Download The Great Non-Debate over International Sweatshops and more Study notes International Business in PDF only on Docsity!
SWEATSHOPS AND BRIBERY
The Great Non-Debate
over International Sweatshops
In r e c e n t years, t h e r e has b e e n a d r a m a t i c growth in the contracting out of p r o d u c t i o n by companies in the industrialized countries to suppliers in developing countries. This glob- alization of p r o d u c t i o n has led to an emerg- ing international division of labor in footwear a n d apparel in which companies like Nike and R e e b o k c o n c e n t r a t e o n p r o d u c t design a n d marketing b u t rely on a network of contractors in Indonesia, China, Central America, a n d the like, to build shoes or sew shirts according to exact specifications a n d deliver a high-quality good according to precise delivery schedules. As Nike's vice president for Asia has p u t it, "We d o n ' t know the first thing a b o u t manufactur- ing. We are marketers a n d designers." T h e contracting arrangements have drawn i n t e n s e fire from critics—usually labor a n d h u m a n rights activists. These "critics" (as I will refer to t h e m ) have c h a r g e d that the compa- nies are (by proxy) exploiting workers in the plants (which I will call "international sweat- shops") of t h e i r suppliers. Specifically t h e c o m p a n i e s stand accused of chasing c h e a p labor a r o u n d the globe, failing to pay their workers living wages, using child labor, turn- i n g a b l i n d eye to abuses of h u m a n rights, b e i n g complicit with repressive r e g i m e s in denying workers the right to j o i n u n i o n s a n d failing to enforce m i n i m u m labor standards in the workplace, a n d so on. T h e campaign against international sweat- shops has largely unfolded on television and,
Ian Maitland to a lesser extent, in the p r i n t media. W h a t seems like n o m o r e t h a n a handful of critics has m o u n t e d an aggressive, media-sawy cam- p a i g n w h i c h has p u t t h e publicity-shy retail giants o n the defensive. T h e critics have or- c h e s t r a t e d a series of s e n s a t i o n a l "disclo- sures" on prime time television exposing the terrible pay a n d working conditions in factories makingjeans for Levi's or sneakers for Nike or Pocahontas shirts for Disney. O n e of the princi- pal scourges of the companies has been Charles Kernaghan who runs the National Labor Coali- tion (NLC), a labor h u m a n rights g r o u p in- volving 25 unions. It was Kernaghan who, in 1996, broke the news before a Congressional committee that Kathie Lee Gifford's clothing line was b e i n g m a d e by 13- a n d 14-year-olds working 20-hour days in factories in Honduras. Kernaghan also arranged for teenage workers from sweatshops in Central America to testify before congressional committees a b o u t abu- sive labor practices. At o n e of these hearings, o n e of the workers held u p a Liz Claiborne cot- ton sweater identical to ones she had sewn since she was a 13-year-old working 12-hour days. According to a news report, "[t]his image, ac- cusations of oppressive conditions at the fac- tory a n d the Claiborne logo played well on that evening's network news." T h e result has been a circus-like atmosphere—as in R o m a n circus where Christians were thrown to lions. Kernaghan has shrewdly targeted the com- panies' carefully cultivated public images. H e
From Ian Maitland, "The Great Non-Debate Over International Sweatshops," British Academy of Management Annual Conference Proceedings, September, pp. 240-65, 1997. Reprinted with permission of the author.
has explained: "Their image is everything.
They live and die by their image. That gives
you a certain power over them." As a result,
he says, "these companies are sitting ducks.
They have no leg to stand on. That's why it's
possible for a tiny group like us to take on a
giant like Wal-Mart. You can't defend paying
someone 31 cents an hour in Honduras... ."^1
Apparently most of the companies agree with
Kernaghan. Not a single company has tried to
mount a serious defense of its contracting
practices. They have judged that they cannot
win a war of soundbites with the critics. In-
stead of making a fight of it, the companies
have sued for peace in order to protect their
principal asset—their image.
