MySpace


No Sweat



Last Updated: 12/17/2009

Send Message
Instant Message
Email to a Friend
Subscribe

Gender: Male
Status: Single
Age: 27
Sign: Pisces

State: London and South East
Country: UK
Signup Date: 7/11/2006
Thursday, July 02, 2009 
Here's a little top ten list of sweatshop abusing companies...

1) Primark – Cheap clothes from cheap labour…
In 2008 Primark were exposed employing people in sweatshop conditions in Bangladesh, long hours, hazardous and unhealthy conditions for very low wages. In 2009 Primark were exposed by the BBC for employing people in similar conditions in the UK. Meanwhile, with amid the onset of a recession, Primark recently announced record profits!

2) Topshop – They’ve done it before they’ll do it again…
In 2002 No Sweat and the GMB Union exposed Topshop using sweatshops in the East End of London. Topshops response was to shut down the factories and burn the clothes, ruining lives and the environment. In 2007 The Times found out that Topshop boss, Philip Green, had simply moved his sweatshop conditions abroad, employing hundreds of Sri Lankan, Indian and Bangladeshi workers in Mauritius where they labour for up to 12 hours a day for 30 pence an hour

3) Asda/Walmart - Slave drivers of China & Bangladesh…
As part of the same report into Primark, Asda were also exposed for using some of the same Bangladeshi factories. In 2007 Hong Kong based group SACOM published a report detailing the sweatshop conditions workers that make toys for Asda’s parent company, Walmart. Late last year Walmart decreed that its Chinese suppliers have to respect workers' rights, including the right to organsie. Unfortunately Walmart palmed the cost of better wages and conditions on to the factory owners themselves, leading to mass factory closures and further impoverishment for workers

4) Tesco – Every little help, except in sweatshops…
In 2006 and again in 2008 the charity War on Want exposed Tesco for exploiting people in Bangladesh. In WoW’s report Fashion Victims they reported bullying by managers in factories and intimidation by employed thugs, awful working conditions and long hours. All the while Tesco reported record profits and opened stores across the globe!

5) Nike – Nasty old Nike, always exploiting their workers…
Nike are the experts at exploitation, ever since the anti sweatshop movement emerged, Nike have always been in the top ten of sweatshop abusing companies. Reports from 1996 were describing conditions where workers have to meet a quota before you can go home, no matter how long they’ve been there and without extra pay. In 2007 reports came through that little had changed in Nike sweatshops and workers were forced in to the desperate situation of striking for better pay, striking in countries where such actions can get you beaten or killed.

6) Adidas – Sweatshop made, Olympics specials…
The company that won the contract to be official sports brand behind the Olympics 08 use sweatshop labour to produce the Olympic gear. The money they earned from that contract never came anywhere near the workers at the bottom. A football stitcher in India would have to sew over 12 million balls/year to earn as much as Adidas CEO Herbert Heiner did in 2007 (that’s 100 balls per minute for a 48 hour work week)!!


7) Disney – Magic for some, hell for others…
2007 saw workers at a factory producing toys in Shenzhen, China fighting for their rights. Workers had been forced workers to sign one-sided ‘contracts’in which wages, work hours and benefits were left blank. Wages had been withheld, overtime unpaid, working hours excessive and living conditions in the dormitories atrocious. In addition, Tianyu management falsified contracts and concealed labour violations from social auditors. The workers fought back while Disney ignored their demands.

8) Burberry – Off to China for cheap workforce & fat profits…
In 2007 Burberry shut down its unionised South Wales factory to move garment production to Chinese sweatshops. Burberry moves to factories in Shenzhen in the Guangdong province of China where production is likely to involve employing child labour or use forced, prison labour. Workers in Britain lose their jobs while workers in China are signed up for exploited labour, all the while Burberry gets fat on the profits.

9) Starbucks – Crap coffee, crap employers…
Coffee growers receive little more than $1.10 (50p) for a pound of coffee, which is then sold for $160 (£80). Oxfam launched a campaign against Starbucks in October 2006 after it effectively blocked Ethiopia's attempts to trademark its coffee beans in the United States. Meanwhile, Starbucks workers in the US earn as little $6-$8 per hour depending on the location. Every single barista in the US is part-time and not guaranteed any work hours per week. For example, a Starbucks worker can get 35 hours of work one week, 22 hours the week after, and 10 hours the following week. In Britain baristas get a little over the minimum wage – in other words poverty pay.


