Background
Recently, Apple Inc instituted few changes in the Company’s Code of Conduct, particularly in China. It must be notified that more than 90 percent of their products are manufactured and assembled in China, which enforced the company to conduct operational audit and environmental audit in order to measure the tendency of deviation in production standards. The reasons for conducting the audits were the controversies related to labor mismanagement and environmental unfriendliness in China. According to Guglielmo (2013), Apple Inc announced that the inspection of facilities would be done by “Fair Labor Association” in order to evaluate the quality of working conditions and labor practices applied in the Chinese manufacturing facilities.
According to the association report, the three Foxconn facilities at Longhua, Guanlan, and Chengdu comprise with 170,000 workers approximately. Previously, the workers in the facilities were found to breach the legalized limit related to working hours. It was found that the facilities were paying inadequate salaries to the labors, which force them to work beyond the legislated working hours. Hence, the new code of conduct published by Apple Inc has defined new limits to the working hours and enforced the facilities to ensure the compliance. It must be notified that the maximum working hours were dictated by the Fair Labor Association (Guglielmo, 2013).
Further, the health and safety standards at the manufacturing facilities are another issue that the company addressed while making changes in the code of conduct. This issue gained attention of the company and various legislations after the death of an underage worker, which aged 15 years while working in the facility. The incident occurred during the production and launch of iPhone 5c. The Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the company, Mr. Tim Cook has announced the eradication of personal audits and invited various independent organizations to conduct detailed inspections after the changes (Guglielmo, 2013).
Identified Changes in the Code of Conduct – A Compliance Message to the Global Suppliers
According to Apple Inc (2016), the rights of workers are equivalent to the human rights. As result, the company has segmented the Labor Rights into various segments. First, the working hours of the labors should be limited to 60 hours weekly including the overtime. Besides, each labor should be given a day off in a week by the manufacturing facilities in China. Excluding the overtime, workers should not work more than 48 hours.
According to Harrington (2001), the extended hours would result in poor efficiency, adverse effects on circadian processes, and loss of work-life balance. Hence, the company is aim to retain the aspects by limiting the work hours as specified above. The suppliers in the Asian region should comply with the stated numbers in order to sustain the relationship with the company for longer terms.
An article published on British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) in 2014 stated that the company is unable to protect the workers under this context. It must be notified that Apple Inc will take legislative actions if a supplier exploits the clauses of the new Code of Conduct. For an ethical corporate proceeding, the company wants to dictate the suppliers in China that they should focus on efficacy and productivity of each labor in a manner, which eradicate the practice of overtime gradually.
Further, the supplier should ensure that each labor is receiving a legally dictated minimum wage, fringe benefits, national holidays, and the number of annual vacations from the facility. In case of an overtime performance, the supplier must pay a legislated premium in exchange of the services. The company will discontinue the contractual terms with a facility that breaches the guidelines and legislations while quantifying the services financially.
Lastly, the company is imposing a Juvenile Worker Protection on each facility that engages in the manufacturing processes of Apple Inc. It must be notified that most industries, particularly fashion and apparels, are employing labors below the age of maturity (Butler, 2016). In case of Apple Inc, a facility using child labor, which refers to employing a talent below 18 years, would face legal consequences and discontinuation of the supplier contract. Besides, the company holds the right to disclose the name of a supplier on public platforms in order to warn other corporations and industries. A supplier must avoid a potential engagement in sabotaging the Juvenile Worker Protection and conduct the operations in ethically, which will sustain the relationship with Apple Inc simultaneously.
Health and Safety
In the competitive world of global corporation, values of strong corporate citizenship and ethical conduct are subject to change due to uncertainties (Guthrie, 2012). Health and safety issues are among the essential elements of a sustainable supply chains. As a sustainable organization, Apple Inc recommends each supplier to equip the facilities with hazard preventions. The suppliers are suggested to conduct a facility audit in order to identify, evaluate, and prevent an occupational hazard at the manufacturing facility and submit a detailed report to the company immediately. It must be notified that this regulation in the new Code of Conduct became compulsory for existing and new suppliers. The company holds the right to discontinue the services of existing, and reject the proposals of new suppliers in case of non-compliance or deviations in standards. Each facility should have emergency exits, active response teams, collaborations with national fire and healthcare services, and onsite safety equipment. A supplier without the specified essentials is discouraged to work with Apple Inc and the company will conclude the relationship promptly.
Environment
It came to the knowledge of Apple Inc that suppliers in China and related Asian regions are unfriendly with environmental issues. An environmental protection is the most sensitive factor in the sustainability of corporate citizenship. According to Price (2014), suppliers’ facilities in China has a non-green culture while manufacturing products for Apple Inc. As result, the products offered by the company contain toxics that threaten the lives of workers and customers simultaneously. Hence, in consultation with Mr. Tim Cook, Apple Inc made eco-oriented strategies that bound the suppliers to ensure few elements during operational conducts. First, the raw materials should not contain toxic materials and suppliers must halt the use of such resources. Second, each supplier needs to develop and ensure the deployment of Water Waste Management with effectiveness. Third, suppliers need to manage air emissions that contribute in the ecological damage. Lastly, the sound pollution requires a significant control by aligning the production schedule and updating the machinery. Suppliers in China and Asian regions are requested to comply with each guideline in the value chain, which will develop and/or continue the relationship with Apple Inc in the present and future.
References
Apple Inc,. (2016). Supplier Responsibility - Apple. Apple INc. Retrieved 6 September 2016, from https://www.apple.com/supplier-responsibility/
Bilton, R. (2014). Apple 'failing to protect Chinese factory workers' - BBC News. BBC News. Retrieved 6 September 2016, from http://www.bbc.com/news/business-30532463
Butler, S. (2016). H&M factories in Myanmar employed 14-year-old workers. the Guardian. Retrieved 6 September 2016, from https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/aug/21/hm-factories-myanmar-employed-14-year-old-workers
Guglielmo, C. (2013). Apple's Supplier Labor Practices In China Scrutinized After Foxconn, Pegatron Reviews. Forbes. Retrieved 6 September 2016, from http://www.forbes.com/sites/connieguglielmo/2013/12/12/apples-labor-practices-in-china-scrutinized-after-foxconn-pegatron-reviewed/#7bccfa56647f
Guthrie, D. (2012). Building Sustainable and Ethical Supply Chains. Forbes. Retrieved 6 September 2016, from http://www.forbes.com/sites/dougguthrie/2012/03/09/building-sustainable-and-ethical-supply-chains/#4c2d10dd5cf2
Harrington, J. (2001). Health effects of shift work and extended hours of work. Occupational & Environmental Medicine, 58, 68-72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/oem.58.1.68
Price, D. (2014). Why Apple was bad for the environment (and why that's changing). Macworld UK. Retrieved 6 September 2016, from http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/apple/why-apple-was-bad-environment-why-changing-green-3450263/
