The Bloody Cost of Apple's Success On a Friday night in May 2011, an explosion rocked Building A5. Flashes of fire lit up the sky, the sound was deafening, and twisted metal pipes were scattered about like discarded straw. Workers eating in the cafeteria ran out onto the grounds to see windows shattered, with thick black smoke billowing out from inside. The explosion occurred in a polishing workshop producing iPads. There, workers polished tens of thousands of aluminum casings for the iPad every day.
Two deaths were confirmed on the spot, with over ten injured. The wounded were rushed to ambulances, one of them particularly grievous: his face was unrecognizable, bloodied and mangled by the force and heat of the explosion. His features were indiscernible, only a mass of red and black where his nose and mouth used to be.
The victim’s father, far away in his hometown, received a call. Six months earlier, 23-year-old Lai Xiaodong had moved to Chengdu, a three-hour drive from his home in Mianyang, to work. Here lay the world's largest, most efficient, and most sophisticated manufacturing system, capable of producing electronics for Apple and hundreds of other tech companies at unprecedented speeds. Lai Xiaodong became one of millions of "human gears" that kept this massive system running.
"Are you Lai Xiaodong's father? Something has happened to your son. Please come to the hospital," said the voice on the other end of the line. Over the past decade, Apple has become one of the world's largest, richest, and most successful companies, largely due to its control over global manufacturing. Thanks to its expertise in controlling costs through shifting production locations, Apple and other American high-tech companies, as well as various American industries, have developed at an unparalleled pace in modern history within innovation sectors. However, according to interviews conducted by The New York Times with workers and industry analysts, along with related company documents, workers assembling and manufacturing products such as iPhones and iPads often labor under arduous, even fatal conditions. Some workers reported experiencing leg swelling due to prolonged standing, making walking difficult; others lost their lives or were hospitalized after being exposed to toxic chemicals during industrial accidents. (Related report: Apple CEO responds to The New York Times' 'sweatshop' report)
According to reports from worker rights organizations and Apple itself, there have been instances of child labor in the manufacture of Apple products, involving heat treatment equipment. Some suppliers illegally discharged harmful waste and then falsified data to cover it up. Two years ago, at an Apple supplier factory in eastern China, 137 workers suffered nerve damage from using toxic n-hexane to clean iPhone screens. Last year, within seven months, two explosions similar to the one in Chengdu occurred at factories producing iPads, resulting in four fatalities and 77 injuries. An organization had warned Apple beforehand that the working environment in the Chengdu facility was dangerous, but according to the organization, Apple did not insist on enhancing safety measures at the plant.
"If someone warned Apple in advance and they did nothing, that behavior is condemnable. But it is precisely because what is unacceptable in one country is acceptable elsewhere that these companies profit," said Nick Ashford, former chairman of the National Advisory Committee on Occupational Safety and Health, which directly advises the U.S. Department of Labor.
Apple is not the only electronics company with poor working conditions in its supply chain. Dell, HP, Lenovo, Sony, Motorola, Nokia, and others have also been found to have harsh working environments in their production facilities. Moreover, current and former Apple executives have stated that Apple has made significant progress in improving working conditions at its overseas factories in recent years. For instance, it launched an active auditing program, requiring prompt corrections when issues are found at supplier plants. Just this month, Apple published the list of its major suppliers for the first time. Its annual Supplier Responsibility Progress Report frequently discloses situations where worker rights are not protected. Apple executives are also deeply committed to eliminating child labor and involuntary overtime.
However, many key issues remain unresolved. Apple's Supplier Code of Conduct details regulations regarding labor issues, safety protections, and many other aspects. Yet, according to Apple's own reports, since 2007, at least half of the suppliers audited by Apple have violated at least one guideline, some even contravening local laws.
"Apple basically only cares about two things: improving quality and reducing costs. Whether workers' welfare improves has little to do with the company's interests," said Li Mingqi, who worked as a senior manager at Foxconn, Apple's most important manufacturing partner, until two months before the explosion. Li once supported the construction of the new Chengdu plant where the May explosion occurred.
Some former Apple executives revealed that violations continue because Apple has yet to resolve this contradiction: some managers genuinely wish to improve workers' environments, but once conflicts arise with core suppliers or impact the speed of new product releases, management's resolve wavers. The existing system may not be perfect, former executives said, but substantial reforms would inevitably slow down product innovation and threaten Apple's competitive edge.
"If half of all iPhones were defective, do you think Apple could ignore that for four years? We've known about some labor conditions in these factories for more than four years, and yet they remain unchanged. Why? Because this system benefits us. If Apple insists on changes, suppliers will comply immediately," said a former Apple administrator who wished to remain anonymous. Many interviewees in this article also requested anonymity due to confidentiality agreements.
Apple claims in public reports that it will terminate partnerships with suppliers if violations are discovered. However, several former Apple executives privately admitted that finding new suppliers is both time-consuming and expensive. Foxconn is one of the few suppliers with the workforce and technical capabilities to produce iPhones and iPads. Harvard scholar Cici White believes that Apple "will never leave Foxconn, nor will it leave China. Apple's management hasn't truly spent time examining the actual conditions inside the factories. In the short term, neither Apple nor Foxconn will budge on critical issues, and there are many reasons for that." White was once a representative on the National Academy of Sciences' International Oversight Labor Standards Committee.
The New York Times contacted Apple and provided a summary of much of this article's content, but Apple adhered to its usual policy of secrecy and declined to comment. Interview content comes from 36 current or former Apple employees and Apple suppliers, six of whom have firsthand knowledge of Apple's Supplier Responsibility team.
Steve Jobs, the late CEO of Apple, who passed away in October last year, spoke about Apple's relationship with its suppliers at an industry conference in 2010: "I believe Apple knows more and does more about the working conditions in its supply chain companies than anyone else in the industry."
"For example, you visit a factory—a factory—but my goodness, you can also find restaurants, cinemas, hospitals, and swimming pools. For a factory, that's quite good," he added.
Respondents, including those who work in these factories, acknowledged the presence of dining halls and medical facilities but denied that the factories could be considered "good."
A former Apple executive said: "We have indeed made many efforts to improve working conditions. But if the owners of iPhones could see the conditions under which their phones are produced, most people would likely feel very uncomfortable."
Excerpt source: www.nmny.cn Reproduction must credit the source
Related articles:
World Health Organization recommendations on infant feeding
Pharmaceutical packaging and regulations