SAS not SDS is a new acronym for a new generation of student activists. "Students Against Sweatshops" may not have yet received the same attention as their "Students for a Democratic Society" predecessors, but they have been noticed:

"While in the sixties the civil rights movement and the Vietnam War infused the student movement with a keen awareness of racial oppression and the excesses of the state and its military machine, the new radicals of the nineties are starting out where the sixties left off: with a probing critique of the economic system, informed by an understanding of its gender and racial dimensions."

A vast network of Student Against Sweatshops organization have been cultivating on campuses across North America, and have received support and inspiration from other anti-sweatshop groups and labour organizations. Their primary goal is calling upon on College and University administrations to regulate their lucrative business partnerships with code of conducts, in order to improve the sweatshop conditions of factories making University apparel. These code of conducts provide enforceable standards for wages, working hours, h

Unfortunately, I have no basis of comparison between a proposed code and an implemented code in a Canadian context, for I could not obtain a copy of an implemented code from a Canadian university. (From what I can gather, U of T is the only Canadian university in the process of implementing a code.) I can, however, compare the Columbia University proposed code to the Columbia University implemented code, which is likely to be reflective of the practice of negotiating a code generally. I noticed that the proposed standards were applied without much modification; however, the workweek was modified to mirror what was stated in the Canadian proposal (i.e. 48 hours per week, one day off.) The glaring discrepancy lies not within the standards aspect, but with the matter of public disclosure and compliance. The section that consisted of over a quarter of the entire proposed code, was somehow reduced to a mere paragraph in the process of transformation. Stated below:

These students are serious too. Students Against Sweatshops at U of T conducted a nine-day sit-in at President Pritchards office to force administration to implement a code of conduct for university apparel suppliers and trademark licensors. Studying these code of conducts in detail would be an entire report in itself, but providing a basic shell allows one to observe the interesting evolution from proposals to actually implemented codes. Examining the Students Against Sweatshops Canada (SAS-C) base code, and the Columbia Students Proposed Code of Conduct for University Licensees reveals the same basic categories of information, but each respective code orders and elaborates this information differently. The categories of standards include: Legal Compliance, Ethical Principles, Employment Standards, Wages and Benefits, Regular Working Hours, Overtime, Piece Rates, Child Labour, Forced Labour, Health and Safety, Non-discrimination, Harassment or Abuse, Freedom of Association, and Environmental Standards. These categories are supplemented with sections on monitoring and compliance, and this is where the most important variations lie. On one hand, the SAS-C code displays a precise method for monitoring; outlining how the university, social justice, and private actors are to involved in this process, while the Columbia code does not declare a clearly defined method for internal and external monitoring. The SAS-C code has a less vigorous stance on working hours and overtime compensation, outlining a 48-hour workweek with one day off, while the Columbia code outlines a 40-hour workweek with two days off. The latter has an entire section devoted to Women's rights, which is to its credit. Both elaborate that a "living wage", not just the legal minimum wage, must be enforced.

The sweatshop issue is definitely relevant to more than just students, labour, and rights groups. David Moberg points out that this concern breaks out many fronts: shareholder battles, legislative debates, international regulations, lawsuits, purchasing guidelines, the creation of corporate codes of conduct, and monitoring of workplaces. While the reality of sweatshops is of no doubt, the successfulness of measures put in place to combat sweatshops, including code of conducts, have been called into question. One difficulty is the possibility that code of conducts could lead to loss of jobs, as factories relocate to avoid such standards. The global nature of the apparel industry makes this kind of reactionary measure a reality. Even in the context of a university code of conduct, this kind of reaction would be possible, especially considering that universities like Columbia have vague compliance and monitoring measures. As stated above, the licensees is supposed to disclose the location of their factories. Without an extensive monitoring system in place, corporations could claim that particular factory could not possibly be brought up to code and shut it down, only to secretly reopen elsewhere. Some crit

Some common words found in the essay are:
David Moberg, Columbia University, Indonesia Philippines, Environmental Standards, Solidarity Network, Gap Wal-mart, Eric Brakken, Students Sweatshop, Students Sweatshops, United Unions, code conducts, students sweatshops, code conduct, proposed code, public disclosure, university apparel, living wage, social justice, student movement, students sweatshop, maquila solidarity network, implemented code canadian, clear-cut solutions mean, process implementing code, code conduct university,
Approximate Word count = 2726
Approximate Pages = 11 (250 words per page double spaced)