In this paper, I aim to reflect on “Confessions of a Sweatshop Inspector” written by T.A. Frank and published in Washington Monthly on April 1, 2008. The author talks there about his personal experience of working in a company that specialized in the field of “compliance consulting.” The text raises the vital issue of the control over working conditions at the factories both in the US and abroad. On the one hand, either customers or businesses are interested in minimizing goods’ costs and prices. Since the improvement of working conditions for workers inevitably entails an increase in production costs, companies have no direct interest in it. On the other hand, the processes of globalization lead to the fact that, for example, a US factory featuring satisfying working conditions cannot compete with a factory in China where workers are enslaved. Consequently, the increase in labor standards becomes a challenge at the intergovernmental level.
Anti-sweatshops campaigns have a long history; back in the 19th century, abolitionists actively criticized sweatshop work, arguing that it is similar to slavery. In the late 20th century, the issue became relevant again. The rise of the US protectionist sentiment in the 1990s led to the fact that those companies relying on cheap labor in countries like China and Bangladesh became concerned about their negative publicity. Therefore, they began to take care of the labor conditions at their factories. The companies hired outsource inspectors who prepared reports on the labor standards at the factories they worked with. Based on these reports, companies could terminate the contracts with the factories featuring unsatisfactory standards or require significant improvements to the production process.
The company where Frank worked carried out labor standard inspections both in the US and abroad. The methods included observation, the examination of documentation, and interviews with employees. In many ways, the success of the inspection was a matter of chance. Did the inspectors manage to study all the territory of the factory? Did they succeed in obtaining frank answers from the employees during the interviews? In their turn, the factory managers made a lot of effort to create the Potemkin village for the inspectors. The typical violations they tried to hide included document confiscation, underpayment, increased working hours, child labor, and physical abuse.
According to Frank (2012), the success of an inspection depends primarily on whether the company is interested. Often they are interested in being deceived for a straightforward reason: it is cheaper. For such companies, appropriate monitoring firms existed; they carried out numerous brief understaffed inspections, turned a blind eye to violations, thereby maximizing their profits. Frank (2012) mentions several attributes of a company that cares about labor conditions that its manufacturer provides. The first one is whether they conduct inspections before an order is made, not after. The second attribute of such a company is the fact that it has long-term relationships with manufacturers. The last indicator is the fact that there are unannounced inspections instead of those planned in advance.
“Confessions of a Sweatshop Inspector”, the article by T.A. Frank, describes his experience as a labor conditions checker. The author argues that the success of the inspection is often a matter of chance; it also depends on whether the company is interested in it. Some companies are interested in minimizing their costs rather than in satisfying working conditions for the employees at the factories, they work with. However, due to globalization processes, the increase in labor standards worldwide becomes a challenge for all companies.
Reference
Frank, T.A. (2008). “Confessions of a Sweatshop Inspector.” Washington Monthly. Web.