Gap Kids: New Frontiers in Child Abuse

It was enough to make you vomit all over your new denim jacket. The Gap has been caught using child labor in an Indian sweatshop, and not just child labor--child slaves. As extensively reported on the news, the children, some as young as ten, were worked 16 hour days, fed bowls of mosquito-covered rice, and forced to sleep on a roof and use over-flowing latrines. Those who slowed down were beaten with rubber pipes and the ones who cried had oily cloths stuffed in their mouths.

But let’s try to look at this dispassionately – not as a human rights issue but as a PR disaster, ranking right up there with the 1982 discovery of cyanide in Tylenol capsules. Think of this as a case study in a corporate Crisis Communication course: How is The Gap handling the problem, and could it do better?

This is not the first time The Gap has been caught using child labor, but CEO Martha Hansen went on the air to state that the situation was “completely unacceptable” and that the company would “act swiftly.” Two problems here: One, she failed to detail the actions. It would have been nice, for example, if she had announced that some of the top-producing child slaves would be reassigned to manage Gap outlets in American malls, and that the under-performers would be adopted by Angelina Jolie.

The other, more serious, problem is that she got defensive about child labor. This is the mistake Kathie Lee Gifford made in 1996. When accused of using child labor in Honduras to manufacture her Kathie Lee line of clothing, Gifford broke into tears on TV. Maybe Hansen meant to cover herself by saying that The Gap would not “ever, ever condone any child laborer making our garments” rather than saying the company does not condone child labor itself. We already knew, from the rubber pipes and oily cloths, that The Gap does not condone much from its child laborers.

Hansen underestimated the potential support for a full-throated defense of child labor. More and more American children are tried and punished as adults today. And the ubiquitous conservative pundit William Kristol will surely be enthusiastic, considering his recent – though possibly facetious-- statement that “whenever I hear anything described as a heartless assault on our children, I tend to think it's a good idea.”

The core of the argument, though, is that anyone who opposes child labor has not witnessed its opposite, which is child unemployment and idleness.

Hansen claims to be a mother herself, but I wonder how often she has returned home from a hard day in the C-suites to find her unemployed offspring Magic Marker-ing the walls and crushing the Froot Loops into the carpet. This is what jobless children do: They rub Crazy Glue into their siblings’ hair; they spill apple juice onto your keyboard. Believe me, I see this kind of wantonly destructive behavior every day. Vandalism is a way of life for unemployed children, and they do not know the meaning of remorse.

In fact, corporate America should go further and make a strong statement against the sickening culture of dependency that has grown up around childhood. Why are jobless children so criminally inclined? Because they know that whatever damage they inflict, the Froot Loops will just keep coming. The Gap should portray its child-staffed factories as part of a far-seeing welfare-to-work program, which will eventually be extended to American children as well.

To appeal to American parents, our own child factories should be run more like Montessori schools, where the children are already encouraged to regard every one of their demented activities as “work.” If they’re going to pile up blocks and knock them down all day, then why not sew on buttons and bring home a little cash? But even American families will have to brace themselves for the inevitable cost cutting measures. First the cookies and milk may have to go, then, as in India, the toilets and beds. Wal-Mart has already pioneered the price-cutting defense of human rights abuses, and The Gap should follow suit.

The company can of course expect some lingering opposition. Just as there are vegetarians and pacifists, there will always be some men, for example, who would rather wear skirts than blue jeans impregnated with the excrement and tears of ten-year-olds. Well, let them shop at American Apparel or some other “sweat-free” vendor, and if they can’t find anything there, let them wear dhotis. In a nation that cannot bring itself to extend child health insurance (SCHIP) to all children in need, child-made clothes make a fine fashion statement. And why not accessorize your denim jacket with a scarf derived from one of those oily cloths stuffed in weeping workers’ mouths?

Comments

[jeff]

Uggh - what happened with GAP is deplorable but it has *nothing* to do with SCHIP and associating the two turns a laudable condemnation in a tiresome, Moore-esque rant.

