6 ms·

This story is about the non-Apple employees that work at the subcontractor Apex. To generalize, the title can be "What It’s Like to Work Inside Company X's sub

by jasode 8y ago

This story is about the non-Apple employees that work at the subcontractor Apex. To generalize, the title can be "What It’s Like to Work Inside Company X's subcontractor." Similar stories about subcontractors with less benefits & perks were written for Microsoft, Google, Amazon. Subcontractors are always going to be "2nd class citizens" compared to real employees of the client company. The phenomenon is not specific to the tech industry. Even a workers cooperative like Mondgragon outsources work to subcontractors and those non-employees complain about not being able to participate in Mondragon's benefits. The "subcontractors" that have the same level (or higher level) of prestige and respect as the client company would be consulting companies like McKinsey or Bain.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
brianpgordon 8y ago
Does the big tech company bear no responsibility for shifting as much work as it can out to subcontractors in order to cut costs? It seems to me that they're knowingly using the subcontracting mechanism in order to get away with offering Apex's 24 hours of paid leave per year, insufficient bathrooms, and other appalling conditions without tarnishing their sterling reputation. It says right in the article that Apple reviewed the Apex site and thought it was fine. If big tech companies want to own up to being heartless mercenary capitalists who will wring every drop of sweat out of workers and spit them out as burned-out husks with no savings at the age of 35, hey, that's the system we live in. But something seems off when they want to have their cake and eat it too– that is, they want to seem like inspiring, human-friendly forces for good, but quietly use the glow from that reputation to get away with subcontracting away a huge amount of their labor to people working in miserable conditions. There's a reason that some labels moved away from sweatshop labor: it's bad press. If Apple is going to effectively use sweatshop labor (through a contractor, whatever) they should have to eat the bad press. Don't defend it as just the contractor's fault. It's literally the exact same situation as a clothing sweatshop.
- badpun 8y ago
  You know, unless you're VERY careful about your shopping, you're also using sweatshop labor (to manufacture your clothes, electronics etc.). Also, I don't think that Apple is especially covert about them being a (heartless) business like everybody else. Steve Jobs even said, in response to a question about bringing manufacturing back to USA: "We're in the business of making phones, not in the business of employing people". It was clear that people were mainly just means to an end for him.
  - jrumbut 8y ago
    I think it's better to advocate for improvement without practicing it than it is to not practice it and not advocate. Better to do one thing right if that's the best you can pull off!
    - pampa 8y ago
      It is not. Advocating online gives you the warm and fuzzy feeling that you did something right, without actually doing anything.
    - badpun 8y ago
      > I think it's better to advocate for improvement without practicing it than it is to not practice it and not advocate. Isn't that the definition of hypocrisy?
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
  - brianpgordon 8y ago
    Don't get me wrong, I'm as guilty as anyone of ordering everything on Amazon or at Costco and killing local businesses, or whatever. But I'm not running what must be one of the world's best-funded PR machines telling everyone how great I am. Let's just call a spade a spade, eh? For all the "made in California" / "environmentally friendly materials/packaging" / "100% renewable energy in our facilities" stuff that's supposed to make you feel good about buying their products, the reality is a lot more grim. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-happened-after-the-foxconn-suicides/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-happened-after-the-foxconn... And anyway the particular point I was replying to is that it's pretty silly to absolve Apple of responsibility just because they put a layer of contractor between them and the bad behavior. They know what's going on. It's no different ethically from Apple doing it.
zeveb 8y ago
> To generalize, the title can be "What It’s Like to Work Inside Company X's subcontractor." Not just as a subcontractor. I used to work for a very large company, and it was just as bad as a full-time employee (and even worse for contractors!). Both of these statements applied there: > One described the workplace as depressing and quiet, with everyone on edge. > “There were many people who took initiative and made things, increased the efficiency. They weren’t rewarded in any way,” he says. “There were people who had abandoned any hope. They’d come in late, leave early, and just do nothing all day. They were treated the same as everyone else.” It was absolutely horrible, and I will never let a firm get inside my head like that again.
AndrewKemendo 8y ago
Well written and succinct. I especially like the nod to professional consultants. I'm not quite sure why these stories keep coming up, given the vast amount of literature available describing why and how contracting, with it's bifurcated pay and benefits systems, can and is mutually beneficial to the organizations. In fact the #1 thread, as of this writing, is about freelancing and has dozens of comments from freelancers. One possible explanation for the frequency of the topic, is that it's not the structure of contracting that people are rejecting, but rather the wide disparity between the size, pay and benefits of the contractor vs the contractee. Nobody complains if Bain takes a contract with Apple, as both have good pay and benefits. Similarly nobody complains about the freelancer working for [megacorp] because the freelancer is independent and an owner. However, increase the wealth gap between the companies and now you have a story.
- mc32 8y ago
  If I had to guess it’s because these companies are straddling the line between socially aware company (to attract this conscientious minded employee) and the realities of doing business (core competencies and flexibility when things go south). Given the above a small percentage of employees feel an obligation to look after the subcontracted workers, etc. and want to bring it up as an issue in the next election cycle. I doubt you’ll see this attitude at GM (despite unions) or Archer Daniels Midland, etc., because they don’t try to play both sides as much.
  - AndrewKemendo 8y ago
    Agreed. If you take a progressive social stance like the tech companies seem to like to do, with LGBT rights for example, then you're opening yourself up to criticism when you behave like a regular corporation in a place where you might not have taken a social stance, with the labor movement for example.
    - specialist 8y ago
      What is the phrase for being penalized for trying to help insufficiently. That resentment it generates in the people who weren't helped. This image of the protective tent failing to cover everyone is the best representation I've seen: https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/12884861/tent.png https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/12884861/t...

