Jared Dekker
Lacoste
AP Government
24 February 2016
The Global issue of Sweatshops
Globalization has been one of the most world-changing advances made in centuries, and for the most part, it has been a boon to societies all over the world. Unfortunately, along with many other advances of this nature, it has a dark side that threatens the well being of one unrepresented group: women and children in poverty-stricken areas, who have been often brutally taken advantage of. Use of women and children in sweatshops globally is a crime against humanity. Senegal, being a country with a large number of sweatshops, is striving to eliminate their presence domestically as well as globally.
Sweatshops are a worldwide phenomenon, and are frequently cited as one of the most brutal inventions industry has ever created. Their history dates back to the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, where, according to Businessweek Magazine in their article “A World of Sweatshops”, they probably began at some point in pre-industrial Ecuador, where many Amerindians were forced to work in a textile mill for very little food and sustenance. From there, they have progressed into one of the most virulent forms of imperialistic capitalism since the original conquest of the New World. This lackluster beginning has helped it expand into one of the most profitable techniques for labor that large corporations use today. The effects of sweatshops are one of the most economically depressing factors in the countries where they are established: They are often built in third-world countries, which are often reliant on outside sources for economic stability. By the fact that sweatshops pay their workers a very limited sum of money, these factories effectively wreck the local economy by sucking all of the money out of the region. This is one of the most detrimental factors that they cause, and help to keep developing nations in poverty.
From a corporate standpoint, this development is extremely profitable: In countries like Senegal and China, there are very few labor limitation laws that prevent the people working in these conditions from being brutalized, paid a pittance wage (According to Benjamin W. Powell of Independent.org, these wages can be as low as 13 cents an hour (Powell 3)), and be fired without any form of compensation. This is in clear violation of the Human Rights Council’s mission, which is to bring equal standards of living to all people in the world; by the very fact of their existence and working conditions, sweatshops defy this ruling. The United Nations has spoken out very clearly against sweatshops on several occasions, such as in the UN News Centre’s articles “Almost 21 Million People Worldwide Are Victims of Forced Labour, UN Finds” and “Victims of Forced Labour Lose Over $20 Billion Per Year In Earnings, Finds UN Study”, and will continue to do so.
As the United Nations has been vocally critical of the idea of sweatshops, it has passed a number of resolutions condemning the use of sweatshops, such as Resolution Number HR001 of this year. This resolution begins by acknowledging the growing issue of sweatshops in so-called “G20” nations (nations which have sufficient economic clout to be included in the world forum for economic matters), followed by a denunciation of same worldwide. It also addresses the issue of sweatshops popping up in third-world countries worldwide and sucking the modest economic lifeblood out of them with some alarm, and moves to adopt a set of guidelines that cut back or eliminate sweatshops entirely. These measures are things like the UN encouraging the MIddle East to close its sweatshops, to a heavier tax rate on corporations that use sweatshops, to a requirement that there must be a special bureau of people in every country to run inspections of sweatshops in their country and report if there’s any human rights violations. Sadly, this is where the clout of the UN falls short, as these resolutions have made little to no difference in the sweatshop economy worldwide. Overall, the United Nation’s stated goal is to eliminate the practice of sweatshops entirely, and if at all possible administer relief to the areas left in financial ruin by their presence and departure.
In the case of Senegal, the topic of sweatshops is especially important, as Senegal has been named by the Human Rights council as one of the worst offenders concerning sweatshops (Resolution HR001, 2). Senegal is host to several hundred sweatshops nationwide, and a significant portion of their GDP is financed by funds originating from sweatshops. This began originally in the 1980s, as American and other Westernized companies began to expand their domestic industries overseas to reduce costs and establish tax havens. According to Bill Moyer in PBS’s NOW, “For more than two decades now, the World Bank and the IMF have worked together to shape economic life here. Senegal accepted financial terms known as "structural adjustment." (Moyer 1). This means, essentially, that Senegal’s financial interests are dictated by such organizations as the IMF and the World Bank, who have encouraged growth of sweatshops in this country. This has fostered economic inequality for two decades, as well as has ensured that the young and poor people of senegal have no option save continue to work in these oppressive conditions with no alternative present.
