Wednesday, September 25, 2019

Response to Student Post Kevin Gilling Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Response to Student Post Kevin Gilling - Essay Example The way I see it, the problem about Foxconn is not diversity and inclusion based, but simply the violation of human rights. Diversity and inclusion means that members of a minority group are being discriminated against. In the Foxconn case, it is Chinese maltreating other Chinese of all age groups, genders, and persuasions, so the group is pretty much homogeneous. The problem is human rights, but the source is economic. One would wonder why the maltreated workers continue to choose to stay despite the subhuman conditions. This may be traced to China’s migrant worker problem. Because despite the poor pay, factories in the cities continue to attract poor farmers because wages there are still better than the meager and uncertain income in rural life (Wang, 2005). It appears, therefore, that the D&I deficiency is not with Foxconn, but with Apple, the American company which subcontracts Foxconn. Apple has its iPad made in China because the labor costs are much lower than in the U.S . Apple could have given many unemployed Americans jobs, instead of propagating human rights violations by moving its production to China. If workers in China are paid below what their basic needs require, it is because Apple had wanted to save on cost, and would contract with the lowest bidding supplier. Reference Musil, S. (2012). â€Å"Foxconn working conditions slammed by workers’ rights group.† CNET. Retrieved from conditions-slammed-by-workers-rights-group/ Wang Zhenghua (September 21, 2005). "Convicted migrant worker killer waits for final verdict". China Daily. Retrieved August 9, 2012 from Response to post of Student 2: Christopher Gilbert Christopher makes an important observation in his post when he says that business decisions on whether or not it chooses to treat its workers with dignity and respect their human rights remain s largely voluntary. The problem coming into the 21st century is that multinational corporations have become so powerful that political entities such as states and international agencies cannot effectively exert force upon them to comply with whatever norms or standards have been formulated. The contest is still between economic might and political mandate. In a post economic crisis regime, however, the multinational corporation holds greater sway because of the investment capital and jobs it is able to infuse into a failing economy. Among the challenges identified in the post is that states refuse to implement international human rights standards because these are looked upon as infringing upon local cultures and values. I believe this is not the case, as every signatory to the UN, and every world economic power, has ratified the Universal Declaration of Human Rights without a single dissenting vote (UN Association in Canada, 2012). This means that infractions of human rights viola tions cannot be validly argued as counter-cultural or invasive to their way of life, but more likely is the lack of political will on the part of the Member-state to enforce the principles which it has committed to uphold within its jurisdiction. Furthermore, adherence to practices that violate human rights is not so much due to an altruistic desire to preserve one’s culture, as it is to conform with pressures of multinationals to subcontract with

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.