[Rachel]

Actually, I think SCHIP and the abuses at Gap have everything to do with each other in terms of illustrating, quite vividly, American cultural values and where children fall on that scale. I think this blog was sharp and well written. When a corporation abuses children so thoroughly I think everyone is entitled to a little ranting.

[Tim Worstall]

Worth recalling Paul Krugman's words on this subject:
http://emirateseconomist.blogspot.com/2007/10/in-praise-of-sweatshops-oldie-but.html

"When the movement gets what it wants, the effects are often startlingly malign. For example, could anything be worse than having children work in sweatshops? Alas, yes. In 1993, child workers in Bangladesh were found to be producing clothing for Wal-Mart, and Senator Tom Harkin proposed legislation banning imports from countries employing underage workers. The direct result was that Bangladeshi textile factories stopped employing children. But did the children go back to school? Did they return to happy homes? Not according to Oxfam, which found that the displaced child workers ended up in even worse jobs, or on the streets — and that a significant number were forced into prostitution.

The point is that third-world countries aren't poor because their export workers earn low wages; it's the other way around. Because the countries are poor, even what look to us like bad jobs at bad wages are almost always much better than the alternatives."

[gaby]

When I was child I have learned about hungry children in Africa, exploited children in India, prostituting children in Thailand. I am now middle-aged and they are still hungry, exploited, and prostituting. Quite frankly, I don't want to hear it anymore.

It is the parents responsibility to look after their children, check up on them and ensuring that they receive proper care. What are these parents doing anyway, sending their children to these corporations to work? If they are so poor they should not have children in the first place.

[Christine]

"It is the parents [sic] responsibility to look after their children, check up on them and ensuring that they receive proper care. What are these parents doing anyway, sending their children to these corporations to work? If they are so poor they should not have children in the first place."

Very funny, Gaby. I always imagine that it must be that have never read Swift's A Modest Proposal and thus don't know that their children could be a steady food source. But you know the poor: they just breed away, hoping to somehow subvert your utilitarian values.

[Dawn]

It seems that Jonathan Swift addressed a similar situation in his "A Modest Proposal" and appeared to be in agreement with gaby's comments. Swift wrote satire of course. I'm not sure what gaby is writing....

And Tim's comments about Bangladesh children really brings things into perspective, that even good intentions can cause dire results.

All of this talk we hear about revere the family, protect the family -- every government action speaks loudly that just the opposite is true.

Then again I think about my father who was shining shoes and selling newspapers on street corners with his brothers when he was only 4 years old. That was the good news in his life -- that they could do something about their poverty and contribute to the family. So is the job the worst part of being poor? Eating, finding shelter, keeping warm, having clothes to cover him, those were concerns my father never stopped worrying about. I think there is more to consider than simply the mistreatment of the children. That in itself is awful, but as Tim pointed out, take the job away and what do they have left?

Thought provoking discussion. Thank you.

Dawn

[gaby]

At this point in my life I leave it to likes of Bill Gates and company to worry about it and to "do something" about it. I, for one, tend to be too tired after working a full-time job during the week and a part-time job on weekends to contemplate other people's misery.

Yes, I know, the poverty issue is very complex and blaming the poor for their misfortune is wrong. But, as I age I cannot deny that a degree of cynicism is setting in. No matter how much is done and donated, the suffering never seems to stop.

A point I like to make, though, is that there are parts of this world where human life is just not valued in the same way it is here in the Western world. As Tim pointed out, trying to impose our values on their society brought about even more misery for them.

[chris]

A Few Words from The Gap

India activists decry Gap child labor

NEW DELHI (AP) — The Indian children reportedly found making clothes for Gap Inc. should be reunited with their families and compensated by the government, activists said Monday amid a spreading scandal about the use of child labor by the international clothing chain.

The reported discovery of children as young as 10 sewing clothes for clothing retailer Gap Inc. in a New Delhi factory has renewed concerns about child labor in India, but government officials offered no comment Monday.

"The biggest responsibility here lies with the Indian government — they don't develop a way of monitoring" factories, said Bhuwan Ribhu, a lawyer who works with Bachpan Bachao Andolan, or the Save Childhood Movement.

