6 ms·

The real irony, to my mind is this: Apple is the company with the most integrity I've ever known. This manifests itself everywhere- from product quality to serv

by nirvana 15y ago

The real irony, to my mind is this: Apple is the company with the most integrity I've ever known. This manifests itself everywhere- from product quality to service at Apple stores. Apple has been proactive in making sure their employees are well taken care of, here and abroad, and they've been doing this for the past decade. They've been auditing suppliers in various ways for far longer than this story has even been in the news, going back at least to the 1990s. Sure, Apple is the biggest, most profitable tech company, and it is also the one with the biggest brand. I think Apple's brand is a huge factor here- it is a global brand, it is associated with really good values such as quality, respect, integrity, etc, and thus it is the most attractive brand the put dirt on. This explains why media, and unscrupulous people focus on attacking Apple for "working conditions". But the reality is, when Foxconn has positions open to work for Apple, they get massive numbers of people who want to come work for them. Everyone in china has methods of communication, if Apple wasn't the best place to work, they wouldn't have so many applicants. Word would get out. Apple solved this problem before it ever became a problem, but they are attacked because their brand is strong, and the people attacking them lack integrity. They're also being attacked because it fits a political agenda. Unions and regulation have destroyed the manufacturing employment levels in the USA (actual manufacturing capacity is higher now than then, but a lot fewer people are employed) and so rather than recognize themselves as the cause of business moving overseas, they wish to demonize the businesses that did move overseas in the hope of coercing them to move back here. Every political season there are proposals that companies be punished for doing business overseas. This is why. Thus perpetuating the fantasy that Apple runs sweatshops or uses "slave labor" is politically motivated. The reality: When Foxconn cut back overtime (in response to this muckraking) the employees were very upset. They want to work more hours. The employees have spoken... ---- I digressed. My original point is, that all these other companies are benefiting from Apple leading the way here. Apple is teaching the chinese how to be ethical and to treat employees well, by requiring it, and all these other manufacturers are benefiting from that. This is a cost to apple, and it is a profit to those other manufacturers. Thus it is really ironic when the media smears apple-- the company that has literally revolutionized manufacturing in china, as far as working conditions go.

ajross 15y ago
You have a cite for Apple "revolutionizing" working conditions? Please, they're a electronics designer. They contract with whoever bids lowest, and always have. One of the big reason Foxconn is so large now is precisely because they were the low bidder for Apple's business years ago. Now, I agree with the premise of the linked article that Apple has been unfairly tarnished for problems that are endemic to the industry as a whole. But to flip this around and claim that Apple is somehow a champion fighting for workers rights is ... just weird (and I'll admit that it makes me sad to see this kind of completely unselfaware fawning on a site where discussion used to be a lot more intellectually robust). Like the rest of the industry, Apple didn't do poop about chinese workers until they were embarassed.
- xal 15y ago
  I have no horse in this race but It's very well known that Apple does indeed pick who bids lowest but: * They put severe requirements on the quality of the produce * They put severe requirements on secrecy * The they put severe requirements on how the workforce needs to be treated All of the above are enforced. Apple has massive teeth. They are king makers of the industry and drop suppliers like a hat for any offences. Yes they end up with whoever bids lowest and isn't yet on their shit list. But labour requirements have been part of these requirements since 1990 and have become ever more demanding since. This is exactly how governments do it. They enter trade and aid agreements with other countries and attach labour requirements. That's the very mechanism which in the long run leads to prosperity.
  - DanBC 15y ago
    > They put severe requirements on the quality of the produce That's not great for workers, who lose pay if they cannot meet these exacting standards. > They put severe requirements on how the workforce needs to be treated The conditions they demand may be better than most workers get in the target country. That doesn't mean those conditions are actually enforced, nor does it mean they are acceptable. The amount of profit Apple makes means it should be fairly easy for them to dramatically improve conditions for overseas workers. That would be a huge sales point for them. Not only do you get pretty design, you know you're funding education / healthcare / whatever for developing world workers.

by nirvana 15y ago

ajross 15y ago

You have a cite for Apple "revolutionizing" working conditions? Please, they're a electronics designer. They contract with whoever bids lowest, and always have. One of the big reason Foxconn is so large now is precisely because they were the low bidder for Apple's business years ago. Now, I agree with the premise of the linked article that Apple has been unfairly tarnished for problems that are endemic to the industry as a whole. But to flip this around and claim that Apple is somehow a champion fighting for workers rights is ... just weird (and I'll admit that it makes me sad to see this kind of completely unselfaware fawning on a site where discussion used to be a lot more intellectually robust). Like the rest of the industry, Apple didn't do poop about chinese workers until they were embarassed.

xal 15y ago
I have no horse in this race but It's very well known that Apple does indeed pick who bids lowest but: * They put severe requirements on the quality of the produce * They put severe requirements on secrecy * The they put severe requirements on how the workforce needs to be treated All of the above are enforced. Apple has massive teeth. They are king makers of the industry and drop suppliers like a hat for any offences. Yes they end up with whoever bids lowest and isn't yet on their shit list. But labour requirements have been part of these requirements since 1990 and have become ever more demanding since. This is exactly how governments do it. They enter trade and aid agreements with other countries and attach labour requirements. That's the very mechanism which in the long run leads to prosperity.
- DanBC 15y ago
  > They put severe requirements on the quality of the produce That's not great for workers, who lose pay if they cannot meet these exacting standards. > They put severe requirements on how the workforce needs to be treated The conditions they demand may be better than most workers get in the target country. That doesn't mean those conditions are actually enforced, nor does it mean they are acceptable. The amount of profit Apple makes means it should be fairly easy for them to dramatically improve conditions for overseas workers. That would be a huge sales point for them. Not only do you get pretty design, you know you're funding education / healthcare / whatever for developing world workers.