Monday, November 29, 2010
Working (and buying!) for Hanes
The clip is self-explanatory. And these are not fictional characters. They are REAL. While child labor is illegal is most countries, it is also widespread in the garment industry in Southeast Asia and Central America.
Most people agree that there is something wrong with these practices. But the question is whether Hanes is in any way to blame for the situation of Halima and many other children working in these factories. It is important to remember that these factories are suppliers and subcontractors of Hanes (that is, technically, these workers are not Hanes' employees).
As a customer, do this sort of clips change your decision-making process about shopping for Hanes clothing? Do you think about these children when you have Hanes products in your hands?
As you watch this clip, think also about possible solutions to the problem from the perspective of multinational corporations.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think that although Hanes is not directly accountable for what is going on in these factories, they should definitely be held somewhat responsible for what is going on. It would be ignorant to say that Hanes has absolutely no idea how their products are being made (child labor), but at the same time they would claim that they are not employing these children. Now after viewing that clip it will be inevitable for me not to think about this young girl when I see or buy Hanes clothes. I think there are definitely solutions available for Hanes. This company should threaten to not hire these subcontractors if they do not promise to change the working conditions for these innocent young children. They need to do things like raise the wages, clean the bathrooms, decrease working hours, and stop any beatings. Hanes is not forced to hire these subcontractors and can move their business elsewhere. Overall, I think that Hanes definitely holds some responsibility for what is going on, but it is the duty of both parties to take action to clean up what is going on. Children should not be placed to work in this type of environment, and most would argue that children of this age should not be working at all. Either way, something needs to be done and Hanes can provide a solution.
ReplyDeleteAs a customer, this would most likely change my decision making process to but Hanes clothes because I would feel guilty that this is going on. Young children should not be worked into the ground and treated this poorly.
I believe that Hanes should be held responsible for what was going on in this factory. The girl said it herself; the Hanes label was being made on the entire floor. It is understandable that Hanes trusted this subcontractor to create these specific products for them in an ethical way. But, in my opinion, the moment that Hanes signed a deal with this subcontractor, this factory and all it’s workers became Hanes responsibility. The factory was producing Hanes clothes, thus the products and everyone working to create the products, is Hanes responsibility. Child labor is a huge problem in society today, especially in these third world countries where major companies are producing their products. There have been so many scandals already with huge corporations such as Nike and Gap. I think that these scandals and the scandal such as this, should be a huge wake up call for corporations to make sure they are choosing who they do business with wisely. By this I mean that it is crucial that before reaching an agreement to do business with another party, they need to make sure that the work will be done in an ethical way; there will be no child labor, working conditions will be excellent, and wages will be fair. If I were Hanes or any other corporation with a similar problem, I would go through all of the subcontractors that I have agreement with, and make sure that nothing like this is going on. If it is going on, I would make sure that the subcontractor halts all production until there are no children working, conditions are good, and wages are fair. Additionally, I would do random checks on the factories to make sure nothing unethical is taking place and I would threaten them that if it were to happen again, there would be permanent termination of the contract. While these drastic measures may be hard to take and may take a toll on my company, this is better than the reputation and image we will have be exploiting children and workers. Finally, by doing this we may lose money but we will be putting a stop to the pain of many workers and children and we will be taking them away from a life they do not deserve, and giving them a new one.
ReplyDeleteThe Hanes name has been tarnished for me. Now every time I hear the brand or see it in the stores, I will picture this little girls face. I will remember her saying how she was only paid 6.5 cents/hr, 53 cents a day, $3.20 a week. How at the age of 11 she was working in a factory and was not even allowed to use the disgusting bathroom without permission. No one should be treated like this, especially not children.
