Apple likely to remain with Foxconn despite suicide
updated 11:35 am EDT, Fri July 24, 2009
Apple to stay with Foxconn
Apple is unlikely to drop Foxconn as a manufacturing partner, in spite of the implications of a worker's suicide, industry sources in Taiwan suggest. The worker, Sun Danyong, jumped off a building on July 16th following an incident involving a missing iPhone prototype. Although Danyong informed his superiors about the missing device, he was treated to a harsh interrogation by Foxconn security, including solitary confinement and a search of his home. It is also alleged that Danyong may have been beaten.
Apple maintains a strict secrecy policy around new products, which typically carries over to its partners. Although public opinion could turn against Apple if the company is seen as supporting human rights abuses, economic interests are said to deter a quick manufacturer switch. Current product development involves a close collaboration on technologies, the sources say, of the sort which cannot be easily carried over to another contractor.
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Jun 2007
Worth the moral price?
Steve Jobs is obsessed with privacy and security; has been his whole life. It's an obsession that has put Apple at an advantage and also in high legal and public relations exposure. How convenient that Apple was able to move production offshore to a country with such a poor human rights record that it allows for employers to beat and imprison their employees, and to search their homes without legal warrant. Are we to believe that this is really the first of such abuses? I doubt it. This is beyond the pale. How about canceling that FoxConn contract and bringing those jobs home to America where workers have some rights against illegal search and seizure, against illegal imprisonment, where people are innocent until proven guilty and have a right to trial by independent parties instead of being hounded to suicide by a vindictive corporation that has already decided upon a worker's guilt? Or are American's simply too greedy for cheap iPods to tolerate having to pay for someone else to have the rights they themselves enjoy? Is owning an iPod really worth being a party to this?