Michael Capestrani
MGT-501
Final Case Study
1. Is Apple responsible for the alleged human rights violations that occurred?
I believe that Apple is responsible for the alleged human rights violations that have
taken place during the case study. According to the Corporate Social Responsibility
(CSR), companies are supposed to go beyond legal obligations to actively balance
commitments to investors, customers, other companies, and communities (Wild &
Wild, 2014). According to what was stated in the case study, Apple was known for
having an excellent reputation in terms of corporate social responsibility, previously
being ranked fifth on Forbes for best CSR reputation in 2014. With such a
respectable CSR reputation, you would think that Apple would have better working
conditions for their employees and do everything in their power to make sure those
workers had good working conditions. “In the last decade, Apple has become one of
the mightiest, richest and most successful companies in the world, in part by
mastering global manufacturing” (Duhigg & Barboza, 2012). Although Apple has
become one of the wealthiest companies in the world, it has come at cost for its
workers. In one of Apples Chinese factories, the workers who assemble the Apple
devices often have harsh working environments that are sometimes deadly. Many
workers also reported that 137 workers at an Apple supplier in eastern China were
injured after they were ordered to use a poisonous chemical to clean iPhone screens.
In a letter from Jeff Williams, he stated, “We know of no other company doing as
much as Apple does to ensure fair and safe working conditions, to discover and
, investigate problems, to fix and follow through when issues arise, and to provide
transparency into the operations of our suppliers.” Also, since Apple uses offshore
outsourcing, it allows for the company to have significantly lower labor costs, higher
operating efficiency, less investments on equipment, better utilization of outside
resources, which results in an increase in the business’s profitability and
competitiveness (WJ, 2015). Although offshore outsourcing provides these great
benefits for the business, it comes with some negatives. One of those being that
people expect the company to provide the workers with fair and safe working
conditions. The problem with this is that it is extremely difficult to maintain the
profit margin that they are experiencing while trying to correct the working
conditions in the Chinese factories. “Apple was notorious for its price policy,
squeezing suppliers to produce products at lower and lower costs” (Lee, Mol &
Mellahi, 2016). Since Apple is known for trying to make as much money as they can,
they made it difficult for Foxconn to deal with the requests that were dealing with.
Foxconn was told to meet higher working conditions which would result in paying
higher wages, reducing working hours, investing in safety programs, and providing
training, while also accepting lower and lower prices from Apple (Lee, Mol &
Mellahi). This is almost an unfair request because Apple is telling Foxconn that they
will be receiving less money from Apple but they expect the company to improve the
labor conditions. I believe that Apple is responsible to the human rights violations
against them but they haven’t taken to correct steps to fix them. In order to get the
results they want, they are going to have to accept the fact that this can only be done
if the pay the companies assembling their products more and allow their profits to
MGT-501
Final Case Study
1. Is Apple responsible for the alleged human rights violations that occurred?
I believe that Apple is responsible for the alleged human rights violations that have
taken place during the case study. According to the Corporate Social Responsibility
(CSR), companies are supposed to go beyond legal obligations to actively balance
commitments to investors, customers, other companies, and communities (Wild &
Wild, 2014). According to what was stated in the case study, Apple was known for
having an excellent reputation in terms of corporate social responsibility, previously
being ranked fifth on Forbes for best CSR reputation in 2014. With such a
respectable CSR reputation, you would think that Apple would have better working
conditions for their employees and do everything in their power to make sure those
workers had good working conditions. “In the last decade, Apple has become one of
the mightiest, richest and most successful companies in the world, in part by
mastering global manufacturing” (Duhigg & Barboza, 2012). Although Apple has
become one of the wealthiest companies in the world, it has come at cost for its
workers. In one of Apples Chinese factories, the workers who assemble the Apple
devices often have harsh working environments that are sometimes deadly. Many
workers also reported that 137 workers at an Apple supplier in eastern China were
injured after they were ordered to use a poisonous chemical to clean iPhone screens.
In a letter from Jeff Williams, he stated, “We know of no other company doing as
much as Apple does to ensure fair and safe working conditions, to discover and
, investigate problems, to fix and follow through when issues arise, and to provide
transparency into the operations of our suppliers.” Also, since Apple uses offshore
outsourcing, it allows for the company to have significantly lower labor costs, higher
operating efficiency, less investments on equipment, better utilization of outside
resources, which results in an increase in the business’s profitability and
competitiveness (WJ, 2015). Although offshore outsourcing provides these great
benefits for the business, it comes with some negatives. One of those being that
people expect the company to provide the workers with fair and safe working
conditions. The problem with this is that it is extremely difficult to maintain the
profit margin that they are experiencing while trying to correct the working
conditions in the Chinese factories. “Apple was notorious for its price policy,
squeezing suppliers to produce products at lower and lower costs” (Lee, Mol &
Mellahi, 2016). Since Apple is known for trying to make as much money as they can,
they made it difficult for Foxconn to deal with the requests that were dealing with.
Foxconn was told to meet higher working conditions which would result in paying
higher wages, reducing working hours, investing in safety programs, and providing
training, while also accepting lower and lower prices from Apple (Lee, Mol &
Mellahi). This is almost an unfair request because Apple is telling Foxconn that they
will be receiving less money from Apple but they expect the company to improve the
labor conditions. I believe that Apple is responsible to the human rights violations
against them but they haven’t taken to correct steps to fix them. In order to get the
results they want, they are going to have to accept the fact that this can only be done
if the pay the companies assembling their products more and allow their profits to