The main issue with dealing with sweatshops in Senegal is that they’re one of the biggest reasons the economy is stable. They provide a source of income for over 50% of the country’s population, and the investors that buy into sweatshops provide a source of funding that the government uses to keep itself afloat. This means that expunging sweatshops from Senegal is a very difficult task, and may already be impossible to do so without wrecking the economy (Businessweek 4). That being said, there is a movement in Senegal to reduce the stranglehold that sweatshops hold on the economy, mostly supported by the international organization United Students Against Sweatshops, which is a student organization based out of the US. The Senegalese government has been at least a small bit helpful, as it has enacted some weak legislational laws prohibiting sexual harassment in the workplace, as well as setting a mandated minimum of 21 cents an hour. These measures, however weak, show that the Senegalese government is fighting back to a degree against “sweatshop economics” (Moyer 1). However, it’s going to take a large amount of time before real substantive change can be made, as the economy of Senegal must be allowed to naturally grow in the absence of sweatshops. A sudden jolt away from that system would crash the economy, but a slow progression would allow for a stable change.
In the global move away from sweatshops, Senegal is willing to enact moderate policies to ensure a safer and more independent economic future, by eliminating sweatshops worldwide and ceasing their crimes against humanity. However, it will not be party to radical statements banning sweatshops instantly and redistributing the labor elsewhere, given that their economy is significantly based on the revenue and investors that sweatshops provide. Senegal would be willing to endorse legislature and/or resolutions that take into account the emphasis on a slow-and-steady move away from sweatshops, but any legislation that emphasizes pulling the economic rug out from under them would be fiercely opposed. The key to victory in this circumstance, for Senegal, is to proceed slowly, so as to not destroy the fragility of the economy as it exists currently. This being said, the brutalization of women, children, and countless poverty-stricken people throughout the developing world is a deep crime against the very fabric of moral society, and Senegal is willing to pursue this matter until the bitter end; if not for the economy then for the countless dead, raped, and tortured women and children that suffer from this blight worldwide.
Works Cited
Powell, Benjamin, and Matt Zwolinski. "The Ethical and Economic Case Against Sweatshop Labor: A Critical Assessment." J Bus Ethics Journal of Business Ethics 107.4 (2011): 449-72. BenjaminWPowell.com. Springer Science+Business Media, 17 Sept. 2011. Web. 20 Feb. 2016.
Early, Steve. "Slaves to Fashion: Poverty and Abuse in the New Sweatshops; Immigrants, Unions, and the U.S. Labor Market." Socialism and Democracy. Journal For The Research Group of Socialism And Democracy Online, 17 Apr. 2011. Web. 20 Feb. 2016.
Ki-Moon, Ban. "Resolutions Adopted by the Munich Peace Congress." The Advocate of Peace (1894-1920) 69.9 (1907): 220-23. Human Rights Council.com. United Nations, 06 Jan. 2015. Web. 20 Feb. 2016.
Moyer, Bill. "NOW with Bill Moyer Transcript: Sweatshops." PBS.org. PBS, 09 May 2005. Web. 21 Feb. 2015.
"Almost 21 Million People Worldwide Are Victims of Forced Labour, UN Finds." UN News Center. UN, 01 June 2012. Web. 02 Mar. 2016.
"Sports Footwear Industry Makes Progress in Eliminating Sweatshops – UN Report." UN News Center. UN, 04 Feb. 2005. Web. 02 Mar. 2016.
Powell, Benjamin W., and David B. Skarbek. "Sweatshops and Third World Living Standards: Are the Jobs Worth the Sweat?: Publications: The Independent Institute." Sweatshops and Third World Living Standards: Are the Jobs Worth the Sweat?: Publications: The Independent Institute. Independent.org, 24 Sept. 2004. Web. 25 Feb. 2016.