Tag Archives: Apple

Perhaps We Can Make a Difference

http://ethisphere.com/how-nike-is-changing-the-world-one-factory-at-a-time/

Many people accuse Apple of not doing enough to enforce their supplier code of conduct. Their response in the last half decade has been to audit their suppliers (with more audits happening each year). However, this may not be enough. Among the comments to an article criticizing the poor efforts of electronics companies, one reader used Nike as an example of a company working together with its suppliers to improve conditions. Amazed that a company seemed to know something Apple didn’t, I looked more into it.

In fact, the giant multinational has gone far beyond merely auditing its suppliers and giving them a slap on the wrist for violations. They work together with the companies and try to understand the issues that lead to excessive overtime and poor working conditions. By educating suppliers on ways in which more humane conditions actually improve the bottom line and thinking through more flexible purchasing decisions on their part, Nike has concretely set out to improve the working conditions in its many third-world factories. Perhaps, Apple could spare a sliver of is $100 Billion of cash to engage more with suppliers as Nike is doing.

“Supplier Responsibility” — The Start of a Manufacturer’s Conscience

Last class we discussed the joining of Apple into the Fair Labor Association (FLA). I was curious as to how much Apple, being the “slick” marketing empire that they are, might address this on their website. I was very pleasantly surprised to find an entire section of their website devoted to what they call “Supplier Responsibility.” In this section, they identify some of the problems that they have observed and are attempting to fix within their own corporation. These include some of the problems that Daisey addressed in his podcast, such as work hours, worker age, and living conditions. Needless to say, we as the consumer must take an evaluative approach to these claims. What I mean by that is that we must really wait to judge the severity of their commitment on the results, not the means. Intention, in this facet, is not what counts as much as reaction, change, and actual results. However, I respect the Apple Corporations enactment of this area, and the fact that they are willing to be open about the problems that they see both to the consumers, and in essence to themselves. Now we can only hope that they do something about it.

There Hands Build, Our Hands Play

Our discussions and videogames have led to some interesting thoughts. The relationship between operator and machine is an important theme in videogame analysis. Rarely, however, do we (the “first world”), think about where our machines come from. The articles/podcast this week tend to focus on one company, Foxconn (and through them, Apple), and one factory, the Foxconn factory of Shenzhen, China, in particular.

A natural debate arises from these readings: should “we” feel guilty about our consumption of cheap electronic goods? The articles represent a specific incident (or set of incidences: namely, the use of cheap labour by Apple) to call attention to the wider issue of whether or not our consumption harms others. Johnson writes “did my iPhone kill 17 people”? The podcast talks about the child workforce present in factory jobs. Sample writes about the game “Phone Story”, in which people see the harmful effects of factory life first-hand.

Should consumers take the blame for these atrocities? Best Buy does not seem evil for selling iPads, nor do many people walk around, wallowing in guilt, while playing angry birds on their iPhone. Should the companies exposing cheap labour be held accountable? Surely Apple and other companies must have knowledge of the conditions of their workforce.

I would suggest a different thought though: what involvement should the government have in the lives of workers? In particular, for the case of China, if the government can make “blacklists” (as described in the podcast), then shouldn’t that same government protect its workers from foreign manipulation? Should China exclude (either “exile” or heavily tax) companies that expose and harm its workers, as described in the readings and podcast?

Mike Daisey and the Problem of Global Concern

It is quite easy to conjure up pity and concern while listening to Mike Daisey talk about the labor conditions at Foxconn and other factories in the Chinese “Special Economic Zone” of Shenzhen. You listen to the stories, the hardships. You picture the faces of the men, women, and children who are forced into subpar labor conditions by the cruel corporate officers as they send line after line of technological thingamajigs into production. You think of the seventeen or so people who jumped off of those factory buildings because they just couldn’t take it anymore.

Then you go on your iPhone and check Facebook.

Clearly, the conditions in Foxconn are not good. Clearly, it is not wrong to feel sorry for the workers and to wish for an improved situation. You can blame Foxconn. You can blame Apple. You can even blame the ‘materialism’ of the West in the abstract. But don’t forget the gadget sitting in your own pocket as you read this. It is far too easy to give “the suits” a lot of flak about their mistreatment of the labor force as a means of deflecting any personal blame.

I don’t think Daisey’s desire to see certain reforms in the labor conditions of Shenzhen factories is unreasonable. In an increasingly globalized society, we absolutely need individuals like Daisey to push for small changes that, when done in conjunction with one another, improve the state of humanity. The problem, however, is bigger than a single “Special Economic Zone” halfway across the planet. When we live and actively participate in a society that possesses little more than a superficial conscience, we reap the harvest of our values. One walk through “Phone Story” makes that all too clear.

Is there a solution? As I type away on my Apple MacBook Pro, I know I sure haven’t found one. Not yet, at least. We can keep pointing fingers and chasing labor laws here and there for as long as we would like, and many people will be just fine. But that route will never touch the heart of the matter – or, should I say, the hearts of the matter. The hearts of people dictate the progress of our race and the treatment of our fellows. There will be no end to the exploitation of human beings while we treasure our things more than our neighbors.