Editorials & Other Articles
In reply to the discussion: Apple comes out and says it [View all]usrname
(398 posts)Sure, they may have contracts with Foxconn, et al. But it's a monopsony, with Apple being the buyer of their services. If Foxconn as a corporation decides to go on strike and ask for more money, Apple can't fight back. What's Apple going to do? Go through the chinese court system to sue for breach of contract? I'm sure Apple understands that the chinese government owns at least 12.5% of every chinese corporation. So why would the chinese government help Apple in any way, especially if there's no alternative for Apple? I think Apple, Dell, H-P, Intel and other major computer manufacturers should really contemplate creating a joint manufacturing system here in the US. It may not be as draconian as the chinese system with its dormitories and 12-hour shifts. (And, according to the NYTimes article, labor is only a small portion of the costs. So if the shifts are returned to 8-hours and laborers are paid more per hour than in China, the overall increased costs would be only marginal.)
The point is, a corporation needs to not be held beholden to a singular supplier. Apple was wise to build all their Mac OS X's to run both on PPC and G3/G4 chips from Motorola and Intel chips. (The Mac OS X was designed and written to run on both RISC and CISC chips.)
An investment by Apple and other computer/electronics company for a Foxconn-like plant, or several such plants, would keep the competition for manufacturing available and to help these corporations maintain viable competitive contracts. And, if there's any breaches in contract, I think the US courts are slightly more balanced (at least the courts won't be in the pockets of either side).
It would be a 5 to 10 year process to establish a viable high-end electronics manufacturing base in the US. Could be shorter, who knows.