Compliance with Ethics when Owning an iPhone - Assignment Example

Is it Ethical to own an Apple? A Report on Ethical Dilemma College Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 0 Background Information 3 2.0 The ethical dilemma 3 3.0 Choosing to Use Apple’s Products 4 4.0 Choosing to reject the products 6 5.0 Making the right decision 7 6.0 References 9 Is it Ethical to own an Apple? 1.0 Background Information Today, Apple is a household name with many people possessing at least one of Apples products. In fact, the company is among the leading manufacturing of technological gadgets that have taken the market with a storm. The Ipod, iPad, iPhone and Mac are a few products that have set a benchmark in the technological industry, with the majority of smartphone and PC lovers aspiring to possess one of the gadgets that are recognized to be among the best in the market. However, few people know about how these gadgets are made and where they are made. Armitage (2013), in a story that appeared in one of the major U.K dailies, The Independent, on July 30 wrote a damaging report that put users of Apple products in a dilemma. (http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/even-worse-than-foxconn-apple-rocked-by-child-labour-claims-8736504.html) The report indicated that Foxconn, a Chinese company that produces most of the Apple products had been involved in major human rights abuses. These abuses ranged from offering poor working conditions to its workers, child labor, poor pay and other forms of human rights abuses in the line of producing the gadgets for Apple Company. People should always trade and use services of companies that observe the best of working standards and humans rights to the best extent possible as the least of their corporate social responsibility policies and values, while shunning those that do not.. 2.0 The ethical dilemma Foxconn is the main producer of Apple products and the company had been linked to massive abuses of human rights and labor laws. Apple, though a respected brand in the global market shares the blame for making huge profits by working with companies perpetrating gross human rights abuses and poor working conditions. Therefore, the main dilemma in this case is: is it right to own an Apple despite the gross human rights abuses related to these brands of products? Fig 1. A crowded working environment at Foxconn From the report above, the main dilemma is whether to own an Apple or not based on the gross human rights violations leveled against one of its main partners. Therefore, by using any of Apple’s products, the user would be contributing to the human rights abuses as the company has to produce more due to market demand. On the other hand, rejecting the company’s products may force Apple rethink its strategies and force Foxconn to operate in accordance to international labor laws, which will benefit the people working in these factories. However, choosing the latter decision would suggest that the user fail to benefit from using the company’s products, which are rated as some of the best in the market. For instance, iPhone competes with Samsung smartphones as the leading smartphone brand in the global market, which explains the opportunity cost of foregoing Apple’s products. Therefore, this is a dilemma, which may not be possible to solve by choosing any particular line of action. 3.0 Choosing to Use Apple’s Products Under the first option, the user would find it had to forego using Apples products due their utility benefits. The company has a huge portion of the U.S and the European markets, some of the most lucrative markets across the globe. A huge number of users explains the value of the products to users judged by the high market share of the company. As such, the most obvious choice that users of Apple’s products would make is to ignore the human rights abuses based on the value of the gadgets to the users and the fact that users are not directly affected. As such, users may feel not obliged to react if the final products, which are the most important aspect to a consumer, deliver and exceed their intended values. In choosing this option, users of Apple’s products would leave the human rights violations unabated and may even worsen as Foxconn increases its production to quench the huge demand of Apple products in the market. For instance, Mielach (2012) in an article appearing in the Business Daily noted that workers in Flaxconn were working longer than the stipulated numbers of working hours while earning between $15 and $ 22 per day, despite the long working hours and poor working conditions. Other abuses included employment of underage children in these companies who worked in the same crowded rooms as adults. Many users of Apple’s products have in most cases shrugged of this problem in that Apple is not directly linked to these abuses and due to the value of the gadgets to users. Therefore, Apple customers are directly responsible for the unabated violation of human rights as they continue to buy Apple’s products regardless of such reports. However, values and integrity require that people have to consider the record of companies that they deal. Such considerations before buying the product would ensure promotion of morals and ethics in the market by encouraging companies to be responsible not only to employees, but also to the environment. As the situation currently is, Apple’s customers are indirectly responsible for encouraging the continued abuse of human rights in factories producing Apple products. Consequently, Apple’s customers have to consider themselves responsible for abuses and human rights violations, though indirectly, by encouraging