Roosevelt labor historian Erik Gellman talks to Chicago Tribune about labor issues and poor working conditions in China

Posted: 02/21/2012

Posted at: http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-0219-outside-opinion-apple-foxconn-20120219,0,4104586.story

By Kristin Samuelson, Chicago Tribune reporter

February 19, 2012

Working conditions at one of Apple Inc.'s largest suppliers have come under intense scrutiny.

At least 10 employees at China-based Foxconn Technology Group, which manufacturers the iPad and iPhone, committed suicide in 2010, inciting labor groups to criticize the supplier for making employees work long hours under unfair compensation. Foxconn responded by offering to double wages, install safety nets, and hire counselors. But this year, some of the 1 million-employee workforce at Foxconn threatened to commit suicide in early January to protest the company's plan to transfer employees to a different production line. Later that month, Apple joined the Fair Labor Association, a nonprofit independent plant-investigation agency, and last week hired it to audit Foxconn's factories in China.

The labor association's initial investigation showed "the facilities are first-class; the physical conditions are way, way above average of the norm," especially compared with the "pressure-cooker environment you have in a garment factory," association President Auret Van Heerden told Reuters, adding that the group "has been dealing with suicides in Chinese factories since the 1990s."

Keeping in mind that the association has come under fire for conflicts of interest and lack of independence, we asked Michael Zimmer, professor of law at the Loyola University Chicago School of Law; Laura Pincus Hartman, Vincent de Paul professor of business ethics at the Driehaus School of Business at DePaul University; and Erik Gellman, assistant professor of history at Roosevelt University, about labor issues in China.

Q: What does this say about labor in China?

Hartman: This is an excellent example of China really demonstrating why it has such potential superpower capabilities. It's really set the bar so high in terms of some areas. People will say Apple went there for horrendously low standards in terms of labor. Wake up. People aren't going offshore only because of low labor costs, but because of extraordinarily efficient and valuable labor.

Gellman: At Foxconn, the people who make iPhones not only can't afford them, but they've never even seen one in use. It goes back to (Karl) Marx and his theory of alienation of labor: You're so regimented, you can't even see you can't even see the full picture of the commodity you make. Suicides and depression among workers at Foxconn are partly a result of an extreme version of alienated labor.

Q: How does this compare to America's history of labor issues?

Gellman: The U.S. went through industrialization to the same degree, but China is going through it much more quickly. Historically, decades of struggle led to basic standards in the workplace, which gave us parts of our lives we take for granted, like the weekend.

In late 19th century Chicago, laborers demanded an eight-hour workday. During the progressive era, reformers fought and eventually won child labor laws. In the '20s, manufacturers like Henry Ford started paying unprecedented wages ($5 per day). Conditions in the plants would only improve later with the success of the United Auto Workers union, but the fact that you made a wage that allowed you buy the product you produced seemed important to industrialists like Ford.

It would be a mistake, however, to compare Foxconn of today to only U.S. workplaces of the past. Issues such as wage theft (working longer hours for the same pay), terrible conditions and arbitrary firings (over the need to use the bathroom) still occur with great frequency in the U.S. Many workers fear discussing these violations because they, like Foxconn workers, believe their only choice is between a job, no matter how terrible, and no job. This perceived lack of choices speaks to the need for union growth to help workers counteract these forms of exploitation.

Q: How do workers' rights in China compare to those in the U.S.?

Zimmer: On the books, (China has) a much better safety net than we do. Almost every country does. The whole issue is whether that's enforced. The All China Federation of Trade Unions (ACFTU) is part of the government's Communist party, but it's just another way to control the workers. Foxconn's a huge factory, and there have been only a handful of reported suicides, but it's a pretty stark critique of your employment situation if your only escape is to jump out the window. In the U.S., we have better access to courts. If you have an overtime claim and you get a fair number of people involved, you can get a lawyer involved.

Hartman: What we need to look at is not whether particular conditions in one factory in China are better or worse than conditions in a particular factory in Chicago or Detroit, but whether individual workers in a factory are being treated fairly. If we start comparing wages paid to situations all over the globe, we've opened a can of worms because Apple or Foxconn are not subject to similar standards as those in the U.S. In the U.S., there is a significantly higher bar for all firms. We're all subject to regulations, so there is no competitive edge for a firm to lower their standards.

Companies are run by humans, and humans have to sleep at night. How much to pay workers is a very difficult question. You have to base it on local conditions but temper it with moral standards. You might have a moral minimum line, and then above that, you engage in some utilitarian balance of stakeholder interest.

Q: What about the FLA's findings on Foxconn?

Hartman: The FLA president's statement is a very relative statement. As bad as what? He's saying that Apple has a supplier code of conduct, and that it tries diligently to encourage its suppliers to adhere to this. If you want Apple to do everything to ensure they're adhering to the code of conduct, what should they be doing? They do audits, report to the public on those results and tell the public who their suppliers are. Apple seems to be doing all that we ask of an effective global retailer.

Q: Are there conflicts of interest between the FLA and the companies it audits, such as Apple?

Hartman: The way to resolve a conflict of interest is through disclosure, and if Apple comes clean and says we're a member, here are the protections the FLA puts in place, it can protect against the impact of conflicts of interest. On one hand, if Apple didn't join the FLA, they're ignoring the fact that there are ways they could be a better advocate for labor issues. By joining, Apple is saying, "We represent these civil society companies and organizations dedicated to improving conditions."

Q: Why has Apple come under more intense fire than, say, Dell or Hewlett-Packard, which have faced similar complaints?

Gellman: Consumers buy into the brand of Apple because it seems tied up with the slogan, "Think Different." It's about this idea of "I don't go with the flow, I'm not the usual corporate American type who never challenges the status quo." This might make them more inclined to care about issues like child labor or worker suicides.

Q: How do you see this playing out?

Zimmer: Apple will not bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. without some super efficient machine to assemble these things, and I don't think that's on the horizon. It's a question of how long people will keep this on their minds. It wasn't that long ago that Apple published a list of who their suppliers were. They saw this coming and signed on for this independent auditor to go in, so they're obviously very concerned about it.

Gellman: My initial reaction is, Apple's not going to have to change its practices. Americans prefer a less expensive iPod and don't want to think too hard about where it comes from or who makes it. But historical examples like the movement against chain stores in the '20s, sit-ins at segregated lunch counters in the '60s, and even the anti-apartheid boycott of South African goods show us that consumers do have the power to pressure employers and governments to make conditions less abusive.

Hartman: Some might argue that Apple should cancel their Foxconn contracts and go to other suppliers. I would argue against that approach because Foxconn is enormous and might be best able to meet these demands. And if Apple canceled, it would hurt Foxconn and the workers (whom Apple protesters and labor groups are) trying to help. Instead, if Apple stays, it can engage and use that pressure as leverage to require that Foxconn raise their standards.

ksamuelson@tribune.com

Outside Opinion is a forum for local business executives, economists, analysts and academics to discuss their take on the business topics of the day. Send submissions, suggestions, questions or comments to businessvoices@tribune.com

Chicago 430 S. Michigan Ave.Chicago, IL 60605(312) 341-3500 Directions & Maps

Schaumburg 1400 N. Roosevelt Blvd.Schaumburg, IL 60173(847) 619-7300 Directions & Maps

Roosevelt Online http://www.roosevelt.edu/ruonline/