2 BE2601 S08 NgSuYingOlivia Ethical Assignment
In recent decades, corporate social responsibility (CSR) has gained increased attention on the global forefront. Businesses are challenged to act beyond their economic well-being, with the ethicality and sustainability of a firm determined largely based on its ability to meet the “Triple P bottom line” of People, Planet and Profit10.
In 2012, Foxconn Technology Group, a supplier to electronics giants Apple, Microsoft, Sony and Amazon.com16 came under public scrutiny for multiple unethical issues. Foxconn’s “hellish” work environment was criticized. It pushed employees to work excessive 60-hour work weeks beyond the 49-hour legal limit6 to meet unsustainable production targets. Workers were banned from talking, limited to three toilet breaks in gruelling 14-hour work shifts14 and meted out with corporal punishments like push-ups if they were too slow5. Short-term revenues were prioritized over long-term considerations resulting in the neglect of staff welfare. Conditions were so dire, it drove 18 employees to suicide and attempted suicide7. To cut costs and maintain profit margins, workers were underpaid5 and chemicals used to clean touchscreens of mobile devices were substituted with a cheaper chemical- N-hexanne. This toxic chemical can cause eye, skin and respiratory tract irritation, with prolonged exposure leading to nerve damage and paralysis20. In order to avoid financial costs, Foxconn had blatantly disregarded basic human rights to a safe working environment. Factory audits have surfaced the same unethical problems year after year, showing that Foxconn considers ethics to be more as a public relations tool to “avoid embarrassment”.
Foxconn’s unethical behaviour was dictated by the theory of relativism, utilitarianism and egoism.
According to War-on-Want, a non-profit organisation that fights international poverty, sweatshops are prevalent in manufacturing-oriented China, with 150 million Chinese subject to morally repugnant working conditions19. It is
In 2012, Foxconn Technology Group, a supplier to electronics giants Apple, Microsoft, Sony and Amazon.com16 came under public scrutiny for multiple unethical issues. Foxconn’s “hellish” work environment was criticized. It pushed employees to work excessive 60-hour work weeks beyond the 49-hour legal limit6 to meet unsustainable production targets. Workers were banned from talking, limited to three toilet breaks in gruelling 14-hour work shifts14 and meted out with corporal punishments like push-ups if they were too slow5. Short-term revenues were prioritized over long-term considerations resulting in the neglect of staff welfare. Conditions were so dire, it drove 18 employees to suicide and attempted suicide7. To cut costs and maintain profit margins, workers were underpaid5 and chemicals used to clean touchscreens of mobile devices were substituted with a cheaper chemical- N-hexanne. This toxic chemical can cause eye, skin and respiratory tract irritation, with prolonged exposure leading to nerve damage and paralysis20. In order to avoid financial costs, Foxconn had blatantly disregarded basic human rights to a safe working environment. Factory audits have surfaced the same unethical problems year after year, showing that Foxconn considers ethics to be more as a public relations tool to “avoid embarrassment”.
Foxconn’s unethical behaviour was dictated by the theory of relativism, utilitarianism and egoism.
According to War-on-Want, a non-profit organisation that fights international poverty, sweatshops are prevalent in manufacturing-oriented China, with 150 million Chinese subject to morally repugnant working conditions19. It is
References: 1. Bateman, T. S., & Snell, S. (2011). Management: Leading & collaborating in a competitive world (9th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill/Irwin. 2 3. Bloom, D. (2012, April 30). Foxconn CEO Terry Gou: "What 's wrong with sweatshops?". Retrieved from http://news.techeye.net/business/foxconn-ceo-terry-gou-whats-wrong-with-sweatshops 4 5. Durhigg, C. (2012, January 25). Apple’s iPad and the human costs for workers in China. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/26/business/ieconomy-apples-ipad-and-the-human-costs-for-workers-in-china.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2& 6 7. Heffernan, M. (2013, August 7). What happened after the Foxconn suicides. Retrieved from http://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-happened-after-the-foxconn-suicides/ 8 9. Kan, M. (2015, February 3). Foxconn draws flak from Chinese trade union for overworking employees. Retrieved from http://www.pcworld.com/article/2879352/foxconn-draws-flak-from-chinese-trade-union-for-overworking-employees.html 10 11. Lee, H. L. (2010, October). Don’t tweak your supply chain—Rethink it end to end. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2010/10/dont-tweak-your-supply-chain-rethink-it-end-to-end/ar/1 12 13. Mishkin, S., & Palmer, M. (2012, September 24). Foxconn survives on thin slices of Apple. Retrieved from http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/170a225c-0356-11e2-a284-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3Qx9oXydQ 14 17. Students and Scholars Against Corporate Misbehaviour. (2010, October 13). Workers as Machines: Military Management in Foxconn. Retrieved from http://sacom.hk/workers-as-machines-military-management-in-foxconn/ 18 19. War on Want., & SACOM. (2015, January). Sweatshops in China. Retrieved from http://www.waronwant.org/overseas-work/sweatshops-and-plantations/china-sweatshops 20 21. Yglesias, M. (2012, September 25). Foxconn getting by on $8 per iPhone. Retrieved from http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012/09/25/foxconn_getting_by_on_8_per_iphone.html