Product Design & Development
 Share
RSS Feed 

At Issue

Fair Trade iPods

 Permanent link

We probably won’t know what the going market for fair trade electronics is any time soon. And I’m concerned that the zealous, constant fight to have the most inexpensive device with the most functions and gadgets will keep hipsters and the rest of us from taking a stand for devices made fairly.

By Kim Ukura, Associate Editor, PD&D

Kim UkuraI’ve gone to school at two universities that most people would characterize as quite liberal. Bleeding heart liberal, even.

At both, I remember seeing zealous campaigns over worker conditions in the factories that produced college apparel and advertisements for coffee shops that were fair trade. I walked by, but wasn’t a participant. As far as I was concerned, the term “fair trade” applied mostly to t-shirts and chocolate, and not much else.

But earlier this month, as news broke about worker suicides at Foxconn the idea of fair trade came up in the context of consumer electronics. I was intrigued.

For those who need a refresher, Foxconn is a contract manufacturer in China that makes, among other things, iPads and iPhones for Apple. Their facility in Shenzhen employs and houses more than 300,000 people and has had a recent number of high-profile suicides and suicide attempts – 14 in all.  

Taiwanese scholars and Manufacturing.net’s own Amanda Earing have been part of a chorus of criticism over the poor working conditions and harsh management at the plant.

As part of the response to the suicides and criticisms, Foxconn announced two pay raises, doubling the basic worker pay to 2,000 yuan – about $293 – per month.

For all intents and purposes, $293 a month is basically nothing. Even a small raise will increase the production cost of items coming from this factory and Foxconn has been clear they’ll pass that increase on to corporate customers Apple, Sony, Dell, Nokia, HP and others.

According to a February 2010 analysis by iSuppli, the total manufacturing cost for the iPad ranges from $10 for models without 3G, to $11.20 for models with 3G. Estimates from iSuppli also indicate that the total materials and manufacturing for the iPad models is between about $230 and $346. If worker pay goes up, these numbers will increase.

This presents an interesting set of conundrums for these corporations. Do they absorb the cost themselves or pass it on to customers? If they pass it on, how do they market the increased cost? And how will consumers respond to the change?

In response to the Foxconn controversy, ZDNet blogger Tom Foremski suggested that we’re on the verge of the first fair trade tech company or an electronics device that has an entirely fair trade supply chain:

All technology products trend towards becoming commoditized — that’s just how things work. How do companies fight commoditization? It’s done through differentiation. … Fair Trade electronics is another way companies will be able to differentiate themselves from competitors. Fair Trade will drive sales and it is a high profit value add.

Apple has been getting dinged more than the other Foxconn customers in this whole story, and I think for good reason – fair trade makes sense for Apple and for Apple’s customers.  

As Foremski suggests, Apple appeals to hipsters and artists, to people who like to “think different.” If you walk into any fair trade coffee shop on State Street here in Madison, you’ll see tables full of MacBooks and iPods and coffee in reusable containers to protect the environment. Foremski characterizes the Apple customer, somewhat accurately, in this way:

Fair Trade Apple products would make the fanboys even more annoying. They’d be walking around, their noses in the air, exuding moral superiority from every pore, and their farts would smell better than roses. It could become suffocating if you were caught in a confined space with one of them.

In addition to fanboy consumers, Apple also has a high profit margin – 21 percent – and nearly $40 billion in cash.

So Apple could afford the cost of fair trade and it has a customer base that – at least in theory – agrees with the concept. After all, if hipsters are willing to pay a little more for a socially responsible latte, they should make the same choice for their iPhone.

Would we all be willing to pay more to know that our iPad or eReader or smartphone or computer was made under humane conditions and that workers were paid a wage they could live on? And how much more would we be willing to pay for a fair trade device?

In July 2009, Harvard Business Review blogger Umair Haque estimated that a “good” iPod – one made under decent labor conditions – would cost about $58 more than an “evil” iPod. This estimate held across the iPod family, with Haque estimating that “good” iPods would cost between 20 and 30 percent more to produce.

Let’s assume, for arguments sake, that Haque’s numbers hold true across all Apple products and a “good” iPad or iPhone or iPad would be about 25 percent more. That bumps the $499 iPad up to about $625 and the iPhone 4 to almost $230. Too much?

We probably won’t know what the going market for fair trade electronics is any time soon. And I’m concerned that the zealous, constant fight to have the most inexpensive device with the most functions and gadgets will keep hipsters and the rest of us from taking a stand for devices made fairly.

But it’s an idea, isn’t it?

Would knowing your electronics were fair trade make a difference for you? Or doesn't it really matter? Who do you think will be the first fair trade electronics company? Share your thoughts, predictions, and comments below or e-mail them to kim.ukura@advantagemedia.com


Are the people that make iPods held against their will?

If not than they are free to look for a better job elsewhere right?

Of course having the job they have is probably much better than living on the farm they just left.

Should we pay enough for iPods that the people making them can affort $300,000 houses and send
their kids to Ivy League schools? I don't get paid that much, do you?

Where does fairness stop? Maybe they think it would be fair if we all made $293 a month. Wouldn't that be fair?

Tell you what: boycott Apple, don't buy any products that you think are produced unfairly. See how that helps those people you put out of work.

If that seems harsh send them some money. Everybody that is concerned, get together on Facebook and make a pledge. Go over to China and stand outside the Foxconn factory and once a week hand every worker a $100 bill.

