Wal Mart... A Violator of Human Rights?

Wal Mart is America's favorite super-store. It's big, it's convenient, and it's cheap. But what exactly makes Wal Mart's prices so cheap? Wal Mart is not only rolling back prices... but wages. 
According to research conducted by the International Labor Rights Fund, many Wal Mart workers are being paid up to 30% below their country's legal minimum wage. In violation of law, workers are routinely forced to work overtime, often 16-18 hours a day. In addition, most female workers are denied their legal maternity leave and benefits. Wal-Mart employees in the U.S. have been locked in the stores overnight, and Wal-Mart workers around the world are fired for trying to unionize. 
According to www.pbs.org, the average take-home pay of an American Wal-Mart employee is under $250 a week; the minimum wage pay scale places employees with families below the poverty line. The company is staunchly anti-union, and Wal-Mart employees make 25% less than their unionized counterparts after two years on the job. 85% of the stores' merchandise is made overseas, often in Third World sweatshops. Wal-Mart is the country's largest importer of Chinese goods in any industry. 
On September 13, 2005, a lawsuit was filed in California against Wal-Mart and lists as plaintiffs 15 workers in Bangladesh, Swaziland, Indonesia, China, and Nicaragua, who claim to be paid below minimum wage, forceed to work unpaid overtime, and sometimes endured beatings by supervisors. www.laborrights.org reports that the case cites that in a Bangladeshi dress factory, a pregnant seamstress who paused production was "kicked hard in her stomach" by her supervisor. In Indonesia, one worker in a facility producing clothing for Wal-Mart overheard her supervisor saying "with Wal-Mart, we cannot have overtime [pay.]" 
In another case, a federal judge ruled June 22, 2004, that women employees of Wal-Mart could go ahead in a lawsuit over wage and promotion policies. www.socialistworker.org reports that the lawsuit covers every woman hired by the store since 1998, who were found to have earned 6.2% less than men in similar jobs in America. Wal Mart employee Rosetta Brown has publicly said, "Wal-Mart associates are often placed under harmful working conditions...racial discrimination, intimidation by management, misinformation, [and] violations of workers' rights and the law." 
In an NBC Dateline hidden camera investigation in Bangladesh, reporter Chris Hansen found that the average sweatshop worker earns $2 an hour and endures extreme heat, harsh supervision, and no breaks. According to www.msnbc.msn.com, starting wages in Bangladesh can be as low as 10 cents an hour, which is considered decent for a country living in abject poverty. In response to this investigation, Wal-Mart's international director of corporate affairs, Bill Wertz, has said: "The labor violations depicted on 'Dateline NBC' are common." (As quoted on www.walmartwatch.com) 
In America, many organizations such as www.wakeupwalmart.com have formed to expose alarming facts about workers' wages, conditions, and lack of healthcare. In countries such as Bangladesh, Indonesia, China, and Nicaragua, workers face even more hazardous and cruel conditions that help Wal-Mart to buy low, sell high, and earn economic success nationwide.
Many supporters of Wal-Mart argue that the corporation is not violating sweatshop workers' rights, but supplying them with a job, which, when in poverty, is helping the worker more than harming him or her. They claim that Wal-Mart is doing a good deed by bringing employment opportunities to Third World Countries, and that it is not Wal-Mart's responsibility to make sure that the factory owners do not abuse their workers. But whose responsibility is it to look after workers' rights? Shouldn't all workers be held up to the American standard of rights and liberties, or should people be taken advantage of just because they live in a country where they do not have laws protecting their working rights? Is it okay for Americans to ignore these human rights violations just because they occur in countries where, by comparison, these violations don't seem so bad? 
Sure, Wal-Mart presents inexpensive products to the American public and allows us to buy more for less money. Wal-Mart is helping Americans, in a sense; but what about those who are confined to the minimum wage job with no health benefits, unionization, or overtime pay? Shopping and working at Wal-Mart is not a sin, a crime, nor anything to be ashamed of. However, it does seem to create a perpetual cycle of dependence on the corporation. Employees need to work to earn money. They might also shop at Wal-Mart to save money... so they're putting the money they just earned right back into Wal-Mart, and are still living below the poverty-line. 
If American consumers do stop shopping at Wal-Mart because of ethical reasons, what, then, happens to the American Wal-Mart employees who depend on their job to get by every day? Will the factory workers in Bangladesh find other factory jobs to earn enough money to feed themselves? Wal-Mart is both the villain and the hero. The humans, however, are victims in both scenarios. I offer not a solution, but a scary predicament that threatens human rights.