
Foxconn workers threatened mass suicide for their working conditions - EwanToo
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/technology/2012/01/foxconn-still-hard-place-work/47193/
======
maratd
One of the hallmark properties of a market economy is that you have choice.
You don't like your compensation? You quit. The truth is that everyone at the
factory is there because they want to be. Because it beats being back on the
farm. But still, Foxconn created the problem.

When Western media freaked out over the suicides, Foxconn got scared. They
started making their employees sign non-suicide agreements. What? That is the
height of stupidity. If a worker wants to commit suicide, a contract isn't
going to stop them. However, if a worker does _not_ want to kill themselves
... it creates a new bargaining opportunity.

I have zero sympathy for Foxconn on this. They created the problem with a bad
business decision, by explicitly broadcasting where they were vulnerable and
making themselves even more vulnerable.

You don't need to be sympathetic with the workers either. They're just
negotiating for higher pay in a unique way. Completely within their rights.
Nobody is jumping. The ones who are going to jump won't advertise it or ask
for anything beforehand.

~~~
zasz
Okay, let me see if I got this straight. Foxconn workers are picking between
two shitty jobs. Job A is worse than Job B. Job A is so bad that they are
threatening to commit suicide. What kind of choice is this?

~~~
philwelch
Genuinely suicidal people don't threaten to commit suicide, they just do it.
These people tipped their hand by coming off the roof without Foxconn
conceding to their demands. If idle threats to commit suicide are a surefire
indication that someone's being mistreated, then millions of teenage ex-
boyfriends and ex-girlfriends are mistreated, too.

Threatening to jump off a building shows even less conviction than a genuine
hunger strike (which _will_ kill you more effectively than picketing on a
rooftop making idle threats). IRA terrorists have engaged in hunger strikes to
get released from prison--does that mean it's abusive to imprison terrorists?

~~~
zasz
Not everyone who is suicidal does so because they are mentally ill. People
kill themselves for political causes, too. It's kind of a thing for monks to
set themselves on fire as a means of political protest.

Source: [http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/10/world/asia/tibet-
march/index.h...](http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/10/world/asia/tibet-
march/index.html)

Also, Gandhi went on hunger strikes.

~~~
drumdance
Not to mention the Arab Spring.

------
ChuckMcM
Lots of conflicting thoughts here.

It seems pretty clear that the workers think that their working conditions are
unjust. Further, they apparently would be OK with those conditions if they got
more money.

That suggests they don't consider them inhumane, (not justified regardless of
pay) rather they are economically unjust.

The truth of whether or not they are economically unjust (in a market driven
economy, which China isn't really) is that if they quit there will be no one
else to fill those roles (economic scarcity created by a price imbalance).
However if there are people who will fill those roles at the prices offered,
then they will simply be out of a job.

It is always true in market controlled transactions that the buyer thinks they
are paying too much for a good and the seller thinks they are paying too
little. It's the fulcrum that creates the equilibrium point for the price of a
good or service.

So in a dispassionate economic way one can say the employees are working to
maximize their own economic value. If by periodically pulling stunts like this
gets them more pay then they are doing their part to improve their economic
station at the expense of the company. The company of course may try to use
that to increase the price they charge to assemble such devices, and perhaps
give some of that increase to their working staff.

Saying that their other option is to 'starve' seems improbable in a country
that is based on the communist teachings of Mao and Marx. One might presume
(but I don't know since I don't live there) that there are state jobs
available. I could certainly understand it if those state jobs were less
desirable. But what I do know is that nothing, and I really do mean nothing,
is the same regarding working in China as it is in any western (non-communist
/ non-totalitarian) country. The best one can hope for looking in from the
outside are shadows of those things that are creating them.

~~~
gerggerg
I don't agree. First, education levels among Foxconn employees are probably
considerably lower than you can imagine. These people just don't fully
understand how inhumane their jobs are or the lasting effects of the chemicals
they work with and are probably directly lied to about it. Second they may
already be owed money by Foxconn for overtime, healthcare, regular wages etc.
and can't just outright quit out of fear of never seeing any of that money.
Third there's a never ending supply of new workers, ignorant to the conditions
in the factory, which pretty much nullifies their ability to bargain for
rights. Fourth, according to the recent This American Life episode, THEY CAN
BE LEGALLY PUNISHED FOR TRYING TO FORM UNIONS. I don't know how to stress the
importance of that other than by raising my voice on the internet. HN doesn't
have bolding.

TLDR:

They can't bargain. Plain and simple.

We have worker protections. If all that mattered was the free market then we
wouldn't need them.

