Apple Suppliers & Labor Practices With its highly coveted line of consumer elect

Question

Apple Suppliers & Labor Practices With its highly coveted line of consumer electronics, Apple has a cult following among loyal consumers. During the 2014 holiday season, 74.5 million iPhones were sold. Demand like this meant that Apple was in line to make over $52 billion in profits in 2015, the largest annual profit ever generated from a company’s operations. Despite its consistent financial performance year over year, Apple’s robust profit margin hides a more complicated set of business ethics. Similar to many products sold in the U.S., Apple does not manufacture most its goods domestically. Most of the component sourcing and factory production is done overseas in conditions that critics have argued are dangerous to workers and harmful to the environment. For example, tin is a major component in Apple’s products and much of it is sourced in Indonesia. Although there are mines that source tin ethically, there are also many that do not. One study found workers—many of them children—working in unsafe conditions, digging tin out by hand in mines prone to landslides that could bury workers alive. About 70% of the tin used in electronic devices such as smartphones and tablets comes from these more dangerous, small-scale mines. An investigation by the BBC revealed how perilous these working conditions can be. In interviews with miners, a 12-year-old working at the bottom of a 70-foot cliff of sand said: “I worry about landslides. The earth slipping from up there to the bottom. It could happen.” Apple defends its practices by saying it only has so much control over monitoring and regulating its component sources. The company justifies its sourcing practices by saying that it is a complex process, with tens of thousands of miners selling tin, many of them through middle-men. In a statement to the BBC, Apple said “the simplest course of action would be for Apple to unilaterally refuse any tin from Indonesian mines. That would be easy for us to do and would certainly shield us from criticism. But that would also be the lazy and cowardly path, since it would do nothing to improve the situation. We have chosen to stay engaged and attempt to drive changes on the ground.” In an effort for greater transparency, Apple has released annual reports detailing their work with suppliers and labor practices. While more recent investigations have shown some improvements to suppliers’ working conditions, Apple continues to face criticism as consumer demand for iPhones and other products continues to grow.

Please read the above article and provide the answers for following question.

1.Would knowing that a product was produced under ethically questionable conditions affect your decision to purchase it? Explain with examples.

2. If you were part of a third-party regulating body, how would you deal with ethically questionable business practices of multinational corporations like Apple? Would you feel obligated to do something, or do you think the solution rests with the companies themselves? Explain your reasoning.

Explanation / Answer

1. Yes, the decision to purchase an item like an Apple phone would be impacted by the conditions under which the product has been manufactured and similarly buying blood diamonds, if known, would be another example of product where we would be more careful of purchasing ethically sourced alternative. However if all the phones (case in point here) are being manufactured in Asia (majorly) and under questionable conditions, then it will mean choosing an Apple product (a relatively more responsible company which is acknowledging the issues and is trying to work on them) instead of purchasing from lets say a chinese manufacturer who will not even acknowledge the conditions under which the product has been produced - this could possibly be one of the reasons why they can under cut the market in terms of prices. But on a broad level if there is an ethical alternative which is comparable and competitive in terms of features, benefits and prices, then would definitely select the ethical product. For example plastic is not good for environment, hence we use paper or cloth bags, choosing organic produce over highly pesticide laden food products, choosing artifical or woollen material over fur products.

2. As a regulator, the first thing we should endeavour is to have level playing field. Since this is not a problem with Apple alone though given its size and reputation, it becomes an easy target to catch eyeballs. If we agree that this is a problem at industry level, then the solution should be at industry level - may be something like as below:

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse A
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.