3 ms·

After reading the article, there seemed to be one factory manager that started using this solvent because it dries faster than alcohol, allowing him to shave a

After reading the article, there seemed to be one factory manager that started using this solvent because it dries faster than alcohol, allowing him to shave a few seconds off the production time of each flat screen. They said this manager was fired, and based on the number of employees spending sick days in the hospital, I'm sure the company ended up losing a lot of money on their medical bills. This is hardly newsworthy. It happens all the time in China. Someone unethical wants to skim a little money by using cheaper chemicals, or wants to make a few more cents by producing faster using an unsafe process. You can't blame Apple or Nokia. They likely dictated exactly what solvents were to be used, but the supplier decided they can hire fewer workers if they use the faster drying solvent, so they decided to cut corners.

wdewind 17y ago
For the sake of playing devil's advocate: These chemicals are having an effect on the Chinese economy, and thus the world economy (globalized economic impact), as well as in some cases the environment. That kind of changes whose responsibility it is, because it really does affect all of us (this is a localized case, but there are many American manufacturers who manufacture items in China with methods that severely harm the environment in and out of China). Apple really should maintain more control over manufacturing processes. As a major player in both the US and the entire world, and a representative of the US economically (this is important because we constantly ask 3rd world countries to cut emissions and regulate things like this), they have a responsibility to make sure they don't do things like this in all areas of product creation (just because its offshore and outsourced doesn't mean they have 0 responsibility) when the cost of ensuring it to them would be essentially unnoticeable. If it would be extremely costly to do this kind of regulation (since the Chinese obviously wont) on Apple's part, it would be reasonable to discount their responsibility, but it really wouldn't be that expensive if they wanted to. It's a bit naive to assume that Apple isn't knowingly turning a blind eye to manufacturing conditions. Apple obviously knows things like this are prone to happen when you outsource manufacturing in 3rd world countries, so maybe we should be asking them to do a better job of regulating who they do business with considering the range of impact they actually have...

wdewind 17y ago

For the sake of playing devil's advocate: These chemicals are having an effect on the Chinese economy, and thus the world economy (globalized economic impact), as well as in some cases the environment. That kind of changes whose responsibility it is, because it really does affect all of us (this is a localized case, but there are many American manufacturers who manufacture items in China with methods that severely harm the environment in and out of China). Apple really should maintain more control over manufacturing processes. As a major player in both the US and the entire world, and a representative of the US economically (this is important because we constantly ask 3rd world countries to cut emissions and regulate things like this), they have a responsibility to make sure they don't do things like this in all areas of product creation (just because its offshore and outsourced doesn't mean they have 0 responsibility) when the cost of ensuring it to them would be essentially unnoticeable. If it would be extremely costly to do this kind of regulation (since the Chinese obviously wont) on Apple's part, it would be reasonable to discount their responsibility, but it really wouldn't be that expensive if they wanted to. It's a bit naive to assume that Apple isn't knowingly turning a blind eye to manufacturing conditions. Apple obviously knows things like this are prone to happen when you outsource manufacturing in 3rd world countries, so maybe we should be asking them to do a better job of regulating who they do business with considering the range of impact they actually have...