iPad里的血與淚
, 聯合報道 2012年06月26日
Color China Photo, via Associated Press
去年5月發生在富士康工廠的爆炸導致4人死亡，18人受傷。
2011年五月一個周五的夜晚，爆炸的衝擊波穿透了A5大樓。火光四射，聲音震天，扭曲
的金屬管像被丟棄的稻草一樣四處散落。在食堂吃飯的工人們跑到空地上，眼見窗戶震裂，滾滾黑煙正不斷從裡面冒出。爆炸事發地點是生產iPad一個拋光車
間。在那裡，工人們每天都要為iPad打磨成千上萬的鋁製外殼。
兩人當場確認死亡，十數人受傷。傷者被緊急送到救護車上，有一位傷勢特別明顯：他的面部已經血肉模糊，被爆炸的衝擊力和高溫灼得不像樣子。他的五官已無法辨認，原本鼻子和嘴巴的地方只能看到紅黑一片。
遠在老家的傷者父親接到了電話。六個月以前，23歲的賴小東搬到距家鄉綿陽市3小時車程的成都市上班。這裡有着全世界規模最大、產率最高、設備最精
密的製造體系。這個龐大的體系足以讓蘋果以及數百家科技公司的電子產品以他們能設想到的最快速度製造出來。賴小東成為了數百萬支撐這個龐大體系運作的“人
肉齒輪”中的一個。
“你是賴小東的父親嗎？你兒子出事了。趕緊來醫院吧。”電話那頭的人說。
在過去的十年里，蘋果已經成為世界上規模最大、資金最多、最成功的企業之一，這在很大程度上來自於它對全球製造業的掌控。由於精於通過轉移生產地點 控制成本，蘋果和其他美國的高科技公司，以及美國的各色產業，在創新工業中的發展速度堪稱在現代史上無與倫比。但是，根據《紐約時報》對工人、業內分析人 士的採訪，以及相關的公司文件，組裝和製造iPhone, iPad等電子產品的工人卻時常在艱苦、甚至致命的環境下工作。有些工人反映，由於長時間的站立工作，他們的腿部出現了水腫，以至於無法便捷行走；甚至有 工人因為工業事故而喪命，或者因為接觸有毒化學品而住院。（相關報道：蘋果CEO回應《紐約時報》“血汗工廠”報道）
據工人權益組織及蘋果公司自己發佈的報告，僱傭童工製造蘋果產品的情況確有存在。有的供應商非法排放有害廢品，然後篡改數據修飾遮掩。兩年前，在中 國東部的一家蘋果供應商工廠，137名工人因用有毒的正己烷擦拭清潔iPhone屏幕使神經系統受到損傷。去年，在七個月的時間裡，兩家製造iPad的工 廠發生了類似的爆炸事件——包括在成都的那次——兩次事故，共有四人遇難，77人受傷。有一家組織在爆炸發生前警告過蘋果，成都廠區的工作環境很危險；但 據該組織說，蘋果並沒有堅持加強該廠的安全措施。
“如果有人提前向蘋果示警了，而它卻無所作為，這種行為是應該受譴責的。不過也正是因為在一國不能接受的行為在另外一個地方行得通，這些公司才能佔 到便宜。”職業安全與健康全國建議委員會前主席尼克·阿什福德（Nicholas Ashford）說。該組織直接向美國勞工部提供政策建議。
蘋果並不是唯一一家供應鏈上生產環境惡劣的電子產品公司。戴爾、惠普、聯想、索尼、摩托羅拉、諾基亞等公司都被發現其生產車間內的工作環境嚴苛。而 且，蘋果的前任和現任高管都曾聲明，近年來蘋果在改善其海外工廠的工作條件上取得了長足的進步。譬如它啟動了一項積極的審核計劃，一旦發現供應商工廠出現 問題，將及時令其整改。就在這個月初，蘋果首次公布了它的主要供應商名單。而它的供應商責任進度年報，經常率先披露工人權益得不到保障的情況。蘋果的高管 也對消除童工、非自願加班等問題相當投入。
但是很多重要問題仍沒有得到解決。在蘋果的供應商行為準則中，對勞工問題，安全保護問題以及其它很多問題都做出了詳細的規定。但是，據蘋果發佈的報告，自2007年以來，至少有半數以上經蘋果審核的供應商違反了起碼一項準則規定，有的甚至還存在違反當地法律的行為。
“蘋果基本上只在乎兩件事，一是提高質量，二是降低成本。工人的福利好不好跟公司的利益沒有什麼關係。”李明啟說。李以高層管理人員的身份，在蘋果最重要的製造夥伴富士康工作了多年，直到爆炸發生前兩個月。李曾經支援過成都新廠區的建設，就是5月份發生爆炸的那座工廠。
一些蘋果的前任高管則透露，違規情況屢屢發生是因為蘋果一直沒有解決好這個矛盾：有的管理者確實希望改善工人工作環境；但是一旦與核心供應商發生衝 突，或者影響到新產品出廠的速度，管理層的決心就立刻動搖了。現有的這個系統說不上完美，前高管們說，但如果進行實質性的大整改，必然會影響產品的創新進 度，從而威脅蘋果的競爭優勢。
“如果一半的iPhone出現故障，你覺得蘋果能在四年里都坐視不管嗎？對於一些工廠中的勞工情況，我們已經知道不止四年了，但它們原來什麼樣子， 現在還是什麼樣子。為什麼？因為這樣的體系對我們有好處。只要蘋果說非改不可，供應商絕對第二天就能改過來。”一位不願透露姓名的蘋果公司前管理人員說。 本文很多受訪對象也因為保密原則而要求不公開他們的姓名。
蘋果在公開報告中聲稱，一旦發現供應商有違規現象，蘋果將終止同供應商的合作。然而幾位蘋果的前任高管私下裡曾承認，尋找新的供應商既耗時，又昂 貴。富士康是少數幾家擁有製造iPhone和iPad的勞動力和技術優勢的供應商之一。哈佛學者西瑟·懷特（Heather White）認為，蘋果公司“絕對不會離開富士康，也不會離開中國的。蘋果公司的管理層並沒有真正花時間深入到工廠里，看一看工廠到底是什麼狀況。短期之 內，蘋果或是富士康都不會在關鍵問題上讓步，這是有很多原因的。”懷特曾經是國家科學院國際監察勞動準則代表委員會的成員。
《紐約時報》曾與蘋果聯繫，並提供了本文的大部分內容的總結，但是蘋果堅持了其一貫保密的作風，拒絕置評。本文的採訪內容來源於36位現任或前任蘋果僱員以及蘋果供應商，其中有六位擁有蘋果的供應商責任團隊的一手消息。
去年10月去世的蘋果前任首席執行官史蒂夫·喬布斯（Steven P. Jobs）在2010年一次業內會議中曾談及蘋果與供應商的關係：“我認為蘋果對於其供應鏈各個公司的工作條件的了解以及付出的努力，恐怕是業內做得最好的。”
“比方說，你去一家工廠，這可是一家工廠啊，但是，我的天，你還能看到他們有餐館、電影院、醫院和游泳池——對於一家工廠來說，（如果能有這些設施），就是個很不錯的工廠了。”
受訪者（包括那些在這些工廠里工作的僱員）承認確實有餐廳和醫療設備，但是否認這些工廠能稱得上“不錯”。
一位蘋果公司前高管說：“我們確實在改善工作環境上做出了很多努力。但是如果那些擁有iPhone的人能親眼看到他們的手機是從什麼樣的環境下生產出來的，大多數人肯定會覺得心裡很不舒服。”
通往成都之路
2010年的秋天，也就是在iPad工廠爆炸的半年以前，賴小東剛剛從大專畢業。他向老師們道別，對好友們道別——他恐怕無法再參加朋友們每周一次 的撲克大戰了。他小心翼翼地用衣服包好畢業證書，放到行李箱中，生怕折了。小東很快就要抵達成都開始工作了。這座擁有1200萬人口的城市已經迅速地成為 了世界上最重要的製造業基地之一。
小東性格非常內向，連他的家人們也沒料到他能找到一位非常美麗的護校女孩做女友。女孩在接受採訪時說，希望兩人能夠結婚。所以小東的願望就是能夠攢夠錢，買套婚房。
在成都，大大小小的工廠為成千上百的公司代工各種產品。小東選中的是富士康科技集團——一家擁有120萬工人的公司，其出口量居全中國之冠，員工數 量也是首屈一指。富士康組裝了地球上40%的消費類電子產品，它代工的企業包括亞馬遜、戴爾、惠普、任天堂、諾基亞和三星。但它最重要的客戶要數蘋果公 司。在蘋果去年賣掉的全部產品中，一大半都是經由富士康工廠組裝的。
小東知道，富士康的成都廠區與眾不同。裡面生產的產品正是蘋果最新的，也可能是有史以來最棒的產品：iPad。
小東在富士康找到了一份維修工的工作。他最早注意到的事情之一就是車間里那些永遠亮得晃眼的燈。富士康24小時開工，因此室內永遠明亮如晝。成百上 千的工人或站在流水線旁邊，或坐在板凳上，或蹲在機器旁，或一趟趟地小跑於取貨點和卸貨點。有的工人由於長時間的站立，腿部水腫，步履蹣跚。一個名叫趙晟 的年輕工人在工廠附近的茶館告訴記者：“站上一天的滋味很不好受。”一名坐在他旁邊的工友點頭表示同意。
工廠的車間內貼着各種語錄，警示着在這裡工作的12萬員工。“今天工作不努力，明天努力找工作”便是其中之一。
蘋果的供應商行為準則明確規定：“除特殊情況外，一周工作時間不得超過60小時。”但根據訪問記錄，工人工資單以及第三方團體的調查，在富士康，很 多工人的工作時長都超過了60個小時。小東的工資單顯示，他一天工作12個小時，一周工作六天。遲到的要寫檢討，有時還要罰抄總裁語錄。這裡還有一種制度 叫“兩連班”，指的是工人需要連續工作兩個班次。
小東一天的工資（含加班）大約是22美元。因為他有大專文憑，所以他的起薪比大多數普通工人要高一倍。小東每天一下班就回到自己租的一人單間，房間 不大，僅僅夠放下基本的幾樣傢具，一張床，一個衣櫃，一個書桌，僅此而已。據小東的女友羅小紅說，小東回到自己的出租屋後，在線打鬥地主就是他的主要娛 樂。
儘管條件窘迫，小東租的單間還是好於其他七萬名員工居住的富士康宿舍—一套三居室的宿舍，有時要擠下二十個人。去年由於勞資糾紛，工人們怨憤滔天， 導致宿舍區發生了一場騷動。憤怒的工人從宿舍往樓下扔瓶子、垃圾筒和點燃的紙。據目擊者說，當地出動了兩百名警察衝進廠區，逮捕了八名工人才平息。事後， 據一位富士康的高層說，宿舍里配備的垃圾筒都被收走了，但成堆的垃圾和時常光顧的老鼠又成了新的問題。小東為自己住在單租的房間能免去這些麻煩而暗自慶 幸。
富士康在一份書面聲明中對“兩連班”制度、超長加班時間、擁擠的住宿條件以及去年騷動起因等等進行了否認。富士康稱公司的一切運作符合供應商行為準則，並且公司的政策規定符合行業內的國際標準以及遵守國家法律。
“所有的流水線工人都享有正常的休息時間，其中包括一小時的午餐時間。”公司在聲明中寫道。公司還稱，只有百分之五的工人需要站着作業，工作台的設計也滿足人體工學標準，而且工人享有調崗和升遷的機會。
聲明中說：“富士康一貫保持着良好的安全記錄。公司在改善車間環境和照顧員工等方面做出了不懈的努力，在國內同行業中起到了示範作用。”
蘋果公司的行為準則
情況本不該如此。早在六年前，蘋果就推出了自己的供應商行為準則，以確保“蘋果供應鏈上的廠商能提供安全的工作環境，尊重工人，並確保生產過程不傷害環境。”之後，蘋果的管理層也曾飛到全球各地，要求供應商的管理體系能遵守這些準則，並且符合當地的法律法規。
但在2006年時，英國的《周日郵報》暗訪了一家富士康iPod工廠，並對內部的情形進行了報道：工人要長時間工作、有時還要被罰做俯卧撐，而他們 的宿舍擁擠不堪。一位蘋果公司的前僱員稱，“公司裡面有很多有良知的人，但是他們對工廠的真實情況卻一無所知。這種情形非馬上改變不可。”
蘋果隨後派出了第一支審核小組調查該廠的情況，這也是公司第一次對代工廠採取這樣的行動。審核小組責令該iPod廠進行整改。
蘋果還啟動了一系列的相關機制，包括派公司的審查員到供應商處了解情況，並從2007年起開始發佈一年一度的《供應商社會責任進展報告》。截止至去 年，蘋果總共檢查了396家工廠，包括直接供應商及這些供應商的上游供應商，這是迄今為止電子消費品行業規模最大的調查之一。根據蘋果公司的報告，審查員 們發現了持續違反蘋果相關準則的行為。譬如在2007年，蘋果審核了三十多家工廠，其中三分之二的工廠表示他們的工人一周工作超過蘋果所規定的上限60個 小時。除此之外，還有六項極為嚴重的違規，包括僱傭15歲的童工以及偽造記錄。
在接下來的三年，蘋果共進行了282次審查。每一年，審查員都報告有半數或者更多的工廠要求其工人一周工作六天以上，以及讓他們超時加班。有些工人 的收入低於最低工資標準，而工廠有時還會剋扣工人的工資以作為懲罰。在這段時期，蘋果共發現70起極為嚴重的違規，比如非自願加班、使用童工、偽造記錄、 不當處理有毒害廢棄物、以及一例上百工人受到有毒化學品侵害的事件。
去年，蘋果進行了229次審查，各項指標略見好轉。但是仍有93次審查發現了工人每周工作60小時以上的違規情況，並且有數量相仿的審查發現工人每周違規工作六天以上。2011年，共有四名工人在車間爆炸事件中死亡，另有77人受傷。
“如果你年年都能看到相似的問題出現，這只能說明公司對這些問題視而不見，而不是真想去解決它，”一位熟悉公司供應鏈審核團隊的蘋果前高管坦承，“如果公司嚴肅對待的話，這些極為嚴重的違規是會消失的。”
蘋果公司稱，如果審計發現供應商有違規行為的話，後者會被要求解決指定問題並且變更管理制度以防止類似問題重複發生。蘋果對問題整改的期限是90 天。蘋果的網站上寫道：“如果我們發現問題沒有被充分解決，我們會和有整改意願的供應商攜手解決問題，改善工廠環境。但如果供應商沒有整改意願，我們則會 終止與其合作。”
但沒有人知道蘋果的這個威脅是不是認真的。據一位蘋果前高管所言，自2007年以來，公司在多家供應商處都發現了違反行為準則的情況，但只有不到15家因此被終止合作。
“一旦富士康成為了蘋果的授權供應商，蘋果就不會再理會工人權益或其它與其產品無關的事了。”曾在富士康任經理的李明啟說。李在富士康工作了七年， 因反對富士康將其調往成都廠區工作而於去年三月被強制勸退。他現在正在和公司打官司。但富士康一方否認了李先生的說法，並補充道：“富士康與蘋果都十分重 視員工的福利問題。”
蘋果的努力確實帶來了一些改變。公司2011年發佈的《供應商責任進度報告》中寫道，重新被審計的工廠“情況持續好轉，工作環境改善”。另外，蘋果 審核工廠的數量在逐年遞增，一些公司高管表示，由於調查的規模擴張太快，具體工廠逐年的進步體現得不是很明顯。根據最新的進度報告，蘋果還對100萬工人 進行了權益方面的培訓，教他們怎麼預防工傷和疾病。幾年以前，當蘋果的巡檢員堅持要求與底層工人面談時，他們發現有些工人被迫付了高昂的“受雇費”。在蘋 果看來，這屬於非自願勞動。
截至去年，蘋果已經勒令供應商向工人償還了多達670萬美元的收費。同時，蘋果還在110家被發現有超時加工情況的工廠進行了每周情況追蹤。
“蘋果在防止僱傭童工上做得首屈一指，”英派特諮詢公司（Impactt Ltd.）的迪昂尼·哈里森（Dionne Harrison）說。蘋果僱傭了哈里森所供職的公司專門預防及應對供應鏈中僱傭童工的行為。“他們已經在力所能及的範圍內做出努力了，而且他們在公開討 論這個問題。大多數公司根本連提都不願意提。”問及如何能再改善蘋果的供應商審核項目，哈里森認為這個項目已經很完美了。
另一些諮詢界人士並不認同這種看法。
“我們已經連續多年跟蘋果提出他們有嚴重的問題，並且建議他們改善。但他們從來不去預防問題，就想着怎麼能避免問題出現後的尷 尬，”BSR（Business for Social Responsibility）的一位諮詢顧問指出。蘋果曾兩次委託這家公司為其提供勞工事務方面的建議。
“我們本可以救下那些命的”
