Table of ContentsIntroductionExploitation of Sweatshop WorkersPrecarious Working ConditionsPrioritizing Profits Over Worker Well-BeingExacerbating PollutionNeglecting Environmental ConsequencesConsumer Responsibility and the Way ForwardConclusionIntroductionL he fashion industry, known for its glamor and allure, harbors a dark underbelly characterized by the exploitation of sweatshop workers and environmental degradation. This essay examines the factors most responsible for the tragic deaths of the Rana Plaza sweatshop workers and the catastrophic chrome pollution of the Kanpur River. He argues that large fashion companies bear the greatest responsibility for these problems, as they oppress sweatshop workers, maintain precarious working conditions, and exacerbate pollution in factories. This essay also highlights the urgent need for consumers to drive change in the industry by making informed choices that prioritize ethical practices. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay The Exploitation of Sweatshop Workers Large fashion companies often operate sweatshops where workers endure harsh conditions and are exploited. Despite claims that these companies create sustainable employment opportunities for poor people, these positions lack formal guarantees and benefits. As Andrew Morgan points out in “The True Cost,” because these companies don’t formally employ workers, they evade responsibility for their well-being. This allows brands like H&M to overwork and underpay their unauthorized employees, even employing children as young as 14 for more than 12 hours a day. Such practices blatantly violate Article 24 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which stipulates the right to rest and leisure. These companies therefore exploit workers illegally and exploit their resources in a deceptive manner. Additionally, the exploitation of sweatshop workers extends beyond child labor and excessively long hours. These workers often face unsafe working conditions and have little or no access to appropriate safety measures. In many cases, they are forced to work in cramped spaces without adequate ventilation or safety equipment, putting their health and well-being at risk. This not only violates their basic human rights, but also puts their lives in danger on a daily basis. Precarious working conditions Although garment factories have a responsibility to keep workers safe, they also face financial oppression from large corporations. Dhaka garment factory owner Arif Jebtik laments in “The True Cost” that he is oppressed every day by big business, which forces him to oppress his workers. This financial constraint prevents factories from making necessary safety improvements, leading to disregard for crucial safety measures. The tragic collapse of the Rana Plaza factory, which cost more than a thousand lives, was the result of insufficient financial support from major fashion brands. Although companies like H&M have promised to improve workers' working conditions, they have deliberately delayed action. Rachel Abrams reveals in her article that progress in improving working conditionsin factories has been slow and companies continue to benefit from unfair and unsafe labor practices. environments. These factories, forced to meet tight production deadlines and cost targets set by fashion giants, have no choice but to compromise on worker safety. The consequences are catastrophic, as demonstrated by the Rana Plaza tragedy, which serves as a dark reminder of the human cost of the fashion industry's relentless quest for profit. Prioritize profits over worker well-being. Big fashion companies prioritize advertising and maximizing profits over improving the working conditions of sweatshop workers. DavidWilson argues in "Who Really Benefits From Sweatshops" that if these companies reduced their marketing spending, they could allocate funds to double workers' wages and ensure safe working conditions. This demonstrates that these companies have the means to improve the conditions of workers but opt ​​for maximizing profits through advertising. In essence, they treat human lives as replaceable commodities. The relentless pursuit of profit is not limited to the mistreatment of workers. This also extends to the impact on the environment. Major fashion brands employ various strategies to increase sales, ranging from celebrity endorsements to aggressive advertising campaigns. While these marketing tactics undoubtedly boost sales, they distract from the ethical and environmental consequences of fast fashion. Exacerbation of pollution Fashion companies are exacerbating pollution in various regions, including the Kanpur river, due to the fast fashion trend. The insatiable demand for new clothing, with some companies boasting 52 seasons per year, is forcing factories to produce more and more using harmful and destructive chemicals. Kanpur, known for its production of cheap leather, has seen its environment suffer from chromium contamination due to growing demand from big brands. This situation highlights the negative consequences arising from the demands of these companies, as they maximize profits without considering environmental consequences. The relentless pursuit of fast fashion creates a vicious cycle of environmental degradation. Manufacturers are being forced to produce clothing at an unprecedented rate, leading to overexploitation of resources and the release of harmful chemicals into the environment. These practices not only harm ecosystems, but also endanger the health and well-being of communities living near these factories. Big fashion companies are not only complicit in this environmental degradation, but are often directly responsible for it. Neglect of environmental consequences Fashion companies do not take into account the environmental consequences of their production processes. In "The True Cost," Mike Schragger points out that many resources used in clothing production, such as water, are not factored into production costs. This neglect has detrimental effects on local communities living near the factories, who suffer from both the negative efficiency of the factories and the lack of advanced filtering equipment. Workers in these factories ignore the damage caused by pollution and ultimately bear the brunt. The environmental consequences of fast fashion are considerable and have global implications. Textile production requires large quantities of water, and the discharge.