The issue of interest in the article in the url below centers on the locus of responsibility for ensuring the health and welfare of battery-making factory employees in China (Issues: Auditing CSR, p94; Human Rights, p234):
“But in China, workers making goods for American consumers have long borne the brunt of a global manufacturing system that puts cost cutting ahead of safety. The search for cheaper production means dirty industries are migrating to countries with few worker protections and lenient regulatory environments.”
Clearly, the workers’ employers share some of the responsibility, although the firm in this article claimed not to have known the extent of the danger. But, what about the American firms that contract out production to Chinese suppliers? The dangers of cadmium have long been known in the US and it is not hard to imagine that the constant pressure on suppliers to reduce costs would likely discourage adequate employee protection (Issues: Litigation, p245). What about the role of American consumers in the story? Do they bear any responsibility? Do they care about the welfare of Chinese factory employees and are they willing to pay for adequate protection? Should they care and pay for it? Surely, the Chinese government also has a responsibility to enforce its own regulatory standards and the US government has a responsibility to inspect goods being imported into the US market?
The answers to these (and other) questions are not at all clear. Perhaps everyone is to blame, which means holding anyone accountable is almost impossible and, as usual, the buck is passed down the line:
“After revelations of its cadmium-battery problems arose, GP [Batteries] quit making them at its plants, and now outsources that production to independent factories in China.”
Take care
Dave
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
http://www.sagepub.com/Werther
Toxic Factories Take Toll On China's Labor Force
By Jane Spencer and Juliet Ye
2172 words
15 January 2008
The Wall Street Journal
A1
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119972343587572351.html
