|
Part One
In
the late 1980′ s to the early 1990’s and up until today, people are once again
becoming less interested in fitting a specific social category where one is
judged according to what he/she wears and becoming more interested in the world
around them similar to the 19th century.
There has been an uprising in the fair
trade and ethical buying of clothes amongst the general population and an
increasing interest to seek justice and peace within the past 20 years that has
led people to appropriate their ideas of social justice into the world of
fashion, and focus more on their personal beliefs, their works and how they
affect their environments as a means to identifying themselves.
 This
new “social consciousness” of the West, specifically in the United States,
brought about the Fair Trade and Ethical Buying movement of our day. What began
as a small reaction to the over consumptive West by various underground
organizations and the Christian church is now being appropriated into
mainstream fashion trends and even into the high-end fashion industry.
Fair
Trade, as defined by the Fair Trade Federation, means an equitable and
fair
partnership between marketers in North America and producers in Asia,
Africa, Latin America and other parts of the world. A fair trade
partnership works to provide low- income artisans and farmers with a
living
wage for their work, enabling them to cover basic needs, including
food,
shelter, education and health care for their families.
Ethical Buying simply
means the consumer is making an ethical decision when he/she purchases an item
such as food, clothing, furniture, etc. It is the consumers’ responsibility to
ensure that the item was produced and traded fairly so as to condemn human
rights abuses. Third party certifiers who label products that meet Fair Trade
standards such as guaranteed minimum pricing, environmentally sustainable
production practices, and safe, non-exploitative working conditions regulate
the Fair Trade system.
There
have been many reports describing the awful realities of the unethical
treatment of workers by numerous popular corporations and businesses like
Wal-Mart, Adidas, Starbucks, Gap and Nike. Over the last 20 years, or so, transnational
corporations (TNC’s) have been taking advantage of lower trade barriers and low
transportation/communication costs in order to relocate production to poor
countries in the global south, of which children unfortunately are the
disposable pawns. Many TNC’s source from factories where there is forced labor,
the firing, beating, blacklisting, torture and killings of unionists, physical,
psychological and sexual abuse of workers, discrimination against women, and
exposure to dangerous, unhealthy work.
It has been reported that in Thailand,
workers producing children’s clothing for Nike, Levi Strauss and Adidas
recently reported having to work up to 110 hours per week. Managers made them
swallow “speed” so they could work up to 48 hours straight before collapsing.
In other cases, there are reports of workers injected with contraceptive drugs
and employers pressuring pregnant workers to have abortions. The worst problem,
however, for most workers is that their wages don’t meet basic needs. In China, Vietnam,
Indonesia
and other countries base wages range from 20 to 30 cents a day.
Nike
and The Gap are amongst many of the businesses that have fallen under the
temptation of sweatshop labor. Nike is currently the largest manufacturer of
athletic supplies in the world. In June of 1996, Bob Herbert, a New York Times
columnist, criticized Nike labor conditions within a harsh open-ended piece.
The accusations alleged that Nike built its wealth and products with the
“slave” labor of young Asian women. The accounts described human
rights abuses, violence to laborers, and hideous working conditions within
Nike’s Asian facilities.
Over 40 demonstrations occurred at nationwide
Niketowns, resulting in the arrests of 19 demonstrators. Nike’s image was
stained and it was pressured to respond, so they created a PR campaign claiming
that its factory conditions were equitable and its laborers were fairly
treated. The company was sued in April of 1998 for its false advertisement and
lost millions of dollars, helping a standard for other Fortune 500 companies to
adhere to.
It
is to no surprise that Gap Inc. was once again discovered using child labor to
produce their clothing. Dan McDougall of the British newspaper
The Observer, published his
investigation of the popular TNC: Gap Inc. in October of 2007. His
investigation revealed children between the ages of 10 and 13 hand stitching
Gap garments for no pay, and living under horrid conditions. The children were
bought from their parents and transported by train to underground factories in New Delhi, India,
where the children work from dawn to am hours non-stop with no salary.
Not only
are the children deprived of education, health care, and proper nurturing, but
they are now also slaves to the over consumptive
West. Gap has huge
contracts in India,
which boasts one of the world’s fastest-growing economies. According to the UN,
child labor contributes an estimated 20 per cent of India’s gross national product with
55 million children ages 5 to 14 employed as factory workers. “Gap may be
one of the best-known fashion brands with a public commitment to social
responsibility, but the employment of bonded child slaves as young as 10 in
India’s illegal sweatshops tells a different story,” says Bhuwan Ribhu, a
Delhi lawyer and activist for the Global March Against Child Labor.
To be continued…
Francisco
is currently studying Visual Arts and Anthropology at the State
University of New York at Purchase College. He is passionate about
compassion and service to the poor, and plans on disappearing somewhere
in India after he graduates college to live amongst the “least of
these.”
|
