瑋瑋 發問時間: 社會與文化語言 · 1 0 年前

請各位英文高手幫幫忙翻議~Please><(2)

Typical of the allegations were those detailed in 48 Hours program that aired in 1996. The report painted a picture of young woman at a Vietnamese subcontractor who worked with toxic materials six days a week in poor conditions for only 20 cents an hour. The report also stated that a living wage in Vietnam was at least $3 a day, an income that could not be achieved at the subcontractor without working substantial overtime. Nike and its subcontractors were not breaking any laws, but this report, and others like it, raised questions about the ethics of using sweatshop labor to make what were essentially fashion accessories. It may have been legal, but was it ethical to use subcontractors who by Western standards clearly exploited their workforce? Nike’s critics thought not, and the company found itself the focus of a wave of demonstrations and consumer boycotts.

Adding fuel to the fire, in November 1997 Global Exchange obtained and leaked a confidential report by Ernst & Young of a Nike-commissioned audit of a Vietnam factory owned by a Nike subcontractor. The factory had 9,200 workers and made 400,000 pairs of shoes a month. The Ernst & Young report painted a dismal picture of thousands of young women, most under age 25, laboring 10 1/2 hours a day, six days a week, in excessive heat and noise and in foul air, for slightly more than $10 a week. The report also found that workers with skin or breathing problems had not been transferred to departments free of chemicals. More than half the workers who dealt with dangerous chemicals did not wear protective masks or gloves. The report stated that in parts of the plant, workers were exposed to carcinogens that exceeded local legal standards by 177 times and that, overall, 77 percent of the employees suffered from respiratory problems.

已更新項目:

拜託~~別直接用網路字典翻譯(不通順)

我比較希望是通順ㄉㄧ篇文章~

拜託ㄌ...各位~~~

謝謝你們嚕!!^^

1 個解答

評分
  • 1 0 年前
    最佳解答

    報告在一個越南轉包商描繪年輕的婦女情景, 在貧窮的條件裡與有毒的材料合作一周6 天僅僅一個小時20分。 報告也說明在越南的一份僅夠維生的工資是至少每天3 美元, 不能被在轉包商取得而沒有實際的加班時間工作的一份收入。 耐克和它的轉包商沒毀壞任何法律, 但是這份報告,和其它人喜歡它,提出關於使用血汗工廠勞動做基本上是時尚附件的的倫理學的問題。 可能合法,使用誰以西的標準清楚利用他們的勞工的轉包商是倫理的? 耐克的批評家認為不,並且公司發現它自己為一遊行示威的浪潮的焦點和消費者聯合抵制。

    火上加油, 在1997 11月,全球交換獲得並且漏一祕密報告以和一耐克委托一個耐克轉包商擁有的一家越南工廠的審計年輕的厄恩斯特。 工廠有9,200名工人並且做400,000個雙鞋一個月。 厄恩斯特和年輕的報告描繪數千名年輕的婦女的灰暗情景, 非常不足25歲, 一天小時詳細地闡述10 1/2, 一周6 天,在過度的熱和噪音裡和在令人厭惡的空氣裡,為稍微超過每周10 美元。 報告也發現工人與皮或者呼吸問題一起不沒有化學製品轉移到部門。 超過,一半經營危險的化學製品的工人沒穿防護面罩或者手套。 報告在植物的部分說明那, 工人暴露於超過本地法律標準177 倍和那個的致癌物,總起來,那些雇員的百分之77受呼吸問題之苦。

    參考資料: 我的頭腦
    • Commenter avatar登入以對解答發表意見
還有問題?馬上發問,尋求解答。