Feed on this...
Stick it in your email
What the hell's a Feed?
Made in China: What Price Profit?
 |
| Just like Santa’s workshop! Except these elves work 15 hours a day, 7 days a week and earn 30 cents an hour. |
This post is a follow up to [The New Gilded Age].
The Guardian has [a chilling article], written by the author of [The Real Toy Story] — an exposé of the Chinese toy manufacturing industry — that details just how sordid are the conditions that give rise to the kinds of product recalls that American toy companies have experienced recently. The article’s author, Eric Clark, details the advantages of moving toy production to China for American companies, like Mattel, that have their eyes forever focused on the bottom line: plentiful cheap labor, elimination of plant overhead and ability to negotiate lowered production costs on new products, which reduces further their competitive risks. But his description of conditions for Chinese workers reads like something out of our own dark industrial past:
The workers, mostly young women, shuffle from building to building. They could be on their way to school - if they did not appear so exhausted from working most of their waking hours. They have traveled in by bus from rural areas up to three days journey away - part of the biggest movement of people in human history. Shifts can last 15 hours a day or more, seven days a week - unlawful, but not uncommon in the peak toymaking season. Inside the fetid dormitories, their only living space, and often packed illegally with as many as 22 to a room, they collapse into curtained-off bunks. At lunch breaks, thousands of them in uniform, ID cards dangling on ribbons, pour onto the streets.
Compare that with this [excerpt from a letter] I found from a young woman who worked at the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory, writing about her working conditions in early 20th century New York:
The day’s work was supposed to end at six in the afternoon. But, during most of the year we youngsters worked overtime until 9 p.m. every night except Fridays and Saturdays. No, we did not get additional pay for overtime. At this point it is worth recording the generocity (sic) of the Triangle Waist Co. by giving us a piece of apple pie for supper instead of additional pay! Working men and women of today who receive time and one half and at times double time for overtime will find it difficult to understand and to believe that the workers of those days were evidently willing to accept such conditions of labor without protest. However, the answer is quite simple — we were not organized and we knew that individual protest amounted to the loss of one’s job. No one in those days could afford the luxory (sic) of changing jobs — there was no unemployment insurance, there was nothing better than to look for another job which will not be better than the one we had. Therefore, we were, due to our ignorance and poverty, helpless against the power of the exploiters… As you will note, the days were long and the wages low — my starting wage was just one dollar and a half a week — a long week — consisting more often than not, of seven days. Especially was this true during the season, which in those days were longer than they are now. I will never forget the sign which on Saturday afternoons was posted on the wall near the elevator stating — “if you don’t come in on Sunday you need not come in on Monday”!
Truly, the sins of the past are upon us again. Instead of providing incentives to Chinese manufacturers to improve the lot of the young women who produce our toys (which might require returning more profits to the producers), or moving production back home (which would entail even further reduction in profit) American companies are more than willing to exploit conditions that would be illegal in their own country in order to maintain their margins. According to Clark, of the $10 retail cost of a Barbie doll produced in China, only 35 cents goes back to the people who produced it. Eager to cut their own costs and improve productivity, is it any wonder that Chinese subcontractors cut corners?
This opens up a dilemma for American consumers: the toys under the Christmas tree are tainted — if not literally with lead paint, than figuratively with support of an unjust labor market. How much would consumers be willing to spend — in the form of higher-priced domestically-produced goods, for example — to put pressure on the toy industry to change its ways?
Posted in Politics 08/19/07 | 
Email this |
Share/Save this: 
Why is it that consumers mistakenly believe that toys made in America cost more than toys made in China? I’d hardly say that Mattel or Thomas the Train toys cost less than the average “American” made toy. It’s just that they’re cheaper for corporations to produce due to cheap labor. They certainly aren’t passing the savings on to us, they’re just enjoying record profits! It’s time Americans started making the effort to buy American, even if it means a little more effort finding American products. (For an extensive list of American toys, brands and products, please visit [Toys Made in America]. Let’s start giving American companies our patronage, and force corporations to bring our jobs back home!
Teresa
Comment by teresa — August 20, 2007 @ 10:48 pm
Any US corporate executive or board member who signs off on transferring jobs out of the US to sweatshops should be stripped of citizenship, stripped of most personal assets, and deported. Screw Mattel. Boycott.
Comment by Bob Smith — August 21, 2007 @ 3:14 am
I can’t help think of Ned Beatty’s speech in Network (respectfully referenced by you in a past post) when I read anti-globalization rhetoric. There are forces here that are quite clearly beyond anyone’s control, and especially beyond the control of small, feel-good grassroots movements attempting to divert dollars into MadeInTheUSA companies. I’m not opposed to these impulses, and would certainly support anything that helped rebalance the rather disturbing import/export equation currently at play in this country (which has far graver implications than merely bad dog food, I’m afraid). But the new industrial landscape has already formed, in large part in China, and we are essentially powerless to stop it or the multi-national conglomerates who take advantage of it at this point. The only real solution, in my mind (and I am but a humble media type, certainly no economist) is to somehow get global industries to start regulating themselves more effectively. This will of course require the Chinese government, among others, to start caring about its workforce and its image in the marketplace, which it currently does not in any meaningful way. But the wheels of profit operate with or without our consent, I’m afraid, and until there are some enforceable global business practice standards, the gaps, holes and back alleys of cheap labor and shoddy output will continue to reap rewards at our expense.
Comment by Aatom — August 21, 2007 @ 12:34 pm
Thanks, Teresa for providing the link page. It’s a good thing for people to know there are options out there. Fact is, though, prices on Chinese goods are in fact lower than they would be if companies weren’t benefiting from cheap imports. I read somewhere that a Barbie doll cost two to three dollars when it debuted back in the 50’s — inflation alone would make it more than the $10 they currently cost due to reliance on China.
Aatom, I appreciate the “globalness” of globalization. It is certainly a juggernaut that those in power are firmly committed to. Still, as we saw from the immigration reform debacle, citizens can affect policy when they really believe that it is not in their interest. And the untoward effects of free trade (including loss of jobs and increased risks from imports) could finally push people to seek changes.
Comment by SD — August 21, 2007 @ 5:15 pm
I admire your optimism, Mr. Beale.
Comment by Aatom — August 21, 2007 @ 5:58 pm