The word sweatshops bring multiple images to mind. Whether it is a small, hot room filled with underage children, or a large factory shipping out goods in mass quantities. Having sweatshops around in various countries as well as our own, has been a controversial topic for a while. Whether or not sweatshops should be legal or if major corporations should make their products in sweatshops always seem to be in the news. Because there is not an easy yes or no answer, having a compromise and working together to make sure garment workers receive basic human rights as well as keep a job by bringing more awareness to the companies, sweatshops can turn into a great business. 

Sweatshops have been around in various countries for thousands of years, but have recently moved to the United States in the 1800’s (El Nasser). While many citizens of the United States are unaware that sweatshops are in their backyard, especially in the Los Angeles area and is mostly occupied by immigrants. One factory in Los Angeles employs about 45,000 workers, mostly Chinese immigrants (El Nasser). A survey was taken of 175 garnet workers in Bangladesh to help describe the working conditions of the factories. Over 20% of garment factory workers have experienced harassment in the workplace and many workers have complained of poor conditions, such as dirty drinking water and little ventilation (El Nasser). Many workers have seen rodents and insects and almost none have received health and safety training, a requirement for all factories to pass. While hearing sweatshops like these exist in our own country, many sweatshops in developing countries have worse conditions. 

Bangladesh is one of the world’s most populated countries and full of sweatshops that many citizens work in. Bangladesh has assured the people that 80% of their factories are safe (Mailonline). However, many factories are not inspected, and therefor still run as sweatshops. Many children work in these factories with very few safety regulations. The factories will pay off the health inspector in order to get a passing grade. This is much cheaper than providing a safe environment for the workers (Mailoline). In some cases, children are forced to live in the factories because of the long workdays. They work 6 ½ days out of the week from dawn until far after dusk (Mailonline). Because Bangladesh’s age band is expanded, more children can work in these factories to help with financials back home. (Mailoline). Another country that has many sweatshops is Cambodia.

Sweatshops in Cambodia have been around and known about for many years now. However, these places to work have stuck around due to the powerful companies that run them, such as Walmart, Gap, and Adidas. Sweatshops are hot and loud and many women have been found to faint because of the poor conditions (Winn). While the women that work there have tried to improve their work life, when they went on strike in 2014, many were shot dead (Winn). Workers are scared to make changes or speak up because the people above them have so much more power over them and can get away with much more. Women in Cambodia chose to work in sweatshops because for many, their only alternative would be to work in the rice paddies, where their conditions are even worse (Winn). 

Factories are hiring children, even though there is a law in Cambodia stating that no one under the age of 15 can work. However, children in 7th and 8th grade have been found dropping out of school to work in sweatshops. About 1/3 of the workers are children (Winn). Many families need another income in order to support their children, so children find work in the factories because it is a low skilled job. Also, some companies have been found to pay children less money and they can get away with this because the children need a job to help their families pay bills and food. Children are even sought out to work in factories because they are quick and less likely to complain. Factories can fire women who are pregnant because they believe them to be lazy, slow, and take too many bathroom breaks (Winn). Pregnant women will wear clothes that are too tight, trying to hide their growing belly, so they can keep their job for as long as possible, 

Factories do not let their workers use the bathrooms, even on 10 hour shifts because it wastes time, time that they could be sewing. Because of this workers are uncomfortable and denied their basic human rights. Other workers do not drink liquids during the day in order to take less bathroom breaks, but wind up dehydrated and unhealthy. Some factories have shown to not pay their workers as they have promised them. They would tell their workers if they meet a certain quota that they will earn extra money, but in fact they will not receive any extra money (Winn). Lying to their workers creates mistrust in the work field and a large power gap between the workers and the ones in charge. While these facts may be true, considering where the workers live and how their economy differs than the United States’ is important to keep in mind.  

Working in a sweatshop in foreign lands is much better than any other alternative for many of the workers. Sweatshop workers are paid more, worked less, and guarded from intensive labor work in the harsh climates. The conditions of sweatshops are not up to standards in comparison to developed nations, however, they are close to the best in developing nations. Powell, the author of “Out of Poverty: Sweatshops in the Global Economy”, states, “I argue that the jobs are the best realistic alternative available to the workers employed in them and that such jobs are part of the very process of economic development that allows the descendants of (the workers), and their counterparts toiling in Third World sweatshops today to enjoy a higher standard of living with safer, better paying jobs (74).” Stories from sweatshop workers prove that the conditions of sweatshops are a small disadvantage in comparison to the advantages they take away from them. A woman who worked in a sweatshop in America stated that her job allowed her to make a living while she “learned English and became adjusted to the new country”. Adults who work in sweatshops have been able to feed their family and get out of poverty because their current situation has not allowed them to get a better job. By working in the sweatshop, they provide a stable home life for their families. 

Sweatshop workers in foreign countries are receiving equal to more pay than when compared to the average worker. In relation to the average pay in many countries, the pay sweatshops worker’s receive either matches or is higher. While seeing numbers such as $0.13 an hour, it gives many people the wrong perception because of how dramatically low it is, but in countries such as Bangladesh and Cambodia, it is an average hourly wage. Many workers in Bangladesh make only $1-2 a day, and this price is very similar whether you work in the fields or in a sweatshop. Some companies give their workers more than a salary to help them live a more comfortable life. For example, Nike gives their workers a livable pay as well as benefits such as health insurance and free meals to their workers in Indonesia.

