protects foreigners and allows employers in the U.S. to hire foreign workers on a temporary or permanent basis to perform certain types of work (“Wages and Hours Worked,” n.d.). According to the United States Department of Labor employers are certified “to hire foreign workers in cases where there are insufficient qualified U.S. workers available and willing to perform work at wages that meet or exceed the prevailing wage paid for that occupation in the area of intended employment” (“Wages and Hours Worked,” n.d.). These policies however are only limited to the United States. Companies that take their business abroad must follow the labor laws of the country they are in. However, those labor laws a hardly enforced and allow the companies to continue to exploit people in sweatshops. As a response to this, many people in the U.S began an anti-sweatshop movement. The public refused to buy products from companies that received their products from sweatshops. In order to keep the public from boycotting their goods companies began creating codes of conduct (Maryanov, 2010). These codes of conduct were not made to be enforceable commands but were designed to “ support economic, social and political justice by companies where they do business…” and to “embrace, support, and enact, within their sphere of influence, a set of core values in the areas of human right, labour standards, the environment, and anti-corruption” (Maryanov, 2010). Among the first to set up their codes of conduct was the apparel company Levi Strauss & Co. Their codes stated: “ our goals are to ensure that all individuals involved in the production of the goods we sell are treated with dignity and respect and enjoy safe and healthy working condition; … and achieve positive results and effect change by working with business partners and community organizations to find…solutions to…problems in factories” (Maryanov, 2010). Other companies included standards for their contractors concerning forced labor, child labor, working hours, and safety and health. These codes were used as a self-regulation that were bound public surveillance. Although there are policies and codes that protect the employees of theses companies and their business partners, it is difficult to effectively enforce them.
Enforcing these policies and codes has become a difficult task due to the fact that there are millions of factories through out the world. Companies have attempted to monitor their factories and suppliers but are faced with difficult obstacles. Some companies contract with over seven hundred factories abroad that continuously move around. Many of the suppliers shift their manufacturing to ever-cheaper and less-regulated locations (“Sweatshops,” 2004). This movement, along with the vast number of factories, makes it more difficult for the companies to enforce their codes abroad. Companies in the U.S have fewer obstacles due to the labor laws set by the United States Department of Labor. However companies who are pressured to maximize their profits can easily violate the policies on labor. This puts human rights in a position where they can be easily violated but also gives citizens the chance to act for them.
Conclusion
            Through the many decades that capitalism has been involved with human rights, it has been shown that capitalism possess both positive and negative consequences on human rights. It has provided many people with jobs with better wages, and safer environments to work in. It has also given many people the chance to be free of poverty and live better lives.  Just as capitalism can provide people with better wages, it can also exploit many people. It creates sweatshops that lower wages, and endanger people’s lives in horrible working conditions. In an effort to counteract these negative effects, policies have been made to provide a standard in which all companies must abide by. However, the effectiveness of the policies is often questioned because of the small drop in the number of sweatshops. Until the issue of sweatshops is resolved capitalism will continue to involve itself with human rights. Whether or not to rid of sweatshops is completely the public’s decision. However, the true question remains, Is ending the horrible conditions of sweatshops worth the price of taking the chance to be free of poverty away?


Resources
Becker, M. (1999, March). Terms and Definitions. In Latin American History-Resources. Retrieved March 20, 2011, from http://www2.truman.edu/~marc/resources/terms.html
Bhutta, M. (2010, March 27). Beware the unethical lab coats. In Ebsco host. Retrieved February 22, 2011, from Academic Search Complete.
Fortune 500. (n.d.). In CNN money. Retrieved March 20, 2011, from http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500_archive/full/1955/index.html
Kristof, N. D. (2009, January 14). Where sweatshops are a dream. In New York Times. Retrieved February 22, 2011, from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/15/opinion/15kristof.html?_r=2&ref=nicholasdkristof
Maryanov, D. C. (2010). Sweatshop Liability: Corporate Codes of Conduct and the Governance of Labor Standards in the International Supply Chain (Vol. 14, pp. 397-450). Lewis and Clark Review. Retrieved February 23, 2011, from Academic Search Complete.
Millman, J. (2009, October 4). Sweatshops benefit poor. In The lantern. Retrieved February 25, 2011, from http://www.thelantern.com/opinion/sweatshops-benefit-poor-1.626775
 (n.d.). In Dictionary.com. Retrieved March 20, 2011, from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/capitalism
Reich, R. B. (2007). Supercapitalism (pp. 20-130). New York, NY: Vintage Books.
Sweatshops. (2004). In Green america come together. Retrieved March 21, 2011, from http://www.greenamerica.org/programs/sweatshops/whattoknow.cfm
Wages and hours worked (n.d.). In United States Department of Labor. Retrieved March 24, 2011, from http://www.dol.gov/compliance/topics/wages.htm
Women and sweatshop labor. (n.d.). In Fashion Crimes. Retrieved March 22, 2011, from http://www.mtholyoke.edu/~nshah/fashioncrimes/Sweatshops.html
 (2009). In The free dictionary. Retrieved March 20, 2011, from http://www.thefreedictionary.com/human+rights

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)