Question

Many Chinese companies provide “dormitories” for their workers requiring employees to remain there away from their families and to work 10 to 12 hours a day 6 days a week at very low wages. Saturdays are considered a normal business day throughout Chinese industry. Employees are allowed to visit their families one weekend per month though many cannot do so since their families live too far away. In other words, how Foxconn (Apple’s subcontractor) is treating workers is quite normal in China.

In the Discussion Board comment on these issues and questions:

• Compare and contrast Apple’s and HP’s approach and the conditions at their respective suppliers Foxconn and Quanta.
• What improvements has Foxconn made since the original story? How effective do you think those improvements have been? What do you think of the progress that has been made? Should Apple have been criticized for the working conditions at Foxconn? Why or why not? Should they still be criticized?
• What ethical responsibilities does Apple have towards Foxconn’s workers in China? What should Apple do now, if anything? Should Apple and HP hold their suppliers to host country standards (i.e., China), home country standards (i.e., US) or something in between? Why?

Answer 1

1. Apple and HP have employed different strategies that have impacted workers at varying levels. As opposed to previous years, HP Company has been building factories near to potential employees. Such companies mostly employ the local population. In so doing, the company allows the employees to visit their homes more often since their homes are near .Furthermore, the company has built presentable dormitories for the workers to increase the time they spend in the factory. The company offers workers with free food, quality apartments,internet access, and martial art gyms. As opposed to this, Apple strategy has not addressed the workers and factory location proximity issues. The factories are far from the workers’ homes and, therefore, limited time for workers to spend with their families. The boarding facilities are unfriendly for the workers, particularly due to overcrowding.

2. Foxconn has made tremendous changes since the first story. Most of these changes affect the working conditions at the factory. Notably, the organization has made improvements regarding corporate culture, safety conditions, work ethics, and employee development programs. Nonetheless, Foxconn has to consider further changes concerning workers’dormitories and other essential facilities. In my perspective, the company has made remarkable progress, as it has promoted a friendlier working environment. Apple deserved criticism about harsh working conditions because it is the responsibility of the enterprise to provide a supportive environment. After all, the criticism brought about significant changes in the firm. People should still criticize the organization until it provides standard working conditions for its workers.

3. Even though Apple does not own the factory, it has enough influence to change the working conditions at Foxconn. Apple has different ethical responsibilities towards the factory workers . The company should guarantee safe and conducive working environments, minimum pay, family and medical leaves as well as capabilities to air their grievances without manipulation. Apple should consider raising the working conditions for the Foxconn workers. Both companies should minimize the working standards gap existing between foreign and home workers. By so doing, apply can align itself with the required work ethics standards.