by jasode 8y ago

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

brianpgordon 8y ago

Does the big tech company bear no responsibility for shifting as much work as it can out to subcontractors in order to cut costs? It seems to me that they're knowingly using the subcontracting mechanism in order to get away with offering Apex's 24 hours of paid leave per year, insufficient bathrooms, and other appalling conditions without tarnishing their sterling reputation. It says right in the article that Apple reviewed the Apex site and thought it was fine. If big tech companies want to own up to being heartless mercenary capitalists who will wring every drop of sweat out of workers and spit them out as burned-out husks with no savings at the age of 35, hey, that's the system we live in. But something seems off when they want to have their cake and eat it too– that is, they want to seem like inspiring, human-friendly forces for good, but quietly use the glow from that reputation to get away with subcontracting away a huge amount of their labor to people working in miserable conditions. There's a reason that some labels moved away from sweatshop labor: it's bad press. If Apple is going to effectively use sweatshop labor (through a contractor, whatever) they should have to eat the bad press. Don't defend it as just the contractor's fault. It's literally the exact same situation as a clothing sweatshop.

badpun 8y ago
You know, unless you're VERY careful about your shopping, you're also using sweatshop labor (to manufacture your clothes, electronics etc.). Also, I don't think that Apple is especially covert about them being a (heartless) business like everybody else. Steve Jobs even said, in response to a question about bringing manufacturing back to USA: "We're in the business of making phones, not in the business of employing people". It was clear that people were mainly just means to an end for him.
- jrumbut 8y ago
  I think it's better to advocate for improvement without practicing it than it is to not practice it and not advocate. Better to do one thing right if that's the best you can pull off!
  - pampa 8y ago
    It is not. Advocating online gives you the warm and fuzzy feeling that you did something right, without actually doing anything.
  - badpun 8y ago
    > I think it's better to advocate for improvement without practicing it than it is to not practice it and not advocate. Isn't that the definition of hypocrisy?
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
- brianpgordon 8y ago
  Don't get me wrong, I'm as guilty as anyone of ordering everything on Amazon or at Costco and killing local businesses, or whatever. But I'm not running what must be one of the world's best-funded PR machines telling everyone how great I am. Let's just call a spade a spade, eh? For all the "made in California" / "environmentally friendly materials/packaging" / "100% renewable energy in our facilities" stuff that's supposed to make you feel good about buying their products, the reality is a lot more grim. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-happened-after-the-foxconn-suicides/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-happened-after-the-foxconn... And anyway the particular point I was replying to is that it's pretty silly to absolve Apple of responsibility just because they put a layer of contractor between them and the bad behavior. They know what's going on. It's no different ethically from Apple doing it.

zeveb 8y ago

> To generalize, the title can be "What It’s Like to Work Inside Company X's subcontractor." Not just as a subcontractor. I used to work for a very large company, and it was just as bad as a full-time employee (and even worse for contractors!). Both of these statements applied there: > One described the workplace as depressing and quiet, with everyone on edge. > “There were many people who took initiative and made things, increased the efficiency. They weren’t rewarded in any way,” he says. “There were people who had abandoned any hope. They’d come in late, leave early, and just do nothing all day. They were treated the same as everyone else.” It was absolutely horrible, and I will never let a firm get inside my head like that again.

AndrewKemendo 8y ago

Well written and succinct. I especially like the nod to professional consultants. I'm not quite sure why these stories keep coming up, given the vast amount of literature available describing why and how contracting, with it's bifurcated pay and benefits systems, can and is mutually beneficial to the organizations. In fact the #1 thread, as of this writing, is about freelancing and has dozens of comments from freelancers. One possible explanation for the frequency of the topic, is that it's not the structure of contracting that people are rejecting, but rather the wide disparity between the size, pay and benefits of the contractor vs the contractee. Nobody complains if Bain takes a contract with Apple, as both have good pay and benefits. Similarly nobody complains about the freelancer working for [megacorp] because the freelancer is independent and an owner. However, increase the wealth gap between the companies and now you have a story.

mc32 8y ago
If I had to guess it’s because these companies are straddling the line between socially aware company (to attract this conscientious minded employee) and the realities of doing business (core competencies and flexibility when things go south). Given the above a small percentage of employees feel an obligation to look after the subcontracted workers, etc. and want to bring it up as an issue in the next election cycle. I doubt you’ll see this attitude at GM (despite unions) or Archer Daniels Midland, etc., because they don’t try to play both sides as much.
- AndrewKemendo 8y ago
  Agreed. If you take a progressive social stance like the tech companies seem to like to do, with LGBT rights for example, then you're opening yourself up to criticism when you behave like a regular corporation in a place where you might not have taken a social stance, with the labor movement for example.
  - specialist 8y ago
    What is the phrase for being penalized for trying to help insufficiently. That resentment it generates in the people who weren't helped. This image of the protective tent failing to cover everyone is the best representation I've seen: https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/12884861/tent.png https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/12884861/t...