Apple: Rotten to the Core? Part II

Hi everyone!

So yesterday Apple announced that it had hired the Fair Labor Association to audit working conditions in its manufacturing plants overseas, predominantly in China. This is after several scathing reports were published last month--including this blog--that sought to highlight how Apple was cutting corners when it came to worker benefits and safety as a means of getting mass production for the lowest cost.

As the New York Times reiterates today, 137 workers at an Apple parts supplier in China were injured last year as the result of being told to use a hazardous chemical to clean iPhone screens before said iPhones were shipped out for sale. Also last year, four factory workers were killed and 77 injured in two explosions at iPad factories. These examples are just the tip of the iceberg.

Apple's chief executive, Timothy D. Cook, said that the Fair Labor Association (F.L.A.) had already begun inspecting Foxconn factories in Shenzhen and Chengdu. "We believe that workers everywhere have the right to a safe and fair work environment," Mr. Cook stated, "which is why we've asked the F.L.A. to independently assess the performance of our largest suppliers."

This is all well and good and I am pleased that Apple, whose products I use, respect, and swear by, is taking measures to correct the slave labor conditions at some of these factories. It is definitely a step in the right direction. However, calling the F.L.A. an independent monitoring group is a bit of a misnomer since it receives at least some of its funding from the corporations that hire it to audit their manufacturers and parts suppliers. One of F.L.A.'s biggest clients, heretofore, has been Nike who itself has a rather checkered past when it comes to making sure its workers are properly compensated. According to reports, the F.L.A. did have a positive effect on making sure that Nike's overseas suppliers were adhering to safety standards and ethical practices. However, an Indonesian supplier--PT Nikomas--was asked to pay $950,000 in unpaid wages for 600,000 hours of overtime that were due to some 4,500 workers over the course of two years. This apparently came to light after the F.L.A. had concluded their initial audit. The obvious risk here is that when an auditing organization is being paid by a corporation to monitor its facilities, the organization--F.L.A. in this case--is going to be pressured to give the corporation a high rating, perhaps overlooking certain things (like $950,000 in back overtime pay) in order to receive its paycheck.

Perhaps I'm just nitpicking, but I do think that a company like Apple with a record market value of $469 billion can afford the inconvenience of not only making sure its overseas suppliers work in safe 21st century-modern facilities, but also paying its employees the overtime they are due.

Ciao.