Major U.S. retailers have responded by
adopting codes of conduct on human and
labor rights in their international operations.
Levi-Strauss, Nike, Sears, J.C. Penney, Wal-
Mart, Home Depot, and Philips Van-Heusen
now have such codes. As Lance Compa notes,
such codes are the result of a blend of hu-
manitarian and pragmatic impulses: "Often
the altruistic motive coincides with 'bottom
line' considerations related to brand name,
company image, and other intangibles that
make for core value to the firm."' Peter Jacobi,
President of Global Sourcing for Levi-Strauss
has advised: "If your company owns a popular
brand, protect this priceless asset at all costs.
Highly visible companies have any number of
reasons to conduct their business not just re-
sponsibly but also in ways that cannot be por-
trayed as unfair, illegal, or unethical. This sets
an extremely high standard since it must be
applied to both company-owned businesses
and contractors... ." And according to an-
olher Levi-Strauss spokesman, "In many re-
spects, we're protecting our single largest asset:
our brand image and corporate reputation."
Nike recently published the results of a gen-
erally favorable review of its international op-
erations conducted by former American U.N.
Ambassador Andrew Young.
Recendy a truce of sorts between the critics
and the companies was announced on the
White House lawn with President Clinton and
Kathie Lee Gifford in attendance. A presi-
dential task force, including representatives
of labor unions, human rights groups and ap-
parel companies like L.L.Bean and Nike, has
come up with a set of voluntary standards
which, it hopes, will be embraced by the entire
industry. Companies that comply with the code
will be entitled to use a "No Sweat" label.
OBJECTIVE OF THIS PAPER
In this confrontation between the companies
and their critics, neither side seems to have
judged it to be in its interest to seriously engage
the issue at the heart of this controversy, namely:
What are appropriate wages and labor standards
in international sweatshops? As we have seen,
the companies have treated the charges about
sweatshops as a public relations problem to be
managed so as to minimize harm to their pub-
lic images. The critics have apparently judged
that the best way to keep public indignation at
boiling point is to oversimplify the issue and
treat it as a morality play featuring heartless ex-
ploiters and victimized Third World workers.
The result has been a great nondebate over in-
ternational sweatshops. Paradoxically, if peace
breaks out between the two sides, the chances
that the debate will be seriouslyjoined may re-
cede still further. Indeed, there exists a real risk
(I will argue) that any such truce may be a col-
lusive one that will come at the expense of the
very Third World workers it is supposed to help.
This paper takes up the issue of what are
appropriate wages and labor standards in in-
ternational sweatshops. Critics charge that the
present arrangements are exploitative. I
proceed by examining the specific charges of
exploitation from the standpoints of both
(a) their factual and (b) their ethical sufficiency.
However, in the absence of any well-established
that has frustrated the application of neoclas-
sical economic principles to the international
economy on a score of issues. With full em-
ployment, and all other things being equal, mar-
ket forces will encourage workers to make
trade-offs between job opportunities using safety
as a variable. But with massive unemployment,
market forces in developing countries drive the
unemployed to the jobs they are lucky enough
to land, regardless of the safety."^10 Apparently
there are other forces, like Islamic funda-
mentalism and the global debt "bomb," that
rule out reliance on market solutions, but
Donaldson does not explain their relevance.^11
DeGeorge, too, believes that the necessary con-
ditions are lacking for market forces to oper-
ate benignly. Without what he calls "background
institutions" to protect the workers and the re-
sources of the developing country (e.g., en-
forceable minimum wages) a n d / o r greater
equality of bargaining power exploitation is the
most likely result.^12 "If American MNCs pay
workers very low wages... they clearly have the
opportunity to make significant profits."
DeGeorge goes on to make the interesting ob-
servation that "competition has developed
among multinationals themselves, so that the
profit margin has been driven down" and de-
veloping countries "can play one company
against another."^14 But apparently that is not
enough to rehabilitate market forces in his eyes.
