5 ms·

For women who assembled iPhones at a Foxconn plant in southern India, crowded dorms without flush toilets and food sometimes crawling with worms were problems t

by vanusa 5y ago

For women who assembled iPhones at a Foxconn plant in southern India, crowded dorms without flush toilets and food sometimes crawling with worms were problems to be endured for the paycheck. And: The unrest at Foxconn was the second involving an Apple supplier in India in a year. In December 2020, thousands of contract workers at a factory owned by Wistron Corp destroyed equipment and vehicles over the alleged non-payment of wages, causing estimated damage of $60 million. Which will just keep going on and on and on, of course. Until we stop buying their shiny products any more than strictly necessary. And those making ICT4 and higher at Apple -- especially those working at HQ in any capacity -- get together and tell their bosses they simply will not allow this shameful dereliction of duty on their part to continue. And will absolutely resign if there are any further occurrences of it.

askonomm 5y ago
You mean Foxconn, right? As per my understanding this is not Apple's factory, simply just a factory that makes Apple products.
- vanusa 5y ago
  It is 100 percent Apple's responsibility to guarantee safe and humane working conditions for all workers at every level in its supply chain. The idea that this is Foxconn's responsibility, or that Apple is "unable" to proactively monitor what happens at these plants is just BS.
  - askonomm 5y ago
    I don't think that's how the world works. Just because you hate Apple, doesn't make it any different. I have a friend who runs a B2B sales company, by selling things like pencils and cups with logos on them, and he frequently communicates with a wide variety of factories who make those things, and in none of the factories does he have any control over how they do work, or what process they follow. But according to your logic, he should? And not only _should_, but it's his *responsibility*? Or do you just make this argument selectively based on how much money the company has who hires a factory? Because then again, you just hate Apple.
    - seoaeu 5y ago
      Apple is the most valuable public company in the world. They have plenty of leverage to force their suppliers to treat workers better. Apple just chooses not to use it to the degree they could. It is laughable to compare the market power of an enormous multinational that frequently buys out factories' entire production capacity, to some random middleman who sells branded cups and pencils.
    - vanusa 5y ago
      I don't hate Apple. I just don't see why they shouldn't be held accountable to universally accepted principles of basic human decency.
      - zepto 5y ago
        They are. They are held to higher standards than any of their conpetitors.
        vanusa 5y ago
        That doesn't mean these standards are sufficient.
        fivea 5y ago
        > They are. They are held to higher standards than any of their conpetitors. Are they, though? I don't see people claiming that "crowded dorms without flush toilets and food sometimes crawling with worms" is totally fine if the plant makes Samsung or off-brand smartphones. What I'm seeing is a luxury brand on the defensive because their customer base learned that the workers making Apple's luxury products not only have been enduring "crowded dorms without flush toilets and food sometimes crawling with worms" but also tainted food that causes mass health issues. What really boggles the mind is that these sub-human working conditions seem to cause downtime in their plants, which ultimately means it costs them money. But somehow even that is not enough to convince them to treat workers as if they are human beings.
        5y ago
  - CoastalCoder 5y ago
    > It is 100 percent Apple's responsibility to guarantee safe and humane working conditions for all workers at every level in its supply chain. You're advocating a particular ethical framework, but I'm not sure what the justification is. I'd be interested in hearing an argument for why others should adopt it.