"International companies hire subcontractors and then forget about it. There is no monitoring at all," Ribhu added. "Where the Gap is concerned, at least they've taken a good pro-active stand against the subcontractors."

Britain's Observer newspaper on Sunday reported that it had found children making clothes with Gap labels in a squalid factory in New Delhi. It quoted the children as saying they were from poor parts of India and had been sold to the sweatshop by their impoverished families. Some said they were not paid for their work.

Gap responded quickly, saying the factory was being run by a subcontractor who was hired in violation of Gap's policies, and none of the products made there will be sold in its stores.

"We appreciate that the media identified this subcontractor, and we acted swiftly in this situation," Gap spokesman Bill Chandler told the Associated Press on Sunday. "Under no circumstances is it acceptable for children to produce or work on garments."

Child labor remains a widespread problem in India, despite the country's economic boom and its growing wealth.

The government has repeatedly tried to ban the use of child workers — in 1986 outlawing them from working in dangerous industries, such as glassmaking, and last year banning them being employed as domestic servants or in restaurants.

But the prohibitions have had only a minimal impact and children's rights activists estimate that 13 million children are still working in India, with many being used in labor-intensive businesses like carpet-weaving and in dangerous industries, such as making fire crackers.

Chandler said Gap requires its suppliers to guarantee that they will not use child labor to produce garments. Gap stopped working with 23 factories last year over violations uncovered by its inspectors.

The San Francisco-based company has 90 full-time inspectors who make unannounced visits around the world to ensure vendors are abiding by Gap's guidelines, he said.

[Maya's Granny]

As long as societies have large gaps between the poor and the rich, there will be injustices like this. If we wish to end child labor, we need to close the income gap.

[Solo]

Very few children here or around the world have "Ozzie and Harriet" type upbrings. In fact, even the Nelson boys didn't.

So if in order for a family to make ends meet children must work then they must work in safe, clean conditions.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating child labor. But it is a reality and has been since before the days of Dickens.

Farm families and pioneer families often had lots of children because they needed the extra hands. Children were often used in machine shops because their smaller hands reached places adult hands couldn't go.

In a perfect world no child should have to work to eat, but in this world if work is their best options then it is up to the government and retailers to insist and assure that conditions are humane.

Outlawing child labor in countries were people are starving only forces it underground creating the worse conditions imaginable.

[roger]

"In a perfect world no child should have to work to eat, but in this world if work is their best options then it is up to the government and retailers to insist and assure that conditions are humane.

Outlawing child labor in countries were people are starving only forces it underground creating the worse conditions imaginable."

we speak of a perfect world as if it is the childs environment which is the issue and as if these familes have any control over their future. if we accept the tawdry argument that children must work in developing countries in order to eat then the question become which entity is responsible that the children are working in these conditions. i say tawdry because the govt is unwilling or unable to provide for its most vulnerable citizens. did gap fail them as a class or is the indian govt to blame for allowing this to continue. the caste system in india is impermeable. this is a social stratification which would allow just such abuse as barbara describes. gap is not blameless here. a much heavier blame however rests at the feet of govt, politics and class sturucture in the asian subcontient.

Barbara: "The core of the argument, though, is that anyone who opposes child labor has not witnessed its opposite, which is child unemployment and idleness.

facetious and silly conclusion to a fallacious question.

[Chickensh*Eagle]

Tim: "...and that a significant number were forced into prostitution."

Take that a step further -- if we don't avail ourselves of these children's services, they'll starve.

gaby: "...trying to impose our values on their society brought about even more misery for them."

We can, however, impose our values on American companies that import these goods. They typically retail them at huge markups over what they pay for them. If the Gap is living up to the statement chris posted, fine. Now how about the rest of them?

chris and roger: I've replied to your last posts in the previous thread. Wouldn't want you to think I tried to get the last word by stealth.

[A Canadian]

I don't really believe that GAP wasn't aware of the problem. Why did they outsource their labor there in the first place? Because it's cheap and it allows them to make even GREATER PROFITS. Let's not get fooled by their insincere concern for the poor children in India. They knew full well what they were paying for. They're just sorry that they got found out. Who is really to blame? Consumers who want ever-cheaper goods. We can't stand there and gasp when we discover this horrible fact. We created it in the first place.