THE CASE AGAINST INTERNATIONAL SWEATSHOPS
To many of their critics, international sweat-
shops exemplify the way in which the greater
openness of the world economy is hurting
workers.... Globalization means a transition
from (more or less) regulated domestic
economies to an unregulated world economy.
The superior mobility of capital, and the es-
sentially fixed, immobile nature of world labor,
means a fundamental shift in bargaining
power in favor of large international corpora-
tions. Their global reach permits them to shift
production almost costlessly from one loca-
tion to another. As a consequence, instead of
being able to exercise some degree of control
over companies operating within their bor-
ders, governments are now locked in a bid-
ding war with one another to attract and retain
the business of large multinational companies.
The critics allege that international com-
panies are using the threat of withdrawal or
withholding of investment to pressure gov-
ernments and workers to grant concessions.
"Today [multinational companies] choose be-
tween workers in developing countries that
compete against each other to depress wages
to attract foreign investment." The result is a
race for the bottom—a "destructive downward
bidding spiral of the labor conditions and
wages of workers throughout the world... ,"^15
Thus, critics charge that in Indonesia wages
are deliberately held below the poverty level
or subsistence in order to make the country a
desirable location. The results of this com-
petitive dismantling of worker protections,
living standards and worker rights are pre-
dictable: deteriorating work conditions, de-
clining real incomes for workers, and a widening
gap between rich and poor in developing
countries. I turn next to the specific charges
made by the critics of international sweatshops.
Unconscionable Wages
Critics charge that the companies, by their
proxies, are paying "starvation wages" and
"slave wages." They are far from clear about
what wage level they consider to be appropri-
ate. But they generally demand that compa-
nies pay a "living wage." Kernaghan has said
that workers should be paid enough to sup-
port their families and they should get a "living
wage" and "be treated like human beings."^16
... According to Tim Smith, wage levels
should be "fair, decent or a living wage for an
employee a n d his or h e r family." H e has said that wages in the maquiladoras of Mexico av- eraged $35 to $55 a week (in or n e a r 1993) which he calls a "shockingly substandard wage," apparently on the grounds that it "clearly does n o t allow an employee to feed a n d care for a family adequately."^17 In 1992, Nike came in for harsh criticism when a magazine published the pay stub of a worker at o n e of its Indonesian suppliers. It showed that the worker was paid at the rate of $1.03 p e r day which was report- edly less than the Indonesian government's fig- ure for "minimum physical need."1 8
Immiserization Thesis
Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich has pro- posed as a test of the fairness of development policies t h a t "Low-wage workers s h o u l d be- come better off, n o t worse off, as trade a n d in- v e s t m e n t b o o s t n a t i o n a l i n c o m e. " H e has written t h a t "[i]f a country pursues policies t h a t... limit to a narrow elite the benefits of trade, the promise of o p e n c o m m e r c e is per- verted a n d d r a i n e d of its rationale." A key claim of the activists is that companies actu- ally impoverish or immiserize d e v e l o p i n g country workers. They experience an absolute decline in living standards. This thesis follows from the claim t h a t the b i d d i n g war a m o n g developing countries is depressing wages....
Widening Gap Between Rich and P o o r
A related charge is that international sweat- shops are contributing to the increasing gap between rich and poor. Not only are the p o o r being absolutely impoverished, but trade is gen- erating greater inequality within developing countries. Another test that Reich has proposed to establish the fairness of international trade is that "the gap between rich a n d p o o r should tend to narrow with development, not widen." Critics charge that i n t e r n a t i o n a l sweatshops
flunk t h a t test. They say t h a t t h e increasing GNPs of some developing countries simply mask a widening gap between rich a n d poor. "Across the world, both local and foreign elites are getting richer from the exploitation of the most vulnerable." And, "The major adverse consequence of quickening global economic integration has been widening income dispar- ity within almost all nations... ,"^22 T h e r e ap- pears to b e a tacit alliance between the elites of both first and third worlds to exploit the most vulnerable, to regiment a n d control a n d con- script them so that they can create the material conditions for the elites' extravagant lifestyles.
