Fascinating stuff from The Guardian today. I think the title says it all really. Shocking…
“Excessive overtime is routine, despite a legal limit of 36 hours a month. One payslip, seen by the Observer, indicated that the worker had performed 98 hours of overtime in a month.
Workers attempting to meet the huge demand for the first iPad were sometimes pressured to take only one day off in 13.
In some factories badly performing workers are required to be publicly humiliated in front of colleagues.”
To be fair on Apple, Foxconn boards are in loads of machines, phones etc. Every shiny thing you own is probably produced under hideous conditions in a sweatshop somewhere.
We made that decision when we chose the cheap option. Sadly Apple is a premium brand but the premium doesn’t bubble up.
I agree- Foxconn works for many companies, but the demand for Apple products must have had an impact. I don’t blame Apple for this, but it is still shocking what happens.
Welcome to the real world!
It is common practice all over Asia. In any case you can’t produce in Europe or the US of A.. costs are prohibitive. And it is not as shocking as the “well thinking” press would like you to think, it is just a fact of life. I spent the last 24 years in factories in Asia (retired now), I have seen 200 hours OT some months when production had to get out of the door… and the rules are made to please the nice people in the Western world, to give them a good feeling… not to apply to the workers
I’d rather pay more. My Psion devices were relatively expensive in 2007/09 and I was happy to pay. I believe the Psion 5 were assembled in the UK. Many of my Nokia phones were made in Finland – again I was happy to pay the appropriate price. Apple must have some of the smartest people in the world working for them – I am sure they could arrange humane business arrangements with their sub-contractors.
I’d rather pay more.
Would sufficient people do this, though, to justify an increase in price? Or would profit be offset?
I am sure they could arrange humane business arrangements with their sub-contractors.
Their contracts probably already do – but that doesn’t mean it happens. It needs to be more than arrangements, and actual integration of contractual obligations into reality, with oversight and management. It could be a clear selling point, but, equally, if Apple considers that it has already priced its devices at the optimal profit point whilst maintaining its “exclusive” brand image (which I’d guess is Apple’s balancing act, but, of course, I could be wrong), one might question whether an increase in cost to set off the additional manufacturing costs could be profitably passed on to consumers.
And, if not, whether Apple is prepared to take a hit on the bottom line to act “ethically”.