[roger]

"We created it in the first place."

do we really have that much control over where the products are manufactured. suppose we were able to organize and boycott all manuactured goods from china, india and malaysia. the manufacturers would then move operations to thailand and mexico and continue production. i am always wary of these arguments that some poor smuck in de moines who buys a pair of shoes is responsible for the misery of the folks who manufactured the goods. how many hands did the product go through in the meantime? who is responsible to maintain proper work conditions? who decided to sell their children to the factory to begin with? why is the thai govt sufficiently corrupt to allow abusive child labor? how old are the children in question? why are the import regulations apparently so lax that this type of product is allowed in the country?

there is no justification for child abuse whether committed in the workplace or otherwise. at the same time we would do well to recognize that trade is a very complicated issue and that a straight line cannot be drawn from sweatshop to consumer.

[Andrea]

Well, here's the thing. No human being should have an oily rag stuffed into his or her mouth for crying. Then too, no human being should be beaten with a rubber pipe for working a little slower when he or she is tired. I think the reason that it happens is that the people who are catching the beatings are smaller and less able to defend themselves than the people who are dealing out the abuse. The people dealing out the abuse are not able to defend themselves against the people who are demanding the output at levels the workers can't sustain.

Now, I remember being expected to work when I was a child. I had household jobs to do, as did my brothers. Dad needed small jobs done in his office, for which I received a small sum of money. When I messed up, however, Dad corrected me and made me do the work over. He kept the oily rags and the rubber hoses in the garage and tried to teach me a thing or two about being careful.

It's not work that's bad for children. Work is as much a learning opportunity as school. It's lack of any opportunities to do anything other than labor in sweatshops, and the abuse, and the systemic devaluation of certain human lives to prop up the value of other human lives that really makes problems in my conscience. These children have to lead the lives they do because other people feel the need to have lots and lots of cheap, attractive clothing to look good all the time.

I wonder how it would feel to ackowledge that we are all interdependent, that the person who makes our clothes and cuts our grass and delivers our food is as necessary and valuable as the person who heals our illnesses, defends us against injustice and invents our electronic amusements. Tradition and culture create the imbalance, not any fact of effort or intelligence.

But I must wake up now and get ready to work. Some children are depending on me to teach them.

[chris]

This sudden obsession with sweat-shop labor in India, including claims that children had oily rags stuck into their mouths and were hit with rubber hoses is reaching comical levels.

First, why is The Gap, a retail clothing chain, also expected to function as the International Labor Police?

Second, how does anyone know the claims of oily rags in mouths and beatings with rubber pipes are true?

Frankly, given the Dickensian atmosphere infusing the story, why would shop managers bother with rubber pipes? Why not simply slapping the kids, or punching them?

That aside, India is a rapidly evolving country. The advent of democracy and capitalism have begun to work as predicted. Every backward nation should follow the path broken by India. Far from perfect, but heading the right way.

Amazingly, critics at this site seem to think the US can determine and set labor laws in other countries.

Okay. Try this. How about those millions of muslim females who weave those rugs for which the middle east is famous? For the most part, they are paid NOTHING.

If they had the opportunity, they'd move to India and take the jobs in those factories supplying The Gap. If they were allowed that much freedom. But they're not.

Meanwhile, islamic law permits wife-beating.

Moreover, much US clothing is stitched together or manufactured in backwards parts of the world. The tags in my shirts list Pakistan, Malaysia, Thailand, India, Vietnam, Bangladesh, El Salvador and Mongolia. Those are only a few of the world's textile hot-spots.

Those are countries that still suffer from a lack of clean drinking water, where kids die from diseases and hazards long gone from the US scene. Whether anyone cares to admit it or not, these lousy jobs are a start.

But unless the countries in which these textile-makers operate are headed toward democracy and capitalism, it's not possible for Americans to discipline them over abusive labor practices.

The truth of this should be evident in the example of Cuba. The island prison has been made vastly poorer because the US does no business with the Castro brothers.

