fashion loves people

Jump to Comments

I’m thinking very hard right now. The NY Times’ amazing Nicholas Kristof published an op-ed piece Wednesday, Where Sweatshops are a Dream, that makes the reasons for supporting overseas manufacturing — even sweatshops — painfully clear. Most notably, because the alternatives to factory jobs are much, much worse.

As an ethical fashion advocate, I don’t ask for everything. I ask for TRANSPARENCY. I don’t want us to become paranoid shoppers, I want us to become informed and conscientious shoppers. I know that the reason overtime hours are an issue in factories is that many workers WANT to work every waking hour they’re able, to send just *that much* more money home. I know that this is a complex issue, and no solution will solve everyone’s problems.

But I’m still thinking.

Please have a read and let me know your thoughts.

Mr. Obama and the Democrats who favor labor standards in trade agreements mean well, for they intend to fight back at oppressive sweatshops abroad. But while it shocks Americans to hear it, the central challenge in the poorest countries is not that sweatshops exploit too many people, but that they don’t exploit enough.

Talk to these families in the dump, and a job in a sweatshop is a cherished dream, an escalator out of poverty, the kind of gauzy if probably unrealistic ambition that parents everywhere often have for their children.

“I’d love to get a job in a factory,” said Pim Srey Rath, a 19-year-old woman scavenging for plastic. “At least that work is in the shade. Here is where it’s hot.”

Another woman, Vath Sam Oeun, hopes her 10-year-old boy, scavenging beside her, grows up to get a factory job, partly because she has seen other children run over by garbage trucks. Her boy has never been to a doctor or a dentist, and last bathed when he was 2, so a sweatshop job by comparison would be far more pleasant and less dangerous.

I’m glad that many Americans are repulsed by the idea of importing products made by barely paid, barely legal workers in dangerous factories. Yet sweatshops are only a symptom of poverty, not a cause, and banning them closes off one route out of poverty. At a time of tremendous economic distress and protectionist pressures, there’s a special danger that tighter labor standards will be used as an excuse to curb trade.

When I defend sweatshops, people always ask me: But would you want to work in a sweatshop? No, of course not. But I would want even less to pull a rickshaw. In the hierarchy of jobs in poor countries, sweltering at a sewing machine isn’t the bottom.
My views on sweatshops are shaped by years living in East Asia, watching as living standards soared — including those in my wife’s ancestral village in southern China — because of sweatshop jobs.

…

The best way to help people in the poorest countries isn’t to campaign against sweatshops but to promote manufacturing there. One of the best things America could do for Africa would be to strengthen our program to encourage African imports, called AGOA, and nudge Europe to match it.

Among people who work in development, many strongly believe (but few dare say very loudly) that one of the best hopes for the poorest countries would be to build their manufacturing industries. But global campaigns against sweatshops make that less likely.

Look, I know that Americans have a hard time accepting that sweatshops can help people. But take it from 13-year-old Neuo Chanthou, who earns a bit less than $1 a day scavenging in the dump. She’s wearing a “Playboy” shirt and hat that she found amid the filth, and she worries about her sister, who lost part of her hand when a garbage truck ran over her.

“It’s dirty, hot and smelly here,” she said wistfully. “A factory is better.”

In the full article, Kristof mentions Cambodia, which completed an interesting labor experiment with financing and support from the Clinton administration. This American Life: David and Goliath tells the story of one Cambodian factory owner who made it sound very successful, though Kristof suggests otherwise. (It’s only 95 cents, and it’s Ira! Buy it…)

This report from NPR, Made in a Sweatshop? Clues for Consumers, left a lot of questions unanswered but was a decent listen. (And this one’s free, enjoy.)

Thoughts?