If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Made in the USA - American Sweat Shops
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Came across this documentary on Joost ... quite scarey to see how the USA allows slave labour in one of it's colonies whilst allowing US firms to claim their clothes are "Made in the USA"
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=7543104430091001172&q=saipan
http://sonic.net/~doretk/Issues/00-06%20SUM/madein.html
Out in the Pacific Ocean, on a chain of fourteen islands known as the US Com-monwealth of the Northern Mariana Is-lands, a $1 billion garment industry has been booming since the 1980s. Thousands of garment workers live and toil in deplorable conditions, working up to 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, and earning $3.05 an hour or less, often without overtime pay. Yet, the clothes these workers sew carry labels that say "Made in the USA."
After World War II, the US won control from Japan of the Northern Mariana Islands (the Marianas). Because of the Marianas' limited economic base, the US delegated control of minimum wage and immigration laws to the Marianas' government. The US also provided for duty-free imports of products into the US and no quota restrictions. Last year alone, the federal government estimated that contractors and US retailers avoided more than $200 million in duties for $1 billion worth of garments shipped from Saipan, the main island of the Marianas. With no US import tariffs, no US quota restrictions, a minimum wage of $3.05, and lax immigration laws, the Marianas have attracted a host of foreign investors from China, Korea, and other nations who produce clothes for some of the biggest brand-name labels, at the cost of exploiting workers.
Indentured Labor
Over 90% of garment industry jobs in the Marianas are held by foreign "guest workers," predominantly young women from China, the Philippines, Bangladesh, and Thailand. With promises of high pay and quality work in the US, workers agree to repay recruitment fees from $2,000 to $7,000, trapping them in a state of indentured servitude. They often must sign "shadow contracts" waiving basic human rights, including the freedom to join unions, attend religious services, quit, or marry.
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=7543104430091001172&q=saipan
http://sonic.net/~doretk/Issues/00-06%20SUM/madein.html
Out in the Pacific Ocean, on a chain of fourteen islands known as the US Com-monwealth of the Northern Mariana Is-lands, a $1 billion garment industry has been booming since the 1980s. Thousands of garment workers live and toil in deplorable conditions, working up to 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, and earning $3.05 an hour or less, often without overtime pay. Yet, the clothes these workers sew carry labels that say "Made in the USA."
After World War II, the US won control from Japan of the Northern Mariana Islands (the Marianas). Because of the Marianas' limited economic base, the US delegated control of minimum wage and immigration laws to the Marianas' government. The US also provided for duty-free imports of products into the US and no quota restrictions. Last year alone, the federal government estimated that contractors and US retailers avoided more than $200 million in duties for $1 billion worth of garments shipped from Saipan, the main island of the Marianas. With no US import tariffs, no US quota restrictions, a minimum wage of $3.05, and lax immigration laws, the Marianas have attracted a host of foreign investors from China, Korea, and other nations who produce clothes for some of the biggest brand-name labels, at the cost of exploiting workers.
Indentured Labor
Over 90% of garment industry jobs in the Marianas are held by foreign "guest workers," predominantly young women from China, the Philippines, Bangladesh, and Thailand. With promises of high pay and quality work in the US, workers agree to repay recruitment fees from $2,000 to $7,000, trapping them in a state of indentured servitude. They often must sign "shadow contracts" waiving basic human rights, including the freedom to join unions, attend religious services, quit, or marry.
0
Comments
I am pretty sure that the chocolate you eat probably has a connection to slavery too. A lot of cocoa is sourced from the Ivory Coast on plantations which use children who are trafficked there. Allegadly Nestle and Mars have been known to source their food from there.
Basically, unless it's Fairtrade, it's probably not fair at all.
Yeh because Fairtrade is really fair and improves the lives of farmers in developing countries!
Yeah I remember watching something the other day about how Fairtrade was a bit of a rip off. Cant remember what it was though. My memory is getting worse
It's fairer than using child slavery. :rolleyes:
I agree, it's not the answer to the overall hugely complex picture, but it's the lesser of two evils.
Would be interesting to read/watch because I have worked alongside people in the trade justice movement and read a lot on Fairtrade. It'd be nice to read the other side of the arguement (if anybody has it... Yerascrote? Seeing as you were so quick to mock, maybe you can pull your head out yer arse and provide some links).
Naughty naughty. :angel:
Does that mean you can hop off your pedestool and show us something?
Or are you just making a pointless post?
being all adult and all.
I can't, my head is up my arse.
And what are your thoughts on the first thing you could find on Google?
Are you saying that like I didn't know those things already?