It's clear that Fidel's communism would evaporate if American wealth entered the Cuban economy. We've isolated Cuba for over 45 years, but the marxist paradise has lived on, barely, while its dictator refused to allow the changes that would give every Cuban a good life.

Either we kill the dictators or we open trade, or both. But taking away jobs from the people who need them most is cruel. Moreover, in The Gap case, yanking jobs from poor children in India serves the interests of labor in the US. The last people to benefit are those kids who are tossed back in the street.

By the way, many of the world's poorest coutries are the sources of children used for sexual purposes. It's reasonable to think that a child working long hours for The Gap in a third-world country is unlikely to moonlight in a less savory work environment.

[Anarcissie]

chris: '... By the way, many of the world's poorest coutries are the sources of children used for sexual purposes. It's reasonable to think that a child working long hours for The Gap in a third-world country is unlikely to moonlight in a less savory work environment.'

I don't know why you say that. Children are pretty weak, socially and politically, and we live in a world where the strong use the weak and the weak use the weaker. One can use children for factory work _and_ sex. Those rubber pipes and oily rags could provide silence and compliance for more than one kind of service.

The problem with child labor (factory or sexual) is that it's non-voluntary. Non-voluntary labor is slavery. As Mr. Lincoln said, if slavery isn't wrong then nothing is wrong. We happy Americans probably don't have to worry about using Asian children sexually unless we travel to Asia -- well, there _are_ certain kinds of pornographic movies, a kind of indirect use -- but we do have the question of whether we want our fine, hip duds to be made by slaves. Seven-year-old slaves. No doubt many would answer, "Yeah, WTF, whatever." But some wouldn't.

In any case I don't buy this "If we don't slave 'em for the clothes someone will slave 'em for worse." Every crime stands by itself.

[Monica]

If child labor is banned, children still don't have a choice whether they want to work or not. It's just that they are forced not to work regardless of what they may need or prefer. That may also push a certain amount of work underground, under worse conditions and at lower wages, and make children feel that law enforcement authorities are their enemies.

Many children actually prefer to work in order to help their families and/or get pocket money. You may say that this choice is not truly voluntary. But if you think of it, neither is school attendance and doing homework, which is even closer to slavery because there is no remuneration and the law may actually force children to attend school, whereas it does not force them to work. On the other hand, many adults work out of economic necessity, so their choice whether to work or not is not free either. It is true that slaves are not allowed to change jobs and employers, but child labour is considered evil even if the children are allowed to do that.

Children would be protected much better if the age of majority was lowered while maintaining their parents' obligation to support them if they are in school and/or making it easier for older children and teenagers to have their own source of income and the right to protect their property. I was just reading about a case where a legally minor but working person had her father pay for her computer but reimbursed him out of her own money and nevertheless the father sold her computer without her permission.

Whether they are physically adult or not, legally minor young people are treated like slaves, more so nowadays than when it was normal for older minors to escape the school system early and have jobs and families of their own. Now, even though most states have lowered their age of majority, young people are made helpless and are disempowered to the point of not being able to have one drink until three years after the age of majority. Therefore, if any country is more lax about this kind of systemic disempowerment of their young citizens, by allowing them to work or not enforcing child labour bans too strictly, this is actually a good thing. In fact, our yong children and the more progressive adults should probably try to bring about laws to put some economic power in childrens' and teenagers' hands, even if that includes allowing them to work more or at a younger age.

[chris]

anarcissie, you wrote:

"Children are pretty weak, socially and politically, and we live in a world where the strong use the weak and the weak use the weaker."

There's only so much America can do about the global problems of poverty and the misery related to exploitation.

You wrote:

"One can use children for factory work _and_ sex."

Well, anything is possible. But I'm willing to bet that toiling for a clothing company precludes sex work for children.

You wrote:

"Those rubber pipes and oily rags could provide silence and compliance for more than one kind of service."

That's cheap melodrama that appeals to an American mindset. When kids are uncooperative the most frequently used weapon of coercion is the hand or fist.

