Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorNicholson, Emily
dc.date.accessioned2019-09-25T20:41:29Z
dc.date.available2019-09-25T20:41:29Z
dc.date.issued2019-05-19
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.tcu.edu/handle/116099117/27064
dc.description.abstractThe Textile Industry is characterized by low-cost production. At the same time, its labor environments have developed notoriety for poor working conditions (low wages, uncompensated overtime, poor treatment, exposure to chemicals, dangerous facilities). The Textile Industry represents some countries? chief trading relationship with United States MNCs, meaning that US MNCs sustain a great portion of Textile Industry practices in the rest of the world; however, supply chain management, which plays a key role in building an efficient and low-cost production process for the MNC, rarely measures or tracks labor factors in non-wage working conditions. So, while MNCs? supply chains are a controlling factor in the employment of textile laborers, supply chain managers likely know little to nothing about the implications of employing people in this industry. The purpose of this paper is to look at commonalities among the countries with the most dependence on textile as an export to the US. I hope to determine if there are qualities that make a country more prone to rely on the exploitative manufacturing industry of textiles. Using a regression model with data taken from Hofstede?s cultural indices, the International Labor Organization (ILO), The World Bank, United Nations Development Program, and CountryWatch, I was able to quantify and prove a correlation between degrees of exploitation and concentration of textile-related goods and services as well as between degrees of dignity-deprivation and concentration of textile-related goods and services (and the necessary textile laborers to produce these goods and services). Supply chain managers should be aware that the Textile Industry is concentrated in countries where exploitation and dignity-deprivation has been observed. In pursuit of low-cost consideration, likely made in part to meet the needs of shareholders and customers, managers have entered into business with ethical ambiguity. This paper disaggregates the social implications of doing work in a low-cost, low-wage environment. I conclude with a recommendation that supply chain managers pay particular concern to and include in their agendas the dignity-restoration of individuals working in textiles upstream in the supply chain.
dc.titleTEXTILE LABOR AT BOTTOM OF PYRAMID AND RESPECTIVE CULTURAL AND HUMAN DIGNITY IMPLICATIONS
etd.degree.departmentSupply and Value Chain Management


Files in this item

Thumbnail
This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record