2006年，BSR、世界銀行和其他的一些組織聯手發起了一個在全球範圍內改善電子產品工廠工作環境的項目，中國也包括在內。發起者們承諾會嘗試一系列的手段，富士康同意成為這個項目的參與者。
在整整四個月的時間內，BSR等發起者一直在與富士康溝通，試圖建立一條新的“員工熱線”。有了這條熱線，工人可以反映惡劣的工作條件、尋求心理輔 導以及談論車間里的其他問題。BSR一位了解內情的諮詢顧問說，蘋果公司並未正式參與到這個項目中，但是對項目的進展是知情的。
但是在溝通的過程中，富士康方面的要求不斷在變動。最開始，富士康提出公司原先已經有一條員工熱線了，所以不用建新的，先評估一下這條老的熱線如 何。然後，富士康提出熱線“提供心理輔導”一項應被去掉。富士康要求所有的項目參與者都簽署一份協議，保證不對外透露他們在工廠裡面看到的情況，後來又不 斷地修改這份協議。
最後，各方面的意見終於達成一致，項目定於2008年1月正式啟動。但就在啟動的前一天，富士康又提出要修改調查問卷收集的方式。管理層把所有人召 集到了一起，開始逐項宣布公司方面的要求，直到大家都明白：這個項目是根本做不下去了。BSR在一份2008年公開的項目總結中披露了這些細節，但當時並 沒有點出富士康的名字。
在項目終止一年之後，一名弄丟了iPhone樣機的富士康員工從一公寓樓頂墜落死亡，是失足跌落還是自殺行為尚不清楚。在此後的兩年中，富士康共發 生了十八起自殺性墜樓或其他方式的自殺行為。2010年，在時隔新熱線項目擱淺兩年後，富士康創立了一條專門針對員工心理健康的熱線，並且開始為員工提供 免費的心理輔導。
“我們本可以救下那些命的，而且我們也督促了蘋果去給富士康施壓，但他們就是不肯，”一名BSR的諮詢顧問說。“其他的公司像惠普、英特爾、耐克等 等都會力促他們的供應商（去改善員工的工作、生活環境）。但是蘋果總想和它的供貨商保持點距離，尤其富士康是他們最重要的貨源，所以蘋果根本不願意去施加 什麼壓力。”
在一份書面聲明中，BSR的總裁阿隆•克拉默稱這些說法是諮詢顧問的個人觀點，並不代表公司立場。“我個人以及在BSR的同事都認為蘋果在確保其供 應鏈上勞工的權益方面做出了不懈努力，使之符合相關的法律法規、公司準則和消費者的期望。”克拉默補充道，要求蘋果對富士康施壓與熱線項目的初衷不符，因 為項目的發起者希冀看到供應商能夠自覺地實施這些項目，而非礙於某種外力。並且，項目當初未能進行下去的原因是多種多樣的。
在連續性的自殺事件發生後，富士康發表了一份聲明，稱公司已經快速、全面地處理了相關問題，並且“記錄顯示，我們採取的措施是行之有效的。”
偷工減料
每個月，來自世界各地的公司都會長途跋涉到加州的庫比蒂諾（蘋果公司總部所在地），或者邀請蘋果的高層們去參觀他們在外國的工廠，追求的是同一個目標：從蘋果獲得一份合同。
當有了蘋果對哪一家公司的產品或服務感興趣的消息時，那裡總會爆發一系列小型的慶祝活動：人們舉杯暢飲威士忌，然後在卡拉OK高歌。
然後，蘋果公司的需求開始滾滾而來。蘋果通常要求供應商列出每個零件的成本是多少，需要多少工人，以及他們工資的金額。蘋果希望知道每一個財務細節。
然後，蘋果計算出它需要為每個最終用於iPhone、iPad或者其他產品的零件付多少錢。多數供應商只能獲得很小的利潤。據供應商的主管說，實際 上利潤小到對於很多公司來說為蘋果代工是接近虧損的。作為對策，供應商經常試圖偷工減料，或者用便宜的替代品代替昂貴的化學製品，或者—據代工廠的人講— 要迫使工人們做得更快、工作得時間更長。
“能從和蘋果的生意中賺到錢的唯一方式，就是想出如何能讓生產更有效率，或者更省成本，”一家參與iPad生產的公司主管說，“然後第二年他們會來續約，但是要求將出廠價降低百分之十。”
2010年1月，蘋果的供應商之一勝華科技（Wintek）經歷了一場工人罷工—罷工者們推翻了一部汽車並砸壞了電腦。罷工的導火索是一系列問題， 包括在工人之間流傳的有工人中毒的消息。維權人士和報紙的調查最終發現137名員工受到一種叫正己烷的化學製品的傷害。正己烷可以導致神經損傷和麻痹。
工人們說他們被要求用正己烷替代酒精清潔iPhone的觸屏，因為正己烷的揮發比酒精幾乎快三倍。揮發更快意味着工人可以在每分鐘清潔更多的屏幕。
直到2011年二月，也就是罷工爆發一年多以後，蘋果公司才對勝華科技的事件作出評論。在公司的供應商責任報告中，蘋果說“已經要求勝華科技停止使 用正己烷”，並稱“蘋果已經確認所有受到影響的工人都受到了效果良好的治療。我們會繼續關注他們的醫療報告直到徹底痊癒為止。”在那份報告中，蘋果還表示 已經要求勝華科技修理通風系統。
同在二月份，一位《紐約時報》的記者採訪了多位受到毒害的勝華科技工人，他們說從來沒有任何蘋果公司或者替蘋果公司代理此事的人聯繫過他們。與此同 時，勝華科技要求他們拿着現金賠償離職，就此免除代工廠的一切責任。在《紐約時報》的採訪後，勝華科技保證向受傷工人提供更多賠償，而蘋果也派出一位代表 與工人們聯繫。
六個月後，報道電子消費品貿易的刊物稱蘋果大幅削減了付給勝華科技的價格。
“你可以制定所有你想要的行為準則，但如果你不給供應商足夠的利潤去善待工人，這些準則都是沒有意義的，”一位熟悉供應商責任審核項目的蘋果前高管說，“如果你壓榨利潤，你就是在強迫他們削減安全方面的投入。”
勝華科技依然是蘋果最重要的供應商之一。它在一份聲明中拒絕發表任何評論，僅表示在正己烷事件以後，公司已經採取了“充分的措施”來解決這個問題，並稱公司“致力於確保員工福利和營造一個安全健康的工作環境。”
蘋果公司的同行在員工待遇問題上採取的是另一種姿態。多個供應商的主管在採訪中表示，惠普等公司能積極投入到供應商的“綜合能力建設”中，即在供應商承諾改善工人福利時，這些公司會給代工廠略多的利潤空間和其他津貼來抵消增加的成本。
惠普公司的佐伊·麥克馬洪（Zoe McMahon）說，“我們的供應商對我們非常坦率。如果他們認為達到我們的期望有困難，他們會讓我們知道。他們的反饋會影響我們的決定。”麥克馬洪在惠普負責公司供應鏈社會和環境責任項目。
車間爆炸
在iPad車間爆炸當天的下午，賴小東像往常一樣給他的女朋友打了電話。他們本希望在那天晚上見面，但賴小東告訴他女朋友，經理讓他必須加班。
賴小東在富士康升得很快。在進入工廠幾個月之後，小東就開始掌管負責維護iPad後蓋拋光機器的小組。打磨區域非常嘈雜而且瀰漫著鋁粉。工人們戴着面罩和耳塞，但不管他們洗多少次澡，你都可以從他們頭髮中和眼角殘留的亮晶晶的鋁粉辨別出他們是這裡的工人。
僅僅在爆炸的兩周前，一家權益組織曾發佈一份報告警告成都廠區的工作環境很危險，包括具有可燃性的鋁粉的問題。這個叫“大學師生監察無良企業行動” （SACOM）的組織用攝像機拍到了覆蓋著一身鋁屑的工人。據該組織的報告稱，“成都廠區的職業健康和安全問題值得擔憂。工人們還強調了空氣流通不暢和人 身保護設備不足的問題。”
SACOM的報告被送到了蘋果公司。“沒有任何答覆，”SACOM的陳詩韻說，“幾個月之後我去了蘋果公司的加州總部，並且去了蘋果公司的大堂，但是沒有人想見我。我也沒有收到過蘋果任何人的任何答覆。”
爆炸發生的那天早上，賴小東騎着他的單車去上班。iPad在幾個星期之前剛剛上市，工人們被告知每天有成千上萬的後蓋需要拋光。他們說，整個工廠都 要忙瘋了。成排的機器高速打磨着後蓋，戴着面具的工人們按着按鈕。每一個工位上方都盤旋着一個巨大的空氣導管，但這並不足以導出三條不間斷運行的生產線噴 出的鋁粉。粉末到處都是。
粉塵是公認的安全隱患。在2003年，一起發生在印第安納州的鋁粉爆炸毀壞了一座工廠並導致一名工人殞命。在2008年，一家美國糖廠內的農業粉塵爆炸致使14人遇難。金屬粉塵尤其危險，因為它的溫度可以高到燒穿皮肉。
爆炸剛發生時，賴小東的第二個八小時輪班剛過了兩個鐘頭。廠房開始顫抖，彷彿地震波就在腳下。據工人們回憶，爆炸聲此起彼伏。
有人開始大聲尖叫。
有人用手機拍下了那一刻：當賴小東的工友們衝到廠房外時，濃煙正從廠房表面的一個大洞滾滾冒出，和綿綿的小雨交織在一起。兩人當場身亡。而最終的傷亡數字是：四人遇難，十八人受傷。
在醫院，賴小東的女友看到他的皮膚幾乎全部燒光了。“我是從他的腿才認出他的，要不然我都不知道那個人是誰，”她說。
最後他的家人也到了。“他的皮膚都被燒焦了，還有水泡，”他的弟弟說，“我媽第一眼剛看到他就馬上跑到房間外了。我也哭了。沒有人受得了那個場 景。”小東無法講話，醫生給他插呼吸管的時候，他甚至都張不開他的嘴，整張臉被大火燒得血肉模糊。當小東的母親回來時，她嘗試着避免碰到兒子，以免增加小 東的疼痛。
“如果我當時知道（小東後來會去世），”這位母親說，“我會抓住他的手臂，我會在他死之前摸摸他。”
“他非常堅強，”她說，“他又堅持了兩天。”
賴小東的父母希望把他的遺體帶回村子。但一個富士康的經理說，如果想得到賠償，他們必須先同意火化，因為中國法律要求遺體需要在火化後才能被運往異 地。賴小東的父親擋住病房的門，拒絕了這個提議，直到一個保安威脅把他帶走。幾天後，一隊富士康工人開車到賴小東的家鄉送交了一盒骨灰。富士康隨後向賴小 東的家人轉了約90萬人民幣。（富士康在一份聲明中說他們並沒有威脅不給賠償。）
蘋果和富士康在爆炸後都對事故展開了調查。一個蘋果發言人表示蘋果公司“對發生在富士康成都廠區的悲劇深表悲痛，我們的心與遇難者和他們的家人在一 起。我們正與富士康緊密合作以了解這起可怕事故發生的原因。” 富士康在一份聲明中說，成都廠區在爆炸發生前遵守了全部有關法律法規，並稱“在確保所有遇難員工家屬得到他們所要求的支持以後，我們還確保了所有受傷的員 工獲得最高質量的醫療護理”。在爆炸以後，富士康立即中止了所有拋光車間的生產，並在隨後改善了通風設備和與粉塵處理有關的習慣做法。新的技術也被提供到 位以進一步提升工人的安全。然而，不管是蘋果還是富士康，都尚未公布與事故調查有關的文件。
在最新的供應商責任報告中，蘋果公司表示在這起爆炸以後蘋果找到了“第一流的生產安全專家”並組成了事故調查組。調查組為預防將來類似事故提出了建議。
然而，在十二月，也就是造成賴小東身亡的爆炸發生七個月以後，另一家位於上海的iPad工廠又發生了爆炸。根據權益組織和蘋果最新的供應商責任報告，鋁粉還是罪魁禍首。這一次，59名工人受傷，其中23人需要住院治療。
“在一起爆炸發生後沒有意識到每一個工廠都應該受到檢查，這是嚴重的疏忽，”目前在麻省理工學院擔任教授的職業安全專家尼克•阿什福德說，“如果是 因為處理鋁粉非常困難，我可以理解。但你知道粉塵有多麼容易控制嗎？這個辦法就叫做通風。我們在一個世紀前就解決這個問題了。”
在最新的供應商責任報告中，蘋果表示儘管兩起爆炸都與可燃鋁粉有關，但爆炸的原因不盡相同。然而蘋果拒絕提供更多細節。報告補充說，截至目前蘋果已 經審查了所有拋光鋁製品的供應商並採取了更強有力的預防措施，包括特定的通風設備要求，強制執行的導管檢查，以及確保有可用的滅火器。報告說，除了一家供 應商之外其他所有的工廠都採取了應對措施，而那一家將一直處於關閉停產狀態，直到措施到位後才能恢復生產。
然而，對賴小東的家人來說，疑問依然存在。“我們不太清楚他是因為什麼死的，”賴小東的母親站在她在自己家附近修的墳邊說，“我們不知道發生了什麼。”
蘋果公司的“彩票”
每年，當關於蘋果新產品的傳聞開始浮出水面時，報道貿易的刊物和網站都會去猜測哪些供應商有可能中這個“蘋果彩票”。從蘋果獲得一個訂單可以讓一家 公司的價值增加數百萬美元。但很少有企業去炫耀他們接到了什麼工作：這些供應商的高管說，蘋果通常要求他們簽協議保證不會泄露任何信息，包括合作關係。
這種透明度的缺乏使蘋果可以輕易為自己的計劃保密。但權益組織和蘋果公司前高管認為，這同時也成為了改善其工作條件的障礙。
本月早些時候，在權益組織和包括《紐約時報》在內的新聞媒體的多番請求後，蘋果公司公布了156個供應商的名字。在公布這份名單的報告中，蘋果稱這些公司“占我們付給全部產品供應商總金額的97%還多”。
儘管如此，蘋果公司並未公布其間接供應商的名單。這些間接供應商並不直接和蘋果有合約關係，而是向其直接供應商供貨的幾百家上游公司。這幾百家中， 許多也受蘋果公司的審核。此外，在公開的供應商名單中，蘋果沒有透露任何有關其工廠地點的信息。不僅如此，權益組織表示，他們曾試圖檢查蘋果供應商的運營 情況，但卻被告知其將無法踏入大門一步，而這一禁令直接來自於蘋果公司。
一位曾就職於蘋果供應商責任部門的主管表示，“我們對這個問題進行過多次討論。全公司上下對都我們的行為準則都做出了真誠的承諾。但是如果再往前走 一步、進行一些實質性的變動會與我們的商業機密和發展目標相衝突，所以我們只能止步於此。商業機密至上的企業文化影響着公司內外的一切事務。”
原則上，蘋果公司的僱員不允許同絕大多數外部組織合作，例如非政府組織等等。“如果沒有得到准許，我們部門的員工不可以與非政府組織溝通，”另一位 掌握來自蘋果供應商責任部門第一手信息的蘋果前管理人員如是說。“即使大家是在同一場會議上碰見了，也不能深入交談。這項規定確實很令人沮喪，我們本來可 以從別人那裡學到很多東西。”
其他技術公司則沒有採用這種做法。英特爾公司企業社會責任經理加里·涅克爾克（Gary Newkerk）表示，“我與任何有正當理由和我展開交流的人進行溝通。我們公司的外部合作非常豐富。這個世界很複雜，如果不與外界溝通，我們將會錯過許多重要信息。”
鑒於蘋果公司在全球製造業領域擁有卓越聲譽和領先地位，如果其對目前的政策做出重大改變，將會為主流商業模式帶來翻天覆地的變化。“每個公司都想成 為蘋果，”來自尹納夫（Enough）公司的薩沙·列茨涅夫（Sasha Lezhnev）一語中的。尹納夫是一個致力於幫助公司運營者從遭受種族滅絕和環境退化的國家中抽身而退的組織。“如果蘋果公司承諾推出一款不會引發任何 衝突的iPhone，這將會徹底改變目前所謂的‘技術’。”
然而，據許多蘋果前任和現任的管理人員所言，無論怎麼說，真正能夠促成蘋果政策轉變的外部壓力寥寥無幾。“蘋果”是全球最出色的品牌之一，根據《紐 約時報》進行的一項全國性調查，56%的受調查者認為蘋果公司完美無缺；14%的人認為蘋果公司最大的缺點是它的產品過於昂貴；只有2%的回應者提到了海 外勞動力問題。
哈佛學者懷特女士表示:“蘋果公司目前沒有足夠的壓力來做出太多改變。股東們並沒有提出意見，股票價格也風平浪靜。更何況，政府也沒有表示將對其提 出制裁。”權益組織認為，除非消費者表達出對改善海外工廠環境的需求——正如他們當年對耐克公司和蓋普（GAP）公司提出類似要求並改變了供應商的處境一 樣。而決策者也必須有所作為，否則蘋果公司實在缺乏政策改革的動力。一部分蘋果內部員工也同意這一看法。
“你有兩種選擇，要麼在舒適安全的工作環境下進行生產製造，要麼就每年都推陳出新，提供質量更好、功能更強大、速度更快並且價格更便宜的產品，後者就需要一個在美國人眼裡非常艱苦的生產環境，”一位蘋果公司現執行管理人員如是評論。
