Although many students think they’ve heard the term “sweatshop” 10 times too many, three University students say it is an issue that should not go away, and that overseas factories can improve the way of life for workers whose only alternative is poverty and hunger.
While many of the activists who protested for the University to sign on with the Worker Rights Consortium have never set foot in a third-world country, Rakesh Tolani, Gabriela Serrano and Mehreen Khan have each lived in one. Although all three students support many of the causes behind the WRC, they say that sweatshops “have saved many families in those countries,” and that negative publicity has drowned out this reality.
“Because of the situation there, people live completely differently from people in the United States,” said Tolani, a junior business major from India. ” The poverty is extremely bad and for them to make even a little bit of money is a big deal … Sweatshops pay more than begging on the street does, and they provide jobs for many people who would otherwise be starving.”
Khan, a sophomore business major from Pakistan, said anti-sweatshop activists in the United States portray sweatshops in a much more negative light than people from third-world countries do.
“Compared to Pakistan-run factories, sweatshops are not bad at all; they both have the same conditions,” she said. “The way activists were treating the issue on campus was ridiculous; they act like it’s a much bigger deal than it really is. Many people from my country don’t hate sweatshops … and they don’t feel exploited.”
Tolani added that, despite the conditions, many workers aren’t anxious to make changes in their workplaces.
“I can guarantee that if somebody goes to those factories and says ‘Don’t work here, we’ll find you something better,’ workers will say ‘We don’t care, we want to work here,’” said Tolani. “Sweatshops give these people the security that they won’t die of hunger. They don’t want to leave.”
Tolani, Serrano and Khan said harsh conditions in some factories don’t represent sweatshops as a whole, and generalizations shouldn’t be made.
“My mom works with a lot of women who work in sweatshops,” said Serrano, a sophomore business major from El Salvador. “Some of them like their jobs, but then others think the treatment is too rigid. Working in a sweatshop isn’t the best job, but it’s not the worst either … You can’t say all sweatshops are good, but you can’t say they’re all bad.”
Serrano said that although the WRC may improve some working conditions, its efforts could also have a negative impact.
“WRC intentions are good,” she said. “But it could have a double effect. For example, the WRC is thinking about closing down some sweatshops in El Salvador, and that would bring many economic problems and make the country’s poverty even worse.”
Tolani, Serrano and Khan advocate some of the activists’ causes, but they said some have made the mistake of applying high American standards to third-world countries without actually going there, and this makes sweatshops appear worse than they are. They said activists should have real-life exposure to third-world countries before fighting for the people living in them.
“Out of all those people who protested in front of Johnson Hall, how many have been to a third-world country?” said Tolani. “They should go to these countries to see people’s situations firsthand; then if they still want to fight for it, I’m behind them all the way.”
Sweatshop debate seen in new light
Daily Emerald
October 12, 2000
0
More to Discover