Factory workers claim Foxconn hid underage employees before FLA inspection - Page 4

What, what a non-story.

1. 1st of all, Bill Weir EXPLICITLY states (around the 4 min mark) that there's workers 17 yrs old, etc. Not exactly a deep, dark secret that they attempted to hide from knowledge.

2. I like how the goalposts are constantly moved. 13 has now become 16. Do I consider 16 an under-age worker? No, I don't.

3. When you want to discover potential abuses, it helps to look at motivation and intent. What specific motivation does Foxconn have to purposely hire underage workers? There are tens of thousands dying to work @ Foxconn, as we;ve seen from the footage. Foxconn isn't exactly desperately looking for underage employees to fill positions.

4. Would it have been in Foxconn's best interest to 'clean-house' a bit and move the younger employees (16-17) away from the section they were going to cover and interview people in? Sure. Any other company would have done the same. I would also try to show my company in the best light if it was being reported on, and if the stakes were so high. This does not equate to 'hiding all their 13 yr old slave workers in the dungeons', as some have implied through conspiracy theories.

Honestly, it seems some are chomping at the bit to imagine up sinister conspiracy theories in order to get some time in the spotlight and exploit the issue. We've seen no evidence that there's deep, dark secrets being hidden, and Apple/Foxconn has been more transparent than I would ever have expected them to. What we saw it probably very close to the daily reality of the place, as it is in thousands of other assembly lines. Might infractions be exposed in the future with all these audits? I'd be surprised if that wasn't the case, as we're talking about a company that employs hundreds of thousands of people. The important thing is to try and stay sane and take everything into context. Nothing I've seen 'horrifies' me, but maybe it's because I wasn't ignorant enough not to expect these exact scenes. I mean honestly- I have no idea of what some people expected an assembly line in China to look line, if they were shocked or horrified by this. I'd chalk it up to extreme ignorance, and the opinion of someone with this level of grotesque ignorance on the matter, completely disconnected from reality, would not interest me in the least.

Because it's Apple who for years has benefited from the low manufacturing cost, which has enabled them to accumulate a vast amount of wealth that now puts them in the position of having the means to address the situation whilst suffering as-near-as-damnit no material impact.

What about China benefiting from a low cost work force that most of the rest of the world can't compete with?

It's certainly noble to take a stand for the betterment of others who can do nothing for you but unfortunately this isn't how good business works. There has to be a reason that is ulately financial to get Apple involved.

Perhaps I can use the Socrate method to relay my point so let me ask you this: Should Apple, utilizing Foxcon's labor force not jut focus on the 400k employees working on their products or for all of Foxconn? If Apple should take an initiative for some of Foxconn's employees why no the ones working on products for MS, Dell, Acer, etc.? They certainly have the money and they still people if they aren't making iDevices.

Sure why not. I think a million people work at Foxconn so there is plenty of space. Or Apple could take the lead, claim the moral high ground and use it as a selling point. Apple embraced environmental concerns a few years ago and now it's at the forefront of their marketing.

But do you think it would be fair for Foxconn to pay ONLY workers who touch Apple product more, and leave the rest as is? Wouldn't that cause tension within the company, and contribute to a feeling of injustice and unfairness, especially when the job description is the same whether its an iPad or anything else? Should Apple then contribute to the pay of ALL of Foxconn's employees, thus subsidizing the company? I'd love workers to be paid more, I just think the hypothetical scenarios of Apple contributing to suppliers wages is extremely complex, and not so cut and dry, especially considering the unfair dynamics and politics it would introduce within the company.

I'm not convinced China has the means to improve the living quarters of every Chinese citizen.


Well, I disagree with that but nevertheless we've both answered this question already; in the long run I believe Apple would financially gain from the investment:




I've already addressed this. I think I've made it clear that I'm talking about Apple spending money to improve living quarters for those working on Apple products, not anyone else's. They are indeed still people if they are not making iDevices but it's up to DELL etc. and DELL etc.'s customers to actively do something about those making DELL etc.'s products.

China has magnitudes more money than Apple to improve the conditions of average Chinese.... and I think they are. They have a fast growing middle class and that market will likely be more profitable for Apple than the US within a few years.


