The Hidden Workforce Expanding Tesla's Factory • Hacker News Board

Re: The Hidden Workforce Expanding Tesla's Factory

#61

Post by bardworx » Mon, May 16, 2016, 10:16 AM UTC

pingec wrote: post #37

bardworx wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also funny how they call us an "impoverished country". In my eyes an average Joe has much better quality of life in Slovenia than in the US :). I would say the problems start if you want to me more than the average Joe. Creating labels and positioning the individual who was hurt as a victim, coming from an "impoverished country" is more attractive then reporting a different ("positive") point of view. In defense of…

So how much higher is US minimum wage? Perhaps 100%? Would you agree with someone who earns twice as much as you to automatically call you impoverished? I am no native speaker so I could be wrong, but I have looked up the word on Google. I believe that "impoverished" does imply context eg. [1] and is not simply a comparative word. It implies someone is really poor in a way that seriously affects his well-being, requi…

> So when applied to a country, the context should of course matter.

I agree with you. Even in my last sentence, I didn't refer to Slovenia as "impoverished". The author of the article used the word in the context of juxtaposition of minimum wage, incorrectly, it seems.

Re: The Hidden Workforce Expanding Tesla's Factory

#62

Post by chmaynard » Mon, May 16, 2016, 11:24 AM UTC

Several years ago, Apple executives stepped up and took responsibility for monitoring and improving substandard labor practices in its Chinese manufacturing plants. Tesla could learn a few things from Apple about business ethics. Some of the Tesla shine has been tarnished by this story, and I hope they decide to conduct an impartial investigation and take action to make sure their subcontractors comply with US labor law.

Re: The Hidden Workforce Expanding Tesla's Factory

#63

Post by croon » Mon, May 16, 2016, 1:03 PM UTC

hueving wrote: post #55

jsprogrammer wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Parent company that accepts bid isn't morally responsible to check on their subcontractors. If parent company is responsible, imagine the possibilities? Ever subcontractor would then blame the parent company for just about everything since they're not held responsible. What absolves them of responsibility? Exchanging money? If the parent company isn't responsible then imagine what happens: every parent company blame…

You are saying the customer is responsible for how a company achieves something. (Tesla is a customer of the contractor.) By that procedure of blame shifting, we could basically blame every Volkswagen customer for the diesel emissions scandal because they should have done their due diligence and realized that an engine couldn't perform that well without cutting corners.

Just playing devils advocate:

When you go to the grocery store to pick up bananas and coffee and you go for the cheapest of each you can pretty much guarantee that you're purchasing something produced by mistreating workers, spraying of carcinogens, destroying rain forests, etc.

Even if you're not producing it you are supporting it. You might go for the the second cheapest banana, and still not know if it's "good" or "bad", but at least the answer goes from "definitely bad" to "possibly okay".

I understand the realities we live with, but blankly accepting the status quo without at least questioning it shouldn't be defended. Why shouldn't companies be held at least morally/ethically responsible in the same way grocery store customers are, even if none are held legally accountable?

Re: The Hidden Workforce Expanding Tesla's Factory

#64

Post by hueving » Mon, May 16, 2016, 7:12 PM UTC

croon wrote: post #63

hueving wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are saying the customer is responsible for how a company achieves something. (Tesla is a customer of the contractor.) By that procedure of blame shifting, we could basically blame every Volkswagen customer for the diesel emissions scandal because they should have done their due diligence and realized that an engine couldn't perform that well without cutting corners.

Just playing devils advocate: When you go to the grocery store to pick up bananas and coffee and you go for the cheapest of each you can pretty much guarantee that you're purchasing something produced by mistreating workers, spraying of carcinogens, destroying rain forests, etc. Even if you're not producing it you are supporting it. You might go for the the second cheapest banana, and still not know if it's "good" or…

>When you go to the grocery store to pick up bananas and coffee and you go for the cheapest of each you can pretty much guarantee that you're purchasing something produced by mistreating workers, spraying of carcinogens, destroying rain forests, etc.

But I don't know that. I don't follow the latest on the sourcing for the banana markets, cucumber markets, whatever. It's ridiculous to expect that everyone could. What about the mushrooms you bought? The cheese? Depending on the location, the cheapest item could easily be an ethically sourced one.

>You might go for the the second cheapest banana, and still not know if it's "good" or "bad", but at least the answer goes from "definitely bad" to "possibly okay".

Not even close. Second cheapest could just as likely be a more inefficient operation of the cheapest abusive one. Transportation/storage of fruits/veggies is one of the highest components of the cost. The price you end up paying in the store is much less related to abuse than you think.

Consider that people pay a premium for 'local' and/or 'organic'. Either of those could have the most abusive labor practices in the industry and you would be paying more for them than the non-local/non-organic fruit while feeling pretty good about yourself at the same time.