Sweatshop Labor Essay

The rise and fall of sweatshop labor in the United States have had major effects on the global garment industry. The effects of sweatshop labor are still debated today because we still struggle over the morality of sweatshops (Ross, 50). It is problematic to think that “Sweatshops aren’t that bad. You can live like a king on those wages in other countries because everything is so cheap and they don’t have the same expenses we do in the United States” (Kelley). We can analyze this statement by applying Catholic Social Thought (CST) to identify, evaluate, and recommend a different course of action that would allow the statement to better align with CST. CST is a set of ethical principles that allow for “reflection to form our conscience, criteria
for judgement, and for directives for action.” These principles are outlined in the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church (Kelley). When analyzing this statement with CST, we find this way of thinking as a direct contradiction of CST’s key principles. This statement is problematic in regards to CST because it violates the Compendium’s key principles of the common good, role and purpose of work, and solidarity. This statement does not follow CST’s principle of the common good as stated in the Compendium by failing to recognize that the working conditions for sweatshop laborers inhibit them from reaching his or her fulfillment easily. The Compendium defines the principle of the common good: “To which every aspect of social life must be related if it is to attain its fullest meaning, stems from the dignity, unity and equality of all people. According to its primary and broadly accepted sense, the common good indicates the sum total of social conditions which allow people, wither as groups or individuals, to reach their fulfilment more fully and more easily (Compendium, 164).
The statement fails to recognize the application of the common good towards sweatshop laborers and how conditions of sweatshops do not allow a person to reach his or her own highest level of fulfilment. According to CST, the common good must be shared by all people, either as groups or individuals to reach his or her fulfilment easily. Each member of society has a duty to develop the common good equally and every member deserves to enjoy the benefits of the common good (Compendium, 166). The statement made does not recognize the right of the common good to sweatshop laborers by discouraging their fulfilment by stating “sweatshops aren’t that bad” (Kelley). This individual’s statement does not follow CST’s principle of sharing the common good with all people, including the sweatshop laborers. However, many argue that the definition of the common good cannot be used because of its ambiguity, so the person making this statement is not alone in his or train of thought. This person and Albino Barrera disagree with the definition of human fulfilment in the common good. In What Does Catholic Social Thought Recommend for the Economy?, Albino Barrera argues that this definition of the common good lacks specificity because the definition of human fulfilment by the Compendium is both incomplete and subjective. Because of this, he argues that the principle of the common good cannot be applied to economic matters or in the case of sweatshop laborers. The term’s ambiguity makes it difficult to come to an agreement on the specifics of what CST recommends for human fulfilment and for the economy (Barrera, 15-16). Regardless, a conceptual middle ground is possible, and Barrera has made progress to apply CST’s principle of human fulfilment of the common good which has solidified the shared responsibility of all people to encourage others to reach his or her common good, including sweatshop laborers. To better align with CST, this individual must recognize that all people have the right to achieve his or her highest level of fulfilment, and that people, including the individual who made this statement, is responsible for making this process easier. The original statement does not follow CST’s definition of the role and purpose of work by stating “Sweatshops aren’t that bad” (Kelley). The Compendium describes work as the “original state of man and precedes his fall; it is therefore not a punishment or curse” (Compendium, 256). However, as seen in the Rivoli text, sweatshops do not follow CST’s guidelines for work and would be considered “bad.” The specific practices that make a factory a “sweatshop” as seen in the Rivoli text violate the way the Compendium and CST view the rights of employees and the distribution of the products of work.
Section 323 of the Compendium explains that on one hand we must produce material goods for life, but not at the expense of people. This section states “The prophetic tradition condemns fraud, usury, exploitation and gross injustice, especially when directed against the poor” (Compendium, 323). To follow CST, we must acknowledge poverty and share the gifts of God with the poor. However, the goal of the garment factories in chapter 5 of the Rivoli text is to gain enormous profit, regardless of the conditions of the workers it employs. This section of the Compendium explains that we must not exploit the people who work, but unfortunately as seen in most sweatshops, the conditions are poor and the workers are exploited. Rivoli described her visit to the Shanghai Number 36 Cotton Yarn Factory as a sensory assault. “The noise is a metal blanket, a deafening clatter of real machines, rather that the electronic buzzing or beeping emitted by factories in America. The metal noise blanket smothers not only conversation but thinking as well” (Rivoli, 5). This practice could be improved by improving the conditions of the factory workers to better align with CST. Specifically, providing a safe, more quiet, and spacious work environment for the factory
workers. The Compendium requires that the products of work must be distributed to all and especially the needy. This is seen in section 329, which states, “Wealth is a good that comes from God and is to be used by its owner and made to circulate so that even the needy may enjoy it. Evil is seen in the immoderate attachment to riches and the desire to hoard” (Compendium 329). However, as seen in the Rivoli text, the cotton that is made into textiles is made by the poorest members in the poorest societies (China, Bangladesh, etc.), but are distributed to the wealthiest societies (U.S., Canada, etc). This practice violates CST because the goods that are made should be circulated so the needy can enjoy them. This practice could be improved by the companies donating or subsidizing the cost of the clothing to its factory workers. Unfortunately, the people working in unjust conditions to make these clothes cannot afford them. This practice is a major violation of CST and needs to be changed. The statement conflicts with CST’s principle of solidarity because the statement presents an us vs them mentality rather than empathizing with the poor and marginalized who work in sweatshops.
The Compendium states solidarity is a principle that “highlights in a particular way the intrinsic social nature of the human person, the equality of all in dignity and rights and the common path of individuals and peoples towards an ever more committed unity” (Compendium, 192). The principle of solidarity relates to how we are to be in relation to each other, especially the poor and marginalized. This statement contradicts the principle of solidarity because it highlights the division between the individual making the statement and the laborers working in sweat shops. To better align with CST, the individual should be accepting of the poor and marginalized, instead of ostracizing
them. The statement that “Sweatshops aren’t that bad. You can live like a king on those wages in other countries because everything is so cheap and they don’t have the same expenses we do in the United States” (Kelley), directly violates the key principles of the common good, role and purpose of work, and solidarity. We can analyze this statement with CST to suggest responsible courses of action. To better align with the principle of the common good, the individual making the statement must recognize that sweatshop laborers are included and deserve to reach his or her highest level of fulfilment. Also, this individual must realize that all people share the responsibility of making this process easier for each other. To better align with the principle of work, this individual must recognize that the working conditions in sweatshops are bad. Finally, to better align with the principle of solidarity, the individual must be accepting of the poor and marginalized. The presence of sweatshop labor in the United States has resulted in major global effects on the garment industry, but using CST to evaluate the ethics of sweatshops provides information for reflection to better suggest more responsible courses of action to better align with the principles of CST.