Question

Please read the following instructions.

(1) Write a short essay on Ian Maitland’s article to explain the following:

(i) the argument that market wages in international sweatshops are too low (or “unconscionable”);

(ii) Ian Maitland’s counter-argument that rejects (i).

(2) Explain the supporting reasons/evidence that Maitland uses and Use your judgement to decide what to include in your essay.

220 words max

Answer 1

Answer.

In his article ‘The Great Non-Debateover International Sweatshops’ ( 1997), Ian Maitland makes a case of the changing nature of the market economy in globalised societies. The globalization of production by big merchandise brands and companies has led to an emerging international division of labor where the companies give contract to local traders in developing countries for the manufacture of the goods at low cost production due to the involvement of low wage indigenous labour. Maitland presents the local factories as ‘ international sweatshops’ for the big corporations. The contracting arrangements have drawn intense fire from critics—usually labor and human rights activists. These critics have charged that the companies are exploiting workers around the globe, failing to pay their workers living wages, using child labor, abusing their human rights by denying workers the right to join unions and failing to enforce minimum human conditions and labor standards in the workplace.

However, Maitland argues that the debate between the big enterprises and the critics misses the real picture and the more significant issue of what are the actual appropriate labour standards and wages for the labour in international sweatshops. Thus, Maitland challenges the argument of critics and instead shows that the increased demand for labor resulted in the bidding up of wages as companies competed for a scarce labor supply. While he agrees that the sweatshop factories are marked by poor labour standards in terms of labour union rights, he disagrees about the situation of low wages and presents that the wages earned by workers in the export factories are much higher than their average national wage standard. An important issue to consider is if the sweatshops are such low paying sectors then Why would indigenous workers choose international factories over local enterprises. It I saw here that Maitland’s own argument becomes worth considering as he shifts the focus beyond the ethical issue of human rights and dignity of the workers to addressing the reality that the workers have voluntarily taken their jobs , and want to keep them because it has allowed them to maintain a steady income for their families which is above their national minimum wage. However, this does not take away the fact that most international companies may have not followed a stringent ethical standard in its outsourced operations which has led to the exploitation of the workers.

the workers whom minimum wage legislation tries to protect- the urban formal workers employed in the sweatshops already earn much more than the less favored majority rural workers. Higher wages in the formal urban sector like the sweatshops reduce the rate of employment And by increasing the supply of labor depress incomes in the informal sector. The critics’ solution of higher living wage standard may therefore worsen the local economy.

References:

Maitland, I. (1997). “The Great Non-Debate Over International Sweatshops," British Academy of Management Annual Conference Proceedings, September, pp. 240-65.