That I don't get. If it's about Apple's bottom line then I agree with Apple doing it (or any company) and Apple has more reason to because of their financial and psychological position in the world (which is why this story has even happened). But if we are talking about being humane then that should transcend anything to do with working on Apple product or even working at Foxconn or being Chinese. It should be about giving everyone an opportunity.

It sounds like we are in agreement on many aspects here but perhaps the way were coming at it is different. It's certainly not an easy problem to resolve or else we wouldn't be discussing it.

So Foxconn is allegedly hiding the evidence? Troubling, if true.

I don't see why they would need to. If they so many applying for the jobs why would they hire 13yos when it's against the law? What is the benefit for Foxconn over workers of the appropriate age?

Hell, we're still trying to resolve it in North America.

I spent the 1950s in 40-beds dormitories. And the food was institutional and awful. And for the most part the hygienic conditions were substandard for the days. Yet my parents paid extortion money to get me in.

Why? Well, the educational matrix was so tightly fitted to my potential that it relegated the relatively poor living conditions where they belong: an ancillary footnote in my personal history.

This debate should hover over lifting young people up from futureless misery through life-changing, potential-enabling priorities. Easy access to a new educational framework, to innovative educational tools, ...and time slots to unleash all that great creative potential onto it.

My intellectual development had to pay due process for its enablement. And I'm none the physically worst for it. If Apple can seize the moment and 'mobilize' part of its cash riches for youth enfranchisement, I would look upon it as a paradigmatic cash procurement.

That's the essence of socialism, right there, folks. Its nothing more than theft. And you see in this post the naked greed at the root of it.

These people don't give a damn about workers, they just want to steal Apple's money. Apple is a target because it has been successful.

Nevermind that when these people get their way, as they had in China in the not too distant past, 10s of MILLIONS of people starve.

Nope. Who cares about genocide, so long as I can steal from the productive!

Mr. H is advocating theft, nothing more, and in one way or another, he's doing it because HE will benefit from the idea taking hold.

Nicely stated.

My guess is that they could do everything you suggest, gain a public relations coup, and earn a profit on the invested capital.

Don't trouble yourself.

Leftists lie. its what they do when it comes to economics. They can't stand reality, so they lie. No matter what Apple does, they'll be claiming that Apple is employing underage workers. Its the only thing they have to use against Apple.

If Apple made all their hardware by robots, they'd be complaining that Apple wasn't employing enough humans.

(Neocons lie too, only they lie to get us into wars... about equally as destructive.)

This ignores economic reality. When you have some jobs paying massively more than others, then you have a massive increase in desire for those jobs, which leads to job peddling, back room deals, etc. It is the creator of corruption.

Mr. H would love that, because in a few years he could be bitching about Foxxconn employees getting killed by the mafia that exists to control Apple jobs. (which came about because this recommendation was followed.)

In fact, that's what Mr. H wants-- a mafia-- which is another way of saying union.

Don't be daft.

He never said anything like that. These kind of "mis-attribution" posts should be a cause of reprimand around here.

Part of the inspection process has to be rooting out cover-ups. If this is true (and its perfectly plausible in China) then its something the FLA has to get to the bottom of, if theyre to perform their mission effectively. Presumably, one or two visits is not the end of the process, so anyone hiding underage employees from Apple and the public can still get busted. I hope they are!

Out of where do you pull this stuff?

Actually, don't answer that one.....

You have a key word missing there that makes it difficult to respond to the point you're trying to make.

If the missing word is 'high,' that tells me you don't get Econ 101. You know, demand, supply, competition...

If the missing word is 'low' then I don't understand what you're implying.

I can make a case for 0.5% for subsidized laptops for poor children. Another person can make a case for setting aside 0.5% to subsidize iPads for doctors who serve patients in the frontlines of war-torn zones. Someone else can make a case for 2.5% for setting up a test manufacturing plant back home in, say, Michigan. Yet another person can make a case for 0.9% for.....

Do you see where I am going with this? Where does it start? Stop? For what causes should it go, and who decides? If there's a toss-up, how do we break the tie about which cause is more important?

Yes, honestly, it beggars belief.

Oh, I want to play too!

Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes, No, Yes.

What's your counter-argument?

Too low. The demand is outstripping supply by too grate a margin which means Apple isn't making as much profit as they otherwise cold have.

This is also seen from the unusually high interest in the high end model over the lower tier models. The standard unit sale model should naturally make the low end sell the most, followed by the middle and then the upper tier.

However I didn't expect them to alter this once this was evident. You can drop price points but it's hard to increase them without potential blow back. I have no ruled out that Apple's use of the Retina Display (and possibly doubling the storage) might lead to an increase in the base price for those models with the new display.

What I am talking about is spending money targeted specifically and directly at those who work to assemble Apple products and that's it. I find it odd that you can't see a distinction between that and the examples you cite above.

√ √ √ √ X √ lowercasefiller

I don't believe for a second that Foxconn is deliberately employing underage workers. Given the number of people they employ, it would be surprising if they aren't accidentally doing so due to employees lying about their age. As many in this thread have pointed out, given the huge number of adults applying for jobs there, why on earth would Foxconn deliberately employ under-age labour?

This one I dreamed up all by myself. That was clear from the post itself.

According to Mr. H, it both starts and stops at Apple ensuring that its supply chain use reasonable labor policies. His posts have been clear on that point.

Better yet, scrutinize all labor practices in China. Good luck trying.

This reminds me of the reports after the first moon landing occurred that it was filmed in a studio in Burbank.

Did it say they were hiring underage workers, or rather working them longer hours than Chinese law (or was it just policy??) permitted?

If you're going to film it i secrecy Burbank isn't the place to do it. Area 51 seems much better suited.



From the title: "Factory workers claim Foxconn hid underage employees before FLA inspection"

Impossible. Everyone knows it was filmed at Area 51.

And your 6 brain cells havn't been able to compute that this is by design - so that companies like Apple have a scapegoat? Or are you just 'playing' stupid?

The investors on this site make more money in 1 day of doing absolutely nothing then a lot of these workers will who toil in these factories for years. They are easy to pick out... they are the ones lashing out here in Apple's defence... Terrified that their free meal ticket and gravy train is going to end.

Are you his assistant? Or is there an echo in here?

I think this opinion piece at macworld sums up my feelings, and is reasonable, rational, and grounded. It's worth a read in its entirety.

http://www.macworld.com/article/1655...t_factory.html

Conclusion:

I find it odd that you consider that (i.e., pay a profit-making company money to subsidize their workers' living quarters) to be a remotely sensible use of Apple's money compared to educating deprived children or help healthcare workers in the frontlines of war who are or could be using Apple's product.

Indeed, your concern for relatively well-off workers who are relatively well-fed and well-housed compared to poor children and people who are putting their life on the line by trying to save that of others, to be shockingly misplaced.

'Nuff said.

Or maybe without all that red tape, there would be so many jobs available, they would be forced to compete for workers.

Don't believe every AI headline. One a few days ago said Apple's iPhone4 settlement would only apply to a few buyers when Apple said nothing of the sort.

I think in this case Foxconn wasn't accused of hiring underage workers. They were accused of over-working 16 and 17 year olds if I'm correct.

EDIT: You should read more carefully Soli. From AI's article:

Workers at Apple partner Foxconn have alleged that their employer transferred underage employees to other departments or did not schedule them to work overtime in order to avoid discovery during recent inspections by the Fair Labor Association, according to one non-governmental organization...

"All underage workers, between 16-17 years old, were not assigned any overtime work and some of them were even sent to other departments," ...

Apple's supplier code of conduct allows for workers between 16 and 18 years old if they are legally allowed to work, but it requires special protections for those workers that limit how much and what kinds of work they are allowed to perform.

So the employee's weren't under legal age to work. Apple obligated themselves to special protections for those younger worker's and the claim is they weren't following, or at least enforcing, their policy.

Are you deliberately misunderstanding and/or misinterpreting what I'm saying?

Nice try there with your second paragraph. Were we not talking specifically about what Apple could do with 0.5% of its wealth?

You are the one that brought up "poor children and people who are putting their life on the line by trying to save that of others", and I would add in a way that suggested you think nothing should be spent on them, either.