Judging The Apple 'Sweatshop' Charge

jurgen writes "MacWorld summarizes an article published in the U.K., stating that Apple's iPods are made in China by women who work 15 hours/day, make $50/month, and have to pay half of that right back to the company for housing and food. The article also claims the workers live in dormitories where they are housed 100 per room, and are not allowed visitors." A Wired article looks at the same story, exploring the reliability of the Mail on Sunday's claims. From that article: "The situation is too murky for a rush to judgment on Apple's ethics here, and it may well meet minimum global standards. But for a company that has staked its image on progressive politics, Apple has set itself up as a potential lightning rod on global labor standards. Sweatshops came back to bite Nike after its customers rose up in arms; and Apple can expect a similar grilling from its upscale Volvo-driving fans in the months ahead."

Comments

Re:A few random thoughts

[timeOday]

I'd expect and hope, from a supposedly intelligent group of readers, that the majority of the comments here will be examining China's labor laws and China's human rights record

Apple deserves focus because Apple is cashing in bigtime.

I'm fairly certain that this will be read by a number of people who think that corporations and corporate behavior are inherently "evil", and that the larger a company or business interest is, the more "evil" it is and indeed must be by definition, which is an awfully one-sided and half-blind way to look at corporations.

Gee, I wonder where people get such ridiculous ideas? Could it be from stories such as the one we're reading right now?

What's broken is the law itself. The reason the US has lost its manufacturing sector and runs a massive trade deficit is pure and simple: because you can save a huge amount of money by evading US law - evading US minimum wage, evading OSHA, etc. etc. We rightfully hold up companies producing goods in our own country to certain standards. Then we stab them in the back by allowing the competition to bypass all the rules and get their manufacturing done almost for free by outsourcing. As a result, we have only shell corporations who advertise and keep profits but don't actually make anything.

A sweatshop for consumer merchandise? Never....

[ShyGuy91284]

This is stupid. I look around my room, and It's probably likely at least half, if not more like 80% of the stuff here probably has some sweatshop labor in it (with 20% being made in the US if I push it). Although Apple and the related company are no small fries, they are in the overall picture of this sweatshop labor stuff. Ohhh, Apple indirectly uses sweatshop labor. Time to gang up on them, and about every other company that does it, especially directly.

Re:Not everywhere, you can "work however you want"

[/ASCII]

While I agree that sweatshops suck, I have yet to hear of any practical way to bring third world countries up to first world standard that does not involve exploiting the gap in labour cost between coutries.

To put things simply, third world countries have inferior infrastructure, inferior education levels, inferior political stability and a non-existing domestic market, when compared to a first world country. The _only_ thing most third world countries have going for them is cheap labour.

The theory is that by allowing companies to exploit cheap labour, the state is given enough money to invest in infrastructure, publich schooling, police and other things that are needed to bring in more companies to the country, which will in turn create higher demand for labour, which will drive up the cost of labour. This is a slow and painful process, where the future of a country is built on the broken backs of people living today, but we have seen countries like South Korea and Taiwan raise themselves from poverty to prosperity over the course of a few decades using this method. All the foreign aid and all the U2 concerts against poverty in the world have yet to raise a single country out of poverty.

Re:A few random thoughts

[rossifer]

Communism is actually the ideal system until you add the human factor.

I would say the problem is a slightly different one: communism doesn't scale past the group where everyone knows everyone else. In order to work, communism requires trust based on first-hand observation. Shaker communities, kibbutzim, families are common examples of successful communal groups (some families more than others). All have worked because people observe that others are actually contributing as much as they can and taking out no more than they need.

The upper limit on "everyone knowing everyone" appears to be in the range of 100 to 150 people.

A pure democracy stinks in some ways because you can never come to a consensus to get things done, but perhaps the world would be better off because you wouldn't see a massive government with a tax-and-spend mentality like we have here in America today.

Are you sure? I think modern media is pretty much able to whip the population into a frenzy when needed by "The Powers That Be(tm)" to get something voted in. I think a pure democracy stinks because if you can whip up a mob, you can get just about anything you want. Ultimately, pure democracies stink because there are no protections for the minority.

Remember, democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

Constitutionally limited republics get much less done (a very good thing), but are still subject to creeping expansion of powers and eventual subversion of the critical checks and balances once enough power is in the hands of the executive (police & military). Nothing is perfect forever.

Regards,
Ross