It seems pretty clear that the workers think that their working conditions are unjust. Further, they apparently would be OK with those conditions if they got more money.
That suggests they don't consider them inhumane, (not justified regardless of pay) rather they are economically unjust.
The truth of whether or not they are economically unjust (in a market driven economy, which China isn't really) is that if they quit there will be no one else to fill those roles (economic scarcity created by a price imbalance). However if there are people who will fill those roles at the prices offered, then they will simply be out of a job.
It is always true in market controlled transactions that the buyer thinks they are paying too much for a good and the seller thinks they are paying too little. It's the fulcrum that creates the equilibrium point for the price of a good or service.
So in a dispassionate economic way one can say the employees are working to maximize their own economic value. If by periodically pulling stunts like this gets them more pay then they are doing their part to improve their economic station at the expense of the company. The company of course may try to use that to increase the price they charge to assemble such devices, and perhaps give some of that increase to their working staff.
Saying that their other option is to 'starve' seems improbable in a country that is based on the communist teachings of Mao and Marx. One might presume (but I don't know since I don't live there) that there are state jobs available. I could certainly understand it if those state jobs were less desirable. But what I do know is that nothing, and I really do mean nothing, is the same regarding working in China as it is in any western (non-communist / non-totalitarian) country. The best one can hope for looking in from the outside are shadows of those things that are creating them.
I don't agree. First, education levels among Foxconn employees are probably considerably lower than you can imagine. These people just don't fully understand how inhumane their jobs are or the lasting effects of the chemicals they work with and are probably directly lied to about it. Second they may already be owed money by Foxconn for overtime, healthcare, regular wages etc. and can't just outright quit out of fear of never seeing any of that money. Third there's a never ending supply of new workers, ignorant to the conditions in the factory, which pretty much nullifies their ability to bargain for rights. Fourth, according to the recent This American Life episode, THEY CAN BE LEGALLY PUNISHED FOR TRYING TO FORM UNIONS. I don't know how to stress the importance of that other than by raising my voice on the internet. HN doesn't have bolding.
TLDR:
They can't bargain. Plain and simple.
We have worker protections. If all that mattered was the free market then we wouldn't need them.
I completely relate to the emotion, in California we've had folks like Caesar Chavez organize to overthrow the exploitation of immigrant farm workers.
I'm saying that the article says they want more money. I'm sure there are lots of other things they want too but as I mentioned its very dangerous to assume anything when dealing with a culture and political climate that is so very different from one you are in or grew up in.
You point out that "Third there's a never ending supply of new workers, ..." That is, unfortunately, the economic force that is allowing these conditions to persist.
It suggests that one way to put pressure on Foxconn would be to cut off that supply through education and outreach to the people immigrating from the rural areas but I have no idea how that might be accomplished.
I agree that a long term strategy for improving working conditions involves access to quality education but I don't think that pertains to the issue being discussed nor is it very helpful to the people described in the article. The sad fact is these people are living their lives now and have virtually no bargaining power now. So they've taken to following the example set by the desperate measures of their former co-workers as a last ditch effort to eek out a fight. Perhaps the mass suicide was dis-genuine and they just wanted media attention. This to me is an indicator of what they feel they have to do to get a semblance of justice. Or that they genuinely have no idea how to stand up to their employer. An employer, mind you, that requires them to sign a contract stating that they will not commit suicide on the job. Think about that. Where would you be if you got paid $2 an hour to stand on your feet for 12 hours a day working with toxic chemicals without proper safety measures, having had signed a contract stating you wouldn't commit suicide, with no legal right to organize coworkers to even discuss how to improve working conditions, and don't have enough education to understand any of it other than your legs hurt, your hands won't stop shaking, and you haven't yet received any money for that overtime you put in to make electronics you'll never see people in your own country using.
>That is, unfortunately, the economic force that is allowing these conditions to persist.
No, it's a government problem. An individual is not on equal footing with a group of individuals (e.g. a company). Therefor either the government must allow workers to unionize or it must enforce some level of sane working conditions.
If your "free market" allows companies to exploit people to the point that working slowly kills them and not working kills them quicker then I want nothing what-so-ever to do with it.
