The discussion around where our clothes come from is a popular one. People are beginning to understand and prioritize ethically made clothing. But what about when it comes to technology? Well, to start, we don’t buy as many phones and laptops as we do t-shirts and Pants, and we don’t have as many options when it comes to buying them. However, that doesn’t mean giant tech companies should get off scot-free for using sweatshops for their production.
Apple and Samsung are the two most popular smartphone brands in the world, but their factories are anything but smart. Here’s what you need to know about how your Samsung and Apple technology is made.
Samsung Sweatshops
In 2017, a report on a large Samsung factory in Vietnam exposed the company for treating its mostly female employees terribly. The women dealt with neurological and reproductive problems and suffered severe health issues linked to exposure and overwork. The raw materials required to make fancy smartphones are literally taking lives. Miscarriages are incredibly common and often expected. The endless hours of standing, exposure to toxic materials, and physically and emotionally draining work have meant that many women have suffered miscarriages.
A South Korean Samsung factory was no better. Like other smartphone factories, workers suffered from leukemia, lupus, lymphoma, and multiple sclerosis. There have been over 200 documented cases of terminal illness in Samsung factory workers. South Korean authorities have helped the factories cover up the deadly issues related to exposure at Samsung chip and display factories. This has stopped sick employees from receiving the compensation they deserve. A supreme court ruling denied any financial compensation to Samsung plant worker Lee Yoon-Jung’s family. She died at 32 from a brain tumor.
Apple Sweatshops
We can’t talk about Apple without mentioning Foxconn, which manufactures a lot of its technology. At one point, Foxconn’s 1.4 square-mile flagship plant in Longhua employed about 450,000 workers. In 2010, assembly-line workers began killing themselves. The factory had 18 reported suicide attempts and 14 documented deaths that year alone. One worker confided that “It wouldn’t be Foxconn without people dying. Every year people kill themselves. They take it as a normal thing.”
When it came to how workers felt about being there, he said, “They call Foxconn a fox trap because it tricks a lot of people.” They were originally promised free housing, but once they moved in, they were charged extremely high rates for electricity and water. The dorms sleep eight, although there was a time when they used to sleep twelve.
Workers at Foxconn will be fined if they try to quit before the first three months. They are trapped in an environment that does not care enough about them to treat them right but will not let them leave, either.
We think of Apple as the modern, sleek tech brand. When we get a new iPhone, everything about it seems perfect. After all, we’ve paid enough money for it to be as close to perfection as possible. In reality, 1,700 iPhones pass through a single assembly-line worker’s hands every day. That same worker then goes to sleep in an overcrowded dorm and regularly has co-workers commit suicide around her. Nothing about that is modern or impressive.
These Are Not Isolated Instances
Samsung and Apple are not special. Google has been accused of wage theft and called a “white-collar sweatshop”. Microsoft, Sony, Nokia, and several other tech companies have been accused of using forced labor camps in China. Whenever a piece comes out about one of these tech giants using sweatshops, they release a statement expressing their concern and that they’re launching an investigation. As far as we can tell, nothing has changed. When will giant corporations stop encouraging and inflicting suffering on laborers? And who’s going to hold them legally responsible for these lives?
Related Content:
- 8 Times the Textile Industry Got Busted for Human Rights Violations
- U.S. Restricts Apparel and Tech Products Made by Chinese Producers in Xinjiang Suspected to Use Forced Labor
- How the Chinese Government is Abusing its Muslim Minority Group, Uighurs
For more Animal, Earth, Life, Vegan Food, Health, and Recipe content published daily, subscribe to theOne Green Planet Newsletter! Lastly, being publicly-funded gives us a greater chance to continue providing you with high-quality content. Please considersupporting us by donating!
Being publicly-funded gives us a greater chance to continue providing you with high-quality content.Click here to Support Us
Drawing from my expertise and depth of knowledge on the topic, let me first validate the issues presented in the article by discussing various facets, including the historical context, corporate responsibility, labor conditions, and public perception.
-
Historical Context: Over the years, multinational corporations, including tech giants like Apple, Samsung, Microsoft, Google, and Sony, have faced scrutiny for their supply chain practices. This is not a recent phenomenon. Concerns about labor conditions, environmental impact, and human rights violations have emerged time and again, prompting investigations, media exposés, and public debates.
-
Corporate Responsibility: While these companies often tout their commitments to sustainability and corporate social responsibility (CSR), the ground reality in many of their overseas factories tells a different story. CSR initiatives are only as good as their implementation. Companies need to ensure that their supply chains adhere to ethical labor practices, prioritize worker safety, and respect human rights.
-
Labor Conditions: The article rightly highlights alarming conditions in factories, such as those run by Samsung and Foxconn. Workers face grueling hours, unsafe working conditions, limited rights, and often live in substandard accommodations. These conditions can lead to severe health issues, mental stress, and, tragically, loss of life. The high-pressure environment, coupled with low wages and limited mobility, creates a cycle of exploitation.
-
Public Perception and Accountability: Despite repeated exposés and public outcry, it appears that systemic change is slow. While some companies pledge reforms, critics argue that these measures are insufficient or merely symbolic. Consumers, activists, and regulators play crucial roles in holding corporations accountable. Public awareness campaigns, boycotts, and legislative measures can exert pressure on companies to improve their practices.
Now, diving into the specific concepts and terms used in the article:
-
Ethically made clothing: This refers to clothing produced under humane working conditions, where workers receive fair wages, safe working environments, and are treated with dignity and respect.
-
Sweatshops: These are workplaces characterized by poor working conditions, low wages, long hours, and often, violations of labor rights and human rights. Sweatshops prioritize profit over worker well-being.
-
Foxconn: A major manufacturer based in Taiwan, known for producing electronics for companies like Apple. It has faced scrutiny for its labor practices, including worker suicides and poor working conditions.
-
Corporate social responsibility (CSR): This is a business approach that aims to contribute positively to society and the environment. It involves ethical business practices, sustainability initiatives, philanthropy, and community engagement.
-
Forced labor camps: These are places where individuals are compelled to work against their will, often under exploitative conditions. Forced labor is a severe violation of human rights and international labor standards.
-
Uighurs: A predominantly Muslim ethnic minority group in China, subjected to human rights abuses, including forced labor, internment camps, and cultural suppression by the Chinese government.
In conclusion, the article sheds light on critical issues surrounding the production practices of tech giants and underscores the need for increased transparency, accountability, and ethical oversight in global supply chains. Addressing these challenges requires concerted efforts from corporations, governments, civil society, and consumers.
