answer the discussion questions

answer the questions on the discussion, please. there are 5 questions answer them clearly. see the attached file.please do not do it as Essay. I need you to answer each question by order you put the qestion and the answer under it. do not use contractions when you write like ” don’t, can’t, couldn’t etc..”thank you
__apple___s_supplier_code_of_conduct_and_foxconn___s_chinese_factories.docx

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
answer the discussion questions
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay

Apple’s Supplier Code of Conduct and Foxconn’s Chinese
Factories
In March 2012, the Fair Labor Association ( FLA) released the results of an
independent, month- long investigation, commissioned by Apple, on labor conditions
at three enormous Chinese factories where the company’s iPhones, iPads, and other
popular consumer electronics were manufactured. The FLA, a nongovernment
organization committed to promoting fair labor practices globally, found a number of
serious violations of Apple’s supplier code of conduct, as well of its own standards.
Among the key findings of the audit were these:
• During peak production periods, all three factories, which were operated by the
Taiwan-ese firm Foxconn, had exceeded the mandated limit of 60 hours of work per
week, and many employees had been required to work more than seven days in a
row.
• Fourteen percent of workers had not received fair pay for overtime. Workers were
paid in 30- minute increments, so if an employee worked 55 minutes of overtime, for
exam-ple, she would be paid for one half hour, not for the full period worked.
• Almost two- thirds of workers said that their pay did not meet their basic needs.
Average wages at Foxconn’s plants, the report said, were about $ 426 to $ 455 a
month, including overtime.
• Almost half said they had experienced an accident or injury at work or had
personally witnessed one. Many workers said they were in pain by the end of their
workday.
Particularly worrisome was the FLA’s discovery that Foxconn had instructed
employees on how to respond to questions during earlier audits conducted by Apple,
using what the FLA called a “ cheat sheet” to avoid detection of code violations.
At the time of the report, Apple was riding a wave of business success, lifted by a
series of innovative products and services. In 2012, Apple was the largest publicly
traded company in the world by market capitalization, with revenues exceeding those
of Google and Microsoft combined. The company directly employed more than
60,000 people and operated more than 350 stores in 10 countries, as well as its iTunes
online music store. Fortune magazine had named Apple the most admired company
in the world for four years in a row.
But there was a dark side to the company’s success. Since the 1990s, Apple had outsourced almost all of its manufacturing, mostly to China. The company’s biggest
supplier was Foxconn, which by 2012 had become the largest manufacturer of
consumer electron-ics in the world. Foxconn’s facility in Shenzhen, China— one of
three audited by the FLA— operated like a good- sized city, with its own dormitories,
cafeterias, hospital, swim-ming pool, and stores. In its complex of factories, 300,000
workers— many of them young women and men from rural areas— churned out
electronics for Sony, Dell, IBM, and other major brands, as well as Apple.
In 2006, a British newspaper ran a story alleging mistreatment of workers at the
Shenzhen facility. Apple investigated and found some violations of its supplier code of
conduct, which it had introduced in 2005. The following year, the company
published its first annual supplier responsibility progress report. By 2011, Apple had
inspected nearly 400 suppliers and had terminated 11 for serious violations. In 2010, a
series of developments focused a fresh spotlight on harsh conditions in Foxconn’s
factories. In a few short months, nine workers committed suicide by throwing
themselves from the upper floors of company dormitories. ( Foxconn responded by
putting up nets to catch jumpers, raising wages, and opening a counseling center.) In
2011, two separate explosions at factories where iPads were being made ( one was
Foxconn’s facility in Chengdu), apparently caused by a buildup of combustible
aluminum dust, injured 77 and killed four. At Wintek, another Chinese supplier, 137
workers were sickened after us-ing a toxic chemical called n- hexane to clean iPhone
screens.
In January 2012, the public radio show This American Life broadcast a feature by
mon-ologist Mike Daisey about his interviews with workers leaving their shifts at
Foxconn’s Shenzhen facility, which related in dramatic fashion their disturbing
stories. Although Daisey’s piece was later criticized for not being entirely factual, it
prompted some listeners to launch a petition drive on www. change. org that quickly
garnered more than a quarter million signatures calling on Apple to protect workers
that made their iPhones.
Just one week later, Apple announced it had joined the Fair Labor Association, the
first electronics company to do so. The FLA, founded in 1999, was a nonprofit alliance
of companies, universities, and human rights activists committed to ending sweatshop
condi-tions. At Apple’s request and with the company’s financial support, the FLA
immediately undertook the most extensive audit ever conducted of conditions in
China’s electronics supply chain. Auditors spent weeks inspecting Foxconn’s three big
Chinese factories, and 35,000 workers filled out anonymous questionnaires— on
iPads— about their experiences.
In response to the FLA’s findings, Apple issued a statement saying, “ Our team has
been working for years to educate workers, improve conditions and make Apple’s
supply chain a model for the industry, which is why we asked the FLA to conduct
these audits.” For its part, Foxconn agreed to reduce overtime from 80 to 36 hours per
month by July 2013, while raising wages to prevent workers from losing income. It
also agreed to pay workers retroactively for unpaid overtime and to improve health
and safety protections. “ That’s a major commitment,” said the head of the FLA. “ If
Apple and Foxconn can achieve that, they will have set a precedent for the
electronics sector.”
Sources: “ The Forbidden City of Terry Guo,” The Wall Street Journal, August 11,
2007; “ The Man Who Makes Your iPhone,” Bloomberg Businessweek, September 9,
2010; “ Fair Labor Association Secures Commitment to Limit Workers’ Hours, Protect
Pay at Apple’s Largest Supplier” [ press release], March 29, 2012, www. fairlabor. org;
“ A Trip to the iFactory: ‘ Nightline’ Gets an Unprecedented Glimpse Inside Apple’s
Chinese Core,” February 20, 2012, www. abcnews. go. com; “ How the U. S. Lost Out
on iPhone Work,” The New York Times, January 21, 2012; “ Electronics Giant
Vowing Reforms in China Plants,” The New York Times, March 29, 2012; “ Apple’s
Chief Puts Stamp on Labor Issues,” The New York Times, April 1, 2012; and “ Apple
Moves from Laggard to Sector Leader on Transparency,” March 30, 2012, www.
socialfunds. com . Apple’s Supplier Responsibility Progress Reports are available at
www. apple. com/ supplierresponsibility . The Fair Labor Association report is
available at www. fairlabor. org/ transparency/ complaints- investigations
www.fairlabor.org/transparency/complaints-investigations .
Discussion Questions
1. Do you think that Apple has demonstrated global corporate citizenship, as defined
in this chapter? Why or why not?
2. In its response to problems in its contractor factories, do you think Apple moved
through the stages of corporate citizenship presented in this chapter, or not? Why do
you think so?
3. What are the advantages and disadvantages to Apple of using its own companyspecific supplier code of conduct, rather than a global code, such as those discussed in
this chapter?
4. What are the advantages and disadvantages to Apple of using an independent thirdparty auditor, rather than rely solely on its own internal audits?

Purchase answer to see full
attachment

Order a unique copy of this paper
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
$26
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Urgency

Order your essay today and save 15% with the discount code ESSAYHELP