Collusion with Repressive Regimes
Critics charge that, in their zeal to make their countries safe for foreign investment, T h i r d World regimes, notably China a n d Indonesia, have s t e p p e d u p their repression. N o t only have these countries failed to enforce even the m i n i m a l labor rules on the books, b u t they have also used t h e i r military a n d police to break strikes and repress i n d e p e n d e n t unions. They have stifled political dissent, b o t h to re- tain their hold on political power a n d to avoid any instability that might scare off foreign in- vestors. Consequently, critics charge, compa- nies like Nike are profiting from political repression. "As unions spread in [Korea a n d Taiwan], Nike shifted its suppliers primarily to Indonesia, China a n d Thailand, where they could d e p e n d on governments to suppress in- d e p e n d e n t union-organizing efforts."
EVALUATION OF THE CHARGES AGAINST INTERNATIONAL SWEATSHOPS
T h e critics' charges are undoubtedly accurate on a n u m b e r of points: (1) T h e r e is n o d o u b t t h a t i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o m p a n i e s are c h a s i n g
T h e same news reports also shed some light on the working conditions in sweatshops. Ac- cording to the Washington Post, in 1994 the In- donesian office of the international accounting firm Ernst & Young surveyed Nike workers con- cerning worker pay, safety conditions, a n d at- titudes toward t h e j o b. T h e auditors p u l l e d workers off the assembly line at r a n d o m a n d asked t h e m questions t h a t the workers answered anonymously. T h e survey of 25 work- ers at Nike's S e r a n g p l a n t f o u n d t h a t 23 t h o u g h t the hours a n d overtime hours too high. N o n e of the workers reported that they h a d been discriminated against. Thirteen said the working environment was the key reason they worked at the Serang plant while eight cited salary a n d benefits.' T h e Post r e p o r t also n o t e d that the Serang plant closes for a b o u t 10 days e a c h year for Muslim holidays. It quoted Nike officials and the plant's Taiwanese owners as saying that 94 percent of the workers h a d r e t u r n e d to the plant following the most recent break.... T h e r e is also the mute testimony of the lines of j o b applicants outside t h e sweatshops in Guatemala a n d H o n d u r a s. According to Lucy Martinez-Mont, in Guatemala the sweatshops are conspicuous for the long lines of y o u n g people waiting to be interviewed for a j o b. O u t s i d e t h e gates of the industrial p a r k in H o n d u r a s t h a t R o h t e r visited "anxious o n l o o k e r s are always waiting, h o p i n g for a chance at least to fill out a j o b application [for employment at o n e of the apparel plants]." T h e critics of sweatshops acknowledge that workers have voluntarily taken their jobs, con- sider themselves lucky to have them, a n d want to k e e p t h e m.... But they go o n to discount the workers' views as the p r o d u c t of confusion or ignorance, a n d / o r theyjust argue that the workers' views are b e s i d e t h e p o i n t. T h u s , while "it is u n d o u b t e d l y true" that Nike has given j o b s to t h o u s a n d s of p e o p l e w h o wouldn't be working otherwise, they say that "neatly skirts the fundamental human-rights
issue raised by these production arrangements that are now spreading all across the world."3 5 Similarly the NLC's K e r n a g h a n says t h a t " [w] h e t h e r workers think they are better off in the assembly plants t h a n elsewhere is n o t the real issue."^36 Kernaghan, a n d Jeff Ballinger of the AFL-CIO, c o n c e d e that the workers des- perately n e e d these j o b s. But " [ t ] h e y say they're n o t asking that U.S. c o m p a n i e s stop operating in these countries. T h e y ' r e asking that workers be paid a living wage a n d treated like h u m a n beings."' Apparently these work- ers are victims of what Marx called false con- sciousness, or else they would grasp that they are being exploited. According to Barnet a n d Cavanagh, "For many workers... exploitation is n o t a concept easily c o m p r e h e n d e d because the alternative prospects for e a r n i n g a living are so bleak."3 8
Immiserization and Inequality
T h e critics' claim that the countries that host international sweatshops are marked by grow- ing poverty and inequality is flady contradicted by the record. In fact, many of those countries have experienced sharp increases in living stan- dards—for all strata of society. In trying to at- tract investment in simple m a n u f a c t u r i n g , Malaysia and Indonesia and, now, Vietnam a n d China, are retracing the industrialization path already successfully taken by East Asian coun- tries like Taiwan, Korea, Singapore a n d H o n g Kong. These four countries got their start by producing labor-intensive manufactured goods (often electrical a n d electronic components, shoes, a n d garments) for export markets. Over time they graduated to the export of higher- value-added items that are skill-intensive and re- quire a relatively developed industrial base.3 9 As is well known, these East Asian countries achieved growth rates exceeding 8 p e r c e n t for a q u a r t e r century.... T h e workers in these economies were n o t impoverished by growth.