10) Planet Earth Inc – Sweatshop labour across the globe…
Sweatshop labour isn’t confined to just a few companies in a few countries, it exists all over the world with factories ignoring basic right to decent conditions and pay while producing products for a whole variety of companies. Big companies make big profits from contracting their production out to middle men with the proviso to produce as cheap as possible to a certain standard. To reach that standard workers bear the brunt of long hours, low wages and terrible conditions. To keep the workers in line bullying and intimidation are commonplace.Sweatshop labour is modern, global capitalism striped bare.

No Sweat exists to make solidarity with sweatshop workers and their organisations, help them organise themselves, publicise, expose and help stamp out sweatshop exploitation.
Stratus Blue

 
Great Blog!!!!
 
Posted by Stratus Blue on Friday, July 03, 2009 - 7:59 AM
[Reply to this
Stratus Blue

 
Please support this blog by giving kudos, posting your comments and directing your readers here.
 
Posted by Stratus Blue on Friday, July 03, 2009 - 7:59 AM
[Reply to this
Stratus Blue

 
Got me on Starbucks.  A low-life crap head on a occasion, I am.  Thanks for drawing attention and outing me.  Being conscientious is key, although, there are other times when one can be a bit more selective in taking business elsewhere for the very reasons stated above.  Ain't easy sometimes...when it comes to clothes, may have to resort to suiting up in coconut husk, tapa cloth, and or palm leaves with the way it is out there in the market.  Actually, doesn't sound like a bad trip, eh?  They did where that back in the day in all of Polynesia.  Time to get back to basics.

 
Posted by Stratus Blue on Friday, July 03, 2009 - 8:01 AM
[Reply to this
sweettina2
Tina Sullivan

 
Blue, can we have a new picture of you in your new suit?  LOL, maybe you could start a trend, but then they would underpay the coconut growers and pickers, then create sweat shops! 
The more things change, the more they stay the same. 

 
Posted by sweettina2 on Tuesday, July 07, 2009 - 11:44 AM
[Reply to this
the ghoul

 
how do you ever expect to make a difference? whenever workers get rights they lose jobs. look at america. we don't have manufacturing anymore, and we rack up national debt every day, with no hope of ever paying it off (current figures project that every man, woman, and child in america today would have to pay $30,000 to pay off the national debt). we have some of the best working conditions in the world, but no jobs. what is worse? the possibility of a workplace accident or the certainty of starvation?

   in my opinion the only way to ever effectively combat sweatshops is to cut off all foreign aid. the u.s. sends hundreds of billions in foreign aid to tyrants, dictators, despots, and strongmen, ostensibly because we want them to provide milk for their schoolchildren. the crooks who get the money then actually use it to do so, which frees up their resources to build up their militaries, and, more pertinent to the issue you are presenting, subsidize their nation's exporters. in other words, the only reason it is profitable to export goods across thousands of miles of ocean and sell them at rock-bottom prices is because any loss that the company takes is paid off by the government of the nation it came from, and this is possible because that nation gets money from US.

US -->  CHINA --> CHINESE EXPORTERS

   this obviously needs to stop. if we cut off the foreign aid, foreign nations will no longer be able to support their unprofitable businesses using our money. as it stands, they use our own money and credit to destroy our industries and bring our economy closer to collapsing, and the really stupid part is they expect us to someday pay them back for this! nobody really wins; they get our jobs but they don't really make any money for it. meanwhile we are running up debt so that we can send them what is left of our own money for crappy junk, which we have become dependent on because it breaks and falls apart so often.

   for all the money we have wasted trying to make friends or at least allies, we have nothing but ingrates and enemies, and a LOT of debt! the key to stopping sweatshop labor is to cut off foreign aid.

-the ghoul

see ron paul's book "a foreign policy of freedom"

 
Posted by the ghoul on Friday, July 03, 2009 - 8:04 AM
[Reply to this
sweettina2
Tina Sullivan

 
American's are not the blame for the situation of unemployment... this was done by design!

 
Posted by sweettina2 on Tuesday, July 07, 2009 - 11:43 AM
[Reply to this
No Sweat

 
The ghoul presents a very interesting example of right-wing perspective on international export and the issue of sweatshop exploitation.

Whilst it is true that Foreign aid sent to directly countries controlled by dictators and corrupt regimes often leads to funds being misappropriated/stolen for use by the power system, it is naive to suggest that multinational companies using workforces in areas around the world that have limited or no labour laws and health and safety regulations is a direct consequence of foreign aid.

Dictatorships and corrupt regimes are often supported by Western governments wherever it benefits their own political and economic agenda.The issue and reasoning of foreign aid given by countries like the US is another issue. For detailed discussion on these issues look up almost any work by Noam Chomsky.

