Ravisankar begins his essay by identifying with his audience’s need to find the lowest prices and uses an example of the extremes that people will go to get a bargain. The problem he identifies is that bargain based consumerism can be detrimental to the welfare of factory workers in other countries. He mentions that this includes the large-scale use of sweatshops by major companies.
Ravisankar assumes his readers are college students who may not be familiar with the low wages, long hours, human rights abuses, and the intolerable working conditions of sweatshops in other countries.
His purpose in this essay is to inform students about why they should support the University Students against Sweatshops effort to make universities purchase their …show more content…
Ravisankar notes that only a small wage increase could make a considerable difference for those who work in sweatshops.
In his essay, Ravisankar addresses the main argument against his thesis, that opposition to sweatshops creates a negative effect on those in the developing countries. Companies say these protests force industries to relocate and causes factory workers to become unemployed.
He refutes this argument by saying that factory relocations are due to lower labor costs and more lenient labor restrictions. This business model creates lower wages, intolerable working environments, and lower standards of living in developing countries. He uses examples such as Nike, Reebok, Adidas, Champion, Gap, and Wal-Mart as those who continue to exploit workers.
Finally, he concludes by making the point that major companies are obligated to pay workers a decent wage. He calls on his audience to support the University Students against Sweatshops whose aim is to influence universities to purchase their branded merchandise only from those vendors which respect worker’s rights. Consequently, this would aid in helping poverty-stricken developing
Ravisankar assumes his readers are college students who may not be familiar with the low wages, long hours, human rights abuses, and the intolerable working conditions of sweatshops in other countries.
His purpose in this essay is to inform students about why they should support the University Students against Sweatshops effort to make universities purchase their …show more content…
Ravisankar notes that only a small wage increase could make a considerable difference for those who work in sweatshops.
In his essay, Ravisankar addresses the main argument against his thesis, that opposition to sweatshops creates a negative effect on those in the developing countries. Companies say these protests force industries to relocate and causes factory workers to become unemployed.
He refutes this argument by saying that factory relocations are due to lower labor costs and more lenient labor restrictions. This business model creates lower wages, intolerable working environments, and lower standards of living in developing countries. He uses examples such as Nike, Reebok, Adidas, Champion, Gap, and Wal-Mart as those who continue to exploit workers.
Finally, he concludes by making the point that major companies are obligated to pay workers a decent wage. He calls on his audience to support the University Students against Sweatshops whose aim is to influence universities to purchase their branded merchandise only from those vendors which respect worker’s rights. Consequently, this would aid in helping poverty-stricken developing