T h e benefits of growth were widely diffused: These economies achieved essentially full em- ployment in the 1960s. Real wages rose by as m u c h as a factor of four. Absolute poverty fell. A n d i n c o m e inequality r e m a i n e d at low to m o d e r a t e levels. It is t r u e t h a t in t h e initial stages the rapid growth generated only mod- erate increases in wages. But once essentially full employment was reached, a n d what econ- omists call t h e Fei-Ranis t u r n i n g p o i n t was reached, the increased d e m a n d for labor re- sulted in the bidding u p of wages as firms com- p e t e d for a scarce labor supply. Interestingly, given its historic mission as a watchdog for international labor standards, the ILO has embraced this development model. It recently n o t e d that the most successful devel- oping economies, in terms of o u t p u t a n d em- ployment growth, have b e e n "those who best exploited emerging opportunities in the global economy."^4 An "export oriented policy is vital in countries that are starting on the industri- alization path and have large surpluses of cheap labour." Countries which have succeeded in at- tracting foreign direct investment (FDI) have e x p e r i e n c e d rapid growth in manufacturing o u t p u t a n d exports. T h e successful attraction of foreign investment in plant a n d e q u i p m e n t "can be a powerful spur to rapid industrializa- tion a n d employment creation." "At low levels of industrialization, FDI in garments a n d shoes a n d some types of c o n s u m e r electronics can be very useful for creating e m p l o y m e n t a n d o p e n i n g the e c o n o m y to i n t e r n a t i o n a l mar- kets; there may be some entrepreneurial skills created in simple activities like garments (as has h a p p e n e d in Bangladesh). Moreover, in some cases, such as Malaysia, the investors may strike d e e p e r roots a n d invest in m o r e capital- intensive technologies as wages rise."
According to the World Bank, the rapidly growing Asian economies (including I n d o n e - sia) "have also b e e n unusually successful at sharing the fruits of their growth." In fact, while inequality in the West has b e e n growing,
it has b e e n shrinking in the Asian economies. They are the only economies in the world to have experienced high growth and declining inequality, a n d they also show shrinking gen- der gaps in education....
Profiting from Repression?