The bottom line is that I'll bet that to a person they are better off now making $293 a month for Foxconn than they were at home making $0 and sleeping on a dirt floor with three generations of relatives and the chickens and pigs.
Posted by: mike at 6/30/2010 1:56 PM


I've always said that there's nothing wrong with free trade (or outsourcing), all things being equal.

But they're not, are they? Will free trade eventually make everything equal, knocking down the standard of living of developed countries, while raising the standard of living for developing countries, so that the average is something that a 19th century European peasant might be happy to have?

I really don't know--just that all things aren't equal right now.
Posted by: ChuckG at 6/30/2010 2:45 PM


mike: Of your suggestions, I think the only one close to what this particular piece advocated was paying workers more money (although not by the method you suggest). What I'm wondering in the piece is whether those of us who buy some of these products would be willing to pay more for them to guarantee that workers were paid a wage that makes it possible for them to live comfortably and not have to work overtime to make ends meet. Certainly, having a job is better than not having a job, but that doesn't mean it's not important to also think about what kinds of jobs they are and what values we as consumers support.

ChuckG: I'm also not sure what sort of outcome free trade will bring. But I do think you're right -- things are not equal now, and I'm not sure what to do about that. Fair trade seems like an interesting concept, especially with something as increasingly common as electronics.
Posted by: Kim Ukura at 7/1/2010 3:28 PM


I have to admit, all of you have hit a nerve with me. Let’s think about this situation for a moment. I am sure that the laborers at Foxconn are working under less than hospitable conditions. I don’t think there is any argument there. My question is, “What made these 14 people want to commit suicide – what was so bad that this seemed like the only viable solution?” Was it the pay scale, the working conditions (which could be any number of things), the feeling of hopelessness stemming from the fact that there just doesn’t seem to be a good way out, or is it some combination of these or other factors? It’s not like we can send an investigative reporter into the factory to get the answer or at least not a truthful answer. Do any of you think paying these laborers more is going to correct the situation? My guess is that this is only a small part of the problem. How much better would any of you feel if you got a pay raise to keep working under what have been described as “unbearable conditions”? I don’t think I’d feel much better. Let’s get real here. I have a solution, and I’m dead serious about this. Make these products in America. America has labor laws. America has a minimum wage law. America has pollution laws. America has all kinds of laws. America has unions. America has a burdensome corporate tax structure. That’s why America is so uncompetitive with countries that don’t have to play by the same rules. For sure these products are going to cost more if they are made in America, way more, but they’ll be made under conditions everyone can feel good about. How come no one offered up this solution? I’ll take that question – because we in America want low priced goods no matter what it takes – only now we are starting to get a conscience. How much is a conscience worth? In my opinion, it’s going to take much more than just doubling the salary of these workers to make this situation truly better, but no one wants to face up to that fact. If acceptable working conditions are expected then expect to pay for them.
Posted by: Don at 7/1/2010 7:42 PM


Holly Cow, this article could be the same article but replace the words "fair trade" and "Apple" with "products" and "Walmart" or with some twists it could be about "foreign cars" or buying things made in the USA rather that the less expensive imported versions.

Anyways I would certainly support a slightly different campaign to buy American made product rather than "fair trade" or "living wage" anywhere in the world. I don't feel it is right to enjoy low prices on our computers, cars, tv's, anything sold at Walmart, etc on the back of people that live with a completely different quality of life and lifestyle. I hope that still qualifies me as a humanitarian as much as the next guy.

I have a more isolationist or "islanding" view. I would rather use my made up term "islanding" to avoid the connotations associated with a view described as "isolationist". Perhaps viewed as closed minded, etc.

I would like economic policy to be similar to the golden rule. If the golden rule is "treat other as you would like to be treated" then the economic version would be "pay people as much as you would want to be paid to do the same job." If this rule were in place right alongside the laws of supply and demand the world would be a better place, or at least a fairer place to work.

I actually applaud the different lifestyles that allow people to work hard and sweat and take pride in their work without any politically incorrect stigma. I think the stigma started when the meaning of the phrase "work smarter not harder" drifted and eroded from a meaning similar to "do it right the first time" to a more dysfunctional and entitled: "you are smart if you don't work hard". I would also support a campaign to go back to taking pride in working hard and taking pride in the work that you do.
Posted by: mecheng1776 at 7/6/2010 3:02 PM


I would appreciate some credible and reliable way of evaulating and certifying that tech products are manufactured in safe and humane working environments. That is probably much easier said than done unless manufacturers can be made to see value in it.
Posted by: Bob_L at 7/15/2010 1:52 PM


register or log in to comment on this blog!

At Issue

Picking Glass Out of My Eyes
David Mantey, Editor, PD&D
Asteroid Mines: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
Karl Stephan, Consulting Engineer, Texas State University, San Marcos

Site Sponsors


Most Viewed

Videos & Webcasts

David Eagleman: Welcome to Your Future Brain 5/22/2012
We're entering a very interesting stage of human history right now where we can start importing technology to enhance our natural senses or perception of the world, says neuroscientist David Eagleman.     Continue
Race on Sunday, Sell on Monday 5/21/2012
Allison and Vince explore how Aston Martin Racing takes lessons from the race track to inform their consumer car designs.     Continue
Jaron Lanier: Why Facebook Isn't Free 5/21/2012
Internet pioneer Jaron Lanier argues that free technologies like Facebook come with a hidden and heavy cost - the livelihoods of their consumers.     Continue

Top Stories and Headlines
EVERY DAY!

FREE Email Newsletter