“就眼前來說，消費者更關心的是一台新的iPhone，遠非中國工人的工作境況。”
兩人當場確認死亡，十數人受傷。傷者被緊急送到救護車上，有一位傷勢特別明顯：他的面部已經血肉模糊，被爆炸的衝擊力和高溫灼得不像樣子。他的五官已無法辨認，原本鼻子和嘴巴的地方只能看到紅黑一片。
“你是賴小東的父親嗎？你兒子出事了。趕緊來醫院吧。”電話那頭的人說。
在過去的十年里，蘋果已經成為世界上規模最大、資金最多、最成功的企業之一，這在很大程度上來自於它對全球製造業的掌控。由於精於通過轉移生產地點 控制成本，蘋果和其他美國的高科技公司，以及美國的各色產業，在創新工業中的發展速度堪稱在現代史上無與倫比。但是，根據《紐約時報》對工人、業內分析人 士的採訪，以及相關的公司文件，組裝和製造iPhone, iPad等電子產品的工人卻時常在艱苦、甚至致命的環境下工作。有些工人反映，由於長時間的站立工作，他們的腿部出現了水腫，以至於無法便捷行走；甚至有 工人因為工業事故而喪命，或者因為接觸有毒化學品而住院。（相關報道：蘋果CEO回應《紐約時報》“血汗工廠”報道）
據工人權益組織及蘋果公司自己發佈的報告，僱傭童工製造蘋果產品的情況確有存在。有的供應商非法排放有害廢品，然後篡改數據修飾遮掩。兩年前，在中 國東部的一家蘋果供應商工廠，137名工人因用有毒的正己烷擦拭清潔iPhone屏幕使神經系統受到損傷。去年，在七個月的時間裡，兩家製造iPad的工 廠發生了類似的爆炸事件——包括在成都的那次——兩次事故，共有四人遇難，77人受傷。有一家組織在爆炸發生前警告過蘋果，成都廠區的工作環境很危險；但 據該組織說，蘋果並沒有堅持加強該廠的安全措施。
“如果有人提前向蘋果示警了，而它卻無所作為，這種行為是應該受譴責的。不過也正是因為在一國不能接受的行為在另外一個地方行得通，這些公司才能佔 到便宜。”職業安全與健康全國建議委員會前主席尼克·阿什福德（Nicholas Ashford）說。該組織直接向美國勞工部提供政策建議。
蘋果並不是唯一一家供應鏈上生產環境惡劣的電子產品公司。戴爾、惠普、聯想、索尼、摩托羅拉、諾基亞等公司都被發現其生產車間內的工作環境嚴苛。而 且，蘋果的前任和現任高管都曾聲明，近年來蘋果在改善其海外工廠的工作條件上取得了長足的進步。譬如它啟動了一項積極的審核計劃，一旦發現供應商工廠出現 問題，將及時令其整改。就在這個月初，蘋果首次公布了它的主要供應商名單。而它的供應商責任進度年報，經常率先披露工人權益得不到保障的情況。蘋果的高管 也對消除童工、非自願加班等問題相當投入。
但是很多重要問題仍沒有得到解決。在蘋果的供應商行為準則中，對勞工問題，安全保護問題以及其它很多問題都做出了詳細的規定。但是，據蘋果發佈的報告，自2007年以來，至少有半數以上經蘋果審核的供應商違反了起碼一項準則規定，有的甚至還存在違反當地法律的行為。
“蘋果基本上只在乎兩件事，一是提高質量，二是降低成本。工人的福利好不好跟公司的利益沒有什麼關係。”李明啟說。李以高層管理人員的身份，在蘋果最重要的製造夥伴富士康工作了多年，直到爆炸發生前兩個月。李曾經支援過成都新廠區的建設，就是5月份發生爆炸的那座工廠。
一些蘋果的前任高管則透露，違規情況屢屢發生是因為蘋果一直沒有解決好這個矛盾：有的管理者確實希望改善工人工作環境；但是一旦與核心供應商發生衝 突，或者影響到新產品出廠的速度，管理層的決心就立刻動搖了。現有的這個系統說不上完美，前高管們說，但如果進行實質性的大整改，必然會影響產品的創新進 度，從而威脅蘋果的競爭優勢。
“如果一半的iPhone出現故障，你覺得蘋果能在四年里都坐視不管嗎？對於一些工廠中的勞工情況，我們已經知道不止四年了，但它們原來什麼樣子， 現在還是什麼樣子。為什麼？因為這樣的體系對我們有好處。只要蘋果說非改不可，供應商絕對第二天就能改過來。”一位不願透露姓名的蘋果公司前管理人員說。 本文很多受訪對象也因為保密原則而要求不公開他們的姓名。
蘋果在公開報告中聲稱，一旦發現供應商有違規現象，蘋果將終止同供應商的合作。然而幾位蘋果的前任高管私下裡曾承認，尋找新的供應商既耗時，又昂 貴。富士康是少數幾家擁有製造iPhone和iPad的勞動力和技術優勢的供應商之一。哈佛學者西瑟·懷特（Heather White）認為，蘋果公司“絕對不會離開富士康，也不會離開中國的。蘋果公司的管理層並沒有真正花時間深入到工廠里，看一看工廠到底是什麼狀況。短期之 內，蘋果或是富士康都不會在關鍵問題上讓步，這是有很多原因的。”懷特曾經是國家科學院國際監察勞動準則代表委員會的成員。
《紐約時報》曾與蘋果聯繫，並提供了本文的大部分內容的總結，但是蘋果堅持了其一貫保密的作風，拒絕置評。本文的採訪內容來源於36位現任或前任蘋果僱員以及蘋果供應商，其中有六位擁有蘋果的供應商責任團隊的一手消息。
去年10月去世的蘋果前任首席執行官史蒂夫·喬布斯（Steven P. Jobs）在2010年一次業內會議中曾談及蘋果與供應商的關係：“我認為蘋果對於其供應鏈各個公司的工作條件的了解以及付出的努力，恐怕是業內做得最好的。”
“比方說，你去一家工廠，這可是一家工廠啊，但是，我的天，你還能看到他們有餐館、電影院、醫院和游泳池——對於一家工廠來說，（如果能有這些設施），就是個很不錯的工廠了。”
受訪者（包括那些在這些工廠里工作的僱員）承認確實有餐廳和醫療設備，但是否認這些工廠能稱得上“不錯”。
一位蘋果公司前高管說：“我們確實在改善工作環境上做出了很多努力。但是如果那些擁有iPhone的人能親眼看到他們的手機是從什麼樣的環境下生產出來的，大多數人肯定會覺得心裡很不舒服。”
通往成都之路
2010年的秋天，也就是在iPad工廠爆炸的半年以前，賴小東剛剛從大專畢業。他向老師們道別，對好友們道別——他恐怕無法再參加朋友們每周一次 的撲克大戰了。他小心翼翼地用衣服包好畢業證書，放到行李箱中，生怕折了。小東很快就要抵達成都開始工作了。這座擁有1200萬人口的城市已經迅速地成為 了世界上最重要的製造業基地之一。
小東性格非常內向，連他的家人們也沒料到他能找到一位非常美麗的護校女孩做女友。女孩在接受採訪時說，希望兩人能夠結婚。所以小東的願望就是能夠攢夠錢，買套婚房。
在成都，大大小小的工廠為成千上百的公司代工各種產品。小東選中的是富士康科技集團——一家擁有120萬工人的公司，其出口量居全中國之冠，員工數 量也是首屈一指。富士康組裝了地球上40%的消費類電子產品，它代工的企業包括亞馬遜、戴爾、惠普、任天堂、諾基亞和三星。但它最重要的客戶要數蘋果公 司。在蘋果去年賣掉的全部產品中，一大半都是經由富士康工廠組裝的。
小東知道，富士康的成都廠區與眾不同。裡面生產的產品正是蘋果最新的，也可能是有史以來最棒的產品：iPad。
小東在富士康找到了一份維修工的工作。他最早注意到的事情之一就是車間里那些永遠亮得晃眼的燈。富士康24小時開工，因此室內永遠明亮如晝。成百上 千的工人或站在流水線旁邊，或坐在板凳上，或蹲在機器旁，或一趟趟地小跑於取貨點和卸貨點。有的工人由於長時間的站立，腿部水腫，步履蹣跚。一個名叫趙晟 的年輕工人在工廠附近的茶館告訴記者：“站上一天的滋味很不好受。”一名坐在他旁邊的工友點頭表示同意。
工廠的車間內貼着各種語錄，警示着在這裡工作的12萬員工。“今天工作不努力，明天努力找工作”便是其中之一。
蘋果的供應商行為準則明確規定：“除特殊情況外，一周工作時間不得超過60小時。”但根據訪問記錄，工人工資單以及第三方團體的調查，在富士康，很 多工人的工作時長都超過了60個小時。小東的工資單顯示，他一天工作12個小時，一周工作六天。遲到的要寫檢討，有時還要罰抄總裁語錄。這裡還有一種制度 叫“兩連班”，指的是工人需要連續工作兩個班次。
小東一天的工資（含加班）大約是22美元。因為他有大專文憑，所以他的起薪比大多數普通工人要高一倍。小東每天一下班就回到自己租的一人單間，房間 不大，僅僅夠放下基本的幾樣傢具，一張床，一個衣櫃，一個書桌，僅此而已。據小東的女友羅小紅說，小東回到自己的出租屋後，在線打鬥地主就是他的主要娛 樂。
儘管條件窘迫，小東租的單間還是好於其他七萬名員工居住的富士康宿舍—一套三居室的宿舍，有時要擠下二十個人。去年由於勞資糾紛，工人們怨憤滔天， 導致宿舍區發生了一場騷動。憤怒的工人從宿舍往樓下扔瓶子、垃圾筒和點燃的紙。據目擊者說，當地出動了兩百名警察衝進廠區，逮捕了八名工人才平息。事後， 據一位富士康的高層說，宿舍里配備的垃圾筒都被收走了，但成堆的垃圾和時常光顧的老鼠又成了新的問題。小東為自己住在單租的房間能免去這些麻煩而暗自慶 幸。
富士康在一份書面聲明中對“兩連班”制度、超長加班時間、擁擠的住宿條件以及去年騷動起因等等進行了否認。富士康稱公司的一切運作符合供應商行為準則，並且公司的政策規定符合行業內的國際標準以及遵守國家法律。
“所有的流水線工人都享有正常的休息時間，其中包括一小時的午餐時間。”公司在聲明中寫道。公司還稱，只有百分之五的工人需要站着作業，工作台的設計也滿足人體工學標準，而且工人享有調崗和升遷的機會。
聲明中說：“富士康一貫保持着良好的安全記錄。公司在改善車間環境和照顧員工等方面做出了不懈的努力，在國內同行業中起到了示範作用。”
蘋果公司的行為準則
情況本不該如此。早在六年前，蘋果就推出了自己的供應商行為準則，以確保“蘋果供應鏈上的廠商能提供安全的工作環境，尊重工人，並確保生產過程不傷害環境。”之後，蘋果的管理層也曾飛到全球各地，要求供應商的管理體系能遵守這些準則，並且符合當地的法律法規。
但在2006年時，英國的《周日郵報》暗訪了一家富士康iPod工廠，並對內部的情形進行了報道：工人要長時間工作、有時還要被罰做俯卧撐，而他們 的宿舍擁擠不堪。一位蘋果公司的前僱員稱，“公司裡面有很多有良知的人，但是他們對工廠的真實情況卻一無所知。這種情形非馬上改變不可。”
蘋果隨後派出了第一支審核小組調查該廠的情況，這也是公司第一次對代工廠採取這樣的行動。審核小組責令該iPod廠進行整改。
蘋果還啟動了一系列的相關機制，包括派公司的審查員到供應商處了解情況，並從2007年起開始發佈一年一度的《供應商社會責任進展報告》。截止至去 年，蘋果總共檢查了396家工廠，包括直接供應商及這些供應商的上游供應商，這是迄今為止電子消費品行業規模最大的調查之一。根據蘋果公司的報告，審查員 們發現了持續違反蘋果相關準則的行為。譬如在2007年，蘋果審核了三十多家工廠，其中三分之二的工廠表示他們的工人一周工作超過蘋果所規定的上限60個 小時。除此之外，還有六項極為嚴重的違規，包括僱傭15歲的童工以及偽造記錄。
在接下來的三年，蘋果共進行了282次審查。每一年，審查員都報告有半數或者更多的工廠要求其工人一周工作六天以上，以及讓他們超時加班。有些工人 的收入低於最低工資標準，而工廠有時還會剋扣工人的工資以作為懲罰。在這段時期，蘋果共發現70起極為嚴重的違規，比如非自願加班、使用童工、偽造記錄、 不當處理有毒害廢棄物、以及一例上百工人受到有毒化學品侵害的事件。
去年，蘋果進行了229次審查，各項指標略見好轉。但是仍有93次審查發現了工人每周工作60小時以上的違規情況，並且有數量相仿的審查發現工人每周違規工作六天以上。2011年，共有四名工人在車間爆炸事件中死亡，另有77人受傷。
“如果你年年都能看到相似的問題出現，這只能說明公司對這些問題視而不見，而不是真想去解決它，”一位熟悉公司供應鏈審核團隊的蘋果前高管坦承，“如果公司嚴肅對待的話，這些極為嚴重的違規是會消失的。”
蘋果公司稱，如果審計發現供應商有違規行為的話，後者會被要求解決指定問題並且變更管理制度以防止類似問題重複發生。蘋果對問題整改的期限是90 天。蘋果的網站上寫道：“如果我們發現問題沒有被充分解決，我們會和有整改意願的供應商攜手解決問題，改善工廠環境。但如果供應商沒有整改意願，我們則會 終止與其合作。”
但沒有人知道蘋果的這個威脅是不是認真的。據一位蘋果前高管所言，自2007年以來，公司在多家供應商處都發現了違反行為準則的情況，但只有不到15家因此被終止合作。
“一旦富士康成為了蘋果的授權供應商，蘋果就不會再理會工人權益或其它與其產品無關的事了。”曾在富士康任經理的李明啟說。李在富士康工作了七年， 因反對富士康將其調往成都廠區工作而於去年三月被強制勸退。他現在正在和公司打官司。但富士康一方否認了李先生的說法，並補充道：“富士康與蘋果都十分重 視員工的福利問題。”
蘋果的努力確實帶來了一些改變。公司2011年發佈的《供應商責任進度報告》中寫道，重新被審計的工廠“情況持續好轉，工作環境改善”。另外，蘋果 審核工廠的數量在逐年遞增，一些公司高管表示，由於調查的規模擴張太快，具體工廠逐年的進步體現得不是很明顯。根據最新的進度報告，蘋果還對100萬工人 進行了權益方面的培訓，教他們怎麼預防工傷和疾病。幾年以前，當蘋果的巡檢員堅持要求與底層工人面談時，他們發現有些工人被迫付了高昂的“受雇費”。在蘋 果看來，這屬於非自願勞動。
截至去年，蘋果已經勒令供應商向工人償還了多達670萬美元的收費。同時，蘋果還在110家被發現有超時加工情況的工廠進行了每周情況追蹤。
“蘋果在防止僱傭童工上做得首屈一指，”英派特諮詢公司（Impactt Ltd.）的迪昂尼·哈里森（Dionne Harrison）說。蘋果僱傭了哈里森所供職的公司專門預防及應對供應鏈中僱傭童工的行為。“他們已經在力所能及的範圍內做出努力了，而且他們在公開討 論這個問題。大多數公司根本連提都不願意提。”問及如何能再改善蘋果的供應商審核項目，哈里森認為這個項目已經很完美了。
另一些諮詢界人士並不認同這種看法。
“我們已經連續多年跟蘋果提出他們有嚴重的問題，並且建議他們改善。但他們從來不去預防問題，就想着怎麼能避免問題出現後的尷 尬，”BSR（Business for Social Responsibility）的一位諮詢顧問指出。蘋果曾兩次委託這家公司為其提供勞工事務方面的建議。
“我們本可以救下那些命的”
2006年，BSR、世界銀行和其他的一些組織聯手發起了一個在全球範圍內改善電子產品工廠工作環境的項目，中國也包括在內。發起者們承諾會嘗試一系列的手段，富士康同意成為這個項目的參與者。
在整整四個月的時間內，BSR等發起者一直在與富士康溝通，試圖建立一條新的“員工熱線”。有了這條熱線，工人可以反映惡劣的工作條件、尋求心理輔 導以及談論車間里的其他問題。BSR一位了解內情的諮詢顧問說，蘋果公司並未正式參與到這個項目中，但是對項目的進展是知情的。
但是在溝通的過程中，富士康方面的要求不斷在變動。最開始，富士康提出公司原先已經有一條員工熱線了，所以不用建新的，先評估一下這條老的熱線如 何。然後，富士康提出熱線“提供心理輔導”一項應被去掉。富士康要求所有的項目參與者都簽署一份協議，保證不對外透露他們在工廠裡面看到的情況，後來又不 斷地修改這份協議。
