In the context of the United States, which I believe the original poster is talking about. There's the classic rural problem of how do you keep them down on the farm. There's many economic opportunities across the whole country, which allows freedom of movement, so people can emigrate to different parts of the country with more job opportunities and more lucrative uses of time.

So it's not a dichotomy of work a rotating schedule or starve. There are other jobs in the area, they might be farm labor jobs, they may not pay as consistently, they may not pay as well, but there are economic opportunities in most rural areas. If those are insufficient, people have been known to move to the cities the urban areas where there's more work opportunities.

This rotating shift opportunity, is just one of many available to people living in the United States. They're not being forced into it. People are choosing it of their own free will.

If we would like to say rotating schedules should be illegal, great, let's codify that into the labor laws. Vote on it. Then every business will have the same constraints.

Most of the service industry in the US is still in the sweatshop phase.

Some areas - yes. Developing a local economy is tricky, for places that don't have historic concentration of logistics, there has to be a some attractive force to offset geographic conditions, and attract capital and employers to an area.

I'm all for providing alternative jobs to communities, a national Job corps, increasing military pay, or providing labor laws saying that rotating shift jobs are not allowed. Those are all fine. Giving people better options is the solution.