I believe that Hanes should be held responsible for what was going on in this factory. The girl said it herself; the Hanes label was being made on the entire floor. It is understandable that Hanes trusted this subcontractor to create these specific products for them in an ethical way. But, in my opinion, the moment that Hanes signed a deal with this subcontractor, this factory and all it’s workers became Hanes responsibility. The factory was producing Hanes clothes, thus the products and everyone working to create the products, is Hanes responsibility. Child labor is a huge problem in society today, especially in these third world countries where major companies are producing their products. There have been so many scandals already with huge corporations such as Nike and Gap. I think that these scandals and the scandal such as this, should be a huge wake up call for corporations to make sure they are choosing who they do business with wisely. By this I mean that it is crucial that before reaching an agreement to do business with another party, they need to make sure that the work will be done in an ethical way; there will be no child labor, working conditions will be excellent, and wages will be fair. If I were Hanes or any other corporation with a similar problem, I would go through all of the subcontractors that I have agreement with, and make sure that nothing like this is going on. If it is going on, I would make sure that the subcontractor halts all production until there are no children working, conditions are good, and wages are fair. Additionally, I would do random checks on the factories to make sure nothing unethical is taking place and I would threaten them that if it were to happen again, there would be permanent termination of the contract. While these drastic measures may be hard to take and may take a toll on my company, this is better than the reputation and image we will have be exploiting children and workers. Finally, by doing this we may lose money but we will be putting a stop to the pain of many workers and children and we will be taking them away from a life they do not deserve, and giving them a new one.
ReplyDeleteThe Hanes name has been tarnished for me. Now every time I hear the brand or see it in the stores, I will picture this little girls face. I will remember her saying how she was only paid 6.5 cents/hr, 53 cents a day, $3.20 a week. How at the age of 11 she was working in a factory and was not even allowed to use the disgusting bathroom without permission. No one should be treated like this, especially not children.
-Alyssa Marino
Andrew Yacyshyn-
ReplyDeleteI agree very much so with Kevin. I believe Hanes, though they are not directly responsible for what goes on in the sweatshop factories overseas, that they are still responsible because it is the Hanes company that employs this kind of child labor that produces its products. Though these factories are not in America and they may follow another country's acceptable customs, Hanes is still the company associated with these factories. It is their products, specifically underwear, that are being produced in these sweatshops. Therefore, Hanes is directly related with the child labor, the unfair wages, dirty bathrooms and working conditions, and beatings that are given to the children when they make a mistake. As a customer, I will always think of Halima and the horrible conditions she and the other children face when working in the Hanes factories. Even when looking at my clothes now that are of the Hanes brand, I can't help but think about the way these garments were produced.
Andrew Yacyshyn-
ReplyDeleteI agree very much so with Kevin. I believe Hanes, though they are not directly responsible for what goes on in the sweatshop factories overseas, that they are still responsible because it is the Hanes company that employs this kind of child labor that produces its products. Though these factories are not in America and they may follow another country's acceptable customs, Hanes is still the company associated with these factories. It is their products, specifically underwear, that are being produced in these sweatshops. Therefore, Hanes is directly related with the child labor, the unfair wages, dirty bathrooms and working conditions, and beatings that are given to the children when they make a mistake. As a customer, I will always think of Halima and the horrible conditions she and the other children face when working in the Hanes factories. Even when looking at my clothes now that are of the Hanes brand, I can't help but think about the way these garments were produced.
Well, I was going to do the usual thing... counterexamples, objections, etc... But I'd better highlight something that is just undeniable: in case you have not noticed it, the quality of your comments is getting better and better. You have made my day!
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Kevin and Andrew. Although Hanes is not directly being held accountable for the things that are taking place in their factories abroad, as a result of the workers not being perceived as "Hanes employees", I believe that Hanes still has some responsibility for these workers.
ReplyDeleteBe that as it may, Hanes is obligated to do something. As shown in the interview with the little girl, she clearly states that when she goes to the bathroom, there is no paper, soap, or water. I think that even though Hanes does not have a direct responsibility for the workers, it does in fact have a responsibility for their products and clothing. As a customer, I would not want to buy something that has been touched with unsanitary hands or made by individuals who have been treated wrongly by their superiors. I could only imagine how one would feel if they were to find out what Hanes has been practicing in their sweatshops.
