Steve Jobs says Foxconn in China ‘not a sweatshop’ after worker deaths

Foxconn, the contract manufacturer that assembles Apple’s iPhones and iPads, has to deal with workers committing suicide. Steve Jobs, the CEO of Apple, replies that the Chinese factory isn’t a sweatshop. “It’s a difficult situation. We are trying to understand right now, before we go in and say we know the solution”, Jobs said. However, Apple doesn’t suffer the situation, it even overtook Microsoft as the world’s largest technology company by market value.

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/jun/02/steve-jobs-foxconn-china-not-sweatshop

Jobs claims that’s not important to him, “it’s not what makes you come to work every morning”. But for being CEO of such an important company in the world, his reaction on the suicide-matter is rather passionless. According to Dries’s blog on Chinese workers, these suicidal actions weren’t the only problems on Chinese working conditions. Although those facts suggest that Apple doesn’t care about their workers, the suicide rate amongst employees at Foxconn appears to about half the rate that one might expect for workers of that age in China. 

Tim Van den Berghe

British supermarket employs one thousand homeless people.

British supermarket Morrisons wants to hire one thousand homeless people in the next 3 year. Thus, they can help these people to get their life back on track. They also will get some education.

                                           

This is a great initiative and great example that not all managers are selfish and only want to win money. Some managers can find the balance between the demands of stakeholders and stockholders. Nevertheless, it’s also a superb marketing stunt! The company will be linked with charity. And we all know that this will boost sales. It’s fantastic that helping people and winning money can be combined.

Steff Van den Bruele

Source:  http://destandaard.be/artikel/detail.aspx?artikelid=JOBAT_3226&subsection=228

National railway company of Belgium will be on strike on November 23.

November 23, NMBS will be on strike… Again. Every month, they find something to strike for. Not enough safety on the train, not paid enough, difficult working hours,… 

This is another, maybe quite unexpected example in the stakeholders theory. The employees of the Belgian railway company are definitely stakeholders, and they fight for their rights. But enough is enough. The employees don’t take account of the consequences of their actions. Every time they strike, hundreds, maybe thousands of people can’t get to work or arrive to late at work. This affects our whole economy. Every time NMBS is on strike, we lose millions of euro’s. They just aren’t aware of the other stakeholders: people from who a train is their only way of transportation. 

Striking is a human right, which I think is a very good thing. But employees of NMBS need to take account of the consequences. These consequences should be equivalent to their demands. They can’t terrorize the whole country every month…

Source: http://destandaard.be/artikel/detail.aspx?artikelid=DMF20101119_201

Steff Van den Bruele

Online shopping at work ‘increases security risks’

Due to the increasing number of employees using company mobile devices, companies are very vulnerable to viral internet threat such as malware and phishing attacks. As employees also use those devices for purposes other than work, they could click on suspicious links, or they could admit confidential information to unverified websites. Furthermore, the increased use of social networks for purchasing goods could also harm corporate security. 

Devices who are property of a company should only be used for business purposes in theory, in practice employees benefit without disgrace. Businesses should not be harmed due to private the activity of their employees. Therefore, employers could supervise their personnel, and limit their possibilities. 

As company mobile devices can be considered as a perk, employees should treat them with respect. While company cars are expensive, devices such as notebook computers or mobile phones can be given to all employees as motivation.

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2010/nov/10/online-christmas-shopping-security-risks

Tim Van den Berghe

Biggest solar panel installation on roof Colruyt

Colruyt decided to install 8000 square meter of solar panels on the roof of their distribution centre. These 1200 solar panels should be able to provide enough green energy for the whole Colruyt group throughout a year. As a result the CO² emissions will drop with 78 ton each year. It’s an expensive investment but because of the governments subsidies it’s sure to be profitable. 

Source :http://www.destandaard.be/artikel/detail.aspx?artikelid=GAT129IJ8&word=zonnepaneel+colruyt

It’s really remarkable when a company invests in green energy! It’s especially the society who benefits from such an investment. But a good company keeps all his stakeholders happy. One way to do this is by creating a positive image for your company. Nowadays investing in green energy gives your company an environment-friendly image. This appeals to all stakeholders. After all, the environment is also a stakeholder!