    - worik 5y ago
      > You're advocating a particular ethical framework Treating human beings decently is the ethical point here Why should others adopt it? For me it is enough to treat others decently, and by that I can only use my own standards (and I do not have a flush toilet in my house, but there is running water to wash with). But perhaps some people need another reason. Perhaps they should ask their priest? Perhaps they should consider how they wish to be treated themselves, and what goes around comes around. But for me: Just be decent. Remember the Golden Rule: Do not be a dick
      - xwolfi 5y ago
        Well if India the country cant even bother to inspect its own factories (in many countries we dont bemoan the american overlord to please stop our people from beating each other: we just inspect ourselves), nothing will change. The problem is Indian or Chinese people valuing each other so low they do that to each other. The american overlord, they tell him yes yes and will print all the pretty pictures and stamped documents he required. So Apple, Foxconn, I dont think we should even care, they dabble in a specific environment: what is India doing for its taxpayers ?
        worik 5y ago
        > India the country cant even bother to inspect its own factories That is unfair. The USA in the nineteenth century had similar problems, as did England. It is a side effect of rapid economic development, methinks. Time will tell but I think working conditions will improve. They are not that flash in England or the USA either
  - WalterBright 5y ago
    What's the role of the government of India in this?
  - renewiltord 5y ago
    It is actually 100 percent the consumer's responsibility to guarantee that they are using only things made under safe conditions. For instance, if the packets you sent over the Internet to post your comment traveled over equipment manufactured in unsafe conditions, you are acting unethically.
    - vanusa 5y ago
      The manufacturer has infinitely more visibility into, and leverage over the supply chain than the customer. That's where this attempt to flip responsibility fails.
kunai 5y ago
Voting with your wallet doesn't work. There is no ethical consumption under our current economic system. The only way to end this is to end the global neoliberal anti-protectionist social and economic order which permits serfdom in third-world countries for lower prices on final goods here at home. Note that I'm not advocating for protectionism. Free trade is largely a good thing. But the current system is unsustainable and affords too much privilege to multinationals to self-police. It cannot be allowed to continue unchecked, lest we sacrifice our environment and the living/working conditions of families and individuals halfway around the world.
- vanusa 5y ago
  There is no ethical consumption under our current economic system. This is manifestly false. It may only exist in narrow domains. But it most certainly exists, and in the mainstream. I'm sure you can think of a few examples. You're right though that it cannot be relied on a strong lever in the near-term. The only way to end this is to end the global neoliberal anti-protectionist social and economic order which permits serfdom in third-world countries for lower prices on final goods here at home. Unfortunately there's no clear route to "just doing this" either. It's a genuinely vexxing problem that I certainly do not pretend to know the answer to. Indeed, it's kind of one of those big questions people have been wrestling with, and throwing bombs, and whacking people on the head over for quite some time now, is it not. I only know that I'm not going to pretend this shit doesn't seriously bother me. And as a matter of principle, I try not to buy fancy gadgetry of any kind that I don't literally need to get through the day.

