Gap busted for sweatshops

[JerichoHill]

Well, if you value the Gap brand name highly, then alot

if you dont, well, not much

 

[aneeshm]

Now those children will either have to do even worse work, or they will starve.

 

[JerichoHill]

Now those children will either have to do even worse work, or they will starve.

Anti-sweatshops activists dont care though, theyve moved on to the next sweatshop.

 

[Murky]

Now those children will either have to do even worse work, or they will starve.

Or they'll just be sent back their original homes.

 

[happy_Alex]

No I expect for you to offer a solution if you shut down the sweatshops so that folks don't resort to whoring. I've not ever defended sweatshops at good places to work, but I do know what happens when they're shut down by overzealous activists who don't think ahead. Its the same error in judgement Bush made about Iraq. We just forgot about the Afghans. Onto something new. Activists in all paths of life do this, and its annoying as hell.

You've got to see the bigger picture. All your attacks have been either "Do an insane amount of work to prove something to me that I won't believe anyways" or "I don't believe what you're saying" At the very least, I'd expect to be given some leeway since I haven't gone around posting untrue statements round these parts

Your wrong about prostitution, its just another vector of exploitation, I can’t see how decoupling it from sweatshops/child labour, presents any soloution. I would ask you to clarify your position on the matter. By posting that article, are you implying that either you disagree with labour laws in the country, and by extension those in the ‘west’ or that there is no point in enforcing them anyway?

This discussion should move on from ‘is child labour bad’ to ‘what are the systemic causes of the corruption that allows it to flourish’ and ‘how can it be stopped’

I don’t agree with those who seemed to have implied that child labour is acceptable, along with unsafe working conditions and reduced or restricted labour laws.
Now here’s some articles on the subject:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/2206026.stm

International standards exist as well as national laws for example those established by the UN International Labour Organisation.

By the end of June 2007, the ILO had adopted 188 Conventions and 199 Recommendations covering a broad range of subjects: freedom of association and collective bargaining, equality of treatment and opportunity, abolition of forced and child labour, employment promotion and vocational training, social security, conditions of work, labour administration and labour inspection, prevention of work-related accidents, maternity protection, and the protection of migrants and other categories of workers such as seafarers, nursing personnel or plantation workers. More than 7,500 ratifications of these Conventions have been registered so far.

(my italics)




So the problem is not that labour legislation and law, in regards to children, exists, it is that it is not being enforced at local and national level.

The finger of blame is firmly pointed at vested interests - including those in government - who are making money out of it - and therefore there is no political will to stop it.
India has world standard labour legislation, but in practice it has more slave and abused labourers than any other country.
The whole system is riddled with corruption, with politicians and contractors benefiting from it.
Amazingly VK Sharma, in the office of the local labour commission, agreed to the accusation.

If one sweatshop is closed, will the laid of workers seek alternative employment possibly as prostitutes? Maybe. Will the same happen in an economy which effectively enforces employment law in a uniform way? Not if we take developed economies as an example.

The Asian-Pacific region accounts for 60% of all working children, with a further 23% of them working in sub-Saharan Africa.
Only 1% work in developed countries.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1970563.stm

there’s a good quote in that article, which seems to point the way to the soloution you are asking for...

The effective abolition of child labour is one of the most urgent challenges of our time and should be a universal goal

Juan Somavia
director-general
International Labour Organisation

This article emphasises the difficulty National governments have in tackling a problem that is international in scope and driven by super-national causes.


I disagree with you regarding activism and its negative consequences. Laws are changed and enforced through activism, and politicians are held accountable through activism, bad practice is exposed. Are the grannies I saw on telly the other day, stuffing envelopes for the Democrats participating in ‘activism?’ Is that the wrong activism? How do you tell ‘right’ activism from ‘wrong’ activism? If a sweatshop is breaking national law and international conventions, I don't consider the effects of that to be necessarily bad for the people working there. If laws exist, then they should be enforced.


I disagree when you say that closing sweatshops necessary promotes prostitution and would point out that system which does not enforce labour law effectively promotes illegal prostitution as well. Again, prostitution is another vector of this exploitation.

And about 8.4 million children are forced into the worst forms of child labour including slavery, prostitution and pornography, or are forced to fight as child soldiers.

Additionally, there is a vicious cycle here. Children are forced into this work because of poverty. Reduce or remove the poverty and the need to work such hours is removed. So by enhancing the standard of living and reducing poverty, the need to resort to slave wages is removed.

Here are some questions for Mr 'dude, I'm an economist' :What would be the effect of enforcing labour law as it exists today, throughout the third world? How can multinationals aim to comply with labour ethics and laws when it makes them less competitive? Can a multinational such as GAP possibly avoid including in its supply chain companies that use child labour, when they use the most competitive sources of their products?