In addition, having these people perform in poor working conditions cannot only ruin a company’s image, but can at times lead to companies to shut down or lose quarterly income, if people begin to boycott their company’s products. Nevertheless, Hanes needs to do something to address the things that are going on in their sweatshops abroad. I think if Hanes were to make a better effort in giving the workers enhanced working conditions at the minimum, it will contribute to making business better overall. One benefit being that these factories will no longer attain workers falling asleep on the job or unsanitary conditions. As well as, Hanes not being severely criticized for what they are doing abroad, as they once were before the new working conditions.
Furthermore as a customer, I would not want to buy anything associated with Hanes, if they were to still continue to have children and workers be beaten and acquire unfair working conditions. I would feel uncomfortable buying a product from Hanes knowing about the working conditions still occurring in their sweatshops.
I also agree with Kevin and Andrew. Although Hanes is not directly being held accountable for the things that are taking place in their factories abroad, as a result of the workers not being perceived as "Hanes employees", I believe that Hanes still has some responsibility for these workers.
ReplyDeleteBe that as it may, Hanes is obligated to do something. As shown in the interview with the little girl, she clearly states that when she goes to the bathroom, there is no paper, soap, or water. I think that even though Hanes does not have a direct responsibility for the workers, it does in fact have a responsibility for their products and clothing. As a customer, I would not want to buy something that has been touched with unsanitary hands or made by individuals who have been treated wrongly by their superiors. I could only imagine how one would feel if they were to find out what Hanes has been practicing in their sweatshops.
In addition, having these people perform in poor working conditions cannot only ruin a company’s image, but can at times lead to companies to shut down or lose quarterly income, if people begin to boycott their company’s products. Nevertheless, Hanes needs to do something to address the things that are going on in their sweatshops abroad. I think if Hanes were to make a better effort in giving the workers enhanced working conditions at the minimum, it will contribute to making business better overall. One benefit being that these factories will no longer attain workers falling asleep on the job or unsanitary conditions. As well as, Hanes not being severely criticized for what they are doing abroad, as they once were before the new working conditions.
Furthermore as a customer, I would not want to buy anything associated with Hanes, if they were to still continue to have children and workers be beaten and acquire unfair working conditions. I would feel uncomfortable buying a product from Hanes knowing about the working conditions still occurring in their sweatshops.
As a customer, this clip definitely changes my perception on the Hanes brand in a negative way, to say the least. As we discussed in the last class, there are some things that are inherently wrong, and this situation of child labor is just wrong. This brings up an important issue in ethics involved in global business. Many consumers when they go to buy something do not think twice about how the product they are buying was made or who the product was made by and under what working conditions. Since it would be hard for consumers to always know for sure if what they are buying was made by workers working in a safe environment and being paid justly, it is up to the company to engage in ethical business practices. Therefore, in this example, Hanes is directly responsible for Halima and other children working in these factories’ situations. Regardless of whether they are Hanes’ employees or not, Hanes is still responsible for these children because they are still working on the final Hanes products. If Hanes didn’t take responsibility who would? I agree with Kevin, I definitely think Hanes could solve this problem by threatening to not hire subcontractors who participate in this type of child labor. From the perspective of multinational corporations, I believe that by taking a stance to ensure that their business did not involve the use of child labor they would be operating on a higher level than most companies and ensuring a higher ethical standard for their company, which could only bring about good for them as a company. Hanes should take into practice an industry-wide movement of ethical business practices, which is described in the textbook. Though child labor is something that is illegal in most countries, it still occurs and since it is still occurring I think a major step would be to at least improve the working conditions of the children and increasing wages or providing schooling for them. This can only become effective however if enough MNCs begin to make an effort to ensure these safer working conditions or to make sure their factories are not using child labor at all.
ReplyDeleteI think the National Labor Committee did an excellent job with creating this video and “putting a human face on the global economy.” I think companies can market their brands very well and attract many customers so that they can easily hide the corrupt business practices going on behind the creation of the products. I think this clip is a sign that more responsibility needs to be taken by the consumer to make sure they support corporations that practice ethical means of business.