 Dries Vander Meeren

Company Cars

Cars are useful for a company, they are necessary to operate. When an employee has to deliver a package or he must go to a meeting, he needs a car. Although this is the main objective of a company car, we can see that they are also used in another way. A lot of companies give expensive cars to their managers to motivate them to perform well. This type of perks is not essential to do their job as such but it is a specially added reward. In Belgium, more than half of managers own a company car.

In my eyes, company cars are excellent objects to motivate your managers. It is necessary that they feel good because they are a very important stakeholder. When they receive a nice car from the company they will notice that their work is appreciated. This trigger is important for the employer because a happy employee will work harder and achieve more. On the other hand, this type of rewarding may lead to envy by the other employees. The employer must pay attention for this because it’s not meant to create disharmony in the company.

Source: http://www.standaard.be/artikel/detail.aspx?artikelid=JOBAT_3270&subsection=228

Lars Van Nieuwenhuize

Chinese workers link sickness to n-hexane and Apple iPhone screens

In the city of Suzhou several Chinese employees were poisoned by the chemical n-hexane. They were exposed to this dangerous substance while cleaning parts for Apple. Although the potential risks were well known by Wintek , a Taiwan-owned electronics giant, they still decided to switch from alcohol to n-hexane because it dried more swiftly.  Wintek doesn’t want to say anything about who it’s working for and even Apple won’t reveal who it’s working with. Apple says they have a strict code of conduct which sets requirements for working and environmental practices. Despite a 2010 audit which shows that many manufactures don’t follow this code Apple claims to be innocent.

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/may/07/chinese-workers-sickness-hexane-apple-iphone

Apple doesn’t take its responsibility. If subcontractors don’t follow the code of conduct Apple should intervene. And because of their product secrecy it’s impossible to ensure workers' rights are protected

Apple is a giant multinational with a quarterly profit of more than $3bn. They should spend some more money on ensuring safe working conditions. After all employees are one of the most important stakeholders!  

Dries Vander Meeren

Profit and sustainability can go together.

Profit and sustainability can go together. It is possible to find a way to produce without damaging the environment. More and more companies start to realize that the environment is a very important stakeholder nowadays. They are willing to adapt their production process to reduce the environmental damage. We see the corporate social responsibility in the mission of big companies such as Volvo and Carrefour. Next to the financial performance, the companies take also the ecological and social performance into account.

Vanheede is an example of a company with respect for the environment. It is a company specialized in collecting and processing waste. When we look at their mission, we can see that the environment is very important for them. Environmental protection, safety and corporate governance are keywords for this company. They want to be a valuable partner who guarantees a durable, integrated and efficient waste management for a reasonable price.

The environment is not the only important stakeholder for Vanheede. They also respect their employees and their neighbours. However they want to make profit, every stakeholder is important for them. This is a very noble view and I think if every company would act like Vanheede, the world would be a better place.

Sources: http://www.volvotrucks.com/trucks/belgium-market/nl-be/aboutus/sustainability/pages/sustainability.aspx 

http://www.carrefour.eu/corporate/sustainabledevelopment.cfm?lang=nl

http://www.vanheede.com/duurzaam-ondernemen.aspx

Lars Van Nieuwenhuize

America's most generous companies

The Chronicle of Philanthropy, a newspaper representing the non-profit world, launched a survey about America’s most generous companies. Though the survey contains the results of more than 300 companies, dozens of the most profitable firms such as Apple or Google refused to provide information about their giving. Despite the economic crisis, most of America’s largest companies continued donating. However, when corporate profits were recovering, many businesses tightened their belts on cash donations. For the first time since 2003, cash and product donations declined. More than half of the largest American businesses cut back on cash giving and only 16% of them gave about the same amount as they did the year before.

A remarkable thing is that the pharmaceutical sector is outshining when it comes to donating. Pfizer, the largest pharmaceutical company in the world, ranked number 1 on the list of most generous companies. They gave $2.3 billion, representing 24.2% of its 2008 profits while companies on average gave an amount equal to 1.2% of their 2008 profits. Also other pharmaceutical giants duped 5 of the top 10 spots on that list. The question is: will they be able to keep their position or will they soon be repudiated by other upcoming companies?

