Making the assumption that they would find other customers. Imagine Greenpeace saying "why is company X using Y as a supplier, when Apple cancelled their contract with Y because they are exploiting their employees and destroying the environment"?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Releases 2012 Supplier Responsibility Progress Report and Supplier List
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Making the assumption that they would find other customers. Imagine Greenpeace saying "why is company X using Y as a supplier, when Apple cancelled their contract with Y because they are exploiting their employees and destroying the environment"?
I think they mean violations of Chinese environmental laws. I have done a good deal of work in China's environmental sector (several years), and I'd be fine with that standard. China generally has strong environmental laws but enforcement is very spotty.
Large, rich, foreign, and non-state owned companies (like Apple's suppliers) are more likely to be held to strict compliance. Richer provinces (where most Apple products are made) also are much better at enforcing their environmental laws. The bad polluters tend to be state owned companies or locally owned factories in poorer regions.
Be under no illusion fanboys. Apple is ONLY interested in making money. It does not care about the people who make their products. They will only grudgingly pay lip-service to the issues of human rights and dignity for the sake of PR. If slavery was still legal in the US then Apple would likely have the greatest number of forced labor workhouses in the US operating 24/7. Their products are brilliant but their morals stink. Apple have the financial and political clout to change things for the better for asian workers overnight....but the shareholders would go ape and the CEO would be fired. Their agenda has only one single item...to make as much money as possible at whatever cost. You would have to be naive to think otherwise.
And what evidence do you have for your opinion?
There are some companies in the world that refuse to make money their top priority, and as a result end up being highly successful and making tons of money. That usually happens when a company makes customer satisfaction and employee satisfaction their top priority. Many people don't get it. Most CEO's don't get it. But Steve Jobs did get it, and Tim Cook would have to be a complete moron if he hadn't figured it out yet. There are other companies as well. Motto: "If you look after your customers, and you look after your employees, then the stock will look after the shareholders all by itself".
Summary: You don't have a clue what you are talking about.
And if you started a company and employed people, your soul purpose would be to take care of the workers. Think about your first sentence real carefully.
Yes, since Apple is paying the suppliers they have very little control over them, much like employers have little control over their employees.
Does anyone know who within Apple's management structure oversees supplier responsibility? I can't find anything at all about a corporate citizenship team, and while I know there's a "Supplier Responsibility" team, can't figure out who they roll up to.