Why is everyone so fixated on just Apple? I am sure these type of conditions and issues exist for the majority of companies manufacturing in China.
I believe that we should be just as outraged with everyone who is, in essence, supporting these practices. I am aware that outsourcing involves giving up some control but it doesn't absolve one of moral and inhumane abuses caused in the process.
It's easy to focus on Apple because they're making an awful lot of money. Selling a premium product with a profit margin of 60% [1], this race to the bottom for labour costs becomes questionable.
At the moment, it really seems like the only reason Apple is being fixated on is because they're the ones that are publishing some of the most detailed first-hand accountings of what's going on within their supply chain. Greater transparency, in this case, is translating to a disadvantage. I don't think they're the only ones, but some cursory Googling reveals plenty of companies with codes of conduct, and some even with detailed explanations, but few if any with detailed reports, annual or otherwise.
In essence, they're being proactive—in part because they can afford to be—and getting skewered because they're giving people a peek under the hood.
That's one part. The other is of course that they are wildly profitable, in part through large profit margins, and the question arises of “can't you cut into those margins to pay your workers better”. Though this latter one is not only true of Apple, Apple is perhaps one of the most visible companies to whom it can apply.
I believe Gruber intended irony there, i.e. Apple is leading the industry in every measurable way on this issue, but are perhaps not as far ahead here as they are in other respects.
Isn't this sad? This should be no matter at all, bad working conditions is something of the past century. Enabling the next revolution should be the biggest challenge for them.
Its easy to forget that unacceptable working conditions are not exclusive of china or even the tech manufacturing industry, see sago mine disaster, west virginia, 2006. Conditions for the working poor worldwide have a ways to go, and it seems to me Apple is taking a step in the right direction with independent investigation.
Kind of ironic that the appalling working conditions of the 1900s are largely what gave rise to communism. Although based on what I know, the average 1900s factory worker would have sold their mother for Foxconn's working conditions.
Either they took worker's conditions very seriously, or they didn't. I have no tolerance for sentences like this:
> Apple takes working conditions very, very seriously, and we have for a very long time.
When put in context of all the stories tha have come out, obviously their "[..] very serious and long [term effort]" is a failure. 84% compliance? with what? _not_ abusing their workers?
I look down on Apple for their deplorable behavior, but I look down on most everyone, so please do not confuse my disgust as a unique disgust with Apple.
All the other manufacturers are worse. Apple is just the only one who publishes reports about it, and so for some reason they get pilloried for it. Apple does seem to take it more seriously than anyone else in the industry. If anything, they should be commended for their level of transparency and their continued, explicit efforts to improve things.
I haven't seen Nike or Reebok show hints of transparency in their supply chain. They probably have harsher conditions than tech manufacturing, but I'm guessing they've learned to keep their worker suicide rates on the down low so nobody throws a fuss. I think it's kind of odd that Apple is one of the few companies with this kind of transparency.
84% compliance isn't great, but you still see "coerced" overtime in western countries. I picked my wife up at 9:30 on the day before Christmas eve as she had no choice but to finish her work (she works for a law firm and the deadlines if not met can cause a multi-million dollar case to be thrown out). Even though I know it was necessary for her job, I can't agree with employers doing this. The lawyers make 6 figures minimum (her lawyer is a senior partner and gets a share of the company profits so well above 1 mil a year). Yet my wife makes $35,000 and has to bust her ass yet they can't afford to hire anyone else so their workers aren't constantly running on deadlines.
At least my wife's lawyer will not allow her (no arguing) to get paid overtime pay. If she works late, she gets the time off. Some of her coworkers have been paid almost double their wage in overtime pay because the company won't hire them more workers. This is illogical to me. Why pay someone double for 65 hours when you can pay two people for 80 hours.
The quick distraction to the unrelated "We also believe that education is the great equalizer." what has nothing to do with the average Foxconn worker. Sounds totally like a PR move and shows no personal relation to the subject.
This is something Jobs never did and was for me part of the magic of the brand. Cook has no public personality. Apple makes now without Jobs a cold and frightening impression to me. Even Ballmer with his weird personality makes Microsoft human somehow.
Apple has to do something really revolutionary again (not just milking their cash cows and an iOS TV device), to win the magic back. Imagine what is theoretically possible with 100B, but who in the company has the vision and enough leverage?
A lot of people have tried to excuse Apple using a variety of methods (citing Krugman, pointing to Samsung's use of Foxconn etc), but they all ignore the fact that Apple is breaking a fairly important social convention.
When a person pays premium for a product, they don't just expect quality, but they want to feel good about their purchase as well. When you buy Direct Trade coffee/chocolate, you know more of your dollars are going in the hands of locals, when you purchase food at a Farmer's market, you know you're supporting small-scale local farmers, when you buy Canada Goose, you know you're supporting decently-paid and treated workers in Ontario. OTOH, when you buy an Apple product, you're supporting the same kind of supply chain used by low-cost manufacturers. With them, you pay premium dollar, but don't get premium experience. The fact that this extra profit simply goes to Apple's coffers (not even dividends, or R&D or charity) is particularly galling.
A few years ago they got pilloried by Greenpeace and that forced them to clean up their act, so I'm glad they're once again getting pilloried.
I associate Apple products a lot more closely to luxury goods than the sort of socially-conscious products you mention. Apple did that (RED) promotion a while back with their products, but that is as close as they have come to putting forward a socially responsible face.
I don't think consumers expect luxury brands to compensate their workers more, though it would be nice if they did.
I believe that we should be just as outraged with everyone who is, in essence, supporting these practices. I am aware that outsourcing involves giving up some control but it doesn't absolve one of moral and inhumane abuses caused in the process.