最後，各方面的意見終於達成一致，項目定於2008年1月正式啟動。但就在啟動的前一天，富士康又提出要修改調查問卷收集的方式。管理層把所有人召 集到了一起，開始逐項宣布公司方面的要求，直到大家都明白：這個項目是根本做不下去了。BSR在一份2008年公開的項目總結中披露了這些細節，但當時並 沒有點出富士康的名字。
在項目終止一年之後，一名弄丟了iPhone樣機的富士康員工從一公寓樓頂墜落死亡，是失足跌落還是自殺行為尚不清楚。在此後的兩年中，富士康共發 生了十八起自殺性墜樓或其他方式的自殺行為。2010年，在時隔新熱線項目擱淺兩年後，富士康創立了一條專門針對員工心理健康的熱線，並且開始為員工提供 免費的心理輔導。
“我們本可以救下那些命的，而且我們也督促了蘋果去給富士康施壓，但他們就是不肯，”一名BSR的諮詢顧問說。“其他的公司像惠普、英特爾、耐克等 等都會力促他們的供應商（去改善員工的工作、生活環境）。但是蘋果總想和它的供貨商保持點距離，尤其富士康是他們最重要的貨源，所以蘋果根本不願意去施加 什麼壓力。”
在一份書面聲明中，BSR的總裁阿隆•克拉默稱這些說法是諮詢顧問的個人觀點，並不代表公司立場。“我個人以及在BSR的同事都認為蘋果在確保其供 應鏈上勞工的權益方面做出了不懈努力，使之符合相關的法律法規、公司準則和消費者的期望。”克拉默補充道，要求蘋果對富士康施壓與熱線項目的初衷不符，因 為項目的發起者希冀看到供應商能夠自覺地實施這些項目，而非礙於某種外力。並且，項目當初未能進行下去的原因是多種多樣的。
在連續性的自殺事件發生後，富士康發表了一份聲明，稱公司已經快速、全面地處理了相關問題，並且“記錄顯示，我們採取的措施是行之有效的。”
偷工減料
每個月，來自世界各地的公司都會長途跋涉到加州的庫比蒂諾（蘋果公司總部所在地），或者邀請蘋果的高層們去參觀他們在外國的工廠，追求的是同一個目標：從蘋果獲得一份合同。
當有了蘋果對哪一家公司的產品或服務感興趣的消息時，那裡總會爆發一系列小型的慶祝活動：人們舉杯暢飲威士忌，然後在卡拉OK高歌。
然後，蘋果公司的需求開始滾滾而來。蘋果通常要求供應商列出每個零件的成本是多少，需要多少工人，以及他們工資的金額。蘋果希望知道每一個財務細節。
然後，蘋果計算出它需要為每個最終用於iPhone、iPad或者其他產品的零件付多少錢。多數供應商只能獲得很小的利潤。據供應商的主管說，實際 上利潤小到對於很多公司來說為蘋果代工是接近虧損的。作為對策，供應商經常試圖偷工減料，或者用便宜的替代品代替昂貴的化學製品，或者—據代工廠的人講— 要迫使工人們做得更快、工作得時間更長。
“能從和蘋果的生意中賺到錢的唯一方式，就是想出如何能讓生產更有效率，或者更省成本，”一家參與iPad生產的公司主管說，“然後第二年他們會來續約，但是要求將出廠價降低百分之十。”
2010年1月，蘋果的供應商之一勝華科技（Wintek）經歷了一場工人罷工—罷工者們推翻了一部汽車並砸壞了電腦。罷工的導火索是一系列問題， 包括在工人之間流傳的有工人中毒的消息。維權人士和報紙的調查最終發現137名員工受到一種叫正己烷的化學製品的傷害。正己烷可以導致神經損傷和麻痹。
工人們說他們被要求用正己烷替代酒精清潔iPhone的觸屏，因為正己烷的揮發比酒精幾乎快三倍。揮發更快意味着工人可以在每分鐘清潔更多的屏幕。
直到2011年二月，也就是罷工爆發一年多以後，蘋果公司才對勝華科技的事件作出評論。在公司的供應商責任報告中，蘋果說“已經要求勝華科技停止使 用正己烷”，並稱“蘋果已經確認所有受到影響的工人都受到了效果良好的治療。我們會繼續關注他們的醫療報告直到徹底痊癒為止。”在那份報告中，蘋果還表示 已經要求勝華科技修理通風系統。
同在二月份，一位《紐約時報》的記者採訪了多位受到毒害的勝華科技工人，他們說從來沒有任何蘋果公司或者替蘋果公司代理此事的人聯繫過他們。與此同 時，勝華科技要求他們拿着現金賠償離職，就此免除代工廠的一切責任。在《紐約時報》的採訪後，勝華科技保證向受傷工人提供更多賠償，而蘋果也派出一位代表 與工人們聯繫。
六個月後，報道電子消費品貿易的刊物稱蘋果大幅削減了付給勝華科技的價格。
“你可以制定所有你想要的行為準則，但如果你不給供應商足夠的利潤去善待工人，這些準則都是沒有意義的，”一位熟悉供應商責任審核項目的蘋果前高管說，“如果你壓榨利潤，你就是在強迫他們削減安全方面的投入。”
勝華科技依然是蘋果最重要的供應商之一。它在一份聲明中拒絕發表任何評論，僅表示在正己烷事件以後，公司已經採取了“充分的措施”來解決這個問題，並稱公司“致力於確保員工福利和營造一個安全健康的工作環境。”
蘋果公司的同行在員工待遇問題上採取的是另一種姿態。多個供應商的主管在採訪中表示，惠普等公司能積極投入到供應商的“綜合能力建設”中，即在供應商承諾改善工人福利時，這些公司會給代工廠略多的利潤空間和其他津貼來抵消增加的成本。
惠普公司的佐伊·麥克馬洪（Zoe McMahon）說，“我們的供應商對我們非常坦率。如果他們認為達到我們的期望有困難，他們會讓我們知道。他們的反饋會影響我們的決定。”麥克馬洪在惠普負責公司供應鏈社會和環境責任項目。
車間爆炸
在iPad車間爆炸當天的下午，賴小東像往常一樣給他的女朋友打了電話。他們本希望在那天晚上見面，但賴小東告訴他女朋友，經理讓他必須加班。
賴小東在富士康升得很快。在進入工廠幾個月之後，小東就開始掌管負責維護iPad後蓋拋光機器的小組。打磨區域非常嘈雜而且瀰漫著鋁粉。工人們戴着面罩和耳塞，但不管他們洗多少次澡，你都可以從他們頭髮中和眼角殘留的亮晶晶的鋁粉辨別出他們是這裡的工人。
僅僅在爆炸的兩周前，一家權益組織曾發佈一份報告警告成都廠區的工作環境很危險，包括具有可燃性的鋁粉的問題。這個叫“大學師生監察無良企業行動” （SACOM）的組織用攝像機拍到了覆蓋著一身鋁屑的工人。據該組織的報告稱，“成都廠區的職業健康和安全問題值得擔憂。工人們還強調了空氣流通不暢和人 身保護設備不足的問題。”
SACOM的報告被送到了蘋果公司。“沒有任何答覆，”SACOM的陳詩韻說，“幾個月之後我去了蘋果公司的加州總部，並且去了蘋果公司的大堂，但是沒有人想見我。我也沒有收到過蘋果任何人的任何答覆。”
爆炸發生的那天早上，賴小東騎着他的單車去上班。iPad在幾個星期之前剛剛上市，工人們被告知每天有成千上萬的後蓋需要拋光。他們說，整個工廠都 要忙瘋了。成排的機器高速打磨着後蓋，戴着面具的工人們按着按鈕。每一個工位上方都盤旋着一個巨大的空氣導管，但這並不足以導出三條不間斷運行的生產線噴 出的鋁粉。粉末到處都是。
粉塵是公認的安全隱患。在2003年，一起發生在印第安納州的鋁粉爆炸毀壞了一座工廠並導致一名工人殞命。在2008年，一家美國糖廠內的農業粉塵爆炸致使14人遇難。金屬粉塵尤其危險，因為它的溫度可以高到燒穿皮肉。
爆炸剛發生時，賴小東的第二個八小時輪班剛過了兩個鐘頭。廠房開始顫抖，彷彿地震波就在腳下。據工人們回憶，爆炸聲此起彼伏。
有人開始大聲尖叫。
有人用手機拍下了那一刻：當賴小東的工友們衝到廠房外時，濃煙正從廠房表面的一個大洞滾滾冒出，和綿綿的小雨交織在一起。兩人當場身亡。而最終的傷亡數字是：四人遇難，十八人受傷。
在醫院，賴小東的女友看到他的皮膚幾乎全部燒光了。“我是從他的腿才認出他的，要不然我都不知道那個人是誰，”她說。
最後他的家人也到了。“他的皮膚都被燒焦了，還有水泡，”他的弟弟說，“我媽第一眼剛看到他就馬上跑到房間外了。我也哭了。沒有人受得了那個場 景。”小東無法講話，醫生給他插呼吸管的時候，他甚至都張不開他的嘴，整張臉被大火燒得血肉模糊。當小東的母親回來時，她嘗試着避免碰到兒子，以免增加小 東的疼痛。
“如果我當時知道（小東後來會去世），”這位母親說，“我會抓住他的手臂，我會在他死之前摸摸他。”
“他非常堅強，”她說，“他又堅持了兩天。”
賴小東的父母希望把他的遺體帶回村子。但一個富士康的經理說，如果想得到賠償，他們必須先同意火化，因為中國法律要求遺體需要在火化後才能被運往異 地。賴小東的父親擋住病房的門，拒絕了這個提議，直到一個保安威脅把他帶走。幾天後，一隊富士康工人開車到賴小東的家鄉送交了一盒骨灰。富士康隨後向賴小 東的家人轉了約90萬人民幣。（富士康在一份聲明中說他們並沒有威脅不給賠償。）
蘋果和富士康在爆炸後都對事故展開了調查。一個蘋果發言人表示蘋果公司“對發生在富士康成都廠區的悲劇深表悲痛，我們的心與遇難者和他們的家人在一 起。我們正與富士康緊密合作以了解這起可怕事故發生的原因。” 富士康在一份聲明中說，成都廠區在爆炸發生前遵守了全部有關法律法規，並稱“在確保所有遇難員工家屬得到他們所要求的支持以後，我們還確保了所有受傷的員 工獲得最高質量的醫療護理”。在爆炸以後，富士康立即中止了所有拋光車間的生產，並在隨後改善了通風設備和與粉塵處理有關的習慣做法。新的技術也被提供到 位以進一步提升工人的安全。然而，不管是蘋果還是富士康，都尚未公布與事故調查有關的文件。
在最新的供應商責任報告中，蘋果公司表示在這起爆炸以後蘋果找到了“第一流的生產安全專家”並組成了事故調查組。調查組為預防將來類似事故提出了建議。
然而，在十二月，也就是造成賴小東身亡的爆炸發生七個月以後，另一家位於上海的iPad工廠又發生了爆炸。根據權益組織和蘋果最新的供應商責任報告，鋁粉還是罪魁禍首。這一次，59名工人受傷，其中23人需要住院治療。
“在一起爆炸發生後沒有意識到每一個工廠都應該受到檢查，這是嚴重的疏忽，”目前在麻省理工學院擔任教授的職業安全專家尼克•阿什福德說，“如果是 因為處理鋁粉非常困難，我可以理解。但你知道粉塵有多麼容易控制嗎？這個辦法就叫做通風。我們在一個世紀前就解決這個問題了。”
在最新的供應商責任報告中，蘋果表示儘管兩起爆炸都與可燃鋁粉有關，但爆炸的原因不盡相同。然而蘋果拒絕提供更多細節。報告補充說，截至目前蘋果已 經審查了所有拋光鋁製品的供應商並採取了更強有力的預防措施，包括特定的通風設備要求，強制執行的導管檢查，以及確保有可用的滅火器。報告說，除了一家供 應商之外其他所有的工廠都採取了應對措施，而那一家將一直處於關閉停產狀態，直到措施到位後才能恢復生產。
然而，對賴小東的家人來說，疑問依然存在。“我們不太清楚他是因為什麼死的，”賴小東的母親站在她在自己家附近修的墳邊說，“我們不知道發生了什麼。”
蘋果公司的“彩票”
每年，當關於蘋果新產品的傳聞開始浮出水面時，報道貿易的刊物和網站都會去猜測哪些供應商有可能中這個“蘋果彩票”。從蘋果獲得一個訂單可以讓一家 公司的價值增加數百萬美元。但很少有企業去炫耀他們接到了什麼工作：這些供應商的高管說，蘋果通常要求他們簽協議保證不會泄露任何信息，包括合作關係。
這種透明度的缺乏使蘋果可以輕易為自己的計劃保密。但權益組織和蘋果公司前高管認為，這同時也成為了改善其工作條件的障礙。
本月早些時候，在權益組織和包括《紐約時報》在內的新聞媒體的多番請求後，蘋果公司公布了156個供應商的名字。在公布這份名單的報告中，蘋果稱這些公司“占我們付給全部產品供應商總金額的97%還多”。
儘管如此，蘋果公司並未公布其間接供應商的名單。這些間接供應商並不直接和蘋果有合約關係，而是向其直接供應商供貨的幾百家上游公司。這幾百家中， 許多也受蘋果公司的審核。此外，在公開的供應商名單中，蘋果沒有透露任何有關其工廠地點的信息。不僅如此，權益組織表示，他們曾試圖檢查蘋果供應商的運營 情況，但卻被告知其將無法踏入大門一步，而這一禁令直接來自於蘋果公司。
一位曾就職於蘋果供應商責任部門的主管表示，“我們對這個問題進行過多次討論。全公司上下對都我們的行為準則都做出了真誠的承諾。但是如果再往前走 一步、進行一些實質性的變動會與我們的商業機密和發展目標相衝突，所以我們只能止步於此。商業機密至上的企業文化影響着公司內外的一切事務。”
原則上，蘋果公司的僱員不允許同絕大多數外部組織合作，例如非政府組織等等。“如果沒有得到准許，我們部門的員工不可以與非政府組織溝通，”另一位 掌握來自蘋果供應商責任部門第一手信息的蘋果前管理人員如是說。“即使大家是在同一場會議上碰見了，也不能深入交談。這項規定確實很令人沮喪，我們本來可 以從別人那裡學到很多東西。”
其他技術公司則沒有採用這種做法。英特爾公司企業社會責任經理加里·涅克爾克（Gary Newkerk）表示，“我與任何有正當理由和我展開交流的人進行溝通。我們公司的外部合作非常豐富。這個世界很複雜，如果不與外界溝通，我們將會錯過許多重要信息。”
鑒於蘋果公司在全球製造業領域擁有卓越聲譽和領先地位，如果其對目前的政策做出重大改變，將會為主流商業模式帶來翻天覆地的變化。“每個公司都想成 為蘋果，”來自尹納夫（Enough）公司的薩沙·列茨涅夫（Sasha Lezhnev）一語中的。尹納夫是一個致力於幫助公司運營者從遭受種族滅絕和環境退化的國家中抽身而退的組織。“如果蘋果公司承諾推出一款不會引發任何 衝突的iPhone，這將會徹底改變目前所謂的‘技術’。”
然而，據許多蘋果前任和現任的管理人員所言，無論怎麼說，真正能夠促成蘋果政策轉變的外部壓力寥寥無幾。“蘋果”是全球最出色的品牌之一，根據《紐 約時報》進行的一項全國性調查，56%的受調查者認為蘋果公司完美無缺；14%的人認為蘋果公司最大的缺點是它的產品過於昂貴；只有2%的回應者提到了海 外勞動力問題。
哈佛學者懷特女士表示:“蘋果公司目前沒有足夠的壓力來做出太多改變。股東們並沒有提出意見，股票價格也風平浪靜。更何況，政府也沒有表示將對其提 出制裁。”權益組織認為，除非消費者表達出對改善海外工廠環境的需求——正如他們當年對耐克公司和蓋普（GAP）公司提出類似要求並改變了供應商的處境一 樣。而決策者也必須有所作為，否則蘋果公司實在缺乏政策改革的動力。一部分蘋果內部員工也同意這一看法。
“你有兩種選擇，要麼在舒適安全的工作環境下進行生產製造，要麼就每年都推陳出新，提供質量更好、功能更強大、速度更快並且價格更便宜的產品，後者就需要一個在美國人眼裡非常艱苦的生產環境，”一位蘋果公司現執行管理人員如是評論。
“就眼前來說，消費者更關心的是一台新的iPhone，遠非中國工人的工作境況。”
The iEconomy
In China, Human Costs Are Built Into an iPad
2012年06月26日
Color China Photo, via Associated Press
An explosion last May at a Foxconn factory in Chengdu, China, killed four people and injured 18. It built iPads.
