Cheap labour

[anotheoldgit]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama /7456965.stm

Child exploitation to our western minds is deplorable, but should we interfer in the way these children earn a living?

If western companies cancel contracts with these sweat shop owners, will it mean that these bosses will just cut their work force, thus depriving these young persons of their earnings?

[Theland]

I agree. In a perfect world the kids would be in school, and getting three squares a day.
It's not perfect is it.
It's all very well claiming the moral high ground but before the work is taken away from these kids, something else needs to be put in place.
What are we to do if we just nip out to the shops to buy a shirt? Fell guilty about it? Maybe there needs to be a fair trade label similar to the food labels.

[Ethel]

It doesn't have to be 'either, or'.

There was a report in The Independent a couple of years ago about a company thatcommissioned, imported and sold rugs made in India.

Like all the other companies in the same field this company used children and women. However, they provided each worker with two meals a day, free health care, including eye care and asthma checks (something to do with the wool) and education for the children.

The wages were on a par with the other companies but the extra benefits helped to ensure the workers were better looked after. The companies argument for not paying higher wages was to discourage teachers, nurses and so on leaving their jobs to earn better money doing this sort of manual labour which had happened when a different company offered higher wages for unskilled work.

[123everton]

That was the same argument the industrialists used in the 19th century when faced with the disgrace of our child labourers, were they right?
Children belong in schools, not sweat shops.