Huseyin S. Kuyumcuoglu

Kadir Has University
  •  231
    A Contractualist Defense of Sweatshop Regulation
    Business Ethics Journal Review 10 (2): 8-13. 2022.
    Kates argues that ex ante contractualism fails to defend interference with sweatshops on moral grounds. In this commentary, I argue that Kates does not apply this approach correctly. Ex ante contractualism, indeed, successfully defends interference and thus should still be considered an appealing alternative to other moral approaches for evaluating when and how to interfere in sweatshop conditions to help workers.
  •  52
    Sweatshops, Harm, and Interference: A Contractualist Approach
    Journal of Business Ethics 169 (1): 1-11. 2019.
    Activists and progressive governments sometimes interfere in the working conditions of sweatshops. Their methods may include boycotts of the products produced in these facilities, bans on the import of these products or tariffs imposed by the home country, and enforcing the host country’s laws that aim at regulating sweatshops. Some argue that such interference in sweatshop conditions is morally wrong since it may actually harm workers. The reason is that the enterprise that runs the sweatshop m…Read more
  •  5
    Reassessing the Exploitation Charge in Sweatshop Labor
    Croatian Journal of Philosophy 23 (68): 221-240. 2023.
    One common argument against sweatshops is that they are exploitative. Exploitation is taken as sufficient reason to condemn sweatshops as unjust and to argue that sweatshop owners have a moral duty to offer better working conditions to their employees. In this article, I argue that any exploitation theory falls short of covering all standard cases of sweatshops as exploitative. In going through the most prominent theories of exploitation, I explain why any given sweatshop can either be wrongfull…Read more