Slashdot Mirror
Apple Enforces "Supplier Code of Conduct" After Child Labor Discovery
reporter writes "Since 2006, Apple has regularly audited its manufacturing partners to ensure that they conform to Apple's Supplier Code of Conduct (ASCC), which essentially codifies Western ethical standards with regard to the environment, labor, business conduct, etc. Core violations of ASCC 'include abuse, underage employment, involuntary labor, falsification of audit materials, threats to worker safety, intimidation or retaliation against workers in the audit and serious threats to the environment. Apple said it requires facilities it has found to have a core violation to address the situation immediately and institute a system that insures compliance. Additionally, the facility is placed on probation and later re-audited.' Apple checks 102 facilities, most of which are located in Asia, and these facilities employ 133,000 workers. The most recent audit of Apple's partners revealed 17 violations of ASCC. The violations include hiring workers who were as young as 15 years of age, incorrectly disposing of hazardous waste, and falsifying records. In Apple's recently released Supplier Responsibility 2010 Progress Report (PDF), they condemned the violations and threatened to terminate their business with facilities that did not change their ways."
It's the chinese manufacturers who are doing this, apple is cracking down on it and fining them for it you moron. (And I hate apple BTW)
From TFA:
I'm a lawyer, but not yours. I wouldn't represent someone who thinks taking legal advice from Slashdot is a good idea.
From page 13 of the summary report:
[quote]During most of our audits, suppliers stated that Apple was the only company that had ever audited their facility for supplier responsibility.[/quote]
IOW, other companies don't give a shit about abusive labor practices from their suppliers. They might pay lip service but no one's really doing any audits to actually check. Apple, OTOH, is going out there and digging around to make sure their suppliers are in compliance with labor and environmental standards.
New low? This is leadership in defining a more responsible way to do business.
Except South Korea doesn't have a history of using child labor. What they did do is work extremely hard to build a strong export-led industry combined with high import duties that ensured domestic production would remain high. Oh and most of those industries were given state funding (as the banks were all nationalized), and were not grown in a laissez faire free market economy.
Prior to Japanese colonization, Korea would have used children to help in the farms (much like on American farms), but not in factories, because they were primarliy an agrarian society.
Core violations of ASCC 'include abuse, underage employment, involuntary labor, [...]
Underage employment and involuntary labor often go hand in hand. I assume involuntary labor means slavery where someone earns a wage (otherwise "involuntary labor" is just a euphemism for slavery).
I'll bet the same people so eager to condemn Apple for actually trying to live up to its responsibilities on a voluntary basis would also decry a government regulation that attempted to regulate this on a less-than voluntary way. And anybody want to bet that the low-cost manufacturers would be the worse offenders? The race to the bottom, indeed. The truth is, Apple does all right in any neutral ranking. Could be better, but they've made a lot of progress. http://www.rankabrand.com/
It's amazing that the mainstream public can be this economically retarded
Hmm, I'll say. But I don't think we're talking about the same group of people...
but it isn't very surprising given that their education is controlled by the government
Tinfoil hat time, here we go!
the very entity that benefits from these sorts of regulations.
The government benefits every time a child doesn't work, every time a pill doesn't kill someone, every time a student becomes a doctor or a scientist, every time a factory recalls tons of e. coli tainted beef... Well, in a sense, that's actually true, in the US, since We The People *are* the government.
Individuals, including children, choose to work in "sweatshops"
Bullshit. No child "choses" to work in a sweatshop. They are forced to by their parents, or by circumstances, but in no way do they think, "boy, I sure wish I could work 15 hours a day and get 2 pee breaks!"
Simply outlawing free market in labor will not make schools, hospitals, and personal wealth rain from the sky!
No. "Socialism" does this. The free market has never, and will never, provide schools, hospitals and personal wealth to reach the masses. A truly free market school system would leave the poor uneducated. A truly free market health system would leave the poor sick.
As for child labor, no free market on the planet would *ever* eliminate it. The only way to eliminate child labor is to outlaw it outright. This is because if it's legal, some company is going to engage in it, and some children are going to be forced by their parents or by circumstances into it.
Free market economies are able to go from child labor and sweatshops to banks and skyscrapers in just a couple of generations, while the "well-intentioned" socialist cesspools remain poor except for the handouts of others (often too through government force).
No free market has ever left child labor behind. You *are* correct that free markets will lead to banks and skyscrapers, however. You are wrong that socialism leads to poor nations. What you are thinking of is communism.
The trick is to gain the benefits of capitalism (banks, skyscrapers, etc.) while avoiding its negatives (exclusion of poor people, child labor, etc.). The way to do that is with laws (outlawing certain practices) and socialism (free education and health care) *AND* capitalism (skyscrapers and banks).
Outside the US this is a different matter. I can get something pretty much equivalent to the 17" macbook Pro from dell (the dell will have a better screen RGBLED) for about half the price of the macbook, as Apple plays funny games with the exchange rate..
http://store.apple.com/au/configure/MC226X/A?mco=MTM3NzYzNjY
http://configure.ap.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?oc=s541210au&c=au&l=en&s=dhs&cs=audhs1
you do understand the difference between a laissez faire free market economy and a market economy don't you? This is basic Korean history post-Korean war. Park Jung-Hee nationalised the banks and directed capital flows to the companies he thought had the best chances of producing products for export in a competitive manner.
North Korea has no export led industry, and no market economy at all (actually that's not entirely true, there is a very very very small internal market experiment being conducted, but it is only at farmer's market level).
oh anyone who shops at the gap, abercrombie, target, walmart, old navy, zara, H&M, C&A, M&S. i.e. if you judge by dollars spent... pretty much everyone.
Read what I mean, not what I wrote.