符合人道标准的iPhone 5是痴人说梦

最近一个人权监督组织SumOfUs呼吁苹果公司(Apple Inc.)，希望在今年夏天推出下一代智能手机── iPhone 5 时，能够成为首款“符合人道标准的 iPhone”(Ethical iPhone)。 苹果公司最近因为其大型制造合作伙伴──富士康公司(Foxconn Electronics Inc.)的劳动环境被西方标准认定为不人道因而饱受批评。据传由于工作环境不佳，富士康公司已有十几位员工相继传出自杀，而其中一座厂房爆炸事件也被指向与不安全的可燃性粉尘有关。 但所谓“符合人道标准”的 iPhone 5 显然无法在今夏前实现。包括苹果、戴尔(Dell)、惠普(HP)和几十家其它一线电子制造商们都将其制造业务外包给EMS。而这些EMS公司(如富士康)正陆续将制造厂房迁移到一些劳动成本更低的地区－－在这些地区的劳动力成本仅占在美洲与欧洲地区时的一小部份。在一款电子产品的总成本中，这种劳动力成本通常不太受重视。 EMS顾问公司Charlie Barnhart & Associates负责人Charlie Barnhart在回复EBN有关OEM/EMS关系建立以及合约关系结束时程的电子邮件中表示： 典型的OEM与EMS在建立一项新的外包供应方案时，从第一次双方的内部会谈到首次产品出货平均约需5个季度的时间。同时，取决于合作计划的规模、方法、复杂度以及OEM的经验，OEM-EMS建立合作关系的时间长短显然存在很大的范围。(我还见过只需三、四个季度即快速签约，也有拖延至七、八个季度才完成签约的案例。) 一般来说，OEM要解除其与现有外包供应方案间的关系并不需要太多时间，平均约三个季度左右。显然，结杕合约关系的时间资料也有一定的范围存在，而且实际的数字也难以确定，因为它通常更难确认发现问题时双方实际进行“第一次内部讨论”的时间。加上我们也研究过许多延宕多年的失败案例，通常是因为材料责任归属问题、法规程序，以及有关产品保固与申诉等问题。 因此，我认为要与一家改变合作方案的客户进行外包计划时，估计约需要八个季度的时间。 对于任何典型的消费电子产品发布速度──例如每6个月发布更新或升级版本──OEM通常必须在产品发布日期的两年以前就开始脱离不符合标准的EMS合作伙伴关系，同时间还要与新的合作伙伴开始进行量产。因此，当OEM要转换其设计、BOM、合约等等制造业务给新的合作伙伴时，其结果将会导致前所未有的大量冗余与浪费──这可是在产业供应链中的一大禁忌！ 有鉴于富士康公司的规模，Barnhart称其为EMS公司中的巨擘 (Goliath fringe)─OEM想要无缝地将其制造业务过渡到另一家EMS是不可能的。包括苹果、Dell及其它厂商都不得不先划分在富士康的制造业务，才可能转换至最富士康的其它EMS竞争对手。根据IHS iSuppli公司表示，以EMS产业阶层来看，光是一家富士康公司的营收大约已经是排名其后的九家公司总营收的两倍。 我们总是只想到要坚持原则，但有时不妨也稍稍计算一下。为了让中国劳工的工资提升到西方的水平，事实上只会让i系列商品(i-product)的成本增加35%，而完全无法改善中国劳工的工作环境。 编译：Susan Hong 本文授权编译自EBN Online，版权所有，谢绝转载 参考英文原文：An 'Ethical' iPhone by Summer? Not Going to Happen，by Barbara Jorgensen

相关阅读：
• 讲不出再见：当苹果赖上富士康
• 中国制造业的原罪——“血汗工厂”
• 电子制造业外迁潮，深圳期待华丽转型sU0esmc

{pagination} An 'Ethical' iPhone by Summer? Not Going to Happen Barbara Jorgensen A human rights watchdog agency has called for Apple Inc. to produce its first "ethical" iPhone -- the iPhone 5 -- by this summer. Apple has recently come under fire for the labor practices, deemed abusive by Western standards, at one of its largest manufacturing partners, Foxconn Electronics Inc. More than a dozen workers at Foxconn have committed suicide, allegedly due to working conditions, and an explosion at one factory has been linked to unsafe levels of flammable dust. An ethical iPhone 5 is clearly not going to happen. Apple, Dell, Hewlett-Packard, and dozens of other top-tier electronics manufacturers have outsourced their manufacturing operations to EMS companies. These companies, such as Foxconn, have migrated to areas where labor -- one of the lesser components of an electronics product's total cost -- is a fraction of rates in the Americas and Europe. Charlie Barnhart, principal of EMS consultancy Charlie Barnhart & Associates, provided the following information in an email to EBN about how long it usually takes for an OEM to engage with an EMS provider -- and how long it takes to end the relationship. On average, it takes a little over five quarters for the typical OEM to implement a new outsourcing supply solution (initial internal discussion to first products delivery). Obviously, there is a big range around this average depending on the scale, approach, and complexity of the project and the experiential level of the OEM (I've seen engagements launched as quickly as three to four quarters and other stretch on for as long as seven to eight quarters). On average, it takes a little less time for an OEM to disengage from an existing outsourcing supply solution, i.e. typically three quarters. Obviously, there is a range on this data point as well, but that number is extremely hard to pin-down as it's much more complicated to determine when the "initial internal discussion" (re: the disengagement) actually took place. Plus many of the failed cases we study drag on for several years due to material liability issues, legal proceedings, warranty related claims, etc. Therefore, when I'm modeling an outsourcing initiative with a client who is "changing solutions," I use an eight-quarter timeline in the project plan. At the rate of release for any typical consumer product -- let's say six months for an updated or upgraded version -- an OEM would have to start disengaging with a non-compliant EMS partner two years before the product's release date, while ramping up with a new partner at the same time. The result would be an unprecedented amount of redundancy -- a big no-no in the supply chain -- as the OEM transfers its designs, bill-of-material, contracts, etc., to the new partner. Given Foxconn's size -- Barnhart counts Foxconn among the "Goliath fringe" of EMS companies -- a seamless transition to another EMS is impossible. Apple, Dell, and others would have to divide their business among Foxconn's nearest competitors. According to IHS iSuppli, the combined revenue of the next nine companies in the EMS hierarchy is half of Foxconn's. As much as many of us would like to stand on principle, just do the math. Bringing Chinese wages up to Western levels would increase the cost of a typical i-product by 35 percent. And that won't improve working conditions.