~~~
ChuckMcM
I completely relate to the emotion, in California we've had folks like Caesar
Chavez organize to overthrow the exploitation of immigrant farm workers.

I'm saying that the article says they want more money. I'm sure there are lots
of other things they want too but as I mentioned its very dangerous to assume
anything when dealing with a culture and political climate that is so very
different from one you are in or grew up in.

You point out that _"Third there's a never ending supply of new workers, ..."_
That is, unfortunately, the economic force that is allowing these conditions
to persist.

It suggests that one way to put pressure on Foxconn would be to cut off that
supply through education and outreach to the people immigrating from the rural
areas but I have no idea how that might be accomplished.

~~~
gerggerg
I agree that a long term strategy for improving working conditions involves
access to quality education but I don't think that pertains to the issue being
discussed nor is it very helpful to the people described in the article. The
sad fact is these people are living their lives now and have virtually no
bargaining power now. So they've taken to following the example set by the
desperate measures of their former co-workers as a last ditch effort to eek
out a fight. Perhaps the mass suicide was dis-genuine and they just wanted
media attention. This to me is an indicator of what they feel they have to do
to get a semblance of justice. Or that they genuinely have no idea how to
stand up to their employer. An employer, mind you, that requires them to sign
a contract stating that they will not commit suicide on the job. Think about
that. Where would you be if you got paid $2 an hour to stand on your feet for
12 hours a day working with toxic chemicals without proper safety measures,
having had signed a contract stating you wouldn't commit suicide, with no
legal right to organize coworkers to even discuss how to improve working
conditions, and don't have enough education to understand any of it other than
your legs hurt, your hands won't stop shaking, and you haven't yet received
any money for that overtime you put in to make electronics you'll never see
people in your own country using.

wages: [http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/06/06/us-foxconn-
china-i...](http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/06/06/us-foxconn-china-
idUSTRE6551EX20100606)

------
Karunamon
FTA: _(apple) so obsessed it even programmed Siri to avert uncomfortable
questions about its origins_

... _freakin' really???_ And I suppose that when I ask Siri in jest to open
the pod bay doors, I should be worried that my phone is plotting my demise
based on the response?

~~~
Homunculiheaded
I think this may be a reference to the recent episode of This American Life on
the topic [0]. On that program they use this issue as a light introduction to
the main theme, just a curious feature of Siri that when you dive deeper leads
to an interesting story.

[0] [http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-
archives/episode/454/m...](http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-
archives/episode/454/mr-daisey-and-the-apple-factory)

~~~
Karunamon
What I was expressing such shock at was the way they phrased it. If you look
at the image to the right of the offending sentence, it's a Siri screenshot
with

Siri, where were you made? Siri: That's classified.

I don't think this is Apple "programming siri to avert uncomfortable
questions" as much as another joking response to a nonsense question along the
lines of "Open the pod bay doors" or "What is the meaning of life".

The implication struck me as utterly absurd.

~~~
MartinCron
Siri _was_ able to answer the "where were you designed?" question with
"Designed by Apple in California", so it may or may not be just joking
response to a nonsense question.

------
louislouis
"Instead of the raise they requested, these workers were given the following
ultimatum: quit with compensation, or keep their jobs with no pay increase.
Most quit and never got the money."

That's a pretty shitty thing to do. Had the manufacturing process not been
outsourced to Foxconn, would this kind of behavior fly under the Apple or
Microsoft brand image? Probably not.

------
jfoutz
I think it's time for me to check out of the smartphone game. I really like
them for travel, but this is crazy.

~~~
marknutter
Why not just ditch every piece of technology then?

~~~
jfoutz
It's a really tough call. Is it ok to keep using the phone i have? well, yeah.
the damage is done. i'd think of that as something like a vintage fur. the
animal won't get any more dead.

the bigger question is, is working at foxconn better than starving on the
farm? I don't know much about rural China. I have a hard time believing that
people would be driven to suicide without the factory job.

also, a lot of stuff i could likely make myself - i'm just to freaking lazy to
buy the parts, solder them up, 3d print a case, and code up the OS.