Source: http://www.forbes.com/2010/10/28/most-generous-companies-leadership-corporate-citizenship-philanthropy.html

Tim Van den Berghe

Companies aren’t charities

In her new book Ann Bernstein claims that companies benefit society just by practicing their core activity. This fact is often forgotten by the advocates of corporate social responsibility (CSR). They talk about the occasional harm a company causes but forget the prosperity they create. With this statement Ann Bernstein tries to explain the social economical problem in South Africa. Because of the strict laws and the demanding NGOs companies prefer to establish their business elsewhere. It’s not that companies in South Africa lack CSR but there just too little companies to provide enough wealth. As a result the lack of companies causes the overwhelming poverty in South Africa.

Source: http://www.economist.com/node/17305554

I picked out this article because I think it’s a good example on how businesses have an important influence on the overall prosperity of a country. By pursuing their own goals they create a lot of benefits for others. For example: employment, lower prices, economical growth, etc...

Dries Vander Meeren

Can profit and sustainability go together?

The best example of the contradiction between shareholders and stakeholders is the discussion about the environment. Can profit and sustainability go together? Can we minimise our environmental footprint and keep our live standard?

Yes, we can! But we have to change our way of live. We need to evolve to a “moral capitalism”: increasing profits and decreasing environmental destruction. This can’t be done without innovations in materials, production technologies, transportation networks, … Obviously, this will take some time. “Rome wasn’t build in a day!” Today, the government subsidies companies who try to improve their way of production, which will help to stimulate other businesses to do the same. Gradually, the awareness among the companies grows that things have to change, f.e. car manufacturers produce hybrid and electric cars.

Last but not least, activists must realize that production without any ecological damage is impossible.

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sustainable-business/blog/jeff-swartz-timberland-sustainability-profit


Steff Van den Bruele

The Ryanair calendar

Michael O’Leary, CEO of airline company Ryanair, has presented a new calendar with sexy pictures of his crew. The calendar will be sold on board of the flights for the democratic price of 10 euro. Ryanair will donate the benefit of this action to the German organization Tafel, that gives food to the most deprived persons in Berlin.

This is a very smart idea of Michael O’Leary because it pleases more than one stakeholder. First of all, this is good news for the society: hungry people will be fed. More important for the company is that, by supporting a charitable organization, it’s building a better image. This could attract more customers which will lead to more income for Ryanair. Furthermore, the photo shoot is a sort of team building activity that might have a positive influence on the work climate. The employees who posed on the calendar will feel a closer connection with the company and will be more motivated to do their job.

Lars Van Nieuwenhuize

Source: http://www.standaard.be/artikel/detail.aspx?artikelid=M7321F07&word=ryanair

Strike at Brinks

Strike at Brinks

Last week the employees of Brinks , a global provider of security services, dropped work. They protest against the announced economy measure.  According to the parent company of Brinks this measure is necessary to remain competitive. As a result the company awaits a long social conflict.

Source: Http://www.destandaard.be/artikel/detail.aspx?artikelid=DMF20101104_049&word=brink%27s

Today it’s all over the news, businesses and ordinary people suffer the consequences of this strike. This shows how important it is for companies to keep their stakeholders happy. By introducing an unpopular measure they provoke a chain reaction. The dissatisfied employees begin a strike which leads to unhappy costumers. As a result not only the employees but also the customers, the two most important stakeholders, are displeased with the company’s corporate policy.

Dries Vander Meeren

A breakdown in our values

A breakdown in our values

Bonuses are a symbol of business’s bigger problem – an eroded sense of duty to the wider community

Discussions about corporate bonuses are just a representation of a much greater underlying problem. Klaus Schwab, the founder and the executive chairman of the World Economic Forum, clarifies the transformation in corporate structures. 

While creation of goods and services for the common good was important to a company, things have changed last decade. Nowadays, the main purpose of a company is maximising profits and shareholder values.  In this context, all parts of a company that do not satisfy expectations can be replaced, which has led to change in individual behaviour. Individualistic profit-seeking now overrules contribution to the common good. The current crisis could bring new hope, it is clear that businesses should deal with their lack of morals.

Therefore,  society must become our primary purpose again. Moreover, corporate social responsibility, which is commonly brought up as an important value by companies, needs a ‘stakeholder’ climate.  

Tim Van den Berghe

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jan/06/bankers-bonuses-crisis-social-risk