Discussion
of Apple’s massive cash pile comes amid critical accounts of worker
exploitation in the corporation’s overseas manufacturing
operations. Claims of low pay, long hours, no breaks, and no benefits are exacerbated by reports of worker
injuries, explosions, deaths and suicides at Apple component maker mega-factories in China.

While swelling
consumer (and stockholder) demand prompts production processes that diminish
manufacturing time, supply chain problems can rapidly damage a multinational
corporation’s reputation. For example, the anti-sweatshop movement emerged
from similar labor scrutiny of Nike in the 1990s. The apparel titan would introduce
reforms designed to eradicate worker maltreatment by overseas suppliers who
make products under its license and even opened those operations to
inspection. 

James
M. Cooney, a labor arbitrator and instructor in the Department of Labor Studies and Employment
Relations at Rutgers’ School of Management and Labor Relations,
discusses recent criticism of Apple and its overseas suppliers and the
importance of remaining proactive regarding labor missteps.

James M. Cooney is an instructor at Rutgers' School of Management and Labor Relations.

In my
opinion, it would be best for Apple to continue to fess up to these issues, and
the company has attempted to be responsive to some degree. Apple developed a Supplier
Code of Conduct in 2005 and recently released a list of its overseas suppliers,
presumably to show that the company welcomes public scrutiny of its overseas
labor practices. Notwithstanding these measures, it is clear that there is still
serious tension between the company’s stated desire to improve labor conditions
while not creating undue conflict with suppliers that will impede the delivery
of new products. 

What are some
of the pros and cons of such an admission?

This
approach would build public trust and confidence that Apple has concern for the
workers who help build its products. There does not appear to be any benefit in
Apple denying the existence of labor problems, as there has been extensive
coverage of the issue by the media and activist groups. Any attempt to deny the
problems would lack credibility.    

How much of Apple’s workforce is in
the United States? Overseas?

Recent
figures show that Apple directly employs approximately 43,000 workers in the
United States and 20,000 workers overseas. However, approximately 700,000
workers who produce Apple products are employed by Apple’s suppliers, and the
vast majority of those jobs are held overseas. Earlier this month, Apple
published the results of a study it commissioned, which purports that the company
has “created or supported” 514,000 American jobs based on the sale of its
products in the United States. There is,
however, substantial debate amongst economists as to the accuracy of this
study.

Could Apple
guarantee acceptable working conditions and supplier compliance by moving work
back to the United States under its own direct supervision? 

While
stronger U.S. labor and employment laws certainly would help curb many of the
abuses seen in overseas plants, it is very unlikely that Apple will agree to relocate
production-level work currently performed by its overseas suppliers to the
United States.  The company predictably
would complain that it would be placed at a competitive disadvantage in terms
of labor costs and the resulting higher costs of its products. In the end, it
appears that Apple’s policies are focused more on providing products to please
consumers, and that little to no emphasis has been placed on the possible
creation of production jobs for American workers.