the company to produce in factories such as Flaxconn. Use of such companies might be motivated by the low cost of the gadgets, as a result of the low labor cost compared to the cost of such products when produced in the American market. However, a customer with strong values and characters has to reject such products based on their production history and the nature of abuses in the companies producing them. 4.0 Choosing to reject the products The second choice would involve outright rejection of Apples products based on the gross human right abuses in companies related to Apple. In this case, due to strong values of individuals, they would not wish to be involved with any product or company accused of gross human rights abuses. In the current market, for example, instead of choosing Apples products, such people would prefer using Samsung’s products or products of other competitors, but whose production is not related to any human rights abuses. Images and reports of many Chinese workers committing suicide as the one shown below is enough to compel such people from trading with the company or having any commercial relationship with such a company. However, this decision leads to some dilemmas and tough questions, which makes it hard to implement. Fig 2. Some Chinese workers who tried to commit suicide at Flaxconn Considering the many benefits and technological advancement of Apple products, would it be possible for a customer to shun these products based on such reports? For instance, as Armitage (2013) explains, the company has been involved in counter claims to refute such damaging reports, which a customer may choose to believe and ignore news reports about its trading partners. Due to the strong urge to use Apple’s products, an individual has to make biased and subjective conclusions that what the company states is the true picture of events compared to the image in which news reporters paint the company as having been involved in cases of gross human rights violations. Therefore, though rejecting the products at first instant, Apples counter defense would appeal to the instincts of such customers,who would find Apples arguments compelling than the arguments of the accusers. Therefore, such customers would ignore the accusing reports and embark on using Apple’s products again. However, making such a decision does not solve the main problem, which is that Apple has been and continues to be involved with companies that treat workers against the widely held values and international labour laws. Therefore, making a decision to use Apples products would be against the values of such customers and a dilemma which would be solved subjectively. 5.0 Making the right decision As observed, using the products of a company linked to gross human violations would be encouraging the vice to continue. In other words, such a company has to produce more to meet the demand in the market, which translates to more human rights violations. The trick is that instead of Apple being involved directly in low labour production cases, which comes about with such violations and inhuman working conditions, the company outsources its services to another manufacturer in areas where such labour laws and oversight are weak. In such a case, the company escapes any direct connection with such abuses and may feign ignorance about the continued abuses as far as the company receives its products at a low cost, which increases its profit margins. For instance, in the financial year 2012, Apple managed to make a $14 billion profit from the sales of its brands of products, a high profit that has been partly contributed by the low cost labour that the company enjoys from its production partners in China. This makes the company escape the tough labour laws in its home country. Therefore, customers of such companies have to be more critical and play an active role to enhance observance of values in the company. Considering the damaging news, customers have a duty to exert pressure on the company in forcing it to deal with business partners who observe labour laws. The company, due to fear of repercussions from its customers who believe in strong values, will have no option but to act according to its customer needs. Exerting pressure on the company requires an active and critical customer segment who have to face the company to act in accordance with the best values. Exerting pressure on the company may partially deal with the dilemma of either having or not having Apples products as customers act as important agents of the required changes to ensure the company forces its partners to act in accordance with the best practices in labour laws. In other words, ignoring the plight of the workers would amount to acting against values and a way to encourage abuses in the market. The question of either having or not buying Apple’s products would be a difficult dilemma based on the value of these products in the lives of customers. However, such a dilemma may be dealt with when customers use their power to exert pressure on the company to act in accordance with the right laws and values. Acting in such a way does not only solve the dilemma but also helps improve the lives of such workers. The decision would improve observance of labor laws in the market. 6.0 References Armitage, J. (2013).Even worse than Foxconn: Apple rocked by child labor claims. The Independent. http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/even-worse-than-foxconn-apple-rocked-by-child-labour-claims-8736504.html Mielach, D. (2012). Is It ethical to own an iPhone? Business News Daily. Retrieved from. http://www.businessnewsdaily.com/1979-owning-iphone-ethical.html Read More