Introduction
Human dignity is connected to the moral life within a society. Providing an ultimate decision based on the ability to analyze that analyzes the communication will provide an enhancement that will determine what people have to benefit from, in terms of their actions. This study will cover the human dignity and the argument based on the morality of the sweatshops.
People have been able to connect to the availability of the sweatshops through the opportunities it offers in different parts of the world. In the developing countries, it is out of the individual’s roles and responsibilities to take up the decisions that have been resolved by the family through an overview of the long-term effects. People settle for the deals in life that are a source of improvement and desire within themselves, as opposed to the liabilities it causes them. As such, the decision made by people to engage in the sweatshop’s activity “is a valuable effect that will provide accurate support as proposed by the same strategy and mechanism used.”1 However, individuals are sovereign, and therefore their decisions should have an objective of respect and emotional support through the same level of impact from their environment.
Ethical Premises and Circumstances
It should be born in mind that the situation regarding sweatshops and the ethical premises, which the choice of working in a sweatshop is based on, depends on a variety of circumstances. While clearly being harmful and destroying the concept of human dignity, as well as supporting the idea of labor exploitation, it is still admittedly helpful to the people who face dire situations and cannot possibly get any assistance. Therefore, making a choice between complete poverty and, therefore, possible death, and the opportunity of earning at least a humble amount of money, one has the right to choose the latter without being judged for it.
Therefore, from an ethical perspective, a case in point represents a dilemma that makes one view the problem of sweatshops from the perspective of social ethics and the needs of an individual. Since the latter should prevail in the process of making a conscious choice, the phenomenon of sweatshops can be considered a bit more complex than it is traditionally viewed.
However, the phenomenon of working in a sweatshop still poses a range of ethical concerns in terms of human rights protection. There is no need to stress that sweatshop labor conditions typically do not invite the possibility of establishing proper relationships between the staff and the employer. Therefore, the situation in question leads to a rapid increase in the chances for the employer to break the principles of human labor by increasing the amount of working hours to nine and more, reducing the salaries of the staff, providing extremely poor working conditions, neglecting the staff’s requests regarding the changes in the workplace conditions due to their health issues, etc.
Hence, there is a strong need for the supervision of compliance with the basic ethical principles within the environment of sweatshops. The supervision in question may be carried out with the help of other organizations, which can be invited to assess the current state of sweatshops and redefine the labor conditions, which the staff has to work in.
Cultural Differences
A closer look at the way in which African sweatshops work will reveal that the introduction of the specified principles into the operation of sweatshops is hardly possible due to the cultural differences between the United States and the countries where the U.S. sweatshops are located. Particularly, the fact that the U.S. alters the core principles of the other states’ culture by foisting their concept of labor and specific labor conditions on the employees in states such as Africa deserves to be mentioned. These are not only the despicable working conditions that create the atmosphere of controversy around sweatshops (although the specified issue also contributes to the conflict significantly) but the fact of altering the local people’s concept of business relationships by neglecting the basic principles of their culture.
In other words, the inability of the American owners of sweatshops in Africa and other third-world states creates the conflict that harms both the culture of the local people and the relationships between the United States and the designated third-world countries. More importantly, the population of the United States seems to have become insensitive towards the problem of sweatshop labor and the poor conditions provided for the staff.2 Therefore, the ethical approach, which is adopted in the United States for shedding light on the problem of sweatshops, is flawed in its very basis, as most people become emotionally detached from the problem. Thus, cultural differences in general and cultural prejudices, in particular, block the process of sweatshop control development, which leads to numerous infringements of the staff’s rights.
Conclusion
Sweatshops have been an effort that determines the proper advocacy of human rights, and the contradiction is based on the knowledge of provision and awareness of values and moral aspects within the same sector. It is important to consider different organizations that have come up to protect human rights and create a long-term solution regarding the moral principles that seek to advise people on the need to be self-independent and reliable in all sectors in life.
The ability to instill a person’s mind with ethical knowledge is important. The difference between human dignity and the cooperation systems that govern human rights is the ability to describe the standardization required for all individuals within a specific working organization. The internal and external factors contribute to the level of competence within the sweatshops that determine the human dignity from the source of the organizational behavior, which in this case is based on the oppression of the less privileged who seek to earn a living out of their labor but tend to be manipulated in the process.
Works Cited
Mele, Domènec. “Three Keys Concepts of Catholic Humanism for Economic Activity: Human Dignity, Human Rights and Integral Human Development.” Humanism in Economics and Business 15.1 (2015): 113-136. Print.
Paharia, Neeru, and Rohit DeshpandĂ©. Sweatshop Labor Is Wrong Unless the Jeans Are Cute: Motivated Moral Disengagement. New York: St. Martin’s, 2011. Print.