This article compares the wages of a person living in a poorer country with somebody living in a rich country.
2 - Fair Trade brings about unfair competition
Uhm... Is this example not a reductio ad absurdum? Maybe it is the way it is translated, I'm unsure. Every market has competition, but this has nothing to do with Fairtrade.
3 - Fair Trade do not take account of ecological costs
Poor arguement, unless you are talking about ALL food which is imported. All Fairtrade products are shipped, apart from roses. There is a greater eco-footprint on products which are flown. So in buying Fairtrade, you at least know the product has not been flown, whereas you don't if it isn't Fairtrade.
4 - Fair Trade helps to bring biodiversity lower
Another ridiculous arguement, unless you apply it to agriculture as a whole.
5 - Fair Trade follows the unculturation of the production
Again, not just Fairtrade :rolleyes:
7 - Fair Trade supports Supermarkets
See previous answer.
8 - Fair Trade supports the World-Company globalisation
You cannot change the world overnight. It is better to make a small difference, than non at all. The answer (in my opinion and I can find some info for anyone who likes) is localisation of markets, but that isn't something that's going to happen any time soon. The global south will continue producing for the global north, how the hell will we stop this? It's hugely complex and not a problem that the Fairtrade mark is bringng to the world. It's just a blatantly biased arguement.
9 - Fair Trade is a new-colonialism*
WTF is this? it has nothing to do with Fairtrade.
10 - Fair Trade goes along with the ideologie of submission
I'm not even going to bother with this... There's nothing submissive about buying Fairtrade, progress is slow. All the activists I know only drink Fairtrade because it's better than nothing.
Are you going to give it or not? because you just took the piss out of me then offered a website that maybe reflects your own feelings on fairtrade?
:rolleyes:
Did you even read this page through?
Oooooooooooooooooooooh! Touch a raw nerve did I?
I just don't like brands advertising sometime as "fair" when it's not totally fair. Yes, it's fairer but not totally fair.
This will also lull certain people into thinking that buying fair trade they are solving the problem when they're not.
It's not brands advertising as fair, it's a certification to show that certain standards are met (environmental, trade union rights, better prices paid to producers ect). Hence not all Green and Blacks is Fairtrade, but one or two products don the label.
And do you think then it is better to do no good, than a little good?
I've never met anybody who believes Fairtrade will solve the problem, maybe you have. Bu the problem is huge and websites like the one you posted, wich are poorly researched and offer illogical arguements aren't helping anybody. Fairtrade is voting with your shopping basket (I believe) and yeah, we still need to use our voices too...
But tbh, I have only ever heard criticisms about Fairtrade from people who are not trying to solve the problem anyway (I'm not saying you're not, for all I know you could be campaigns director for the WDM). Just because you buy Fartrade does not mean that you cannot do anything else. neither is it deceiving people on its labels that you are abolishing poverty. I have no idea what you mean about people being 'lulled' in to anything, you make it sound deceptive when it's better than nowt.
when you sign up to the fair trade thing you only agree to improve, and there isnt too many checks done it seems
was a thing in the guardian the other week bout it, how farmers may only sell 3% of their goods as fair trade
the other thing is that the farmers mark up compared to normal isnt relfected in the price ie the farmer gets 10p more per kilo, it lands up costing more than £1 per kilo
Do you have a link?
And I thought that the checks were frequent?
Would be an interesting read if it's online.
By the looks of the documentary the US Government changed the laws to make it legal .. People probably go into a store - think they're helping fellow Americans out by buying "made in the USA" Products and turns out USA is some island not much different from a prison off the coast of China.
At least if they worked in these conditions in their own country they'd have friends and family around, get to go home every night - not be in some kind of prison .. I believe M&S were caught several years ago selling garments with made in the UK on the label but turned out it was made in India or Pakistan.
expensive certification
Click
if paying farmers above the market price becomes more prevelant it would lead to an eventual over supply and a depressing of prices. that would be fun for farmers, fair trade or not.
The programme about it on Channel 4 was decent. Showed the supposed beneficiaries saying that as much as they appreciate the good will from the people who bought fair trade products, they'd got nothing from it.
Personally, I would never trust corporate business with any scheme like this. Being profit-driven, abuse is inevitable.
So Fairtrade is no better at all for the welfare of the people involved?
Do you mean smaller Fairtrade co-operatives or larger companies who have the mark?
Do you mean they get nothing from it as in they can't really join trade unions, they are forced to work stupid hours? or do you mean financially?
Not according to the people they interviewed. Said they'd seen no benefits whatsoever.
Was this on unreported world?
or is there a link to the synopsis?