 

[Merkinball]

Children are forced into this work because of poverty. Reduce or remove the poverty and the need to work such hours is removed. So by enhancing the standard of living and reducing poverty, the need to resort to slave wages is removed. - Alex

You won't solve anything. Offer "fair" wages, watch job dissappear. Children don't work because of poverty in and of itself. Children work because their parents can't care for the family in and of themselves. They need the kids to work in order to keep the family fed, and a roof over their heads. What are you gonna do when you artificially inflate wages and unemploy all kinds of adult workers?

The best way to do this, is to keep factory jobs coming, ban child labor, enforce it, and keep their parents working these jobs so that their children can GO TO SCHOOL. I don't care where on earth you go. All parents understand the value that education represents to their children. All parents, if they have the power, will send their kids to school.

 

[aneeshm]

Or they'll just be sent back their original homes.

Don't you get it?

Many of these unfortunates don't have homes! They're children of the street.

 

[JerichoHill]

Here are some questions for Mr 'dude, I'm an economist' :What would be the effect of enforcing labour law as it exists today, throughout the third world? How can multinationals aim to comply with labour ethics and laws when it makes them less competitive? Can a multinational such as GAP possibly avoid including in its supply chain companies that use child labour, when they use the most competitive sources of their products?

Which labor laws are you using as the base?

I would assume that if they were enacted tomorrow, we'd have some pretty big problems as companies scattered to new plans.

Rather than forcing new labor laws suitable for developed countries on the developing world, why not work to create the institutions and infrastructure necessary for the development of an economy capable of supporting a middle class.

You act as if by the mere passage of law things would get better.

 

[JerichoHill]

You won't solve anything. Offer "fair" wages, watch job dissappear. Children don't work because of poverty in and of itself. Children work because their parents can't care for the family in and of themselves. They need the kids to work in order to keep the family fed, and a roof over their heads. What are you gonna do when you artificially inflate wages and unemploy all kinds of adult workers?

The best way to do this, is to keep factory jobs coming, ban child labor, enforce it, and keep their parents working these jobs so that their children can GO TO SCHOOL. I don't care where on earth you go. All parents understand the value that education represents to their children. All parents, if they have the power, will send their kids to school.

Perhaps a good example of this is what happened in China. Since girls could not do traditional work and gain employment, girl-babies were smothered and killed and boy babies were prized. That has led China to a major demographics problem upcoming.

Also, children were used for labor in the US not long ago, in a family setting. Poorer societies tend to have more children because children can perform tasks around the house and eventually care for their elderly.

 

[Merkinball]

Poorer societies tend to have more children because children can perform tasks around the house and eventually care for their elderly. - JH

Let's also not forget that a major, and I consider the number one reason for this, is because poorer countries don't have any social security net. Their children are their social security. The more kids you have, the bigger the social security net you have.

 

[happy_Alex]

Which labor laws are you using as the base?

I think you know exactly what labour laws I'm talking about.

I would assume that if they were enacted tomorrow, we'd have some pretty big problems as companies scattered to new plans.

Rather than forcing new labor laws suitable for developed countries on the developing world, why not work to create the institutions and infrastructure necessary for the development of an economy capable of supporting a middle class.

You act as if by the mere passage of law things would get better.

Are you saying that you disagree with such laws? What would you suggest as an alternative?

 

[Murky]

Don't you get it?

Many of these unfortunates don't have homes! They're children of the street.

So your solution to the homeless problem is to make them into slaves?

 

[NKVD]

i would presume he will answer: no but to give them a bit of money so they can have a roof...

children out of the sweatshop will not go to piano courses and swimming classes.

I dont think those sweatshops are roaming in the street in big cars kidnapping children and slaving them to work...maybe i'm wrong and they really do that then i'm wrong

 

[JerichoHill]

I think you know exactly what labour laws I'm talking about.



Are you saying that you disagree with such laws? What would you suggest as an alternative?

I am saying that youre not thinking through the whole process from the development to implementation of the law and its effects.

What you says sounds nice. I am pointing out that the implementation fails to live up to the lofty goals.

 

[happy_Alex]

I am saying that youre not thinking through the whole process from the development to implementation of the law and its effects.

What you says sounds nice. I am pointing out that the implementation fails to live up to the lofty goals.

I agree that passing a law dose not necessarily solve the problem in itself, which is basically what that article points out, and that the problem is more complex. That's not to say that labour laws are not necessary and that they should not be enforced, though. This thread should have been about that type of discussion but it went off on some random tangents...