Chapter 5

Page 187
1. Madeira looks to seek damages under the New York Scaffold Law. The company objected on the basis that he was an undocumented immigrant. He lost his past and future earnings, so the court allowed Madera to receive these benefits. He was seriously injured, which caused him to get compensation.

2. There are many things that contribute to the declining number of deaths in the construction industry. There are more and more workplace laws that come into effect every year. These laws come with very harsh punishments for companies, which in turn gives them greater incentive to keep their workers as safe as possible. The companies issue training to employees, have monthly safety meetings, and provide the proper safety gear for their employees due to the job they are doing.

3. When construction happens in urban areas there should be stricter rules and regulations. I find it very unethical that these companies are taking short cuts that end up costing people their lives. The company that is cutting corners is not a company that is good for its employees. Especially when these incidents lead to the deaths of their employees.

Page 190
1. I feel like global slavery has a good impact on the health of ordinary workers. We see how these people that are enslaved are treated, the things they have to go through, and the abuse that comes to them. This opens the eyes of our people and which in turn makes people value their workers more. Laws for workplace safety and rights for workers have been on the rise as of late.

3. The Fair Trade is a movement to allow poorer nations to ship product over to countries, like the U.S. This would impact world slavery because countries with less wealth would be able to sell and buy products at better rates. This means these countries would generate more money and in turn be able to educate and provide for their people better.

4. In the Unocal case, was settled out in 2005. On the website you can check out every kind of court cases. There are over 5,000 companies with details about their stories.

Page 194
1. Nike was protected by the First Amendment in this particular case. The court ruled that Nike had made a profound national commitment to the principle in debate. Also “under free speech guaranty the validity and truth of declarations in political disputes over issues of public interest must be resolved by the public not the judge”.

5. This school is not one of these schools, nor is it a Consortium. This school would think sweat shops is a god awful, and it needs to end.