As a customer, this clip definitely changes my perception on the Hanes brand in a negative way, to say the least. As we discussed in the last class, there are some things that are inherently wrong, and this situation of child labor is just wrong. This brings up an important issue in ethics involved in global business. Many consumers when they go to buy something do not think twice about how the product they are buying was made. Since it would be hard for consumers to always know for sure if what they are buying was made by workers working in a safe environment and being paid justly, it is up to the company to engage in ethical business practices. Therefore, Hanes is directly responsible for Halima and other children working in these factories’ situations. Regardless of whether they are Hanes’ employees or not, Hanes is still responsible for these children because they are still working on the final Hanes products. I agree with Kevin, I definitely think Hanes could solve this problem by threatening to not hire subcontractors who participate in this type of child labor. From the perspective of multinational corporations, I believe that by taking a stance to ensure that their business did not involve the use of child labor they would be operating on a higher level than most companies and ensuring a higher ethical standard for their company, which could only bring about good for them. Hanes should take into practice an industry-wide movement of ethical business practices. Though child labor is something that is illegal in most countries, it still occurs and I think a major step would be to at least improve the working conditions of the children and increasing wages or providing schooling for them. This can only become effective however if enough MNCs begin to make an effort to ensure these safer working conditions or to make sure their factories are not using child labor at all. I think the National Labor Committee did an excellent job with creating this video and “putting a human face on the global economy.” I think companies can market their brands very well and attract many customers so that they can easily hide the corrupt business practices going on behind the creation of the products. I think this clip is a sign that more responsibility needs to be taken by the consumer to make sure they support corporations that practice ethical means of business.
ReplyDeleteAs a customer, this clip definitely changes my perception on the Hanes brand in a negative way, to say the least. As we discussed in the last class, there are some things that are inherently wrong, and this situation of child labor is just wrong. This brings up an important issue in ethics involved in global business. Many consumers when they go to buy something do not think twice about how the product they are buying was made. Since it would be hard for consumers to always know for sure if what they are buying was made by workers working in a safe environment and being paid justly, it is up to the company to engage in ethical business practices. Therefore, Hanes is directly responsible for Halima and other children working in these factories’ situations. Regardless of whether they are Hanes’ employees or not, Hanes is still responsible for these children because they are still working on the final Hanes products. I agree with Kevin, I definitely think Hanes could solve this problem by threatening to not hire subcontractors who participate in this type of child labor. From the perspective of multinational corporations, I believe that by taking a stance to ensure that their business did not involve the use of child labor they would be operating on a higher level than most companies and ensuring a higher ethical standard for their company, which could only bring about good for them. Hanes should take into practice an industry-wide movement of ethical business practices. Though child labor is something that is illegal in most countries, it still occurs and I think a major step would be to at least improve the working conditions of the children and increasing wages or providing schooling for them. This can only become effective however if enough MNCs begin to make an effort to ensure these safer working conditions or to make sure their factories are not using child labor at all. I think the National Labor Committee did an excellent job with creating this video and “putting a human face on the global economy.” I think companies can market their brands very well and attract many customers so that they can easily hide the corrupt business practices going on behind the creation of the products. I think this clip is a sign that more responsibility needs to be taken by the consumer to make sure they support corporations that practice ethical means of business.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Hanes should be held responsible for what is going. If people that are working for them are using child labor then they are supporting child labor. Hanes should take a stance and not subcontract any company that employs child labor. This being known it greatly effects my view of Hanes. I don't think that I could buy any of Hanes products after finding out about this. A company with a reputation like Hanes should not be subcontracting companies that are using child labor. It is bad for their image and it is also morally wrong. A company with the reputation that Hanes has should be held to the utmost professionalism. Professionalism to means that they should have clean bathrooms and fair wages. As a customer I could not support Hanes knowing how they are operating.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Hanes should be held responsible for what is going. If people that are working for them are using child labor then they are supporting child labor. Hanes should take a stance and not subcontract any company that employs child labor. This being known it greatly effects my view of Hanes. I don't think that I could buy any of Hanes products after finding out about this. A company with a reputation like Hanes should not be subcontracting companies that are using child labor. It is bad for their image and it is also morally wrong. A company with the reputation that Hanes has should be held to the utmost professionalism. Professionalism to means that they should have clean bathrooms and fair wages. As a customer I could not support Hanes knowing how they are operating.