The explosion ripped through Building A5
on a Friday evening last May, an eruption of fire and noise that twisted
metal pipes as if they were discarded straws.
When workers in the cafeteria ran outside, they saw black smoke pouring from shattered windows. It came from the area where employees polished thousands of iPad cases a day.
Two people were killed immediately, and over a dozen others hurt. As
the injured were rushed into ambulances, one in particular stood out.
His features had been smeared by the blast, scrubbed by heat and
violence until a mat of red and black had replaced his mouth and nose.
“Are you Lai Xiaodong’s father?” a caller asked when the phone rang at Mr. Lai’s childhood home. Six months earlier, the 22-year-old had moved to Chengdu, in southwest China, to become one of the millions of human cogs powering the largest, fastest and most sophisticated manufacturing system on earth. That system has made it possible for Apple and hundreds of other companies to build devices almost as quickly as they can be dreamed up.
“He’s in trouble,” the caller told Mr. Lai’s father. “Get to the hospital as soon as possible.”
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. Apple and its high-technology peers — as well as dozens of other American industries — have achieved a pace of innovation nearly unmatched in modern history.
However, the workers assembling iPhones, iPads and other devices often labor in harsh conditions, according to employees inside those plants, worker advocates and documents published by companies themselves. Problems are as varied as onerous work environments and serious — sometimes deadly — safety problems.
Employees work excessive overtime, in some cases seven days a week, and live in crowded dorms. Some say they stand so long that their legs swell until they can hardly walk. Under-age workers have helped build Apple’s products, and the company’s suppliers have improperly disposed of hazardous waste and falsified records, according to company reports and advocacy groups that, within China, are often considered reliable, independent monitors.
More troubling, the groups say, is some suppliers’ disregard for workers’ health. Two years ago, 137 workers at an Apple supplier in eastern China were injured after they were ordered to use a poisonous chemical to clean iPhone screens. Within seven months last year, two explosions at iPad factories, including in Chengdu, killed four people and injured 77. Before those blasts, Apple had been alerted to hazardous conditions inside the Chengdu plant, according to a Chinese group that published that warning.
“If Apple was warned, and didn’t act, that’s reprehensible,” said Nicholas Ashford, a former chairman of the National Advisory Committee on Occupational Safety and Health, a group that advises the United States Labor Department. “But what’s morally repugnant in one country is accepted business practices in another, and companies take advantage of that.”
Apple is not the only electronics company doing business within a troubling supply system. Bleak working conditions have been documented at factories manufacturing products for Dell, Hewlett-Packard, I.B.M., Lenovo, Motorola, Nokia, Sony, Toshiba and others.
Current and former Apple executives, moreover, say the company has made significant strides in improving factories in recent years. Apple has a supplier code of conduct that details standards on labor issues, safety protections and other topics. The company has mounted a vigorous auditing campaign, and when abuses are discovered, Apple says, corrections are demanded.
And Apple’s annual supplier responsibility reports, in many cases, are the first to report abuses. This month, for the first time, the company released a list identifying many of its suppliers.
But significant problems remain. More than half of the suppliers audited by Apple have violated at least one aspect of the code of conduct every year since 2007, according to Apple’s reports, and in some instances have violated the law. While many violations involve working conditions, rather than safety hazards, troubling patterns persist.
“Apple never cared about anything other than increasing product quality and decreasing production cost,” said Li Mingqi, who until April worked in management at Foxconn Technology, one of Apple’s most important manufacturing partners. Mr. Li, who is suing Foxconn over his dismissal, helped manage the Chengdu factory where the explosion occurred.
“Workers’ welfare has nothing to do with their interests,” he said.
Some former Apple executives say there is an unresolved tension within the company: executives want to improve conditions within factories, but that dedication falters when it conflicts with crucial supplier relationships or the fast delivery of new products. Tuesday, Apple reported one of the most lucrative quarters of any corporation in history, with $13.06 billion in profits on $46.3 billion in sales. Its sales would have been even higher, executives said, if overseas factories had been able to produce more.
Executives at other corporations report similar internal pressures. This system may not be pretty, they argue, but a radical overhaul would slow innovation. Customers want amazing new electronics delivered every year.
“We’ve known about labor abuses in some factories for four years, and they’re still going on,” said one former Apple executive who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of confidentiality agreements. “Why? Because the system works for us. Suppliers would change everything tomorrow if Apple told them they didn’t have another choice.”
“If half of iPhones were malfunctioning, do you think Apple would let it go on for four years?” the executive asked.
Apple, in its published reports, has said it requires every discovered labor violation to be remedied, and suppliers that refuse are terminated. Privately, however, some former executives concede that finding new suppliers is time-consuming and costly. Foxconn is one of the few manufacturers in the world with the scale to build sufficient numbers of iPhones and iPads. So Apple is “not going to leave Foxconn and they’re not going to leave China,” said Heather White, a research fellow at Harvard and a former member of the Monitoring International Labor Standards committee at the National Academy of Sciences. “There’s a lot of rationalization.”
Apple was provided with extensive summaries of this article, but the company declined to comment. The reporting is based on interviews with more than three dozen current or former employees and contractors, including a half-dozen current or former executives with firsthand knowledge of Apple’s supplier responsibility group, as well as others within the technology industry.
In 2010, Steven P. Jobs discussed the company’s relationships with suppliers at an industry conference.
“I actually think Apple does one of the best jobs of any companies in our industry, and maybe in any industry, of understanding the working conditions in our supply chain,” said Mr. Jobs, who was Apple’s chief executive at the time and who died last October.
“I mean, you go to this place, and, it’s a factory, but, my gosh, I mean, they’ve got restaurants and movie theaters and hospitals and swimming pools, and I mean, for a factory, it’s a pretty nice factory.”
Others, including workers inside such plants, acknowledge the cafeterias and medical facilities, but insist conditions are punishing.
“We’re trying really hard to make things better,” said one former Apple executive. “But most people would still be really disturbed if they saw where their iPhone comes from.”
The Road to Chengdu
In the fall of 2010, about six months before the explosion in the iPad factory, Lai Xiaodong carefully wrapped his clothes around his college diploma, so it wouldn’t crease in his suitcase. He told friends he would no longer be around for their weekly poker games, and said goodbye to his teachers. He was leaving for Chengdu, a city of 12 million that was rapidly becoming one of the world’s most important manufacturing hubs.
Though painfully shy, Mr. Lai had surprised everyone by persuading a beautiful nursing student to become his girlfriend. She wanted to marry, she said, and so his goal was to earn enough money to buy an apartment.
Factories in Chengdu manufacture products for hundreds of companies. But Mr. Lai was focused on Foxconn Technology, China’s largest exporter and one of the nation’s biggest employers, with 1.2 million workers. The company has plants throughout China, and assembles an estimated 40 percent of the world’s consumer electronics, including for customers like Amazon, Dell, Hewlett-Packard, Nintendo, Nokia and Samsung.
Foxconn’s factory in Chengdu, Mr. Lai knew, was special. Inside, workers were building Apple’s latest, potentially greatest product: the iPad.
When Mr. Lai finally landed a job repairing machines at the plant, one of the first things he noticed were the almost blinding lights. Shifts ran 24 hours a day, and the factory was always bright. At any moment, there were thousands of workers standing on assembly lines or sitting in backless chairs, crouching next to large machinery, or jogging between loading bays. Some workers’ legs swelled so much they waddled. “It’s hard to stand all day,” said Zhao Sheng, a plant worker.
Banners on the walls warned the 120,000 employees: “Work hard on the job today or work hard to find a job tomorrow.” Apple’s supplier code of conduct dictates that, except in unusual circumstances, employees are not supposed to work more than 60 hours a week. But at Foxconn, some worked more, according to interviews, workers’ pay stubs and surveys by outside groups. Mr. Lai was soon spending 12 hours a day, six days a week inside the factory, according to his paychecks. Employees who arrived late were sometimes required to write confession letters and copy quotations. There were “continuous shifts,” when workers were told to work two stretches in a row, according to interviews.
Mr. Lai’s college degree enabled him to earn a salary of around $22 a day, including overtime — more than many others. When his days ended, he would retreat to a small bedroom just big enough for a mattress, wardrobe and a desk where he obsessively played an online game called Fight the Landlord, said his girlfriend, Luo Xiaohong.
Those accommodations were better than many of the company’s dorms, where 70,000 Foxconn workers lived, at times stuffed 20 people to a three-room apartment, employees said. Last year, a dispute over paychecks set off a riot in one of the dormitories, and workers started throwing bottles, trash cans and flaming paper from their windows, according to witnesses. Two hundred police officers wrestled with workers, arresting eight. Afterward, trash cans were removed, and piles of rubbish — and rodents — became a problem. Mr. Lai felt lucky to have a place of his own.
Foxconn, in a statement, disputed workers’ accounts of continuous shifts, extended overtime, crowded living accommodations and the causes of the riot. The company said that its operations adhered to customers’ codes of conduct, industry standards and national laws. “Conditions at Foxconn are anything but harsh,” the company wrote. Foxconn also said that it had never been cited by a customer or government for under-age or overworked employees or toxic exposures.
“All assembly line employees are given regular breaks, including one-hour lunch breaks,” the company wrote, and only 5 percent of assembly line workers are required to stand to carry out their tasks. Work stations have been designed to ergonomic standards, and employees have opportunities for job rotation and promotion, the statement said.
“Foxconn has a very good safety record,” the company wrote. “Foxconn has come a long way in our efforts to lead our industry in China in areas such as workplace conditions and the care and treatment of our employees.”
Apple’s Code of Conduct
In 2005, some of Apple’s top executives gathered inside their Cupertino, Calif., headquarters for a special meeting. Other companies had created codes of conduct to police their suppliers. It was time, Apple decided, to follow suit. The code Apple published that year demands “that working conditions in Apple’s supply chain are safe, that workers are treated with respect and dignity, and that manufacturing processes are environmentally responsible.”
But the next year, a British newspaper, The Mail on Sunday, secretly visited a Foxconn factory in Shenzhen, China, where iPods were manufactured, and reported on workers’ long hours, push-ups meted out as punishment and crowded dorms. Executives in Cupertino were shocked. “Apple is filled with really good people who had no idea this was going on,” a former employee said. “We wanted it changed, immediately.”
Apple audited that factory, the company’s first such inspection, and ordered improvements. Executives also undertook a series of initiatives that included an annual audit report, first published in 2007. By last year, Apple had inspected 396 facilities — including the company’s direct suppliers, as well as many of those suppliers’ suppliers — one of the largest such programs within the electronics industry.
Those audits have found consistent violations of Apple’s code of conduct, according to summaries published by the company. In 2007, for instance, Apple conducted over three dozen audits, two-thirds of which indicated that employees regularly worked more than 60 hours a week. In addition, there were six “core violations,” the most serious kind, including hiring 15-year-olds as well as falsifying records.
Over the next three years, Apple conducted 312 audits, and every year, about half or more showed evidence of large numbers of employees laboring more than six days a week as well as working extended overtime. Some workers received less than minimum wage or had pay withheld as punishment. Apple found 70 core violations over that period, including cases of involuntary labor, under-age workers, record falsifications, improper disposal of hazardous waste and over a hundred workers injured by toxic chemical exposures.
Last year, the company conducted 229 audits. There were slight improvements in some categories and the detected rate of core violations declined. However, within 93 facilities, at least half of workers exceeded the 60-hours-a-week work limit. At a similar number, employees worked more than six days a week. There were incidents of discrimination, improper safety precautions, failure to pay required overtime rates and other violations. That year, four employees were killed and 77 injured in workplace explosions.
