Response to Student Post Kevin Gilling Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Response to Student Post Kevin Gilling - Essay ExampleThe demeanor I see it, the chore about Foxconn is not diversity and inclusion based, but simply the infringement of charitable rights. Diversity and inclusion means that members of a minority group are being discriminated against. In the Foxconn case, it is Chinese maltreating other Chinese of all age groups, genders, and persuasions, so the group is pretty much homogeneous. The problem is human rights, but the source is economic. One would wonder why the maltreated thespians continue to choose to tour despite the subhuman conditions. This may be traced to Chinas migrant worker problem. Because despite the slimy pay, factories in the cities continue to attract poor farmers because wages there are thus far better than the scanty and uncertain income in rural life (Wang, 2005). It appears, therefore, that the D&I deficiency is not with Foxconn, but with Apple, the American company which subcontracts Foxconn. Apple has its i Pad made in China because the labor costs are much raze than in the U.S. Apple could have given many unemployed Americans jobs, instead of propagating human rights violations by lamentable its production to China. If workers in China are paid below what their basic needs require, it is because Apple had wanted to save on cost, and would contract with the lowest bidding supplier. Reference Musil, S. (2012). Foxconn working conditions slammed by workers rights group. CNET. Retrieved from http//news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57444213-37/foxconn-working- conditions-slammed-by-workers-rights-group/ Wang Zhenghua (September 21, 2005). Convicted migrant worker killer waits for final verdict. China Daily. Retrieved August 9, 2012 from http//www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-09/21/content_479492.htm Response to adventure of Student 2 Christopher Gilbert Christopher makes an important observation in his post when he says that business decisions on whether or not it chooses to treat its w orkers with dignity and respect their human rights remains largely voluntary. The problem climax into the 21st century is that multinational pots have become so powerful that political entities such as states and international agencies cannot effectively exert force upon them to comply with whatever norms or standards have been formulated. The contest is still between economic might and political mandate. In a post economic crisis regime, however, the multinational corporation holds greater sway because of the investment capital and jobs it is able to infuse into a failing economy. Among the challenges identified in the post is that states refuse to implement international human rights standards because these are looked upon as infringing upon local cultures and values. I guess this is not the case, as every signatory to the UN, and every world economic power, has ratified the Universal solving of Human Rights without a single dissenting vote (UN Association in Canada, 2012). Thi s means that infractions of human rights violations cannot be validly argued as counter-cultural or invasive to their way of life, but more likely is the lack of political will on the part of the Member-state to enforce the principles which it has committed to uphold within its jurisdiction. Furthermore, adherence to practices that violate human rights is not so much due to an altruistic desire to preserve ones culture, as it is to conform with pressures of multinationals to subcontract with