W h a t a b o u t t h e c h a r g e t h a t i n t e r n a t i o n a l sweatshops are profiting from repression? It is u n d e n i a b l e that there is repression in many of the countries where sweatshops are located. But economic development appears to be re- laxing that repression r a t h e r t h a n strength- e n i n g its grip. T h e companies are supposed to benefit from g o v e r n m e n t policies (e.g., re- pression of unions) that hold down labor costs. However, as we have seen, the wages paid by the international sweatshops already match or exceed the prevailing local wages. N o t only that, b u t incomes in the East Asian economies, a n d in Indonesia, have risen rapidly.... T h e critics, however, are right in saying that the Indonesian g o v e r n m e n t has opposed in- d e p e n d e n t u n i o n s in the sweatshops o u t of fear they would lead to higher wages a n d labor unrest. But the g o v e r n m e n t ' s fear clearly is that u n i o n s m i g h t drive wages in the m o d e r n industrial sector above market-clearing levels— or, m o r e exactly, further above market. It is ironic that critics like Barnet a n d Cavanagh would use the Marxian t e r m "reserve army of the u n e m p l o y e d. " According to Marx, capi- talists deliberately maintain high levels of un- e m p l o y m e n t in o r d e r to control the working class. But the Indonesian government's poli- cies (e.g., suppression of unions, resistance to a higher m i n i m u m wage, and lax enforcement of labor rules) have b e e n directed at achieving exacdy the opposite result. T h e g o v e r n m e n t a p p e a r s to have calculated t h a t h i g h u n e m - p l o y m e n t is a g r e a t e r t h r e a t to its h o l d o n power. I think we can safely take at face value its claims t h a t its policies are g e n u i n e l y
of worse-off ones. If it were within their power,
it appears that they would reinvent the labor
markets of much of Latin America. Alejandro
Portes' description seems to be on the mark:
"In Mexico, Brazil, Peru, and other Third
World countries, [unlike East Asia], there are
powerful independent unions representing the
protected sector of the working class. Although
their rhetoric is populist and even radical, the
fact is that they tend to represent the better-
paid and more stable fraction of the working
class. Alongside, there toils avast, unprotected
proletariat, employed by informal enterprises
and linked, in ways hidden from public view,
with modern sector firms."...
Of course, it might be objected that trad-
ing off workers' rights for more jobs is uneth-
ical. But, so far as I can determine, the critics
have not made this argument. Although they
sometimes implicitly accept the existence of
the trade-off (we saw that they attack Nike for
chasing cheap labor), their public statements
are silent on the lost or forgone jobs from
higher wages and better labor standards. At
other times, they imply or claim that im-
provements in workers' wages and conditions
are essentially free....
In summary, the result of the ostensibly hu-
manitarian changes urged by critics are likely
to be (1) reduced employment in the formal
or modern sector of the economy, (2) lower
incomes in the informal sector, (3) less
investment and so slower economic growth,
(4) reduced exports, (5) greater inequality
and poverty.
CONCLUSION: THE CASE FOR NOT EXCEEDING MARKET STANDARDS
It is part of the job description of business ethi-
cists to exhort companies to treat their workers
better (otherwise what purpose do they serve?).
So it will have come as no surprise that both
the business ethicists whose views I summarized
at the beginning of this paper—Thomas
Donaldson and Richard DeGeorge—objected
to letting the market alone determine wages
and labor standards in multinational compa-
nies. Both of them proposed criteria for set-
ting wages that might occasionally "improve"
on the outcomes of the market.
Their reasons for rejecting market deter-
mination of wages were similar. They both
cited conditions that allegedly prevent inter-
national markets from generating ethically ac-
ceptable results. Donaldson argued that
neoclassical economic principles are not ap-
plicable to international business because of
high unemployment rates in developing coun-
tries. And DeGeorge argued that, in an un-
regulated international market, the gross
inequality of bargaining power between work-
ers and companies would lead to exploitation.
But this paper has shown that attempts to
improve on market outcomes may have un-
foreseen tragic consequences. We saw how rais-
ing the wages of workers in international
sweatshops might wind up penalizing the most
vulnerable workers (those in the informal sec-
tors of developing countries) by depressing
their wages and reducing their job opportu-
nities in the formal sector. Donaldson and
DeGeorge cited high unemployment and un-
equal bargaining power as conditions that made
it necessary to bypass or override the market
determination of wages. However, in both
cases, bypassing the market in order to prevent
exploitation may aggravate these conditions.
