In the nail salon industry, I agree very few “workplace rights” have been abused. First of all, workers have been overlooked when it comes to their safety and health.
Even though the OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) group once alerted to unsafe working conditions, set standards for workplace exposure to harmful chemicals used at the trade shows, it has stated in the New York Times that the working conditions cannot be tolerated, given the quantity and the hazardous effects of dangerous chemicals used. Secondly, living wage rights have been violated. According to n to the federal and state laws regarding wage payment, payment is entitled to a specified amount of wages. However, from the case study, only 25% of the individuals were paid the minimum amount (Nir, 2015). To some, the payments were removed, which forced them into a situation termed as “apprenticeship period.”
Managers in the nail salon could be able to improve the conditions if they wanted. However, it is evident that even if they did so, they would not be able to rich the recommended standards. The situation is further complicated by the cultural gaps that exist in the Asian world. In 2014, more than half of all staff were Vietnamese, while others were Korean. As these Asiatic societies have a strongly collectivist community, the’ workplace privileges’ that Westerners would expect will not change too much. There is documentation of that in response to new legislation and the letters of law provided by the New Yorkers: manicurists were’ reticent’ to comply. And this hesitation has to do in part with the fact that many are undocumented and afraid of being sent off to their country of origin. Don't use plagiarised sources.Get your custom essay just from $11/page
Based on the case study, the two most significant factors affecting the nail industry organization from improving are cultural diversity adopted by the Asian culture. This includes strong collectivism as well as the precarious legal status of workers. Many of the employees are undocumented immigrants who would be fired back and deported back to their native countries if they wished to organize themselves into Unions. And of course, coordinating and battle against corporations, if their cultural context, is not part of their value system.
There is a variety of nuanced factors, making it especially difficult for public officials of regulators to lie down and enforce rules for the nail industry. When officials in New York responded to the damnation of the Times, they immediately took action and produced the “bill of rights” of a manicure and vowed to post it in ten languages in each salon (Childerhouse et al., 2017). Nevertheless, this proposal would be rather impracticable partially due to the intensely competitive nature of the market; the trade fairs themselves entered and went very rapidly and erratically out of business. In general, however, cultural diversities and barriers I have already mentioned in earlier responses are the key factors that make it difficult for the government to interfere in these industries. The Asian majority, whose employees contain much of the rights that the government requires for these jobs, may not make too much sense. They operate without such rights, and other freedoms, including the right to unionize, are directly contradictory to their collectivist belief system.
The key to improving working conditions is to first open up to other ethnic groups apart from the now-majority Asian community in the industry (Farahani, Kormi-Nouri & De Raad, 2019). If there are more staff that have a western cultural background, the rights officials are better given. Second, the participation of more organizations for immigration will aim at engaging and monitoring U.S. citizenship with undocumented illegal immigrants in the sector, by whatever legal means possible. This way fewer employers are afraid of protecting the rights of their employees due to their illicit citizenship status