Students and faculty argued the cause of working conditions and who is responsible for their improvement at a forum held Tuesday.

The discussion, sponsored by the Economics Club and Loyola University Community Action Program, left some students without a clear stance on the matter.

“It is hard for us to determine from our viewpoint,” said mathematics senior James Clary.

Economics and Japanese senior Rose Fortner said she was concerned about people’s lack of knowledge of the treatment workers suffer in countries like Indonesia, which is home to Nike subcontractors.

“You can’t artificially impose an opinion,” she said.

Students’ views were split on who is responsible for ending the abuse that workers endure in sweatshops. Arguments for noninterference, interference from corporations or action taken by governments all conflicted.

“It is hard for us to determine how much somebody should be paid in such a poor country when 40 percent are unemployed,” Clary said on Indonesia. “I think it should be determined by their own market.”

Others agreed that the market will improve on its own and with time bettering working conditions. The United States’s early working conditions during its Industrial Age was cited as an example of how conditions improve as the market strengthens. But some said it takes effort from the corporations to hasten the process.

“The responsibility should be on the companies and their shareholders,” said economics senior, Konrad Reynaud. However, according to a study by Co-Op America, a organization opposed to sweatshops, only 5.25 percent of Wal-Mart’s shareholders support improved working conditions in their subcontracted factories in Bangladesh, where workers sew clothing for nine to 20 cents per hour, up to 24 cents below minimum wage there.

“The way working conditions are improved is through unionization,” said Danny D’Amico, economics and marketing junior.

But in sweatshops like Wal-Mart’s in Bangladesh, workers are not allowed to gather in peaceful protest of their illegal wages. Often, supervisors discourage employee uprising with violence or verbal abuse according to the Co-op study.

“When the workers are beaten the government should step in,” said Clary.

But many students agreed that the countries that are home to these sweatshops have corrupt governments, some possibly taking kickbacks from corporations although it is illegal according to U.S. law.

“It’s a you-scratch-my-back-I’ll-scratch-yours relationship,” D’Amico said.

The government became the responsible party for many students and faculty who saw corporations as a good thing amid governments who steal from their people. According to some, free enterprise must be established which may call for regime change.

“Do we have a moral obligation to send troops and foreign aid?” business professor William Barnett said.

The discussion ended but the opinions remained varied, some claiming the corporations to be responsible for change and some the government.

“I don’t buy Nike,” concluded music composition junior, Josh Daly, “I don’t buy that stuff.”