We don't talk about it, we don't even acknowledge it, but the human trafficking of men is alive and well. It's a global issue that affects the service industry, agriculture and the construction industry. In this economic downturn it is getting worse. In the US, the percentage of reported victims that are male has risen from 6% to 45% from 2006 to 2008. It's not an 'over there' problem, it's an everywhere problem.
In July I spoke at the TED conference in Oxford on this issue in the construction industry. Below is a excerpt from that talk and accompanying slides. Since I gave the talk, UAE officials are pushing through tougher building codes and hopefully stronger laws protecting construction workers.
----
It was a few years ago my eyes where opened to the dark side of my world, the construction industry. In 2006 in Qatar local students took me to see migrant worker housing. They asked me if this was what we meant by progress. Since then I've followed the unfolding issue of worker rights in the construction industry.
Let's take one country, one that has been in the spotlight. This year more than $300bn of building projects have been canceled or put on hold in the UAE. Behind the headlines lays the fate of the often indentured construction workers. All 1.1 million of them.
Mainly Indian, Pakistani and Nepalese, these laborers risk everything to make money for their families back home. They pay a middle man thousands of dollars and arrive to find themselves in camps with no water, no air conditioning and quite often, their passports removed.
It is easy to point the finger at local officials and higher authorities, but let us not forget that it is the private sector that is equally, if not more, accountable. Groups like Build Safe UAE have emerged but the numbers are overwhelming. In August 2008, public health authorities noted that 40% of the countries 1,093 labor camps violated minimum health and fire safety standards. Last summer, more than 10,000 workers protested for nonpayment of wages, poor quality of food and inadequate housing. Then the financial collapse happened.
When the contractors go bust everything goes missing -- documentation, passports and tickets home for the workers. Currently thousands of workers are abandoned in Dubai -- no way to get back, no proof of arrival. They are boom and bust refugees.
The question is, as a building professional, if you know this is going on and you choose to accept this practice as the norm are you complicit in the human rights violations? Forget our environmental footprint, what is our ethical footprint? What good is building a zero energy, carbon neutral complex if unethical labor practices are jeopardizing the lives of those who build this architectural wonder?
I was informed at a debate on ethics in architecture earlier this year that it was easy to take the high road on this issue. The fact is, there is no other road.
We, as building professionals, should use our unique positions to support groups like Build Safe UAE, help influence stronger legislation and to utilize the contract process to make sure the health and living standards of construction workers are respected.
As we worry about the next job in the office, let us remember these men are truly dying to work.
------
Special thanks to Brent Stirton for use of his images and his piece Migrant Labor Issues that re-focused my attention on this issue.
Follow Cameron Sinclair on Twitter: www.twitter.com/casinclair
Fareed Mohamedi: The Resilience of Dubai and the Gulf
Despite this proclivity towards over-borrowing, the fundamentals of the Dubai model are still sound. The infrastructure has been built and is still very useful, and the underlying business logic is still very viable.
How about the idea we get rid of those pests?
A building fulfills the basic human need of "shelter." But what good is a shelter if it causes harm over good? We have a responsibility to design and construct structures that not only shelter a community but nurture that community. As a society we need to have a more holistic outlook - there will always be a take for every give. What matters is how you balance that give and take in order to give more than you take. Net zero footprint should mean more than energy efficiency.
Cheers,
Jack
I hate to admit it, but the Reagan "revolution" succeeded -- in part because Americans don't know their history. Too bad.
http://www.examiner.com/x-20909-Columbia-Independent-Examiner~y2009m9d14-ACORN-troubles-continue-Brooklyn-DA-to-investigate-Senate-stops-funding
Amazing that in the 21st century it's still more profitable to have 'essentially slaves to do ag and const work, you'd think by now robots should be doing this.
John Berger
http://www.MadeBySurvivors.com/
In the 1950's-1980's, construction was the job opportunity of American high school educated men. They made a good salary in many instances, and for those who were able to unionize, a very good living. Then the influx of foreign workers began. Now, the contruction industry in this country is mainly populated by immigrants, of which many do not even have legal status to be here. The results in the US construction industry (because many of these immigrants are illegally here);
> The basics of safety standards can be abandoned because the employees cannot take the chance on reporting violations lest they be reported to INS;
> The guarantee of a wage being paid for work done can be skirted because the employees, etc.;
> The wage rate for construction jobs has dropped dramatically thus forcing American workers to look for jobs elsewhere;
> Labor worldwide is becoming devalued as a resource.
Many immigrants are here illegally, and many are enslaved. Stop blaming people who are just trying desperately to survive in a world dominated by a few super-powers. People aren't resources. And let's not forget our history, either. Laborers have always been devalued, from slaves in the fields to workers in the mines & factories.
And that idea that, gee, if immigrants are willing to work for less, that's just good capitalism, is flawed. Imagine the social and familial dislocation that had to take place for the foreign worker to uproot himself to find a low-wage job in the U.S. It is the epitome of American arrogance to think that others would rather live here. Most cultures place greater emphasis on quality of life than on work and money, and the US likely is a harsh place to live for many such immigrants.
This issue is macroeconomics, specifically multinational corporate greed, aided and abetted by trade treaties that undermine national sovereignty and individual rights. (This happens in the U.S. - under NAFTA, foreign corporations can sue the US in secret arbitration proceedings when, , e.g., an environmental law cuts into their *expected* profits.)
Wouldn't it make more sense for jobs to pay a decent wage everywhere, so people wouldn't feel compelled to tear themselves away from their families and communities for a job? If the present system is "just good business," then the business model has to be changed so that capital interests must take into account social costs of their decisions.
I find it horrible that I have no clue if the people I hire to do a construction job are fairly paying their workers and making sure that they have the proper equipment to prevent injuries. I doubt any of them have health coverage if they are injured.
Somehow we need workers around the world to be able to say, "Enough!" However, this is difficult to impossible when you and your family is starving.
both built with slavery. Both at a time when some felt it was acceptable (even Presidents).
But I think we all agree that the pro-slavery movement is not as strong, can't we?
What I find amazing is how much time our prominent politicians spend in Dubai. It's a regular stop for people like Bill Clinton, Rudy Guiliani and others. It's where the rich and powerful go to network and play. Says a lot for the progress of civilization doesn't it?
Exactly what societal good are any of the pyramids except for tourism? I admit they are amazing to look at, but at what costs were they built? Perhaps we'd be better off if they had been destroyed. Why is it we revere wealth and it's greed, and seldom consider the loss of life or the expense to a civil society that was expended to accomplish it.