I think that if the company hires illegal workers, then they should take responsible for them. If the company doesn’t take care of them, I do really see a big difference between what that and a sweatshop.

I think that if the company takes the risk to hire a person, then they should cover that person should they get injured. There is too much to risk if they don’t. The person could report the company. There would of course get in trouble for being an illegal worker, but they could drag the company down with them.
If the company is hiring illegal workers, it makes you wonder what other corners are they cutting. Are they following all the rules and regulations that OSHA has set up? Are the working conditions safe? Those factors could contribute the employees getting hurt.
The company has to protect the livelyhood it’s employees. The ADA was designed to put an end to discrimination against individuals with disabilities In the case, Echazabel was turn down for a position after a pre-employment physical examination, which revel liver damage. But he was allowed to continue to work his regular job. Nowadays, companies take risk all the time when hiring individuals. The company realized that if they hired Echazabel it could become costly and hazardous to his health. The work would make his condition worsen.

There are a few things that could happen. One thing is that the United States could heavily taxes companies that send jobs to overseas. This would affect companies that are doing the right thing and companies that are using sweatshops. The companies that use factors overseas could be monitored more to ensure that sweatshops aren’t being used. Most of the time, the sweatshops are in developing countries. Those workers are glad to make money. They are willing to take (what we would thing of as) a lower salary so that they can provide food and shelter for their family.