Editing Sweatshop (section)

====Late 20th century to present====

On February 4, 1997, Mayor Ed Boyle of [[North Olmsted]], in the U.S. state of [[Ohio]], introduced the first piece of legislation prohibiting the government from purchasing, renting, or taking on consignment any goods made under sweatshop conditions and including in the definition those goods made by political prisoners and incarcerated criminals.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.villagelife.org/news/archives/12-4-97_sweatshopban.html|title=Village Life News: Ban on Sweatshop Products Becomes Rule|website=www.villagelife.org|access-date=June 11, 2018}}</ref> Similar legislation was subsequently passed in other American cities such as Detroit, New York, and San Francisco.{{citation needed|date=November 2016}} Later Mayor Boyle introduced the legislation to the Mayors and Managers Association where it was immediately endorsed, and he was invited by President [[Bill Clinton]] to address a panel studying the subject in Washington, DC.{{citation needed|date=November 2016}}

Clothing and footwear [[Factory|factories]] overseas have progressively improved working conditions because of the high demand of [[anti-sweatshop movement]] labor rights advocates.<ref name=":3">{{Cite web|url=http://www.laborrights.org/in-the-news/anti-sweatshop-movement-achieving-gains-overseas|title=Anti-Sweatshop Movement Is Achieving Gains Overseas {{!}} International Labor Rights Forum|website=www.laborrights.org|date=18 July 2009|access-date=May 17, 2016}}</ref> Sweatshops overseas have been receiving enormous amounts of pressure. The working conditions from college students, and other opponents of sweatshops have led to some of the powerful companies like [[Nike, Inc.|Nike]] and the Gap who have agreed to cut back on [[child labour]],<ref name=":3" /> restrict the use of dangerous and poisonous [[Chemical substance|chemicals]], and drop the average rate of employees working 80-hour weeks, according to groups that monitor such factories. Labour advocates say this could be a major turning point after 4 decades of workers in Asia and Latin American factories being underpaid, underappreciated and working in an unsafe environment.

Recently, there have been strides to eradicate sweatshops through government action, for example by increasing the minimum wage. In China, a developing country that is known to be a hub for sweatshops due to relaxed labor laws, high population and low minimum wage, the minimum wage is set to be raised by approximately 7% in 10 provinces by the end of 2018.<ref>{{cite web |author=CBNEditor |date=May 26, 2018 |title=10 Chinese Provinces Raise Minimum Wages Levels in 2018 |access-date=September 21, 2018 |work=China Banking News |url=http://www.chinabankingnews.com/2018/05/26/10-chinese-provinces-raise-minimum-wages-level-since-start-2018/}}</ref> As well as these governments also enforced stricter labor laws in 2013 after the [[collapse of Rana Plaza]] in Bangladesh, a large 5 storied sweatshop that killed 1135 people due to the building not being up to code, Bangladeshi police shut down many other factories after safety checks were completed and not met. However, no action has been as beneficial to the anti-sweatshop movement as that of the rise of social media. Social media has allowed for the world to see exactly what companies are doing and how they are doing it instantaneously, for free and is distributed to a wide audience. The platforms have allowed for viral videos, hundreds of thousands of retweets of quotes or statistics, millions of liked and shared pictures etc. to be spread to consumers in regards to companies' production methods without any censorship and thus force brands to be more transparent and ethical with their production practices. This is because a brand's reputation can be destroyed by a bystander with a smartphone who records a brand's product being made in a sweatshop where its workers are treated inhumanely. 

However, social media isn’t just helping to expose brands who are using sweatshops and unethical production practices but also is allowing companies that are trying to increase awareness of the anti-sweatshop movement to spread their message quickly and efficiently. In some cases, it isn't sure that name-calling and shaming is the most effective strategy. Globalization is a big factor in sweatshops within the firm. These lead firms depend on structural and cultural position. In which many are targeting the leading globalizer and lawmakers. A solution, that is offered is to combine structural and cultural values, to be embedded into policy. The anti-sweatshop activism states how firms lack structural power and cultural vulnerability.<ref>{{Cite journal|date=2014|title=Shaming the Corporation: The Social Production of Targets and the Anti-Sweatshop Movement|journal=American Sociological Review|volume=79 |pages=653–679|jstor=43187558|last1=Bartley|first1=Tim|last2=Child|first2=Curtis|issue=4|s2cid=143570345 |doi=10.1177/0003122414540653}}</ref> For example, in May 2017 Mama Cash and The Clean Clothes Campaign, both organizations that are working towards abolishing sweatshops as well as creating a world of sustainable and ethical apparel practices, worked together to create The Women Power Fashion Pop-up.<ref name="fashionunited.uk">{{cite web |last=Hendriksz |first=V. |date=May 17, 2017 |title=Pop-up Sweatshop urges the Fashion Industry to be more Transparent |access-date=September 22, 2018 |work=Fashion United |url=https://fashionunited.uk/news/fashion/pop-up-sweatshop-urges-the-fashion-industry-to-be-more-transparent/2017051724550}}</ref> The event took place in Amsterdam and allowed consumers to sit in a room designed to look and feel like a sweatshop and were forced to create 100 ties in an hour which is synonymous to that of the expectations of women working in sweatshops today.<ref name="fashionunited.uk"/> This pop-up allowed consumers to actually experience the life of a sweatshop worker for a limited time and thus made them more sympathetic to the cause. Outside of the pop-up was a petition that consumers could sign to convince brands to be more transparent with their clothing manufacturing processes.<ref name="fashionunited.uk"/> The campaign went viral and created a significant buzz for the anti-sweatshop movement as well as the work of Mama Cash and The Clean Clothes Campaign.
In recent years, the notion of the ethical consumer has risen. Consumers not only are important to modern markets but also influence the decisions made by companies. These consumers make buying decisions based on how the product was made, by whom and under what conditions, as well as the environmental consequences of production and consumption. This set of criteria means that consumption decisions are not only based on one's satisfaction with a purchase but also other aspects such as the environment and the well-being of workers in clothing factories.<ref>{{cite journal|date=2008|doi=10.1111/j.1470-6431.2008.00724.x |title=Labelling fashion markets|last=Aspers|first=Patrik |journal=International Journal of Consumer Studies |volume=32|issue=6|pages=633–638|hdl=11858/00-001M-0000-0012-4768-F |hdl-access=free}}</ref>