ReplyDeleteYes, Hanes is to blame for the for the situation of Halima. These suppliers should have requirements put upon them by Hanes. No human being should work in these conditions. However, I am aware that the price of Hanes underwear will rise because the production costs of suppliers will rise.
ReplyDeleteIt is up to the consumer to request that American companies employ children at higher wages and demand better working conditions for employees of their suppliers. The real question is: Is America willing to pay more to be more humane to the producers of their products? I don't think so. People want the lowest price and companies, the lowest cost. The solution lies in paying more as a consumer to provide better working conditions for the working children in third world countries.
My second question: Should child labor be banned completely? No. This idea ties into the absolutism and relativism topic from last class. America has its laws that fits American society. Do America's laws and ways fit into every country? No. This is one case where applying our laws somewhere else does not work. This is true because people in America assume the culture in other countries are solvable using the same solutions of America. We would be wrong if we tried to abolish child labor in other countries. The families in these countries need every penny they can get. In many of these third world countries, the cost of living is low. Employees in those countries get paid according to the economic/political situation of the country. Sometimes the families live off of these countries. In some cases, families live off of any money a child makes. Sometimes they are the sole providers for their family. It may sound outrageous but it is the truth.
I understand that a consumer in a Wal-Mart, for example, is not in the environment that would allow them to differentiate a child labor product for another. Also, at the time of a purchase there is not a source displaying detailed information about a product's production origins. If when I was buying a Haynes product, this video was playing, I would not buy this product for the simple fact that this horrible information was in my face. Many times a consumer may forget about information like this when they go to buy a product. A company like Haynes would not want their potential consumers to associate their company to horrid working conditions. This would cause the end of the Haynes company. They don’t publicize it. But they do not do anything to change the situation because of the consumers. Again, it is up to the consumers to pay the higher price for humane working conditions in third world countries. But why would we pay a higher price for a product in such a bad economic environment?
Yes, Hanes is to blame for the for the situation of Halima. These suppliers should have requirements put upon them by Hanes. No human being should work in these conditions. However, I am aware that the price of Hanes underwear will rise because the production costs of suppliers will rise.
ReplyDeleteIt is up to the consumer to request that American companies employ children at higher wages and demand better working conditions for employees of their suppliers. The real question is: Is America willing to pay more to be more humane to the producers of their products? I don't think so. People want the lowest price and companies, the lowest cost. The solution lies in paying more as a consumer to provide better working conditions for the working children in third world countries.
My second question: Should child labor be banned completely? No. This idea ties into the absolutism and relativism topic from last class. America has its laws that fits American society. Do America's laws and ways fit into every country? No. This is one case where applying our laws somewhere else does not work. This is true because people in America assume the culture in other countries are solvable using the same solutions of America. We would be wrong if we tried to abolish child labor in other countries. The families in these countries need every penny they can get. In many of these third world countries, the cost of living is low. Employees in those countries get paid according to the economic/political situation of the country. Sometimes the families live off of these countries. In some cases, families live off of any money a child makes. Sometimes they are the sole providers for their family. It may sound outrageous but it is the truth.
I understand that a consumer in a Wal-Mart, for example, is not in the environment that would allow them to differentiate a child labor product for another. Also, at the time of a purchase there is not a source displaying detailed information about a product's production origins. If when I was buying a Haynes product, this video was playing, I would not buy this product for the simple fact that this horrible information was in my face. Many times a consumer may forget about information like this when they go to buy a product. A company like Haynes would not want their potential consumers to associate their company to horrid working conditions. This would cause the end of the Haynes company. They don’t publicize it. But they do not do anything to change the situation because of the consumers. Again, it is up to the consumers to pay the higher price for humane working conditions in third world countries. But why would we pay a higher price for a product in such a bad economic environment?