“If you see the same pattern of problems, year after year, that means the company’s ignoring the issue rather than solving it,” said one former Apple executive with firsthand knowledge of the supplier responsibility group. “Noncompliance is tolerated, as long as the suppliers promise to try harder next time. If we meant business, core violations would disappear.”
Apple says that when an audit reveals a violation, the company requires suppliers to address the problem within 90 days and make changes to prevent a recurrence. “If a supplier is unwilling to change, we terminate our relationship,” the company says on its Web site.
The seriousness of that threat, however, is unclear. Apple has found violations in hundreds of audits, but fewer than 15 suppliers have been terminated for transgressions since 2007, according to former Apple executives.
“Once the deal is set and Foxconn becomes an authorized Apple supplier, Apple will no longer give any attention to worker conditions or anything that is irrelevant to its products,” said Mr. Li, the former Foxconn manager. Mr. Li spent seven years with Foxconn in Shenzhen and Chengdu and was forced out in April after he objected to a relocation to Chengdu, he said. Foxconn disputed his comments, and said “both Foxconn and Apple take the welfare of our employees very seriously.”
Apple’s efforts have spurred some changes. Facilities that were reaudited “showed continued performance improvements and better working conditions,” the company wrote in its 2011 supplier responsibility progress report. In addition, the number of audited facilities has grown every year, and some executives say those expanding efforts obscure year-to-year improvements.
Apple also has trained over a million workers about their rights and methods for injury and disease prevention. A few years ago, after auditors insisted on interviewing low-level factory employees, they discovered that some had been forced to pay onerous “recruitment fees” — which Apple classifies as involuntary labor. As of last year, the company had forced suppliers to reimburse more than $6.7 million in such charges.
“Apple is a leader in preventing under-age labor,” said Dionne Harrison of Impactt, a firm paid by Apple to help prevent and respond to child labor among its suppliers. “They’re doing as much as they possibly can.”
Other consultants disagree.
“We’ve spent years telling Apple there are serious problems and recommending changes,” said a consultant at BSR — also known as Business for Social Responsibility — which has been twice retained by Apple to provide advice on labor issues. “They don’t want to pre-empt problems, they just want to avoid embarrassments.”
‘We Could Have Saved Lives’
In 2006, BSR, along with a division of the World Bank and other groups, initiated a project to improve working conditions in factories building cellphones and other devices in China and elsewhere. The groups and companies pledged to test various ideas. Foxconn agreed to participate.
For four months, BSR and another group negotiated with Foxconn regarding a pilot program to create worker “hotlines,” so that employees could report abusive conditions, seek mental counseling and discuss workplace problems. Apple was not a participant in the project, but was briefed on it, according to the BSR consultant, who had detailed knowledge.
As negotiations proceeded, Foxconn’s requirements for participation kept changing. First Foxconn asked to shift from installing new hotlines to evaluating existing hotlines. Then Foxconn insisted that mental health counseling be excluded. Foxconn asked participants to sign agreements saying they would not disclose what they observed, and then rewrote those agreements multiple times. Finally, an agreement was struck, and the project was scheduled to begin in January 2008. A day before the start, Foxconn demanded more changes, until it was clear the project would not proceed, according to the consultant and a 2008 summary by BSR that did not name Foxconn.
The next year, a Foxconn employee fell or jumped from an apartment building after losing an iPhone prototype. Over the next two years, at least 18 other Foxconn workers attempted suicide or fell from buildings in manners that suggested suicide attempts. In 2010, two years after the pilot program fell apart and after multiple suicide attempts, Foxconn created a dedicated mental health hotline and began offering free psychological counseling.
“We could have saved lives, and we asked Apple to pressure Foxconn, but they wouldn’t do it,” said the BSR consultant, who asked not to be identified because of confidentiality agreements. “Companies like H.P. and Intel and Nike push their suppliers. But Apple wants to keep an arm’s length, and Foxconn is their most important manufacturer, so they refuse to push.”
BSR, in a written statement, said the views of that consultant were not those of the company.
“My BSR colleagues and I view Apple as a company that is making a highly serious effort to ensure that labor conditions in its supply chain meet the expectations of applicable laws, the company’s standards and the expectations of consumers,” wrote Aron Cramer, BSR’s president. Mr. Cramer added that asking Apple to pressure Foxconn would have been inconsistent with the purpose of the pilot program, and there were multiple reasons the pilot program did not proceed.
Foxconn, in a statement, said it acted quickly and comprehensively to address suicides, and “the record has shown that those measures have been successful.”
A Demanding Client
Every month, officials at companies from around the world trek to Cupertino or invite Apple executives to visit their foreign factories, all in pursuit of a goal: becoming a supplier.
When news arrives that Apple is interested in a particular product or service, small celebrations often erupt. Whiskey is drunk. Karaoke is sung.
Then, Apple’s requests start.
Apple typically asks suppliers to specify how much every part costs, how many workers are needed and the size of their salaries. Executives want to know every financial detail. Afterward, Apple calculates how much it will pay for a part. Most suppliers are allowed only the slimmest of profits.
So suppliers often try to cut corners, replace expensive chemicals with less costly alternatives, or push their employees to work faster and longer, according to people at those companies.
“The only way you make money working for Apple is figuring out how to do things more efficiently or cheaper,” said an executive at one company that helped bring the iPad to market. “And then they’ll come back the next year, and force a 10 percent price cut.”
In January 2010, workers at a Chinese factory owned by Wintek, an Apple manufacturing partner, went on strike over a variety of issues, including widespread rumors that workers were being exposed to toxins. Investigations by news organizations revealed that over a hundred employees had been injured by n-hexane, a toxic chemical that can cause nerve damage and paralysis.
Employees said they had been ordered to use n-hexane to clean iPhone screens because it evaporated almost three times as fast as rubbing alcohol. Faster evaporation meant workers could clean more screens each minute.
Apple commented on the Wintek injuries a year later. In its supplier responsibility report, Apple said it had “required Wintek to stop using n-hexane” and that “Apple has verified that all affected workers have been treated successfully, and we continue to monitor their medical reports until full recuperation.” Apple also said it required Wintek to fix the ventilation system.
That same month, a New York Times reporter interviewed a dozen injured Wintek workers who said they had never been contacted by Apple or its intermediaries, and that Wintek had pressured them to resign and take cash settlements that would absolve the company of liability. After those interviews, Wintek pledged to provide more compensation to the injured workers and Apple sent a representative to speak with some of them.
Six months later, trade publications reported that Apple significantly cut prices paid to Wintek.
“You can set all the rules you want, but they’re meaningless if you don’t give suppliers enough profit to treat workers well,” said one former Apple executive with firsthand knowledge of the supplier responsibility group. “If you squeeze margins, you’re forcing them to cut safety.”
Wintek is still one of Apple’s most important suppliers. Wintek, in a statement, declined to comment except to say that after the episode, the company took “ample measures” to address the situation and “is committed to ensuring employee welfare and creating a safe and healthy work environment.”
Many major technology companies have worked with factories where conditions are troubling. However, independent monitors and suppliers say some act differently. Executives at multiple suppliers, in interviews, said that Hewlett-Packard and others allowed them slightly more profits and other allowances if they were used to improve worker conditions.
“Our suppliers are very open with us,” said Zoe McMahon, an executive in Hewlett-Packard’s supply chain social and environmental responsibility program. “They let us know when they are struggling to meet our expectations, and that influences our decisions.”
The Explosion
On the afternoon of the blast at the iPad plant, Lai Xiaodong telephoned his girlfriend, as he did every day. They had hoped to see each other that evening, but Mr. Lai’s manager said he had to work overtime, he told her.
He had been promoted quickly at Foxconn, and after just a few months was in charge of a team that maintained the machines that polished iPad cases. The sanding area was loud and hazy with aluminum dust. Workers wore masks and earplugs, but no matter how many times they showered, they were recognizable by the slight aluminum sparkle in their hair and at the corners of their eyes.
Just two weeks before the explosion, an advocacy group in Hong Kong published a report warning of unsafe conditions at the Chengdu plant, including problems with aluminum dust. The group, Students and Scholars Against Corporate Misbehavior, or Sacom, had videotaped workers covered with tiny aluminum particles. “Occupational health and safety issues in Chengdu are alarming,” the report read. “Workers also highlight the problem of poor ventilation and inadequate personal protective equipment.”
A copy of that report was sent to Apple. “There was no response,” said Debby Chan Sze Wan of the group. “A few months later I went to Cupertino, and went into the Apple lobby, but no one would meet with me. I’ve never heard from anyone from Apple at all.”
The morning of the explosion, Mr. Lai rode his bicycle to work. The iPad had gone on sale just weeks earlier, and workers were told thousands of cases needed to be polished each day. The factory was frantic, employees said. Rows of machines buffed cases as masked employees pushed buttons. Large air ducts hovered over each station, but they could not keep up with the three lines of machines polishing nonstop. Aluminum dust was everywhere.
Dust is a known safety hazard. In 2003, an aluminum dust explosion in Indiana destroyed a wheel factory and killed a worker. In 2008, agricultural dust inside a sugar factory in Georgia caused an explosion that killed 14.
Two hours into Mr. Lai’s second shift, the building started to shake, as if an earthquake was under way. There was a series of blasts, plant workers said.
Then the screams began.
When Mr. Lai’s colleagues ran outside, dark smoke was mixing with a light rain, according to cellphone videos. The toll would eventually count four dead, 18 injured.
At the hospital, Mr. Lai’s girlfriend saw that his skin was almost completely burned away. “I recognized him from his legs, otherwise I wouldn’t know who that person was,” she said.
Eventually, his family arrived. Over 90 percent of his body had been seared. “My mom ran away from the room at the first sight of him. I cried. Nobody could stand it,” his brother said. When his mother eventually returned, she tried to avoid touching her son, for fear that it would cause pain.
“If I had known,” she said, “I would have grabbed his arm, I would have touched him.”
“He was very tough,” she said. “He held on for two days.”
After Mr. Lai died, Foxconn workers drove to Mr. Lai’s hometown and delivered a box of ashes. The company later wired a check for about $150,000.
Foxconn, in a statement, said that at the time of the explosion the Chengdu plant was in compliance with all relevant laws and regulations, and “after ensuring that the families of the deceased employees were given the support they required, we ensured that all of the injured employees were given the highest quality medical care.” After the explosion, the company added, Foxconn immediately halted work in all polishing workshops, and later improved ventilation and dust disposal, and adopted technologies to enhance worker safety.
In its most recent supplier responsibility report, Apple wrote that after the explosion, the company contacted “the foremost experts in process safety” and assembled a team to investigate and make recommendations to prevent future accidents.
In December, however, seven months after the blast that killed Mr. Lai, another iPad factory exploded, this one in Shanghai. Once again, aluminum dust was the cause, according to interviews and Apple’s most recent supplier responsibility report. That blast injured 59 workers, with 23 hospitalized.
“It is gross negligence, after an explosion occurs, not to realize that every factory should be inspected,” said Nicholas Ashford, the occupational safety expert, who is now at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “If it were terribly difficult to deal with aluminum dust, I would understand. But do you know how easy dust is to control? It’s called ventilation. We solved this problem over a century ago.”
In its most recent supplier responsibility report, Apple wrote that while the explosions both involved combustible aluminum dust, the causes were different. The company declined, however, to provide details. The report added that Apple had now audited all suppliers polishing aluminum products and had put stronger precautions in place. All suppliers have initiated required countermeasures, except one, which remains shut down, the report said.
For Mr. Lai’s family, questions remain. “We’re really not sure why he died,” said Mr. Lai’s mother, standing beside a shrine she built near their home. “We don’t understand what happened.”
Hitting the Apple Lottery
Every year, as rumors about Apple’s forthcoming products start to emerge, trade publications and Web sites begin speculating about which suppliers are likely to win the Apple lottery. Getting a contract from Apple can lift a company’s value by millions because of the implied endorsement of manufacturing quality. But few companies openly brag about the work: Apple generally requires suppliers to sign contracts promising they will not divulge anything, including the partnership.
That lack of transparency gives Apple an edge at keeping its plans secret. But it also has been a barrier to improving working conditions, according to advocates and former Apple executives.
This month, after numerous requests by advocacy and news organizations, including The New York Times, Apple released the names of 156 of its suppliers. In the report accompanying that list, Apple said they “account for more than 97 percent of what we pay to suppliers to manufacture our products.”
However, the company has not revealed the names of hundreds of other companies that do not directly contract with Apple, but supply the suppliers. The company’s supplier list does not disclose where factories are, and many are hard to find. And independent monitoring organizations say when they have tried to inspect Apple’s suppliers, they have been barred from entry — on Apple’s orders, they have been told.
“We’ve had this conversation hundreds of times,” said a former executive in Apple’s supplier responsibility group. “There is a genuine, companywide commitment to the code of conduct. But taking it to the next level and creating real change conflicts with secrecy and business goals, and so there’s only so far we can go.” Former Apple employees say they were generally prohibited from engaging with most outside groups.
“There’s a real culture of secrecy here that influences everything,” the former executive said.
Some other technology companies operate differently.
“We talk to a lot of outsiders,” said Gary Niekerk, director of corporate citizenship at Intel. “The world’s complex, and unless we’re dialoguing with outside groups, we miss a lot.”
Given Apple’s prominence and leadership in global manufacturing, if the company were to radically change its ways, it could overhaul how business is done. “Every company wants to be Apple,” said Sasha Lezhnev at the Enough Project, a group focused on corporate accountability. “If they committed to building a conflict-free iPhone, it would transform technology.”
But ultimately, say former Apple executives, there are few real outside pressures for change. Apple is one of the most admired brands. In a national survey conducted by The New York Times in November, 56 percent of respondents said they couldn’t think of anything negative about Apple. Fourteen percent said the worst thing about the company was that its products were too expensive. Just 2 percent mentioned overseas labor practices.
People like Ms. White of Harvard say that until consumers demand better conditions in overseas factories — as they did for companies like Nike and Gap, which today have overhauled conditions among suppliers — or regulators act, there is little impetus for radical change. Some Apple insiders agree.
“You can either manufacture in comfortable, worker-friendly factories, or you can reinvent the product every year, and make it better and faster and cheaper, which requires factories that seem harsh by American standards,” said a current Apple executive.
“And right now, customers care more about a new iPhone than working conditions in China.”
When workers in the cafeteria ran outside, they saw black smoke pouring from shattered windows. It came from the area where employees polished thousands of iPad cases a day.
按图放大
Ryan Pyle for The New York Times
A JOB TURNS DEADLY
Aluminum dust from polishing iPads caused the blast at Foxconn's plant
in Chengdu, left. Lai Xiaodong was among those killed. He had moved to
Chengdu, bringing with him his college diploma, six months earlier.
按图放大
Ryan Pyle for The New York Times
A SHRINE FOR A SON Lai Xiaodong was killed in a Foxconn factory explosion. His parents have built a memorial in their village.
按图放大
Ym Yik/European Pressphoto Agency
SAFETY PRECAUTIONS
After a rash of apparent suicide attempts, a dormitory for Foxconn
workers in Shenzhen, China, had safety netting installed last May.
Foxconn said it acted quickly and comprehensively to address employee
suicides.
“Are you Lai Xiaodong’s father?” a caller asked when the phone rang at Mr. Lai’s childhood home. Six months earlier, the 22-year-old had moved to Chengdu, in southwest China, to become one of the millions of human cogs powering the largest, fastest and most sophisticated manufacturing system on earth. That system has made it possible for Apple and hundreds of other companies to build devices almost as quickly as they can be dreamed up.
“He’s in trouble,” the caller told Mr. Lai’s father. “Get to the hospital as soon as possible.”
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. Apple and its high-technology peers — as well as dozens of other American industries — have achieved a pace of innovation nearly unmatched in modern history.
However, the workers assembling iPhones, iPads and other devices often labor in harsh conditions, according to employees inside those plants, worker advocates and documents published by companies themselves. Problems are as varied as onerous work environments and serious — sometimes deadly — safety problems.