I'm not saying every company needs to be lilly white, but i'd pay an extra $50
for a device that had a significantly lower probability of driving the maker
to suicide.

\-- edit -- to be clear, i could get a lot of what i want out of something
like this: <http://www.adafruit.com/products/330> \+ wifi + gps. i'm pretty
sure i can get a cellular connection via a sparkfun board.

of course, i'd never get through security with a battery hungry monstrosity
like that, but it's pretty doable.

Also, someone will probably point out the parts come from places far worse
than foxconn, so perhaps i'm screwed.

~~~
srdev
I'm not sure what marknutter's intent was, but Foxconn really manufactures a
lot of stuff beyond smartphones. PCs typically have Foxconn parts in them, as
do routers. Any tablet you own has a good probability of being touched by
Foxconn. Even if you get away from Foxconn completely, a lot of Chinese
manufacturers have the same problems with less press.

So the more pertinent question in my mind is, "Is there any company that sells
ethically built technical gear?"

~~~
dreamdu5t
I think the pertinent question is, "What constitutes ethically built technical
gear?"

~~~
philwelch
Aren't there some rare elements that are necessary for semiconductors to work
that are only mined in impoverished African countries with poor political
stability, working, and environmental conditions? Try going your life without
ever using a semiconductor. You can't. Everything in the world is indirectly
produced by a semiconductor. You'd have to practically move to Africa and
become an open pit miner yourself.

On the other hand, people are fond of pointing out that people who work at
Foxconn are choosing what is far and away the best of all available options.
So it's really a matter of cultural relativism whether a given set of
conditions is good or bad. 100 years from now, are people going to feel guilty
about using software that was developed by programmers working in cubicles?
It's more likely than you think.

------
mbesto
Some meta here:

 _After the incident, Microsoft gave Kotaku's Brian Ashcraft the following
statement.

Foxconn has been an important partner of ours and remains an important
partner. I trust them as a responsible company to continue to evolve their
process and work relationships. That is something we remain committed to—the
safe and ethical treatment of people who build our products. That's a core
value of our company._

Is there anything human about this statement? Clearly they have never been
committed to this. You know what sounds human to me? Someone admitting a
mistake has been made and fixing it with clear actionable items. I hope I
speak for the masses when I say I'm completely desensitized by comments like
this in today's world, because I simply don't believe it.

------
Volpe
Wow this comment thread is depressing.

Anyone who can't see the exploitation in this has their head in the sand.

If you are paying/treating people less (in value) than what they contribute
(in value) back to you, you are exploiting them. Simple as that.

Apple have taken to boasting how great their profit margins are, another way
to look at that, is to say they are boasting at how well they can exploit
others (suppliers and consumers).

Seriously, stop rationalising that your iDevice/Android is a moral device, it
isn't in a utilitarian, or deontological sense, by any stretch. Only some weak
relativistic point of view can justify it. But that's what helps people sleep
at night, so we all just hover around there.

~~~
Dylan16807
That is a terrible definition of exploitation. You're saying that even a
single dollar of profit qualifies.

How are you even defining value? What if I like bananas more than shirts and
you the opposite? Do we somehow exploit each other when we trade?

~~~
Volpe
how do you justify profit not qualifying?

bananas and shirts have an intrinsic value, it isn't subjective, they cost X
to produce/ship, that's their value. The rest is exploitation.

Of course, a pro-capitalist isn't going to like this line of thinking, as it
is explicitly anti-capitalism.

~~~
Dylan16807
Cost to produce is along the lines of what I expected you to answer, but I
don't understand. Am I not to collect a wage as the runner of the business
even if I'm not doing production work? Or is that in fact included in the
'cost to produce' and then you have to figure out a wage with no logical
reference frame?

And how is a business going to get the capital to start if it can't take in
money to pay interest? If that would be allowed you're dangerously close to
capitalism.

Also I disagree that your idea is in fact anti-capitalist. Paying people based
on the value they provide in exchange would favor giving successful wall-
street fund managers hundreds of millions of dollars which seems supremely
capitalist. (the business itself being exploitative to externals doesn't
really matter here)

~~~
Volpe
runner of a business? what is that? Does that mean you are living off the
surplus value of your workers? or are you a worker yourself? Your "wage" is
decided by your work isn't it? i.e if banana is worth x and you pick 5 of
them, then you earned 5x no?

I don't understand your capital/interest point.

except in a world of no-profit companies... wall street fund managers wouldn't
exist.