Like everyone else, I also believe that Hanes is to blame for what has been going on in these factories. When businesses do business with other firms, it is part of their responsibility to find out how the jobs are going to get done. Apparently though, Hanes was lied to and misled because whenever their buyers came, the children were sent to hide in the bathroom. However, I wonder if they really don't know or just pretend not to know about the child labor that was occurring. Personally, I think they must have some idea. It is a known fact that child labor exists in these countries and if Hanes was really concerned about child labor I think they should have done more to ensure that their company was not associated with it.
ReplyDeleteAs a customer, these sort of clips change my decision making process when shopping for Hanes clothing. At home I always receive their magazine in the mail and purchase items from their catalog but after watching this clip I no longer want to buy anything from them. When I hold Hanes products in my hands, I will definitely think about these children.
Part of the solution to this issue is for corporations to do research on these factories before they choose them to make their clothing. Of course cheap labor is ideal but in the end it is not worth it when people's well being (especially children's) is at steak. The company's reputation is at steak as well because most people who watch this clip will feel bad for these children, and like myself, will no longer purchase Hanes products. I would like to say that another solution to this issue is for Hanes to pay the factories more money for their output but I know that in many cases, the factory owners are greedy and even with a higher pay they probably won’t do anything to improve the conditions or salaries of their workers. Hanes would have to pay the workers directly somehow or hire someone from the Hanes Corporation to oversee the way things are handled in the factory.
In accordance with stakeholder theory, these subcontractors are just as much a part of the Hanes company as those who are directly involved with the day-to-day functioning of the company as well as the shareholders. Thus, I believe that Hanes is responsible for the atrocities that are occurring in the factories of the subcontractors. Halima's situation is heartbreaking. As a consumer, I will definitely remember the video of Halima when I see Hanes' products, which will discourage me from buying any Hanes products at all. I believe that it is in the company's best interest to completely stop using their current subcontractors and to establish a strict code of ethics and wage regulations for the new subcontractors that they select. Not only would this be the moral action to take, but it would also create a much better reputation for the company in the public consumer eye. As more and more people learn about the misery of the child laborers, Hanes' profits will certainly decline rapidly. Thus, it is clear that the long-run benefits of finding new subcontractors with fair standards will outweigh the short-term cost of paying more money for a different subcontractor.
ReplyDelete-Claire Smith
Hanes is responsible for this situation because they have adopted this business practice. Hanes's wants its products to be produced this way. The reason for these sweatshops is because of the huge profits and savings. In actuality,not only Hanes, but numerous of other corporations benefit from sweatshops. The common reaction to sweatshops is to do nothing. Since corporations see sweatshops as at tool to maximize their profits,nothing wrong with them. Furthermore,corporations believe sweatshops cause more good than harm. These sweatshops are often found in third world countries. This is seen as "good" because much needed economic development occurs. The issue with sweatshops is not really child labor, but the unhealthy working conditions. Hanes has no control/ cannot implement its policies in these third world countries. Therefore, since Hanes is not directly causing harm, they can not be solely blamed. Hanes is only at fault when they turn a blind eye to this situation. By doing that, Hanes is silently approving this practice. Because Hanes has somewhat distanced themselves from these sweatshops, Hanes believes it is not their problem. Its not in their jurisdiction.
ReplyDeleteWatching this clip does not change my shopping behavior because its known that numerous of corporations use sweatshops and child labor. Some of these corporations are Nike and Wal-Mart. Like thse two corporations, many other corporations that use sweatshops are heavily integrated with society. It would be hard to just wake up one day and stop shopping from your favorite store. Also, because I'm not directly involved with sweatshops, I don't have any emotional or physical connection to them. Sweatshops are bad, but because of the lack of "physical connection" no one does anything about them. We generate awareness about the issue, but I have yet to see someone attempt to resolve the issue.
I don't buy Hanes's products. If I ever do, I guess I might think of children like Halima.
