Reply to Sweatshop Devastation

This is a complex issue in many aspects. But here’s where it is simple for me: We can’t turn a blind eye to fellow human beings living and dieing in horrific working conditions. There have been nearly five hundred deaths in garment factory fires in Bangladesh alone in five years. This fact is more important than freedom from government intervention in commerce, third-party busybodies (aka liberal journalists), parochial viewpoint of “buy American”, union and anti-union sentiments, NAFTA and other trade agreements.

 I don’t necessarily have a problem with companies that hire workers in other countries, either directly or indirectly.  Obviously as a consumer, I benefit from this practice. I can’t afford the newest iPad as it is, even though it’s produced in a factory in China. I also like the fact that we live in a smaller world today.  I doubt we’ll ever return to a time when we manufacture everything we produce within our own borders. 

However, there is something intrinsically wrong with making butt-loads of money by hiring people in areas of the world that are far behind our country in fair labor and worker safety practices. At the very least it’s hypocritical; at its worse it’s exploitive and inhumane. I don’t have a problem with paying someone in another country the prevailing minimum wage, even though it’s lower than ours. Obviously cost of living, work opportunities, and other socio and economic factors drive wages. But I can’t think of an instance when it would be acceptable to allow fellow human beings to work in conditions that we no longer tolerate in our country. 

To say that one situation may be more tolerable than another, say working in a sweatshop versus digging through trash bins, doesn’t justify the lesser evil for me. And I’m not convinced that workers in Bangladesh or Indonesia or Pakistan or Mexico have the luxury of going to another employer if conditions are bad at the factory. Most likely there are few choices for them, one being going back to the farm where their parents make less than they do. The system that you outline, where employees will force employers to provide better conditions by going elsewhere isn’t practical in those areas. Even in our own country it took mandates and fair labor laws to ensure safety and rights in the workplace. 

Because those third-party questioners brought the Hilfiger factory fire to the public’s attention, Hilfiger agreed to spend $1,000,000 for an independent fire inspector in the Bangladesh garment factories. That makes good sense to me. The wildly profitable companies who do business in developing countries can well afford to help improve the infrastructure and labor practices that are obviously intolerable. What is a million to Hilfiger or Nike or Apple? One less bathroom on that yacht?  Thinking globally, these companies could help developing countries raise their standards to those that we enjoy, or at least improve conditions where they are doing business. It seems like a win-win situation to me. 

“Profits are just a reflection of how much one has served his fellow man”? Or are some business practices a reflection of how we fail to serve our fellow man for the sake of profit.