Quote:
Originally Posted by cjr72
Even if the company claims to be making gadgets under better conditions how would I know they are telling the truth?
|
Of course, no reason. Ignore what the company says unless endorsed by an independent source without an ax to grind. The only plausible umpire is the much maligned mainstream dead-tree media.
From the New York Times:
In China, Human Costs Are Built Into an iPad
Quote:
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.”
|
It's true that you can also find articles on the net documenting other than ideal conditions for HP workers. But, from what I read, the umps are saying that Apple tends to be more bad, and HP less bad.
And guess what? HP is, in my experience, cheap. Their printers cost a little more, but their desktop computers are as inexpensive as anyone's. This shows that the cost of treating your suppliers well (at least by the standards of the locality they live in) is way less than fifty percent more. The cost may be zero because of their trying harder satisfy you. It's worth repeating the obvious -- Apple's history shows the lack of any substantial connection between treating people poorly and low prices.