labor36

Sweatshops exist in countries around the world, even in the US. Why? The search
for cheap products that can be sold for greater profit is fueling a race to the
bottom where we all lose--our families, communities, farmers, workers, and the
environment.
This set of FAQ's should answer many of your questions, and can serve as a
resource for your own efforts to educate others about sweatshop labor.
Q: Why are there sweatshops?
A: Corporate greed and global competition to produce goods at the lowest
possible price are the main reasons for the existence of sweatshops. It's much
more cost-effective for corporations to subcontract their manufacturing to
suppliers who produce goods cheaply by minimizing worker salaries and benefits,
skimping on factory and dormitory upkeep and standards, and demanding high
levels of productivity (long hours and big quotas) from their workers.
Developing countries desperately need foreign investment, and therefore
compete with one another to produce goods more and more cheaply, allowing US
corporations to dictate their purchase prices. As reported by the business journal
Fast Company in December 2003, Wal-Mart (the country's largest retailer) actually
implements a corporate policy of requiring its vendors to continually seek ever-
lower prices for its products. "[Wal-Mart] has a clear policy for suppliers," writes
Fast Company's Charles Fishman. "On basic products that don't change, the price
Wal-Mart will pay, and will charge shoppers, must drop year after year."
As retailers compete with one another by seeking lowest-cost workers, they put
pressure on suppliers to keep their costs down, and they encourage consumers
to buy more at "discount" prices. This market for cheap goods then squeezes
factory owners to pinch even more. The result is forced overtime, low wages,
punishments and fines for slow work and mistakes, worker intimidation, child
labor, and other abuses.
Q: But if the reality is that companies have to cut costs to stay competitive, aren't
sweatshops inevitable?
A: No. Low prices are only one of many factors consumers take into account when
they shop, and most consumers don't willingly purchase goods made in
sweatshops or with child labor. Since 1995, three separate research
organizations have conducted surveys on consumer attitudes toward purchasing
products made under sweatshop conditions. The surveys consistently find that
the average consumer would pay up to 28 percent more for an item if s/he knew it
wasn't made in a sweatshop.
Furthermore, with staggering disparities between the pay rates of corporate
executives and the pay rates of actual workers, there's no reason that the pursuit
of low prices should demand rock-bottom wages for those least able to afford it.
For example, while workers in Saipan sewing Levi's blue jeans were making just
$3.05 per hour, Levi's CEO Philip Marineau saw his pay soar to $25.1 million (or
$11,971 an hour), nearly 15 times what he earned in 2001, according to Sweatshop
Watch. The money allocated for Marineau's raise could have accommodated a 50
percent pay increase for more than 7,500 minimum wage workers in Saipan,
helping to lift whole communities out of poverty. Alternatively, such a large sum
of money could have continued to pay the salaries to more than 600 of the Levi's
workers recently laid off in San Antonio, and Levi's could have avoided shifting
even more of its production overseas. Furthermore, even with the shift to
cheaper overseas production, such savings at the corporate level do not get
passed on to consumers. If corporations can afford such exorbitant
compensation for their executives, they can afford to pay workers a living wage
while remaining competitive in the marketplace.
Q: Isn't the low-wage employment offered by sweatshops better than not being
employed at all? Don't sweatshops help poor people climb out of poverty?
A: No. Sweatshop workers and child laborers are trapped in a cycle of exploitation
that rarely improves their economic situation. Since multinational corporations
are constantly pressuring suppliers for cost-cutting measures, workers most
often find conditions getting worse instead of better. Consider the example cited
in a 2003 National Labor Committee report on a Honduran worker sewing clothing
for Wal-Mart at a rate of 43 cents an hour. After spending money on daily meals
and transportation to work, the average worker is left with around 80 cents per
day for rent, bills, childcare, school costs, medicines, emergencies, and other
expenses. Not surprisingly, many workers are forced to take out loans at high
interest rates and can't even think about saving money to improve their lives as
they struggle to meet their daily needs.
Q: Isn't it time-consuming and expensive for corporations to track their goods'
origins?
A: No, actually most corporations already track their goods to the subcontractor
or factory level in order to monitor the quality of their products. "In competitive
industries like the apparel industry, all companies have quality control," says
Nikki Bas, executive director of Sweatshop Watch. "If companies are able to send
representatives to inspect the quality of a garment, they can inspect the quality of
their factories as well." Around the world, name-brand retailers are investing in
new technologies—information systems, international shipping firms, quality
assurance monitoring, business-to-business software, bar codes, universal
numbering systems, and more—all of which can facilitate better oversight for the
factories at products' points of origin.
Q: When companies track their goods to keep sweatshop labor out of their supply
chain, do they mark their products with a special label?
A: Unfortunately, no overarching "sweatshop-free" label exists. Some
independent monitors like Verité follow the supply chains of companies that pay a
fee for that service and help facilitate follow-up correction programs for factories
found to be in violation of labor standards. Because conditions can change
rapidly at factories, Verité does not go on record endorsing particular companies
or factories. For some select industries, however, dedication to monitoring
efforts has resulted in useful labeling for a handful of products. For example, the
RUGMARK Foundation combats the existence of child labor in the woven rug
industry by certifying manufactures to agree to RUGMARK standards, and then
following up with random, unannounced inspections. Carpets made by these
companies then carry the RUGMARK label, letting consumers know that the
carpet is child-labor-free.
Certain commodities such as coffee, tea, chocolate, and bananas are monitored
by TransFair USA, which labels products as Fair Trade Certified™, meaning that
the consumer can be assured that the farmer at the product's point of origin
received a fair price. You can find Fair Trade products listed in Co-op America's
National Green Pages™.
Q: Should I boycott manufacturers that use sweatshop labor, or should I pressure
companies to change?
A: You can do both. In general, boycotts are most effective when organized by the
workers themselves. Otherwise, a boycott effort could cause a company to cut
and run from a factory found perpetuating sweatshop conditions, rather than
working with the factory to change its business practices. A good way to help
improve conditions for workers is to contact the retailers and manufacturers of
the products you buy and ask for guarantees that their workers were paid a living
wage and given basic rights. Include the tag from inside a garment with your
letter to let the company know you are already a customer. If you can find the
product that you need produced by a company you know to be responsible in its
labor practices, you should reward that company with your business.