I've already discussed this before here but if you are looking to buy school uniforms but are worried about exploitation, you should think about all the school products we get that are imported from overseas, and how we can over-think this and realise that using our purchase choices is too indirect a technique to lessen crimes of exploitation. Exploitation in Australia tends to only be possible within the context of organised crime. In other words, to force someone to work for well under the going rate (with the job market the way it is) they would have to be locked up. It is ironic that the local prisoners labour on sewing machines.
I suggest when looking for school uniforms to search for the best quality. Quality demonstrates attention to detail and pride in one's work. This only happens where the sewer is comfortable, happy and satisfied with the conditions of employment. Unhappy workers can easily sabotage the interests of the employer without risk of getting found.
Showing posts with label outworkers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label outworkers. Show all posts
Monday, January 15, 2007
Monday, October 31, 2005
If you quote someone on your weblog, they may find you!
This has happened to me. Appropriately with the Industrial relations changes happening in parliament, this person is a champion of the working mother. She has worked tirelessly to improve the lives of lower socio-economic disadvantaged recent migrants. She has done it by attacking certain unhelpful law provisions that were proposed. Ironically, she is now being made to work up to 18 hours a day by her employer just to try to make a better life for her children. The system that allows this to happen is not being challenged......
Her employer is of course *herself* - The system that allows unlimited work hours is *EBAY*, the unhelpful law provisions she was attacking was the "fairwear" ones, which I also attacked - and migrants from a lower socio-economic status often have industrial sewing skills, children, and are perfect for helping out our sewer shortage, if only they were "free" to work from home, where they could be with their children. Vanthida Lao - You are a champion. Stop by my weblog anytime.
Her employer is of course *herself* - The system that allows unlimited work hours is *EBAY*, the unhelpful law provisions she was attacking was the "fairwear" ones, which I also attacked - and migrants from a lower socio-economic status often have industrial sewing skills, children, and are perfect for helping out our sewer shortage, if only they were "free" to work from home, where they could be with their children. Vanthida Lao - You are a champion. Stop by my weblog anytime.
Tuesday, February 15, 2005
Unfairwear
satans of ethical correctness are pursuing a strategy which will have the undesired side effect of pushing manufacturing offshore, where there are real *possibilities* of "sweat" shops. I put "sweat" in inverted commas because all the loosely identified people whom this site calls "outworkers" are all working at home in airconditioned comfort (all the ones in Townsville, that is), arguably making more money. What is worst of all is that the Uniting Church is supporting this website. I am just glad that I no longer go to a Uniting Church!
Commentators who dispute the concept that the majority of outworkers are exploited
For example, some have criticised the findings of recent reports which conclude that the majority of outworkers are exploited.
Most recently, a report by the Work Reform Unit of the Institute of Public Affairs('the IPA Report') in October 2001 has questioned many of the findings of recent reports that the majority of outworkers are exploited. Their findings contradict those published elsewhere.
Vanthida Lao, spokesperson for the IPA in regard to this report, states that the failure to draw a distinction between legal and illegal operations has the effect of overemphasising the extent of the exploitation of outworkers and at the same time fails to recognise that there are many legitimate outworking businesses which offer good remuneration:
Two dollars per hour, $14 per day, seven days a week. That's the lot of hapless homeworkers, according to the unions. Don't fall for it. It's not accurate and their campaign is threatening thousands of well-paying jobs as well as the fabric of many migrant communities - including mine, the Cambodian community.
If there is exploitation or illegal activity, then that should be addressed. But it's wrong, indeed insulting, to claim that all outworkers are exploited, hapless or criminals.
My mother put my brothers, sisters and me through private schools and universities and helped buy our home by earning a good income from being an outworker. I know many families in my community who did the same thing.
She goes on to say that:
In September, I undertook, in conjunction with the Institute of Public Affairs, the first serious study into homeworkers' remunerations. We only studied people who operated legally. We did so for a number of reasons. First, most people in the industry operate legally. That is, they pay tax and only receive welfare assistance for which they qualify. Second, people who operate illegally are not going to tell me or anyone else the truth about income.
She further questions the methodology behind the recent report produced by Cregan in that it "...failed to distinguish between legal and illegal workers, bringing into question the accuracy and representativeness of the responses."
In comparison, she states that her investigation "...did not rely on memory and hearsay. We went straight to the business records showing the payments made to 58 outworkers over a three-month period covering more than 5000 hours, 13 different types of operations and 12,000 garments."
She concludes that the findings contradicted those of other reports:
What we found was a great deal of diversity, but not exploitation. The payment per garment ranged from $2.80 to $12, and the average hourly remuneration ranged from $9 to $21.80. The average remuneration per outworker surveyed was $14.41 per hour. In comparison, the award wage for level-two clothing workers is about $13.50 per hour.
The bottom line is that outworkers we surveyed made a good wage, comparable to what they would make under an award in a factory. Moreover, outworkers had a pleasanter work environment and more control over it.
Commentators who dispute the concept that the majority of outworkers are exploited
For example, some have criticised the findings of recent reports which conclude that the majority of outworkers are exploited.
Most recently, a report by the Work Reform Unit of the Institute of Public Affairs('the IPA Report') in October 2001 has questioned many of the findings of recent reports that the majority of outworkers are exploited. Their findings contradict those published elsewhere.
Vanthida Lao, spokesperson for the IPA in regard to this report, states that the failure to draw a distinction between legal and illegal operations has the effect of overemphasising the extent of the exploitation of outworkers and at the same time fails to recognise that there are many legitimate outworking businesses which offer good remuneration:
Two dollars per hour, $14 per day, seven days a week. That's the lot of hapless homeworkers, according to the unions. Don't fall for it. It's not accurate and their campaign is threatening thousands of well-paying jobs as well as the fabric of many migrant communities - including mine, the Cambodian community.
If there is exploitation or illegal activity, then that should be addressed. But it's wrong, indeed insulting, to claim that all outworkers are exploited, hapless or criminals.
My mother put my brothers, sisters and me through private schools and universities and helped buy our home by earning a good income from being an outworker. I know many families in my community who did the same thing.
She goes on to say that:
In September, I undertook, in conjunction with the Institute of Public Affairs, the first serious study into homeworkers' remunerations. We only studied people who operated legally. We did so for a number of reasons. First, most people in the industry operate legally. That is, they pay tax and only receive welfare assistance for which they qualify. Second, people who operate illegally are not going to tell me or anyone else the truth about income.
She further questions the methodology behind the recent report produced by Cregan in that it "...failed to distinguish between legal and illegal workers, bringing into question the accuracy and representativeness of the responses."
In comparison, she states that her investigation "...did not rely on memory and hearsay. We went straight to the business records showing the payments made to 58 outworkers over a three-month period covering more than 5000 hours, 13 different types of operations and 12,000 garments."
She concludes that the findings contradicted those of other reports:
What we found was a great deal of diversity, but not exploitation. The payment per garment ranged from $2.80 to $12, and the average hourly remuneration ranged from $9 to $21.80. The average remuneration per outworker surveyed was $14.41 per hour. In comparison, the award wage for level-two clothing workers is about $13.50 per hour.
The bottom line is that outworkers we surveyed made a good wage, comparable to what they would make under an award in a factory. Moreover, outworkers had a pleasanter work environment and more control over it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)