You wrote:

"The problem with child labor (factory or sexual) is that it's non-voluntary."

Many aspects of childhood involve non-voluntary participation by the kids.

You wrote:

"Non-voluntary labor is slavery."

Not quite. The kids are paid. Big difference.

You wrote:

"As Mr. Lincoln said, if slavery isn't wrong then nothing is wrong."

True. But we're not talking about America or other leading nations. We're talking about the process of emerging from a relatively primitive state and moving toward modernity. No matter what Americans want to believe, it's a slow process. But the path has been made.

You wrote:

"We happy Americans probably don't have to worry about using Asian children sexually unless we travel to Asia -- well, there _are_ certain kinds of pornographic movies, a kind of indirect use --"

Your comment suggests that demand for such services is high and that "happy Americans" have easy access to kids for sex.

You wrote:

"...but we do have the question of whether we want our fine, hip duds to be made by slaves."

The workers are paid, and if America can influence these emerging countries, America can speed the advance to the point that child labor is no longer part of the culture.

You wrote:

"In any case I don't buy this "If we don't slave 'em for the clothes someone will slave 'em for worse." Every crime stands by itself."

Yeah. Sure. Take a trip to Africa. There are almost 800 million people on the continent, and most of them would jump for one of those jobs at The Gap factories. But for a lot of reasons, there are not many clothing factories in most of Africa. It's the dictator problem.

[Hattie]

Wow. Do any of you people who think child labor is grand have kids or grandkids?

[The Eternal Squire]

If you think poverty is bad, try boredom: it's worse. For the last two years I have not be ALLOWED to work, because no one would hire me. The only thing left for me to do is clean the house, cook the meals, and pretend to be cheerful for the sake of my child and for my wife who works. But where no one is seeing, I am slowly dying inside.

The Eternal Squire

[Anarcissie]

Maybe you could start some kind of business.

[Anarcissie]

chris -- you can use words whatever way you wish, but in my book when a person is coerced into non-voluntary labor as a regular condition of life, that person is a slave and is performing slave labor.

If slave labor is made profitable it will be continued and extended. However, it is not really a very good thing for capitalism, in spite of the immediate profits, because ultimately capitalism depends on people being able to make enough money to buy the stuff they make and consume it -- or at least, enough to be taxed for the latest war. Slaves don't make that kind of money. In fact, in the case of the children, their power is so small most of them may well never see it at all.

[Monica]

At least, you are free. I realize that your financial means may not allow you to enjoy your freedom to the fullest extent, but there are all kinds of things you can do. For instance, you could read books at the library (assuming you can't afford your own). You can spend time with friends. You can learn something that interests you, such as a language. Since you have Internet access, you may be able to find that for free on the Internet. If this is legal in your state, you could homeschool your child. You could become a really great cook and learn various crafts, such as knitting and sewing, to spend time and depend less on commercially-made products. You can get your own business selling said crafts, or find some other way to sell your skills, but not as an employee. There may be some business opportunity you haven't thought of. Some lady made a business out of Al-Queda propaganda, which she is translating into English (of course, for the English-speaking public, not for Al-Queda). Some Eastern European villagers are making traditional lace for underwear and sexy blouses. I paid $45 for a crocheted snood with beads (not from them). You should see how expensive some Peruvian products are. There is a company called Peruvian Connection where bangles covered in fabric are very expensive (those I have are $59 apiece, but some are even more expensive).

Having to waste your life working for someone else is much worse. You have the opportunity to actually choose what to do.

[chris]

anarcissie, you wrote:

"If slave labor is made profitable it will be continued and extended."

Slave labor is not profitable. Thus, your "if, then" statement is nullified.

You added:

"However, it is not really a very good thing for capitalism..."

Since slavery is not a profitable practice, it is a priori not good for capitalism.

You wrote:

"...in spite of the immediate profits, because ultimately capitalism depends on people being able to make enough money to buy the stuff they make and consume it..."

You've completed your own argumentative circle. Slavery bad -- capitalism good.

Let me know how you think the US should go about eradicating abject poverty in the world, this world with its dictators who are the leading cause of poverty.