Janu Akther's Oppression Of Sweatshops In Bangladesh

Exciting and stirring, February of each year brings a new wind to colleges all around US, promising another successful baseball season to come. While the efforts of college students and their coaches are highly appreciated, no one might acknowledge the great contribution of people like Janu Akther, a 22-year-old man who works in sweatshops in Bangladesh to produce American collegiate apparel―an indispensable part of the game. An $18 baseball cap can be a joy of many American people to wear but a dirty exploitation device in Akther's mind. As a sweatshop laborer, he works every day from early morning until late night in miserable conditions of heat and dangerous machine. Each hour laboring takes away much of his sweat but barely gives him anything
in return―with a starvation wage of only 8 cents per hour, Akther can't even afford his own life. Thinking of one day in the future when he needs to care not only for himself but also his family, Akther trembles in fear, hoping for a better labor laws in which the working environment is full of respect, dignity, and justice.
Sweatshop is defined as a kind of abuse of work which contains the lack of living wages, long hour work, and poor working conditions, but no deal for anything. “Sweatshop” was formed in the Industrial Revolution, but at first, it “was said to be “sweated” from the workers because they received minimal wages for excessive hours worked under unsanitary conditions” (Women and Sweatshop Labor). And until now, sweatshop still exists as an essential part in poor developing countries.
On March 7, 1997, John Diconsiglio made a question “Who Is Making Your Sneakers?” According to John Diconsiglio, almost garment is sold in the United States “probably came from foreign sweatshops-factories where workers labor in abysmal working conditions for pennies an hour, or less” (1).
For that reason, more and more American companies move their “manufacturing operations” to those countries. Sweatshop violated many groups of protecting labor rights, so these groups want to get rid of sweatshop, and improve working conditions and wages. However, a fact that lots of product which owned by “best-known American companies” are made by sweatshop labor. Big American companies like sweatshop because of cheap-labor source. “While Nike pays its U.S factory workers $11 an hour, its Indonesian workers earn about $2 a day” (John 2). On the other hand, some ideas state that sweatshop is bringing opportunities for jobs in poor countries. “By setting up shop in Indonesia, for example, Nike says they bring that poor country much needed jobs and billions of dollars in investments” (John 2). Disagreeing with that, some critics says if those companies want to give occasion for developing countries, they even can pay higher for poor labors to be able to support their families. At the end, the statistic graph shows there is a big disparity of hourly wages among countries. For instance, in East Asia, the hourly wages in Japan is $16.29 while China is
$0.28.
In Benjamin Powell’s research, by comparing the wages between workers in sweatshop and normal workers, he infers the standard of economy in Third World countries. Powell found that “most sweatshop jobs provide an above average standard of living for their workers” (1).
Aitken, Harrison, and Lipsey (1996) and Lipsey and Sjoholm (2001) both find that after controlling for other factors, multinational firms pay higher wages than domestic firms in Third World countries. Feenstra and Hanson (1997) find that multinational firms improve the lives of workers by increasing the demand for labor. Budd and Slaughter (2000) and Budd, Konings, and Slaughter (2001) find that as multinational profits go up, multinational firms share gains with Third World workers. Brown, Deardorff and Stern (2003) summarize the literature documenting the benefits multinational companies provide to Third World workers.
From all studies above and graphs from his paper, Powell might agree with Nike that sweatshop can help Third World countries to raise their standard of living. Also, he claims that eliminating sweatshop means destroying the opportunities for poor developing countries to improve and advance.
On the contrary, the fact in China does not seem to exhibit Powell’s view that sweatshop is helping poor people to improve their lives and their countries.
On World Socialist Web Site, October 2nd, 2012, Louis Zou, a socialist states that many giant brand names typically Apple uses sweatshops to exploit Chinese people, especially students. In China, the government requires students to participate in Foxconn as workers to earn their internship; otherwise, they cannot receive any diploma. The working condition, however, doesn't go along with the goal of an internship, which is to give students chances to take experience. Not only that they are unable to absorb much necessary skill for their future careers, but they also receive very low wages which hardly match the tremendous efforts being spent. “During the work hours, if you want to go to toilet, you must pay attention to his [the supervisor’s] face. If you have a bad supervisor, even going to toilet is not allowed,” a student, Yu said (Zou). Moreover, some of workers were underage but they had to work as adults “11 hours a day, 26-28 days a month—and getting just 70 percent of adult pay” (Zou). Due to that, Zou thinks that sweatshop is a brutal exploitation more than helping to cure poverty in the Third World
countries.