1. Will Foxconn’s response be sufficient to stop any future suicide attempts? Why or why not?
2. If the company has operated on “wafer-thin margins,” how should it deal with the increased labor cost?
3. Would you describe Foxconn’s response as an example of proactive or reactive ethics? Why?
4. If China’s young workers are sending a clear signal that they do not want to work in sweatshop factories, what can executives do from an ethics perspective to win them back?
Foxconn Technology Group is a subsidiary of Taiwan’s HonHai Precision Industry Company (reputed to be the world’s largest “contract manufacturer”). Even as a subsidiary, Foxconn’s numbers are impressive—the company employs about 800,000 people, half of whom work in a huge industrial park in Shenzhen, China, called Foxconn City. With 15 separate multistory buildings, each dedicated to individual customers such as Apple, Dell, Nintendo, and Hewlett Packard, Foxconn’s promotional material proudly states that the company pays minimum wage (900 yuan, or $130 a month), offers free food and lodging, and extensive recreational facilities to its employees—on the face of it, not your stereotypical “sweatshop” environment.