The paper “ How Sweatshops Are Good for the Poor and Why Are Anti-Sweatshop Movements Not Interested in Stopping the Trade in Developing Nations? " is a spectacular example of a literature review on human resources. Sweatshops are places of employment that offer low pay, inflexible working conditions as well as long working hours (Jones and Malones, 2010). According to many economists, sweatshops have been perceived to benefit the poor as well as developing countries. It is also clear that anti-sweatshop movements can reduce employment opportunities in developing countries. From an economic perspective, sweatshops can be viewed as an exchange in which both employers and workers gain when they enter the market voluntarily, even if the wage may be too low.
However, much of the scholarly work regarding sweatshops has been focused on the wages employees get. Some authors argue that after regulating other factors, multinational firms pay more than domestic firms in developing countries. Mobilization against exploitation at the workplace has spawned numerous grassroots movements; the most famous movement, in this case, is the anti-sweatshop movement (Claire, n.d). Anti-sweatshop movements champion for better working conditions, better pay as well as accountability and transparency of practices by the owners and the management (Jones and Malones, 2010).
Many small operations supply big companies with whole or parts of the products that are made under questionable circumstances. Even though, the advocates for reform are diligent they have a daunting task. In most cases, the exposed sweatshops shut down overnight and reopen in another place under a new name (Jones and Malones, 2010). There has been an argument that those corporations buying goods from these firms claim that suppliers using the sweatshop tactics may not be part of the corporation, therefore suggesting that corporations that are not accountable therefore making social transformation intricate.
In order to counter this rhetoric, it requires both imaginative and inventive strategies (Jones and Malones, 2010). Environmental concerns have become more intricate in the present globalized world. Many sweatshops are located in places with low environmental standards (Jones and Malones, 2010). However, there are dangers associated with low environmental standards upon the individuals operating in specific environments. Additionally, producing goods in nations that have low environmental standards implies that there will be increased use of transportation fuels so that the commodities can be moved around the world. According to Roberts, Moser LePan and Buzzard (2011, 478) they state that no story illustrates the growing distrust of the culture of corporate branding more than the international anti-Nike, this is the most known as well as tenacious of the brand-based campaigns.
According to Roberts, Moser LePan and Buzzard (2011, 478), Nike’ s sweatshop scandals have been subject to discussion in more than 1500 new articles as well as opinion columns.
Nike's Asian factories have been probed by cameras from major media houses such as ESPN, CBS, and Disney’ s sports station. Additionally, Nike has been subject to various Doonesbury cartoon strips as well as the butt of Michael Moore’ s documentary The Big One. Consequently, a number of people in Nike’ s PR section are dealing with the sweatshop controversy. This involves, fielding grievances, meeting local groups as well as developing Nike’ s responses (Jones and Malones, 2010). The company has established a new executive post, vice president for corporate responsibility (CCCE, 2013).
The authors of The Broadview Anthology of Expository Prose claim that Nike has received thousands of letters of protest. It has also been faced with several group demonstrations and it is the target of several critical web sites.