As we have seen, above-market wages paid to
sweatshop workers may discourage further in-
vestment and so perpetuate high unemploy-
ment. In turn, the higher unemployment may
weaken the bargaining power of workers vis-a-
vis employers. Thus such market imperfections
seem to call for more reliance on market forces
rather than less. Likewise, the experience of
the newly industrialized East Asian economies
suggests that the best cure for the ills of sweat-
shops is more sweatshops. But most of the
well-intentioned policies that improve on mar- ket outcomes are likely to have the opposite effect. W h e r e d o e s this leave the i n t e r n a t i o n a l manager? If the p r e c e d i n g analysis is correct, t h e n it follows that it is ethically acceptable to pay market wage rates in developing countries (and to provide e m p l o y m e n t conditions ap- propriate for the level of d e v e l o p m e n t ). T h a t holds true even if the wages pay less than so- called living wages or subsistence or even (con- ceivably) t h e local m i n i m u m wage. T h e a p p r o p r i a t e test is n o t w h e t h e r t h e wage r e a c h e s s o m e p r e d e t e r m i n e d s t a n d a r d b u t whether it is freely accepted by (reasonably) in- formed workers. T h e workers themselves are in the best position to j u d g e whether the wages offered a r e s u p e r i o r to t h e i r n e x t - b e s t al- ternatives. ( T h e s a m e logic applies mutatis mutandis to workplace labor standards). I n d e e d , n o t only is it ethically acceptable for a company to pay market wages, b u t it may be ethically unacceptable for it to pay wages that exceed market levels. T h a t will be the case if the company's above-market wages set prece- dents for other international companies which raise labor costs to the point of discouraging foreign investment. F u r t h e r m o r e , companies may have a social responsibility to transcend their own narrow preoccupation with protect- ing their b r a n d image a n d to publicly defend a system which has greatly improved the lot of millions of workers in developing countries.
NOTES
- Steven Greenhouse, "A Crusader Makes Celebrities Tremble." New York Times (June 18, 1996), p. B4.
- Lance A. Compa and Tashia Hinchliffe Darricarrere, "Enforcement Through Corpo- rate Codes of Conduct," in Human Rights, Labor Rights, and International Trade ed. Compa and Stephen F. Diamond (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1996), 193. 3. Peter Jacobi in Martha Nichols, "Third-World Families at Work: Child Labor or Child Care." Harvard Business Review (January-February 1993). 4. David Sampson in Robin G. Givhan, "A Stain on Fashion; The Garment Industry Profits from Cheap Labor." Washington Post (September 12, 1995), p. Bl. 5. Thomas Donaldson, Ethics of International Business (New York: Oxford University Press, 1989), 98. 6. Richard DcGcorge, Competing with Integrity in International Business (New York: Oxford Uni- versity Press, 1993), 79. 7. Ibid., 356-57.
- Ibid., 78.
- World Bank, World Development Report 1995, "Workers in an Integrating World Economy" (Oxford University Press, 1995), 77.
- Donaldson, Ethics of International Business, p. 115.
- Ibid., 150.
- DeGeorge, Competing with Integrity, 48.
- Ibid., 358.
- Ibid.
- Terry Collingsworth, J. William Goold, Pilaris J. Harvey, "Time for a Global New Deal," Foreign Affairs (January-February 1994): 8.
- William B. Falk, "Dirty Little Secrets," Neivsday (June 16, 1996).
- Tim Smith, "The Power of Business for Human Rights." Business &f Society Review (January 1994): 36.
- Jeffrey Ballinger, "The New Free Trade Heel." Harper's Magazine (August 1992): 46-47. "As in many developing countries, Indonesia's mini- mum wage,..., is less than poverty level." Nina Baker, "The Hidden Hands of Nike," Oregonian (August 9, 1992).
- Robert B. Reich, "Escape from the Global Sweatshop; Capitalism's Stake in Uniting the Workers of the World." Washington Post (May 22, 1994). Reich's test is intended to apply in de- veloping countries "where democratic institu- tions are weak or absent."
- Ibid.
- Kenneth P. Hutchinson, "Third World Growth." Harvard Business Review (November-December 1994).
- Robin Broad and John Cavanagh, "Don't Ne- glect the Impoverished South." Foreign Affairs (December 22, 1995).