Sweatshops are also good for the economy. While the workers are getting average pay, they are producing many products. The products they produce get shipped to mainly the United States where they are sold fairly inexpensive. The consumers in the United States are able to afford these products so many are bought. This creates the circulation of money, which is good for a growing economy (Spath). In countries where sweatshops are stationed, the workers get enough money to buy their families food and clothes, which is also a circulation of money. In developing countries, it is important for people to be able to buy things so that everyone benefits. Because many people in developing countries cannot buy many things, citizens who have a constant job with average pay are able to support their economy (Spath). Because sweatshops are located in countries where lower wages are acceptable, companies are saving a lot of money on production costs. This  allows the consumers to pay less for the products, while the companies are making money (Spath). Sweatshops also improve their economy in foreign lands by providing jobs. Sweatshops have popped up extensively in developing countries, where the population is high but their skills are low (Spath). Working in sweatshops gives thousands, if not millions of people jobs in order to support themselves and their family. Having more people with more jobs helps their economy tremendously. While the pros and cons of sweatshops make it hard to pick a side, solutions to improve sweatshops is also not an easy task. 

The idea of boycotting sweatshops has been brought up in the news multiple times. However, boycotting these companies makes them have to make a choice about their sweatshops. If no one is buying their products, they have no reason to have so many sweatshops operating. The companies will shut down sweatshops, leaving hundreds of workers without a job, yet still a family to feed. Another solution would be that the developing country would pass laws that would force sweatshops to improve their conditions. They would have to enforce these new laws, but the problem is they would not. Health and safety laws are already being violated by the country so adding more laws would change next to nothing. Also, in many countries, the corporations are what is running that country by providing jobs and products to their country. Their economy would fail without the role of major corporations taking over.

A solution that seems to have worked in the past is one through the company itself. If the corporation requires sweatshops to be operated in a safer and more enjoyable environment, the sweatshops would have to listen. The companies are fully in charge of the sweatshops because they provide them with the materials and the money to pay the workers (Zwolinski 2). Because the government of the sweatshops cannot make laws that will be enforced, the companies themselves need to be changed. While no solution has been found to leave a lasting effect on the conditions of sweatshops, bringing more awareness to the companies that the public have concerns is the only chance sweatshop workers will receive a more pleasant workspace (Zwolinski 2). 

Protests have been affective for a long time, but when in regards to sweatshops, many of them fall short (Rodriguez). Consumers want to do good by boycotting the goods that these companies sell but because these companies are so big, loosing a few customers does not do much damage to their sales. By bringing the media into the problem and causing a bigger scene, these companies are more likely to do something about it so their good name can be saved. When the media grabs a hold of a story, they can make it seem like the company is doing all bad (Zwolinski 4). This changes the way many people think about the company and can provide a bigger downfall for the company’s stock and sales. When their income decreases, they pay more attention to what the consumer wants (Rodriguez). In order to make a change with large companies, many people must come together so their voices will be heard. The media has been a large output for many years to spread word quickly (Zwolinski 4). Because so many people are invested in the media and believe much of what it says, companies listen and want to fix the mistakes that people accuse them of. 

If consumers declare that they want companies to provide safer working conditions for their workers in foreign lands, and the media gets a hold of it, things will change. When TV’s flash pictures of sweatshops and interview workers that have had a traumatic experience or have a story to tell, the companies will listen and adjust. There are many cheap ways large corporations can make changes to their safety policies and make sure that their sweatshops are inspected correctly and thoroughly (Zwolinski 3). By providing a safe working conditions for workers, the workers will feel more comfortable in their workplace. Also, if consumers request that workers be paid at least the average pay of their country, which most are, then the rumor that sweatshops do not get paid a fair wage will be eliminated from the media (Zwolinski 4). Large corporations such as Nike, Adidas, Walmart, and more will have a clear name about why their products are cheap. 

Governments of developing countries want to make good with corporations that are essentially in charge of their economy. If the government doesn’t do as the companies ask, the companies will stop giving their people jobs in the sweatshops. This will force the government to do as the companies ask. If not, their economy will be greatly hurt. Sweatshops are a big money maker in developing countries because they do not have many factories that employ so many people. Because of this, corporations are in charge of their economy because they provide the money that will then circulate in their local markets and shops. By forcing the government of the developing countries to take action, there will be a greater chance that the sweatshops will continue to run safely and effectively, while both countries get benefits form them. 

Companies will do what it takes in order to please their customers, because their customers are the reason that they are in business and thriving. When it comes to sweatshops, keeping them around so the workers can keep a job and also improving them by implicating safety standards is the best solution. If customers want a change in the way companies run their sweatshops, a change will be made. By incorporating the media, companies will work faster to bring forward these changes in order to please their customers because the media is so popular and travels quickly, more people will be aware of sweatshops and therefore will request a change to be made. While companies want to save money, they will be forced to make sure their sweatshops are run properly. By implicating this compromise, both the companies in charge and the sweatshops will benefit. 

 Factories don’t let their workers use the bathrooms, even on 10 hour shifts because it wastes time, time that they could be sewing. Because of this workers are uncomfortable and denied their basic human rights. Other workers don’t drink liquids 
Companies will do what it takes in order to please their customers, because their customers are the reason that they are in business and thriving. When it comes to sweatshops, keeping them around so the workers can keep a job and also improving them by implicating safety standards is the best solution. If customers want a change in the way companies run their sweatshops, a change will be made. By incorporating the media, companies will work faster to bring forward these changes in order to please their customers because the media is so popular and travels quickly, more people will be aware of sweatshops and therefore will request a change to be made. While companies want to save money, they will be forced to make sure their sweatshops are run properly. By implicating this compromise, both the companies in charge and the sweatshops will benefit. 

 