~~~
Dylan16807
I'm talking about the guy in the back that tracks all the bananas and
schedules the deliveries and orders the equipment and all the other logistics
on this banana team. Does he not get paid? Or does this job not exist somehow?

Creating a banana farm takes money. Who is going to do it? If there are no
profits then nobody that focuses on money will bother, and nobody that focuses
on rewarding labor can get a loan either.

And fine, if you won't ignore the nonexistence of fund managers long enough to
answer a question about principles I'll try a different tack. If I invent a
banana picker that saves ten million dollars am I entitled to ten million
dollars? Value in, value out.

~~~
Volpe
sorry to rankle you. I'm not meaning to. More playing out a thought
experiment.

So this hypothetical (socialist) banana farm, in order not to disadvantage
anyone, would have to be owned by the local community (and ultimately the
nation), given private ownership wouldn't exist. People aren't focused on
money, or profit, they are focused on bananas, because they enjoy contributing
to society.

> If I invent a banana picker that saves ten million dollars am I entitled to
> ten million dollars.

You are phrasing the question from a capitalist centric point of view. If you
invent a banana picker, that is super efficient (and in a capitalist workforce
would allow you to cut costs but firing your ten million dollar workforce)
then you could just let your workers work less, given there is no profit, and
you are already servicing the needs of your community with bananas. So perhaps
the workers can think of improvements to other parts of the process, like
shipping, or perhaps you just want to give them more time to their family.

It's actually very difficult to think about, given we have an innate
capitalist view of things.

Hypotheticals aside, Is it really a controversial point to say that "profit"
and "free markets" (while providing an efficient way to price things)
motivates a whole lot of behaviours not in the "public good". Should we not
explore other alternatives?

~~~
Dylan16807
Don't worry, I'm not rankled.

So you're saying there isn't private ownership of any objects but there is
private ownership of money? That's not something I had realized about your
scenario and if I've got it right I find it strange.

Or do people not get paid in private money and I don't understand your
original point about pay whatsoever.

And yes that scenario I was making is deliberately about an exploitative
capitalist.

Yes, profits lead to both good and bad.

------
moocow01
Very sad.

I think this should be seen as a case for why robotic automation should be
encouraged wherever and whenever possible. There tends to be an undertone of
fear when we talk about automation - fear that robots and technology are going
to eliminate everyone's job. Lets also consider that certain jobs out there
are not suitable or healthy for breathing, thinking, creative, unique humans
(which we all are) to be doing.

~~~
siculars
True, to a point. But I would also say that there should just be better
working conditions, better pay, more vacation and better benefits.

------
tlogan
This article pretty much sums up why revolutions happen.

------
drhowarddrfine
When I hear about these things I can't help but think, this is how it is over
there. This may be their culture and way of life. So how should we think about
that? I do know that some have expressed unhappiness over the hours but, in
the NPR story, I didn't sense it was grief. So I'm just unclear what to think.

------
shareme
I would say that is checkmate Foxconn

~~~
sosuke
What if Foxconn just doesn't respond? Would anything actually happen to them
if the people mass suicided?

~~~
juiceandjuice
Would you buy a bloodPhone?

~~~
elliottcarlson
Considering how much was already known about the working conditions as well as
suicides at Foxconn, it hasn't slowed down sales. I'm sure a mass suicide
would get more media attention, but who knows how it would actually affect
their bottom line.

~~~
drumdance
You never know where that kind of thing could lead. Perhaps the Occupy Wall
Street crowd would rally around it.

------
marknutter
So all the people working there who are willing to take extreme measures to
improve the working conditions are planning to eliminate themselves from the
equation? Seems like they're doing Foxconn a favor. What ever happened to
going on strike?

~~~
Klinky
Going on strike in China _is suicide_...

~~~
marknutter
Well, if they're planning on killing themselves anyways, what's the
difference?

~~~
capisce
Going on strike wouldn't be effective, there are tons of people waiting in
line to replace them. Apparently people are even paying "recruiters" for these
jobs, or agreeing to go without salary the first month.

