The Problem with Workplace Ethics

Adrian Roguski        

Dr. Tyler Zimmer

Philosophy 213-6

30 April 2016

The Problem with Workplace Ethics

The ethics of workplaces around the world has been an issue that has come to light in the past couple of years. One company that has been in the majority of the spotlight of this is Foxconn, a supplier of products for Apple. People are concerned with the electronics leader Foxconn’s responsibility program, its code of ethics, and also the controversy of the treatment of its workers. The reputation of Apple has been drastically bruised due to its suppliers. Foxconn’s management practice was put into the spotlight especially when workers started committing suicide. My goal in this paper will be to show that in the case of Apple’s supplier Foxconn, the theory of Consequentialism outweighs the theory of Kantianism because the ends justify the means and its better off for the consumer. The greatest good outcomes for the greatest number of people. Basically that the pleasure outweighs the pain.

Foxconn is the largest electronics manufacturer in the world and a top supplier for Apples products and many more big industry companies. The problem with it are the poor working conditions that include low wages, long working hours sometimes up to 16 hours, and the inhumane treatment of its workers. Some employees working seven days straight and 60 hours a week. The workers often live in crowded dorms and are punished with physical labor and pay deductions. Most workers have a hard time adjusting to factory life with a manager who supposedly curses at them all the time for not keeping up with the pace and for those that can’t keep up, they get eventual demoted to scrubbing toilets or conditions that they did not agree to. Some workers eventually committed suicides by jumping off the roofs of the factory and safety nets were put around the Foxconn factory buildings to prevent other ones from happening. The question is if there is anything morally and ethically wrong going on there?

A Consequentialists worldview is the theory that the most good, for the most amount of people is the highest degree of morality that can be aimed for. It is basically whatever promotes best overall consequences for the whole. That if “one must die, so that a hundred can live” is not a problem. They believe in not maximizing our own individual good, but instead maximizing the total amount of goodness in the world and promoting best outcomes. Whether an action is right or wrong depends solely on the consequences. When I speak of the greatest good for the greatest number of people in this case, who is it for? Is it for the good of Apple’s stockholders, the good of the consumer, the good of the plants owners, or the good of the workers? In a Consequentialists perspective, what is morally right for the factory workers is not to be the greatest good for the others involved. Every consumer wants high-tech devices and gadgets that can make their lives simpler, more efficient, and costing less than before; its only right that as technology progresses it should cheaper. Stockholders and owners want profit. Then, there are profit oriented companies, such as Foxconn because profit is mostly the only motivation for any business that wants to thrive; without profit they don’t work. What outcome is overall best for all, is the amount of pleasure that the factory gives to the most.