I believe there is no solution to sweatshops and that they will always exist. This is so because of how economies function. We will always have rich and poor countries. Poorer countries will always depend on rich countries for economic stability (A reductionist view). The only possible solution to get rid of these sweatshops is to improve the economic conditions of these third world countries. Corporations could help by taking over these sweatshops/ implement their fair policies. The problem with that solution is that it would be very costly and "costly" is not why corporations use sweatshops.
Hanes is responsible for this situation because they have adopted this business practice. Hanes's wants its products to be produced this way. The reason for these sweatshops is because of the huge profits and savings. In actuality,not only Hanes, but numerous of other corporations benefit from sweatshops. The common reaction to sweatshops is to do nothing. Since corporations see sweatshops as at tool to maximize their profits,nothing wrong with them. Furthermore,corporations believe sweatshops cause more good than harm. These sweatshops are often found in third world countries. This is seen as "good" because much needed economic development occurs. The issue with sweatshops is not really child labor, but the unhealthy working conditions. Hanes has no control/ cannot implement its policies in these third world countries. Therefore, since Hanes is not directly causing harm, they can not be solely blamed. Hanes is only at fault when they turn a blind eye to this situation. By doing that, Hanes is silently approving this practice. Because Hanes has somewhat distanced themselves from these sweatshops, Hanes believes it is not their problem. Its not in their jurisdiction.
ReplyDeleteWatching this clip does not change my shopping behavior because its known that numerous of corporations use sweatshops and child labor. Some of these corporations are Nike and Wal-Mart. Like thse two corporations, many other corporations that use sweatshops are heavily integrated with society. It would be hard to just wake up one day and stop shopping from your favorite store. Also, because I'm not directly involved with sweatshops, I don't have any emotional or physical connection to them. Sweatshops are bad, but because of the lack of "physical connection" no one does anything about them. We generate awareness about the issue, but I have yet to see someone attempt to resolve the issue.
I don't buy Hanes's products. If I ever do, I guess I might think of children like Halima.
I believe there is no solution to sweatshops and that they will always exist. This is so because of how economies function. We will always have rich and poor countries. Poorer countries will always depend on rich countries for economic stability (A reductionist view). The only possible solution to get rid of these sweatshops is to improve the economic conditions of these third world countries. Corporations could help by taking over these sweatshops/ implement their fair policies. The problem with that solution is that it would be very costly and "costly" is not why corporations use sweatshops.
The reason for these sweatshops is because of the huge profits and savings. In actuality,not only Hanes, but numerous of other corporations benefit from sweatshops. The common reaction to sweatshops is to do nothing. Since corporations see sweatshops as at tool to maximize their profits,nothing wrong with them. Furthermore,corporations believe sweatshops cause more good than harm. These sweatshops are often found in third world countries. This is seen as "good" because much needed economic development occurs. The issue with sweatshops is not really child labor, but the unhealthy working conditions. Hanes has no control/ cannot implement its policies in these third world countries. Therefore, since Hanes is not directly causing harm, they can not be solely blamed. Hanes is only at fault when they turn a blind eye to this situation. By doing that, Hanes is silently approving this practice. Because Hanes has somewhat distanced themselves from these sweatshops, Hanes believes it is not their problem. Its not in their jurisdiction.
ReplyDeleteWatching this clip does not change my shopping behavior because its known that numerous of corporations use sweatshops and child labor. Some of these corporations are Nike and Wal-Mart. Like thse two corporations, many other corporations that use sweatshops are heavily integrated with society. It would be hard to just wake up one day and stop shopping from your favorite store. Also, because I'm not directly involved with sweatshops, I don't have any emotional or physical connection to them. Sweatshops are bad, but because of the lack of "physical connection" no one does anything about them. We generate awareness about the issue, but I have yet to see someone attempt to resolve the issue.
I don't buy Hanes's products. If I ever do, I guess I might think of children like Halima.
