On a campus that made such an uproar in the midst of the university's connection to Nike, a company notorious for employing workers in sweatshops, there's no doubt that many students were celebrating when the UW bookstore announced they will be selling a new socially conscious clothing line. But before you rush out and drop some hard-earned cash on that brand new T-shirt, let's take a step backward and figure out exactly what ""socially conscious"" clothing means.
Alta Gracia, a new company named after the Dominican village it where it is located, produces its university-licensed products in a factory that pays each worker what they deem a ""living wage."" This means these workers make over three times the local minimum wage, enough to afford food, school and health-care costs. They claim this offers their 130 employees a helping hand out of poverty.
This seems like a huge victory for workers' rights, but in reality Alta Gracia is nothing more than an economic experiment. Although they claim to offer their clothing at competitive prices, the University Book Store will sell a sweatshirt for $34.99, and a T-shirt for $15.99. This may be on par with Nike or Under Armour gear, but I for one will have a hard time justifying spending that much on a shirt when the $9.99 bins are only a few feet away. I could be alone, but I suspect many cheapskate college students will find it difficult to put their ideals before their bank accounts.
What really matters then, for the sake of benefitting the workers, is whether the brand will be successful in the long term. Although they have contracts with over 400 schools across the country, the question remains: Are American consumers really willing to pay a premium price to support the producers' generous wages and benefits? Marketing will either make or break the company's future, but there's a lot riding on an economic turnaround as well. And unfortunately, if the factory fails, the ideals it's built on die along with it.
Although it's an unpopular stance, many economists say sweatshops are a crucial aspect of economic development. Famous economist Jeffrey Sachs has supported the view, and Nicholas Kristof, a champion of human rights, has said the problem ""is not that sweatshops exploit too many workers, it's that they don't exploit enough."" For many countries around the world, such as Hong Kong, Singapore and South Korea, sweatshop labor led directly from third-world poverty to world-leader status. Even the United States went through its own sweatshop phase before guaranteeing certain workers' rights.
On a smaller scale, a job in such a factory can be a huge leg up for individuals as well. In many countries, the opportunities are much more limited than we realize, especially for women. To support their families, one often must labor at back-breaking agricultural jobs in the hot sun for only a few cents a day. In countries like India, it is not uncommon for a family to sell their children into child labor or the sex trade market because they can't afford to feed them.
It's not surprising, then, that sweatshop labor often seems like a paradise. Just $2 a day may seem an abhorrent inequality to you, but millions around the world will line up outside garment factories for the chance to finally afford food and minimum health care, and earn twice what they are used to in a much safer working environment than sex trafficking. This type of factory will bring about economic benefit as well, but we're looking at a time span of a few generations instead of all at once.
We can argue about human rights and economic opportunity until we're blue in the face, but ultimately our wallets will do the talking. So the next time you're in the market for a new Bucky sweatshirt, think carefully about your choice. If you want to show the world that one factory in the Dominican Republic can become a sustainable model for socially-conscious business practices, go for it. But there's no reason to feel guilty if you decide to save a few bucks, either.
Lydia Statz is a junior majoring in journalism and international studies. Please send all feedback to opinion@dailycardinal.com.