by vanusa 5y ago

askonomm 5y ago

You mean Foxconn, right? As per my understanding this is not Apple's factory, simply just a factory that makes Apple products.

vanusa 5y ago
It is 100 percent Apple's responsibility to guarantee safe and humane working conditions for all workers at every level in its supply chain. The idea that this is Foxconn's responsibility, or that Apple is "unable" to proactively monitor what happens at these plants is just BS.
- askonomm 5y ago
  I don't think that's how the world works. Just because you hate Apple, doesn't make it any different. I have a friend who runs a B2B sales company, by selling things like pencils and cups with logos on them, and he frequently communicates with a wide variety of factories who make those things, and in none of the factories does he have any control over how they do work, or what process they follow. But according to your logic, he should? And not only _should_, but it's his *responsibility*? Or do you just make this argument selectively based on how much money the company has who hires a factory? Because then again, you just hate Apple.
  - seoaeu 5y ago
    Apple is the most valuable public company in the world. They have plenty of leverage to force their suppliers to treat workers better. Apple just chooses not to use it to the degree they could. It is laughable to compare the market power of an enormous multinational that frequently buys out factories' entire production capacity, to some random middleman who sells branded cups and pencils.
  - vanusa 5y ago
    I don't hate Apple. I just don't see why they shouldn't be held accountable to universally accepted principles of basic human decency.
    - zepto 5y ago
      They are. They are held to higher standards than any of their conpetitors.
      - vanusa 5y ago
        That doesn't mean these standards are sufficient.
      - fivea 5y ago
        > They are. They are held to higher standards than any of their conpetitors. Are they, though? I don't see people claiming that "crowded dorms without flush toilets and food sometimes crawling with worms" is totally fine if the plant makes Samsung or off-brand smartphones. What I'm seeing is a luxury brand on the defensive because their customer base learned that the workers making Apple's luxury products not only have been enduring "crowded dorms without flush toilets and food sometimes crawling with worms" but also tainted food that causes mass health issues. What really boggles the mind is that these sub-human working conditions seem to cause downtime in their plants, which ultimately means it costs them money. But somehow even that is not enough to convince them to treat workers as if they are human beings.
        5y ago
- CoastalCoder 5y ago
  > It is 100 percent Apple's responsibility to guarantee safe and humane working conditions for all workers at every level in its supply chain. You're advocating a particular ethical framework, but I'm not sure what the justification is. I'd be interested in hearing an argument for why others should adopt it.
  - worik 5y ago
    > You're advocating a particular ethical framework Treating human beings decently is the ethical point here Why should others adopt it? For me it is enough to treat others decently, and by that I can only use my own standards (and I do not have a flush toilet in my house, but there is running water to wash with). But perhaps some people need another reason. Perhaps they should ask their priest? Perhaps they should consider how they wish to be treated themselves, and what goes around comes around. But for me: Just be decent. Remember the Golden Rule: Do not be a dick
    - xwolfi 5y ago
      Well if India the country cant even bother to inspect its own factories (in many countries we dont bemoan the american overlord to please stop our people from beating each other: we just inspect ourselves), nothing will change. The problem is Indian or Chinese people valuing each other so low they do that to each other. The american overlord, they tell him yes yes and will print all the pretty pictures and stamped documents he required. So Apple, Foxconn, I dont think we should even care, they dabble in a specific environment: what is India doing for its taxpayers ?
      - worik 5y ago
        > India the country cant even bother to inspect its own factories That is unfair. The USA in the nineteenth century had similar problems, as did England. It is a side effect of rapid economic development, methinks. Time will tell but I think working conditions will improve. They are not that flash in England or the USA either
- WalterBright 5y ago
  What's the role of the government of India in this?
- renewiltord 5y ago
  It is actually 100 percent the consumer's responsibility to guarantee that they are using only things made under safe conditions. For instance, if the packets you sent over the Internet to post your comment traveled over equipment manufactured in unsafe conditions, you are acting unethically.
  - vanusa 5y ago
    The manufacturer has infinitely more visibility into, and leverage over the supply chain than the customer. That's where this attempt to flip responsibility fails.

kunai 5y ago

Voting with your wallet doesn't work. There is no ethical consumption under our current economic system. The only way to end this is to end the global neoliberal anti-protectionist social and economic order which permits serfdom in third-world countries for lower prices on final goods here at home. Note that I'm not advocating for protectionism. Free trade is largely a good thing. But the current system is unsustainable and affords too much privilege to multinationals to self-police. It cannot be allowed to continue unchecked, lest we sacrifice our environment and the living/working conditions of families and individuals halfway around the world.

vanusa 5y ago
There is no ethical consumption under our current economic system. This is manifestly false. It may only exist in narrow domains. But it most certainly exists, and in the mainstream. I'm sure you can think of a few examples. You're right though that it cannot be relied on a strong lever in the near-term. The only way to end this is to end the global neoliberal anti-protectionist social and economic order which permits serfdom in third-world countries for lower prices on final goods here at home. Unfortunately there's no clear route to "just doing this" either. It's a genuinely vexxing problem that I certainly do not pretend to know the answer to. Indeed, it's kind of one of those big questions people have been wrestling with, and throwing bombs, and whacking people on the head over for quite some time now, is it not. I only know that I'm not going to pretend this shit doesn't seriously bother me. And as a matter of principle, I try not to buy fancy gadgetry of any kind that I don't literally need to get through the day.