Employees work excessive overtime, in some cases seven days a week, and live in crowded dorms. Some say they stand so long that their legs swell until they can hardly walk. Under-age workers have helped build Apple’s products, and the company’s suppliers have improperly disposed of hazardous waste and falsified records, according to company reports and advocacy groups that, within China, are often considered reliable, independent monitors.
More troubling, the groups say, is some suppliers’ disregard for workers’ health. Two years ago, 137 workers at an Apple supplier in eastern China were injured after they were ordered to use a poisonous chemical to clean iPhone screens. Within seven months last year, two explosions at iPad factories, including in Chengdu, killed four people and injured 77. Before those blasts, Apple had been alerted to hazardous conditions inside the Chengdu plant, according to a Chinese group that published that warning.
“If Apple was warned, and didn’t act, that’s reprehensible,” said Nicholas Ashford, a former chairman of the National Advisory Committee on Occupational Safety and Health, a group that advises the United States Labor Department. “But what’s morally repugnant in one country is accepted business practices in another, and companies take advantage of that.”
Apple is not the only electronics company doing business within a troubling supply system. Bleak working conditions have been documented at factories manufacturing products for Dell, Hewlett-Packard, I.B.M., Lenovo, Motorola, Nokia, Sony, Toshiba and others.
Current and former Apple executives, moreover, say the company has made significant strides in improving factories in recent years. Apple has a supplier code of conduct that details standards on labor issues, safety protections and other topics. The company has mounted a vigorous auditing campaign, and when abuses are discovered, Apple says, corrections are demanded.
And Apple’s annual supplier responsibility reports, in many cases, are the first to report abuses. This month, for the first time, the company released a list identifying many of its suppliers.
But significant problems remain. More than half of the suppliers audited by Apple have violated at least one aspect of the code of conduct every year since 2007, according to Apple’s reports, and in some instances have violated the law. While many violations involve working conditions, rather than safety hazards, troubling patterns persist.
“Apple never cared about anything other than increasing product quality and decreasing production cost,” said Li Mingqi, who until April worked in management at Foxconn Technology, one of Apple’s most important manufacturing partners. Mr. Li, who is suing Foxconn over his dismissal, helped manage the Chengdu factory where the explosion occurred.
“Workers’ welfare has nothing to do with their interests,” he said.
Some former Apple executives say there is an unresolved tension within the company: executives want to improve conditions within factories, but that dedication falters when it conflicts with crucial supplier relationships or the fast delivery of new products. Tuesday, Apple reported one of the most lucrative quarters of any corporation in history, with $13.06 billion in profits on $46.3 billion in sales. Its sales would have been even higher, executives said, if overseas factories had been able to produce more.
Executives at other corporations report similar internal pressures. This system may not be pretty, they argue, but a radical overhaul would slow innovation. Customers want amazing new electronics delivered every year.
“We’ve known about labor abuses in some factories for four years, and they’re still going on,” said one former Apple executive who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of confidentiality agreements. “Why? Because the system works for us. Suppliers would change everything tomorrow if Apple told them they didn’t have another choice.”
“If half of iPhones were malfunctioning, do you think Apple would let it go on for four years?” the executive asked.
Apple, in its published reports, has said it requires every discovered labor violation to be remedied, and suppliers that refuse are terminated. Privately, however, some former executives concede that finding new suppliers is time-consuming and costly. Foxconn is one of the few manufacturers in the world with the scale to build sufficient numbers of iPhones and iPads. So Apple is “not going to leave Foxconn and they’re not going to leave China,” said Heather White, a research fellow at Harvard and a former member of the Monitoring International Labor Standards committee at the National Academy of Sciences. “There’s a lot of rationalization.”
Apple was provided with extensive summaries of this article, but the company declined to comment. The reporting is based on interviews with more than three dozen current or former employees and contractors, including a half-dozen current or former executives with firsthand knowledge of Apple’s supplier responsibility group, as well as others within the technology industry.
In 2010, Steven P. Jobs discussed the company’s relationships with suppliers at an industry conference.
“I actually think Apple does one of the best jobs of any companies in our industry, and maybe in any industry, of understanding the working conditions in our supply chain,” said Mr. Jobs, who was Apple’s chief executive at the time and who died last October.
“I mean, you go to this place, and, it’s a factory, but, my gosh, I mean, they’ve got restaurants and movie theaters and hospitals and swimming pools, and I mean, for a factory, it’s a pretty nice factory.”
Others, including workers inside such plants, acknowledge the cafeterias and medical facilities, but insist conditions are punishing.
“We’re trying really hard to make things better,” said one former Apple executive. “But most people would still be really disturbed if they saw where their iPhone comes from.”
The Road to Chengdu
In the fall of 2010, about six months before the explosion in the iPad factory, Lai Xiaodong carefully wrapped his clothes around his college diploma, so it wouldn’t crease in his suitcase. He told friends he would no longer be around for their weekly poker games, and said goodbye to his teachers. He was leaving for Chengdu, a city of 12 million that was rapidly becoming one of the world’s most important manufacturing hubs.
Though painfully shy, Mr. Lai had surprised everyone by persuading a beautiful nursing student to become his girlfriend. She wanted to marry, she said, and so his goal was to earn enough money to buy an apartment.
Factories in Chengdu manufacture products for hundreds of companies. But Mr. Lai was focused on Foxconn Technology, China’s largest exporter and one of the nation’s biggest employers, with 1.2 million workers. The company has plants throughout China, and assembles an estimated 40 percent of the world’s consumer electronics, including for customers like Amazon, Dell, Hewlett-Packard, Nintendo, Nokia and Samsung.
Foxconn’s factory in Chengdu, Mr. Lai knew, was special. Inside, workers were building Apple’s latest, potentially greatest product: the iPad.
When Mr. Lai finally landed a job repairing machines at the plant, one of the first things he noticed were the almost blinding lights. Shifts ran 24 hours a day, and the factory was always bright. At any moment, there were thousands of workers standing on assembly lines or sitting in backless chairs, crouching next to large machinery, or jogging between loading bays. Some workers’ legs swelled so much they waddled. “It’s hard to stand all day,” said Zhao Sheng, a plant worker.
Banners on the walls warned the 120,000 employees: “Work hard on the job today or work hard to find a job tomorrow.” Apple’s supplier code of conduct dictates that, except in unusual circumstances, employees are not supposed to work more than 60 hours a week. But at Foxconn, some worked more, according to interviews, workers’ pay stubs and surveys by outside groups. Mr. Lai was soon spending 12 hours a day, six days a week inside the factory, according to his paychecks. Employees who arrived late were sometimes required to write confession letters and copy quotations. There were “continuous shifts,” when workers were told to work two stretches in a row, according to interviews.
Mr. Lai’s college degree enabled him to earn a salary of around $22 a day, including overtime — more than many others. When his days ended, he would retreat to a small bedroom just big enough for a mattress, wardrobe and a desk where he obsessively played an online game called Fight the Landlord, said his girlfriend, Luo Xiaohong.
Those accommodations were better than many of the company’s dorms, where 70,000 Foxconn workers lived, at times stuffed 20 people to a three-room apartment, employees said. Last year, a dispute over paychecks set off a riot in one of the dormitories, and workers started throwing bottles, trash cans and flaming paper from their windows, according to witnesses. Two hundred police officers wrestled with workers, arresting eight. Afterward, trash cans were removed, and piles of rubbish — and rodents — became a problem. Mr. Lai felt lucky to have a place of his own.
Foxconn, in a statement, disputed workers’ accounts of continuous shifts, extended overtime, crowded living accommodations and the causes of the riot. The company said that its operations adhered to customers’ codes of conduct, industry standards and national laws. “Conditions at Foxconn are anything but harsh,” the company wrote. Foxconn also said that it had never been cited by a customer or government for under-age or overworked employees or toxic exposures.
“All assembly line employees are given regular breaks, including one-hour lunch breaks,” the company wrote, and only 5 percent of assembly line workers are required to stand to carry out their tasks. Work stations have been designed to ergonomic standards, and employees have opportunities for job rotation and promotion, the statement said.
“Foxconn has a very good safety record,” the company wrote. “Foxconn has come a long way in our efforts to lead our industry in China in areas such as workplace conditions and the care and treatment of our employees.”
Apple’s Code of Conduct
In 2005, some of Apple’s top executives gathered inside their Cupertino, Calif., headquarters for a special meeting. Other companies had created codes of conduct to police their suppliers. It was time, Apple decided, to follow suit. The code Apple published that year demands “that working conditions in Apple’s supply chain are safe, that workers are treated with respect and dignity, and that manufacturing processes are environmentally responsible.”
But the next year, a British newspaper, The Mail on Sunday, secretly visited a Foxconn factory in Shenzhen, China, where iPods were manufactured, and reported on workers’ long hours, push-ups meted out as punishment and crowded dorms. Executives in Cupertino were shocked. “Apple is filled with really good people who had no idea this was going on,” a former employee said. “We wanted it changed, immediately.”
Apple audited that factory, the company’s first such inspection, and ordered improvements. Executives also undertook a series of initiatives that included an annual audit report, first published in 2007. By last year, Apple had inspected 396 facilities — including the company’s direct suppliers, as well as many of those suppliers’ suppliers — one of the largest such programs within the electronics industry.
Those audits have found consistent violations of Apple’s code of conduct, according to summaries published by the company. In 2007, for instance, Apple conducted over three dozen audits, two-thirds of which indicated that employees regularly worked more than 60 hours a week. In addition, there were six “core violations,” the most serious kind, including hiring 15-year-olds as well as falsifying records.
Over the next three years, Apple conducted 312 audits, and every year, about half or more showed evidence of large numbers of employees laboring more than six days a week as well as working extended overtime. Some workers received less than minimum wage or had pay withheld as punishment. Apple found 70 core violations over that period, including cases of involuntary labor, under-age workers, record falsifications, improper disposal of hazardous waste and over a hundred workers injured by toxic chemical exposures.
Last year, the company conducted 229 audits. There were slight improvements in some categories and the detected rate of core violations declined. However, within 93 facilities, at least half of workers exceeded the 60-hours-a-week work limit. At a similar number, employees worked more than six days a week. There were incidents of discrimination, improper safety precautions, failure to pay required overtime rates and other violations. That year, four employees were killed and 77 injured in workplace explosions.
“If you see the same pattern of problems, year after year, that means the company’s ignoring the issue rather than solving it,” said one former Apple executive with firsthand knowledge of the supplier responsibility group. “Noncompliance is tolerated, as long as the suppliers promise to try harder next time. If we meant business, core violations would disappear.”
Apple says that when an audit reveals a violation, the company requires suppliers to address the problem within 90 days and make changes to prevent a recurrence. “If a supplier is unwilling to change, we terminate our relationship,” the company says on its Web site.
The seriousness of that threat, however, is unclear. Apple has found violations in hundreds of audits, but fewer than 15 suppliers have been terminated for transgressions since 2007, according to former Apple executives.
“Once the deal is set and Foxconn becomes an authorized Apple supplier, Apple will no longer give any attention to worker conditions or anything that is irrelevant to its products,” said Mr. Li, the former Foxconn manager. Mr. Li spent seven years with Foxconn in Shenzhen and Chengdu and was forced out in April after he objected to a relocation to Chengdu, he said. Foxconn disputed his comments, and said “both Foxconn and Apple take the welfare of our employees very seriously.”
Apple’s efforts have spurred some changes. Facilities that were reaudited “showed continued performance improvements and better working conditions,” the company wrote in its 2011 supplier responsibility progress report. In addition, the number of audited facilities has grown every year, and some executives say those expanding efforts obscure year-to-year improvements.
Apple also has trained over a million workers about their rights and methods for injury and disease prevention. A few years ago, after auditors insisted on interviewing low-level factory employees, they discovered that some had been forced to pay onerous “recruitment fees” — which Apple classifies as involuntary labor. As of last year, the company had forced suppliers to reimburse more than $6.7 million in such charges.
“Apple is a leader in preventing under-age labor,” said Dionne Harrison of Impactt, a firm paid by Apple to help prevent and respond to child labor among its suppliers. “They’re doing as much as they possibly can.”
Other consultants disagree.
“We’ve spent years telling Apple there are serious problems and recommending changes,” said a consultant at BSR — also known as Business for Social Responsibility — which has been twice retained by Apple to provide advice on labor issues. “They don’t want to pre-empt problems, they just want to avoid embarrassments.”
‘We Could Have Saved Lives’
In 2006, BSR, along with a division of the World Bank and other groups, initiated a project to improve working conditions in factories building cellphones and other devices in China and elsewhere. The groups and companies pledged to test various ideas. Foxconn agreed to participate.
For four months, BSR and another group negotiated with Foxconn regarding a pilot program to create worker “hotlines,” so that employees could report abusive conditions, seek mental counseling and discuss workplace problems. Apple was not a participant in the project, but was briefed on it, according to the BSR consultant, who had detailed knowledge.
As negotiations proceeded, Foxconn’s requirements for participation kept changing. First Foxconn asked to shift from installing new hotlines to evaluating existing hotlines. Then Foxconn insisted that mental health counseling be excluded. Foxconn asked participants to sign agreements saying they would not disclose what they observed, and then rewrote those agreements multiple times. Finally, an agreement was struck, and the project was scheduled to begin in January 2008. A day before the start, Foxconn demanded more changes, until it was clear the project would not proceed, according to the consultant and a 2008 summary by BSR that did not name Foxconn.
The next year, a Foxconn employee fell or jumped from an apartment building after losing an iPhone prototype. Over the next two years, at least 18 other Foxconn workers attempted suicide or fell from buildings in manners that suggested suicide attempts. In 2010, two years after the pilot program fell apart and after multiple suicide attempts, Foxconn created a dedicated mental health hotline and began offering free psychological counseling.
“We could have saved lives, and we asked Apple to pressure Foxconn, but they wouldn’t do it,” said the BSR consultant, who asked not to be identified because of confidentiality agreements. “Companies like H.P. and Intel and Nike push their suppliers. But Apple wants to keep an arm’s length, and Foxconn is their most important manufacturer, so they refuse to push.”
BSR, in a written statement, said the views of that consultant were not those of the company.
“My BSR colleagues and I view Apple as a company that is making a highly serious effort to ensure that labor conditions in its supply chain meet the expectations of applicable laws, the company’s standards and the expectations of consumers,” wrote Aron Cramer, BSR’s president. Mr. Cramer added that asking Apple to pressure Foxconn would have been inconsistent with the purpose of the pilot program, and there were multiple reasons the pilot program did not proceed.
Foxconn, in a statement, said it acted quickly and comprehensively to address suicides, and “the record has shown that those measures have been successful.”
A Demanding Client
Every month, officials at companies from around the world trek to Cupertino or invite Apple executives to visit their foreign factories, all in pursuit of a goal: becoming a supplier.
When news arrives that Apple is interested in a particular product or service, small celebrations often erupt. Whiskey is drunk. Karaoke is sung.
Then, Apple’s requests start.
Apple typically asks suppliers to specify how much every part costs, how many workers are needed and the size of their salaries. Executives want to know every financial detail. Afterward, Apple calculates how much it will pay for a part. Most suppliers are allowed only the slimmest of profits.
So suppliers often try to cut corners, replace expensive chemicals with less costly alternatives, or push their employees to work faster and longer, according to people at those companies.
“The only way you make money working for Apple is figuring out how to do things more efficiently or cheaper,” said an executive at one company that helped bring the iPad to market. “And then they’ll come back the next year, and force a 10 percent price cut.”
In January 2010, workers at a Chinese factory owned by Wintek, an Apple manufacturing partner, went on strike over a variety of issues, including widespread rumors that workers were being exposed to toxins. Investigations by news organizations revealed that over a hundred employees had been injured by n-hexane, a toxic chemical that can cause nerve damage and paralysis.