I believe there is no solution to sweatshops and that they will always exist. This is so because of how economies function. We will always have rich and poor countries. Poorer countries will always depend on rich countries for economic stability (A reductionist view). The only possible solution to get rid of these sweatshops is to improve the economic conditions of these third world countries. Corporations could help by taking over these sweatshops/ implement their fair policies. The problem with that solution is that it would be very costly and "costly" is not why corporations use sweatshops.
I don't think Hanes should be held accountable. Moreover, as a consumer I have no issue with Hanes or with the conditions. This sounds very cruel or unethical to many people but the we must be realists. One must have a utilitarian view of things. Economically, the realities are that these countries need the jobs and development, they very much resemble an early America. 100yrs ago factories in America were very close to sweatshops. Child labor was prevalent and conditions were poor, but they improved. A country like India's condition cannot be compared to America's. India is in the earlier parts of the process, and it will eventually evolve to a level close to the United States in its own time. Knowing this, as a consumer I have no issue with Hanes or with buying these products. Because I know one day the third world will evolve to our level, but we cannot force this arbitrarily, and the realities of the situation are what they are. Jobs are needed, and conditions will improve.
ReplyDeleteAs a woman, I am terrified at the idea that my child might work in a factory at such an early age and in horrible conditions. I ask myself,” Would I ever let this happen to my child, if I have one?” I also ask myself the question of what circumstances would cause parents to have their children to go out and work in a factory. Is it because children are forced against their will? Or is it because there is no other choice? It is obvious that child labor is morally wrong from any angle that one might look at. The question I have, should we ask the multinational corporations to be a good “parent”, or maybe we should ask the parents to be in charge of their children first before we go international. Sadly, it is what it is. Parents in the developing countries let their children to work in factories with the hope that their children will assist in supporting the family. Multinational corporations do business in the developing countries, because the corporation utilizes the cheap labor as a means to exist and find a way to be efficient (efficient in the way of producing of maximum output with minimum input). It seems like a never ending circle: it is efficient for corporations, and the overall welfare of children and their parents is greater, when those children are working vs. when they are not working. Poor families have no other choice than to send their children to work. I am a big believer in education. If the countries where child labor is practiced cannot control their own employment age, then multinational corporations might be (but do not have to!) asked to set up some sort of an educational fund. Educational fund idea was suggested by my friend from developing country. Also, Thomas Donaldson considers the right to minimal education as a fundamental right. So if the multinational corporations feel that they have to give back to the society, the best way would be to educate these little children.
ReplyDeleteI feel that everybody including the consumer, corporation, and the host country in which the sweatshops are located are all responsible, either indirectly or directly. If we admit that we live in a supply and demand economy, then we must acknowledge that we as consumers set the demand for an item at a price that we like. Corporations supply that demand, and in order to fulfill that demand, corporations outsource to countries that are not doing as well economically and take advantage of the country, because they know it will be cost effective for them to do so. When it comes to the responsibility of the consumer, some us don’t think on how the product, we are holding in our hands and are about to pay for, was made. That is why it is our choice to decide whether we want to think about it or not, but that does not mean that choosing not to think about it alleviates us of the responsibility. Like it or not, we as consumer indirectly influence what corporations do and that can lead to underage children potentially making the clothes you are wearing now. In terms of the corporations themselves, corporations should have more control in terms of which contractors they pick and on how they manufacture their items. Not only because it is shameful the way some of the workers are treated, but in terms of public relations, a corporation does not want to be portrayed as willing to let underage children manufacture their clothes. With this case on Hanes, I am sure that next time we are out to buy any sort of Hanes brand clothing; we are going to think twice about, since watching this video. As a country, sometimes they have the misfortune of living in an economy that is not doing well and have to resort to work in terrible conditions, but as the government of the country, they should try to at least set some standards that are universal to protect their citizens. The girl in the video is only eleven years old and already working. At the age of eleven, the most kids worry about is whether or not their favorite T.V. show will be on and what kind of snack they are going to eat while watching it. Eleven year olds should not be worrying about staying up or making sure they don’t surpass their limit on how many times they can use the bathroom, because they are afraid they are going to get beat.
ReplyDelete