Apple's Foxconn Plant Workers Complain of "Militant Culture"

I find it halarious that there complaining that a person with no previous work experience can actively get a job which provides more than enough hours, nevermind that shes a student!

Its the complete oposite in the UK, alot of students find it hard to find full time work between years, not only that but these people can very easily just leave and try and find another job.

Jesus christ just suck it up if you want money that bad.

I agree Signor, many people in lots of countries around the world would do almost anything to get a job.

If the job itself is worse than the money she gets paid for it, then she should just quit - no harm done.

If the job itself is not worse than the money she gets paid for it, she's got a good job.

This may be morally incorect but personally I feel that if a large group of grown adults cannot stand up for themselves and what they believe in then why should we even care.

If the whole workforce were to actually come up with a plan of action on how to increase working standards then they would be able to change things. Much like the concept of a union.

In response to signor, this is china we're talking about not the west. If they attempted to unionise then they would get black bagged and dissapear for two years into a forced labor camp or worse. These people have no power and no collective means of power. They're also some of the poorest in the developing world and are consequently exploited by the west as the cheapest labour possible. If apple REALLY cared they would set up manufacturing in America where the workers have rights.

They do have the power to quit, though.

If having the job worsens their life overall, they should just quit.

Same goes for any worker in any job.

Im actually quite discusted with people's attitudes on here and I think they need to learn about what they are talking about. If i quit my job, I have state to help as well as friends & family who can also help.

If these people in China quit it probably means they and their familiy are out on the streets too, with no food, no money, no where to go.
It may be the lesser of two evils but its still evil nevertheless.

Where do you draw the line between evil and not-evil?

Does it ever end? Who decides where that line is drawn? What if after the line is drawn, someone is still unhappy? Or, what if, after the line is drawn, the factory no longer makes sense to be in that location, so all the jobs disappear?

It's an evil world. Normal laws of supply & demand always follow. It's exactly the same in Western countries. Every employer pays the least they believe they possibly can whilst still getting what they need out of their employee.

If there are hundreds of employees trying to fill one job, the wages get reduced. If there's no employees, the wages go higher.

The reason there is so much unemployment in many Western countries is because an artificial minimum has been defined, and anything below that has been described as 'illegal' - or 'evil'. That has led to the mass movement of factories out of some countries, particularly the USA, causing exactly the problem you describe - people out on the streets, no money, no food, nowhere to go. Not everyone unemployed has such great help from friends & family, and China has a Welfare system of its own, exactly as UK or USA do.

I'm sorry but I hold a controversial view that no company is under any obligation to employ anyone. It is, in my opinion, entirely entitled to offer someone a job for whatever amount that company is prepared to pay. The person is then entitled to accept or refuse. The same way any market place works. It's a controversial view because in some cases it leads to bad conditions, but as you said, those bad conditions are always the lesser of two evils - in other words, the fact the company is actually there converts a life from 'evil' to 'less evil'.

I'm sure lots will disagree with me on this one, but I think a job is a privilege, not a right.

It is really funny how the right-wingers on here are for Communists.

China stopped being "communist" a long time ago. It's now just an oppressive one-party state with a free market economy in some places.

Has anyone else realized that the headline is totally wrong? I expected it to be about workers going on strike and being militant. Instead they're talking about a military-style culture.

Or maybe THG editors think "militant" is the same thing as "military"??

It IS still Communist as the Communist Party runs the place.

These folks there are to high degree, pure and simply, slaves, with slavemasters...demanding everything from sex from young females, and probably from males also, in order keep their jobs and home at the prison complex.

And presumably if they renamed themselves the "Purple Bananas Party" you'd think China was run by purple bananas? Have you not noticed the last 30 years of Chinese history?

Why would a communist state be allowing a profit-making company (from Taiwan of all places) to make parts for wealthy foreign businesses?

If this doesn't make any sense just reply saying "but they call themselves communists so they must be" again. That always works.

The CIA still considers China, a Communist state.
According to CIA World Factbook, China's government is still considered a Communist State. However the source does note some economic changes since the 1970s (see below). A country's economic policy is only one part of it's government, so just because economic policies are changing doesn't necessarily mean the system of government has changed. See below for CIA World Fact Book's discussion of China's economic policy:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publica [...] os/ch.html