Employees said they had been ordered to use n-hexane to clean iPhone screens because it evaporated almost three times as fast as rubbing alcohol. Faster evaporation meant workers could clean more screens each minute.
Apple commented on the Wintek injuries a year later. In its supplier responsibility report, Apple said it had “required Wintek to stop using n-hexane” and that “Apple has verified that all affected workers have been treated successfully, and we continue to monitor their medical reports until full recuperation.” Apple also said it required Wintek to fix the ventilation system.
That same month, a New York Times reporter interviewed a dozen injured Wintek workers who said they had never been contacted by Apple or its intermediaries, and that Wintek had pressured them to resign and take cash settlements that would absolve the company of liability. After those interviews, Wintek pledged to provide more compensation to the injured workers and Apple sent a representative to speak with some of them.
Six months later, trade publications reported that Apple significantly cut prices paid to Wintek.
“You can set all the rules you want, but they’re meaningless if you don’t give suppliers enough profit to treat workers well,” said one former Apple executive with firsthand knowledge of the supplier responsibility group. “If you squeeze margins, you’re forcing them to cut safety.”
Wintek is still one of Apple’s most important suppliers. Wintek, in a statement, declined to comment except to say that after the episode, the company took “ample measures” to address the situation and “is committed to ensuring employee welfare and creating a safe and healthy work environment.”
Many major technology companies have worked with factories where conditions are troubling. However, independent monitors and suppliers say some act differently. Executives at multiple suppliers, in interviews, said that Hewlett-Packard and others allowed them slightly more profits and other allowances if they were used to improve worker conditions.
“Our suppliers are very open with us,” said Zoe McMahon, an executive in Hewlett-Packard’s supply chain social and environmental responsibility program. “They let us know when they are struggling to meet our expectations, and that influences our decisions.”
The Explosion
On the afternoon of the blast at the iPad plant, Lai Xiaodong telephoned his girlfriend, as he did every day. They had hoped to see each other that evening, but Mr. Lai’s manager said he had to work overtime, he told her.
He had been promoted quickly at Foxconn, and after just a few months was in charge of a team that maintained the machines that polished iPad cases. The sanding area was loud and hazy with aluminum dust. Workers wore masks and earplugs, but no matter how many times they showered, they were recognizable by the slight aluminum sparkle in their hair and at the corners of their eyes.
Just two weeks before the explosion, an advocacy group in Hong Kong published a report warning of unsafe conditions at the Chengdu plant, including problems with aluminum dust. The group, Students and Scholars Against Corporate Misbehavior, or Sacom, had videotaped workers covered with tiny aluminum particles. “Occupational health and safety issues in Chengdu are alarming,” the report read. “Workers also highlight the problem of poor ventilation and inadequate personal protective equipment.”
A copy of that report was sent to Apple. “There was no response,” said Debby Chan Sze Wan of the group. “A few months later I went to Cupertino, and went into the Apple lobby, but no one would meet with me. I’ve never heard from anyone from Apple at all.”
The morning of the explosion, Mr. Lai rode his bicycle to work. The iPad had gone on sale just weeks earlier, and workers were told thousands of cases needed to be polished each day. The factory was frantic, employees said. Rows of machines buffed cases as masked employees pushed buttons. Large air ducts hovered over each station, but they could not keep up with the three lines of machines polishing nonstop. Aluminum dust was everywhere.
Dust is a known safety hazard. In 2003, an aluminum dust explosion in Indiana destroyed a wheel factory and killed a worker. In 2008, agricultural dust inside a sugar factory in Georgia caused an explosion that killed 14.
Two hours into Mr. Lai’s second shift, the building started to shake, as if an earthquake was under way. There was a series of blasts, plant workers said.
Then the screams began.
When Mr. Lai’s colleagues ran outside, dark smoke was mixing with a light rain, according to cellphone videos. The toll would eventually count four dead, 18 injured.
At the hospital, Mr. Lai’s girlfriend saw that his skin was almost completely burned away. “I recognized him from his legs, otherwise I wouldn’t know who that person was,” she said.
Eventually, his family arrived. Over 90 percent of his body had been seared. “My mom ran away from the room at the first sight of him. I cried. Nobody could stand it,” his brother said. When his mother eventually returned, she tried to avoid touching her son, for fear that it would cause pain.
“If I had known,” she said, “I would have grabbed his arm, I would have touched him.”
“He was very tough,” she said. “He held on for two days.”
After Mr. Lai died, Foxconn workers drove to Mr. Lai’s hometown and delivered a box of ashes. The company later wired a check for about $150,000.
Foxconn, in a statement, said that at the time of the explosion the Chengdu plant was in compliance with all relevant laws and regulations, and “after ensuring that the families of the deceased employees were given the support they required, we ensured that all of the injured employees were given the highest quality medical care.” After the explosion, the company added, Foxconn immediately halted work in all polishing workshops, and later improved ventilation and dust disposal, and adopted technologies to enhance worker safety.
In its most recent supplier responsibility report, Apple wrote that after the explosion, the company contacted “the foremost experts in process safety” and assembled a team to investigate and make recommendations to prevent future accidents.
In December, however, seven months after the blast that killed Mr. Lai, another iPad factory exploded, this one in Shanghai. Once again, aluminum dust was the cause, according to interviews and Apple’s most recent supplier responsibility report. That blast injured 59 workers, with 23 hospitalized.
“It is gross negligence, after an explosion occurs, not to realize that every factory should be inspected,” said Nicholas Ashford, the occupational safety expert, who is now at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “If it were terribly difficult to deal with aluminum dust, I would understand. But do you know how easy dust is to control? It’s called ventilation. We solved this problem over a century ago.”
In its most recent supplier responsibility report, Apple wrote that while the explosions both involved combustible aluminum dust, the causes were different. The company declined, however, to provide details. The report added that Apple had now audited all suppliers polishing aluminum products and had put stronger precautions in place. All suppliers have initiated required countermeasures, except one, which remains shut down, the report said.
For Mr. Lai’s family, questions remain. “We’re really not sure why he died,” said Mr. Lai’s mother, standing beside a shrine she built near their home. “We don’t understand what happened.”
Hitting the Apple Lottery
Every year, as rumors about Apple’s forthcoming products start to emerge, trade publications and Web sites begin speculating about which suppliers are likely to win the Apple lottery. Getting a contract from Apple can lift a company’s value by millions because of the implied endorsement of manufacturing quality. But few companies openly brag about the work: Apple generally requires suppliers to sign contracts promising they will not divulge anything, including the partnership.
That lack of transparency gives Apple an edge at keeping its plans secret. But it also has been a barrier to improving working conditions, according to advocates and former Apple executives.
This month, after numerous requests by advocacy and news organizations, including The New York Times, Apple released the names of 156 of its suppliers. In the report accompanying that list, Apple said they “account for more than 97 percent of what we pay to suppliers to manufacture our products.”
However, the company has not revealed the names of hundreds of other companies that do not directly contract with Apple, but supply the suppliers. The company’s supplier list does not disclose where factories are, and many are hard to find. And independent monitoring organizations say when they have tried to inspect Apple’s suppliers, they have been barred from entry — on Apple’s orders, they have been told.
“We’ve had this conversation hundreds of times,” said a former executive in Apple’s supplier responsibility group. “There is a genuine, companywide commitment to the code of conduct. But taking it to the next level and creating real change conflicts with secrecy and business goals, and so there’s only so far we can go.” Former Apple employees say they were generally prohibited from engaging with most outside groups.
“There’s a real culture of secrecy here that influences everything,” the former executive said.
Some other technology companies operate differently.
“We talk to a lot of outsiders,” said Gary Niekerk, director of corporate citizenship at Intel. “The world’s complex, and unless we’re dialoguing with outside groups, we miss a lot.”
Given Apple’s prominence and leadership in global manufacturing, if the company were to radically change its ways, it could overhaul how business is done. “Every company wants to be Apple,” said Sasha Lezhnev at the Enough Project, a group focused on corporate accountability. “If they committed to building a conflict-free iPhone, it would transform technology.”
But ultimately, say former Apple executives, there are few real outside pressures for change. Apple is one of the most admired brands. In a national survey conducted by The New York Times in November, 56 percent of respondents said they couldn’t think of anything negative about Apple. Fourteen percent said the worst thing about the company was that its products were too expensive. Just 2 percent mentioned overseas labor practices.
People like Ms. White of Harvard say that until consumers demand better conditions in overseas factories — as they did for companies like Nike and Gap, which today have overhauled conditions among suppliers — or regulators act, there is little impetus for radical change. Some Apple insiders agree.
“You can either manufacture in comfortable, worker-friendly factories, or you can reinvent the product every year, and make it better and faster and cheaper, which requires factories that seem harsh by American standards,” said a current Apple executive.
“And right now, customers care more about a new iPhone than working conditions in China.”
8 June 2012 Last updated at 09:07 GMT
China Foxconn workers riot at Chengdu restaurant
Foxconn produces electronic goods including the Apple iPad
Scores of workers from Foxconn, Apple's main manufacturer in China, have rioted after a dispute at a restaurant.
State media reported that the incident in Chengdu "was
triggered by a conflict" between a group of workers and a restaurant
owner.Foxconn has been criticised for its treatment of workers, but officials said the dispute was not connected to working practices.
Foxconn produces products for Apple and Microsoft, among other companies.
The police said that the seven Foxconn workers were apparently annoyed by an argument between a restaurant owner and his wife on Monday.
The workers said the row had "affected their meal".
A fight broke out, and after the restaurant owner called the police, the workers ran back to their dormitory shouting: "They are beating us."
About 100 of their colleagues then joined the disturbance, throwing bottles, according to a statement published on the police's official microblog.
No-one was reported injured in the incident, but four workers were jailed for the night.
Hon Hai, Foxconn's parent company in Taiwan, told reporters that the seven workers who started the riot were new recruits.
The company said it was co-operating with the police investigation.
A string of suicides at Foxconn last year put the spotlight on working conditions at its factories.
Foxconn has since agreed to reduce hours, protect pay, and improve staff representation.
華視新聞 -
針
對大陸媒體報導鴻海旗下富士康成都廠，6月4日晚間發生大規模「騷亂」，大陸媒體並以「千人暴亂」報導，表示經歷2小時才獲得控制，鴻海對此表示，經查是
成都富士康幾位新進員工，4日晚間在住宿公寓旁美食街用餐後，餐廳老板起爭執，延伸到返回青年公寓住所時，過程又引起 ...
【日經BP社報導】在世界第一大電子產品代工商（EMS）富士康（鴻海）與夏普宣佈開展資本業務合作的消息于2012年3月發佈之後，轉載發自日本的有關富士康新聞的中國大陸和台灣媒體增多了。
在5月下旬的報導中，最為引人注目的是《日本經濟新聞》5月24日刊登的題為「夏普與鴻海在中國大陸生產液晶，為對抗南韓企業提供尖端技術」的報導。 該報導稱，夏普將向富士康設在四川省成都市的液晶面板工廠提供尖端技術。該廠將生產智慧手機等產品使用的高畫質中小型面板，目標是在2013年投產。
關於富士康的成都面板工廠，本公司也于2012年2月底，以「富士康在成都建立第6代LTPS工廠，憑藉高解析率面板與AUO、三星展開競爭」為題在網站（瀏覽需註冊會員，提供免費試讀2周的試用會員）上做了詳細報導。該廠由成都市政府創辦的顯示器公司「天億科技」與富士康合作建設，生產的產品包括LTPS玻璃基板和基板用金屬氧化物半導體（IGZO）。工廠已于2012年2月底開工建設，計劃2013年下半年投產。
在毗鄰香港的深圳，富士康也與深圳市政府共同出資成立了面板公司「深超光電」。第5.5代LTPS生產線已于2011年12月投產。
台灣報紙《經濟日報》（2月28日刊）報導稱，富士康已經在成都設立了「鑫成」、「業成」兩家觸控面板公司。並通過在成都和深圳增設LTPS面板工 廠，似有在承包蘋果公司智慧手機「iPhone」和平板PC「iPad」的組裝的基礎上，再拿下蘋果的配備高精細面板和觸控面板產品的訂單，進一步鞏固其 蘋果主要供應商的地位。
《日本經濟新聞》關於成都面板工廠的報導一石激起千層浪，中國媒體在4月下旬發佈的一則報導最近再次成為了焦點。
這則報導稱，「富士康生產iPad的成都工廠人手不足，當地公務員被迫進廠頂工」。
報導出自4月27日中國經濟報紙《經濟觀察報》的新聞網站。報導稱，自從2010年富士康進入成都以來，四川省政府一直在全力支援富士康的招工活動。 四川省各市、縣、村都接到了任務，黨員幹部和政府的公務員頂在招工的第一線，為完成任務費盡心力。更令人吃驚的是，招工的成績還列為了年終考核的項目之 一。據稱達標者會得到獎金，未達標者將處以罰款。
在這種情況下，一位沒能完成任務的26歲女公務員，其領導說「招不到人，只能自己人去」，於是，從投放新iPad之前最為忙碌的2011年12月開 始，她在成都工廠上了大約1個月的夜班。當月的工資由政府和富士康雙方支付。然而，因為不習慣夜晚工作，身體吃不消，從富士康領來的1130元工資幾乎全 都作了醫療費。這位女公務員還說，在四川省綿陽市政府送來的約500人中，甚至包括大學生村官。因為沒有完成任務而到工廠頂工的公務員不是一個兩個。
 |
| 位於上海郊外松江的富士康集團工廠（點擊放大） |
每當人員不夠時，富士康就會催促政府儘快送人。為了滿足富士康的要求，政府當局不僅在四川，而且到陜西等其他省份招工。聽說每天要有3000～5000名新員工進廠才能滿足需要，規模令人難以想像。
至於離職率高的原因，該報未涉及。總之，這一情況可以證明，在中國，1家工廠要維繫5萬、10萬規模的員工，不要說在廣東、上海等沿海地區，就連在四川等內陸地區也已經不再容易。
而且，與公務員進廠頂工相比，更吸引筆者的反而是報導中提到的由富士康匿名員工介紹的四川省給予富士康的種種優惠政策。
除了提供土地之外，還包括進入保稅區減免稅收、免費宿舍、免費班車等。而且，政府免費負責招工也是富士康進入四川省的決定性條件。
這位員工指出，「因為四川省提供了這麼多的優惠，所以成都工廠的綜合成本變得相當低。所以富士康公司的方針是將iPad的生產盡可能安排在成都，成都實在吃不下再轉給深圳」。因此，對於富士康而言，成都因人手不足而無法生產是相當大的打擊。
四川省之所以如此力挺富士康，自然是期待該公司給當地帶來巨大的經濟效應和就業機會。中國《21世紀經濟報導》（3月3日）在報導富士康成都第6代 LTPS工廠的動工儀式時，介紹了富士康在經濟上對於四川省的貢獻。報導稱，成都工廠已于2010年7月開始生產iPad。在2011年5月，富士康與該 省綿陽市政府、中國著名電視生產商四川長虹（CHANGHONG）就合作建設年產規模5000萬台的智慧手機生產基地達成了協議。加上成都的LTPS面板 工廠的三項計劃，預計在2015年之前，富士康將為四川省創造6000億元的新產值。
地方政府給予一家企業過度的優惠並不僅限于四川省。富士康擁有生產基地的湖北省某開發區內部人士就表示，「對於進駐企業的優惠有統一的明文規定。但實際上，具體條件基本都是通過個別談判敲定的。各企業得到的優惠政策大相逕庭也並不奇怪」。
但現如今，認為「把政府資源都集中到一家企業的政府總動員招工之類的做法太不公平。如若其他企業開始要求同樣的待遇之時，事態將變得無法收拾」（「中 國江蘇網」4月29日）的批評之聲也開始出現。富士康無法以地方政府提供的特別待遇為前提與合作對象制定業務規劃的日子或許已經為期不遠了。（特約撰稿 人：山田 泰司，EMSOne）
■日文原文
中國の鴻海優遇がなㄑなる日
沒有留言:
張貼留言