First, China never was truly communist. It was 'communist' in the twisted definition that the state owned the resources and means of production, but that's not Marxism by any stretch - that's state capitalism, which is not the same thing as a planned economy (and neither of which is the the same thing as Marxism).
Second, China has not been 'communist' (note the scare quotes) for many years now.
Third, there certainly are many people starving in China, just as there are people starving in some part of pretty much any society. I find it entirely believable that there are people who one day's worth of unemployment away from starving in China. For that matter, I would have no trouble believing the same about a capitalist country like the US, or the socialist countries in Europe/South America.
The other option would not be to 'starve', most likely, since there is an abundance of low-skill, low-pay work to be found. But don't be fooled into thinking the government (especially the local government) or the companies care about the workers.
I think it's really interesting to observe the progression of China's economy over the last 70 years, from the "Great Leap Forward" (and the subsequent Cultural Revolution) up until now, they've had quite some twists and turns, but their underlying ideological basis I find intriguing: they derive their policy from the 'Scientific development concept' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_Development_Concept).
I might be mistaken, but I don't think health-services (other than basic ones) are free of charge in China. The same goes for education. What's definitely very "Chinese" is the segregation between the rural poor and the urban population. They're no Sweden, that's for sure.
That suggests they don't consider them inhumane, (not justified regardless of pay) rather they are economically unjust.
There are dollar values in which many people will work in inhumane conditions, especially if it means supporting their family. Many people would willingly give up half their lifespan if it meant a good life for their children.
If you're willing to commit suicide as an act of protest, then you are truly desperate.
> It seems pretty clear that the workers think that their working conditions are unjust. Further, they apparently would be OK with those conditions if they got more money.
I don't think that's what happened. Both the Atlantic and the "Want China Times" article say that the mass suicide threat happened after FoxConn didn't pay compensation to the employees who quit. So that seems more about human dignity, not just angling for a raise.
But the story says that employees staged the suicide threat, which confuses me. It's not clear to me if this was a move in sympathy to their former co-workers, or if those ex-employees somehow regained access to the building, or if the ones who tried to quit didn't succeed because FoxConn refused to let them out of their contracts or something.
Saying that their other option is to 'starve' seems improbable in a country that is based on the communist teachings of Mao and Marx.
Chinese policy is based upon the teachings of the capitalist roader Deng Xiaoping. Go into a Chinese bookstore and you will find his writings not things by Mao or Marx.
There isn't any sense in which China is communist. How could the working class be in control of the society, when they are suffering in foxconn? Such a thing could never happen under communism.
They don't consider it inhumane, because it lies around the general treatment these people will get for the majority of low wage low skill jobs in China. This unrest is good though, as it compliments the already staggering turnover rate Foxconn endures with its employees, and will lead to marginal improvement over time assuming low skill job demand is competitive enough in China.
It seems pretty clear that the workers think that their working conditions are unjust. Further, they apparently would be OK with those conditions if they got more money.
That suggests they don't consider them inhumane, (not justified regardless of pay) rather they are economically unjust.
The truth of whether or not they are economically unjust (in a market driven economy, which China isn't really) is that if they quit there will be no one else to fill those roles (economic scarcity created by a price imbalance). However if there are people who will fill those roles at the prices offered, then they will simply be out of a job.
It is always true in market controlled transactions that the buyer thinks they are paying too much for a good and the seller thinks they are paying too little. It's the fulcrum that creates the equilibrium point for the price of a good or service.
So in a dispassionate economic way one can say the employees are working to maximize their own economic value. If by periodically pulling stunts like this gets them more pay then they are doing their part to improve their economic station at the expense of the company. The company of course may try to use that to increase the price they charge to assemble such devices, and perhaps give some of that increase to their working staff.
Saying that their other option is to 'starve' seems improbable in a country that is based on the communist teachings of Mao and Marx. One might presume (but I don't know since I don't live there) that there are state jobs available. I could certainly understand it if those state jobs were less desirable. But what I do know is that nothing, and I really do mean nothing, is the same regarding working in China as it is in any western (non-communist / non-totalitarian) country. The best one can hope for looking in from the outside are shadows of those things that are creating them.