Multinational companies use sweatshops as they are able to generate enormous profits. Historically companies selling expensive clothing utilized cheap labour abroad as it dramtically increased profit margins. Nike is a classic example of this. Industry is shut down in the West where it is expensive because of labour laws fought for and won by workers over generations past. In developing countries these battles are taking place today with people struggling for decent conditions and decent pay to be able to feed their families. The awful conditions in sweatshops are perpetrated by factory owners who are fighting in a global matrket to offer the cheapest prices in production, the way to offer the cheapest price is to cut back on working conditons, health and saftey and low wages - essentially intimidating the workforce into living with these condition through the threat of expulsion or, more often than not, through violence. 
Check out No Sweat's website www.nosweat.org.uk for many stories of sweatshop exploitation, why it happens and for what reason. For a more detailed discussion of the sweatshop issue and multinational companiessee naomi klein's No Logo.           

Jay
No Sweat

 
Posted by No Sweat on Friday, July 03, 2009 - 8:37 AM
[Reply to this
the ghoul

 
i recognize the name noam chomsky- he was a guest on the daily show with jon stewart to plug one of his books.

   it is possible that a sweatshop abroad could be operated profitably, but i think that the hurt company image causes their profits to drop a bit, and i seriously think that their profits would be further diminished if the host countries weren't able to subsidize them. it is the same as the way the u.s. subsidizes farmers and passenger trains. the host government states that the subsidy is necessary to encourage more american capital and provide more jobs. corporations are always chasing a free handout, whether it be from a foreign country or their own, because it is more profitable to chase a handout than it is to do competitive, commendable, or at least honest business.

   sorry to spam up your comment board. great blog by the way! it is always good to know whether your are drinking blood, so you can avoid doing so.

   by the way, for those of you who want an all-american alternative for your clothing, just check the label before you buy. fruit of the loom is still american, and so are gold toe socks, among other things. i also heard of a t-shirt company in southern california that sells some really cool shirts made right here in the u s of a.

-the ghoul

 
Posted by the ghoul on Friday, July 03, 2009 - 9:15 AM
[Reply to this
No Sweat

 
Sorry to say this but Fruit of the loom are also guilty of using sweatshop labour
See...
http://internationaltrade.suite101.com/article.cfm/t_shirt_sweatshops
http://peopleandplanet.org/corporatepower/news/fruitoftheloom
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/03/423396.html
http://divisionoflabour.com/archives/001388.php

Apart from that, being made in a Western country doesn't necessarily mean not sweatshop made. In teh UK there have been several occasions where sweatshop conditions in London and Manchester (two major cities) were found producing clothes for High Street Brands.

No Sweat advocates solidarity with the workers who make the products wherever they are whatever they produce. Everyone deserves decent conditions and living wages. 

 
Posted by No Sweat on Monday, July 06, 2009 - 4:00 PM
[Reply to this
Thomas (The Psychonauts Log)
Thomas Psychonautslog

 
A woman plucking tea leaves in Assam or Bangladesh earns a dollar per day. If the same woman would earn 10 dollars the tea would be 10 times more expensive and a luxury item (same for coffee maybe). Or there is a huge margin of profit for some middleman along the trade route, which could be shared with the base of the pyramid. I would like to see calculations on that!!!

 
Posted by Thomas (The Psychonauts Log) on Monday, July 06, 2009 - 1:20 PM
[Reply to this
No Sweat

 
This is essentially right. Tea (or any other product) would be more expensive if the company shareholders demanded a stability in profits. In order for the tea picker to earn a decent living wage then the profits have to be distributed more equally with those at the bottom. When companies record record profits of billions and the advertising budget is greater than the amount spent on the overall workforce at the bottom of the pyramid, there can be no excuse for sweatshop conditions.

 
Posted by No Sweat on Monday, July 06, 2009 - 4:05 PM
[Reply to this
sweettina2
Tina Sullivan

 
Great blog.

 
Posted by sweettina2 on Tuesday, July 07, 2009 - 11:43 AM
[Reply to this
Steve White & The Protest Family

 
Great blog. And the list is pretty intuitive if you think about it. You know when you're shopping in the high street which brands are exploiting their workforce by the price of their goods and/or the value of the company.

Starbucks in the UK now only sell Fairtrade coffee. Have the conditions for their workers in the UK improved at all?

 
Posted by Steve White & The Protest Family on Monday, September 07, 2009 - 12:00 PM
[Reply to this
Sirona
Kathryn Sirona

 
Where are you getting your information?  I need to find it to show it to my friends and co workers.

 
Posted by Sirona on Monday, September 14, 2009 - 5:59 PM
[Reply to this
Paregorik

 
im reposting this!

 
Posted by Paregorik on Tuesday, September 22, 2009 - 2:21 PM
[Reply to this