This situation is confusing, but always remember that India is an island of democracy, freedom and human rights in a continent bereft of the same. India is on the front lines of the war with totalitarianism and still standing. They are far from perfect, but kudos to India for these things.
Ah, India. Apple throws you a bone - and you mess it up. Ridiculous laws like this will severely limit its ability to compete. No foreign company should have to babysit your companies.
Wistron is actually a Chinese company.
...
Actually, it's Taiwanese. But, while that makes it Chinese -- Chinese law and regulations are not enforced on it.
While I believe large companies have some responsibility into auditing their contractors for compliance, etc. I don't agree with laws that hold a company responsible for the actions of another. That literally makes no sense.
Also, assuming Wistron was not paying THEIR employees properly, that is a contractual agreement between Wistron and their employees. There is no such agreement with Apple. If Wistron isn't paying people, perhaps employees should file a complaint or walk off the job. Rioting is NEVER the appropriate response.
But the article says "According to the Contract Labor (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, the contractor is responsible for payment of wages and the principle employer is ultimately is responsible for it." So Apple couldn't rewrite the contract to evade the law. If Apple doesn't want to comply with the law, they can leave India. It doesn't matter "if you agree" with it or not.
I agree with you. Apple should leave India.
But then they lose access to the large Indian market -- which is why they went there in the first place. For Apple, it's a Lose-Lose situation. But that's what usually happens when you deal with low-lifes.
This story is confusing. Will the actual rioters be held accountable for, you know, rioting? Surely Indian law doesn't say "if your employer screws you over, bring 1,999 of your friends and trash the place." Also since when is Apple the "contractor"? Or is this term like "bi-weekly" where it means to completely different things?
At the end of the day, I'm confident that this (the government inquiry part, not the losing production for months) won't be more than a paperwork hassle for Apple. Apple will bring forth a raft of documentation showing that they did everything they could to hold Wistron accountable. I find it impossible to believe that Tim Cook and his senior executives are hypocrites on this particular issue.
About 156 people have been arrested. Police is going about its business on that. People will not get spared, since this gives a bad name to the ruling government.
In the early days of American industry -- the days of the robber barons -- The U.S. government invariably sided against the workers too. The corporations not only supported the government with their taxes but they supported the politicians directly.
In business, contracting work out has long been a method used to avoid responsibility on many levels -- from environmental abuses to worker abuse.
That is not to say Apple is in any way even the slightest bit guilty of that. But, the Indian government does need to consider that possibility -- even if to simply rule it out.
Apple has said it uses labour in other countries because there isn't enough labour in America, but that doesn't explain why Apple doesn't own the company that hires the locals to do the labour in other countries. Unless a valid reason is offered, I'm calling it plausible deniability.
This headline and the assumption that Apple could be legally liable for the riots is a leap. It's speculation and interpretation from the author, not something that the unnamed sources said. They do state that Apple could be asked to be part of the investigation, and that they could be called to "explain." But they key quote actually omits an important editorial comment from the Economic Times:
“According to the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, the contractor is responsible for payment of wages and the principal employer is ultimately responsible for it,” said one of them. This implies that the authorities can seek explanations from both Apple and Wistron
The bold part was omitted in the AI article. At no time do the sources or legal experts say Apple could be held liable for the riots. They could be liable, it seems, for pay discrepancies and withholding, but even that doesn't appear likely (just my take).
Comments
But then they lose access to the large Indian market -- which is why they went there in the first place. For Apple, it's a Lose-Lose situation. But that's what usually happens when you deal with low-lifes.
In the early days of American industry -- the days of the robber barons -- The U.S. government invariably sided against the workers too. The corporations not only supported the government with their taxes but they supported the politicians directly.
The bold part was omitted in the AI article. At no time do the sources or legal experts say Apple could be held liable for the riots. They could be liable, it seems, for pay discrepancies and withholding, but even that doesn't appear likely (just my take).