The Truth of the Working Conditions for iPhones

Since the launch of the first iPhone on June 29, 2007, it has been a very prominent part of our society. When people think about the decline of flip phones, they often consider the functionality of iPhones to be the start of that decline. And who could blame them? With all of the impressive features and functions of the device, iPhones were, are, and will likely continue to be a dominant force in our society. Many of the users of the iPhone may wonder, however, where does it come from? What goes into the production process? What are the social effects of that process? Knowing the great reputation that the iPhone has built and all of the joy it has given, and how much money it has made, some may perceive the production process of the iPhone to be a positive one, saturated with well-paid wages and cool ideas. In reality, though, users may be shocked to learn the truth about the making of the iPhone, a process with poor working conditions and over glorification of the product.

According to conflict theory, capitalism is an example of exploitation. This is due to the fact that the two working classes - the Bourgeoisie (the ones who are at the head of the company) and the Proletariat (the workers involved in the manufacturing process) - are paid differently, with the Bourgeoisie paid more money than the Proletariat. However, just because they are paid more doesn’t mean that the Bourgeoisie works harder than the Proletariat. In fact, it is very often that the Proletariat works much more laboriously than the Bourgeoisie and still gets paid less. This particular situation very much applies to the production of the iPhone as well as other Apple products. iPhones are developed by Foxconn, a Taiwanese multinational manufacturing company. Foxconn operates with a large supply of manual labor. This means that in their factory, the workers make the phones with their hands and with little assistance from machines. As one could imagine, this makes the manufacturing of an iPhone no easy feat. iPhones have so many features and can do so much, so making one by hand sounds next to impossible. Now, imagine having to make enough to satisfy the needs of all the consumer demand out there. A job under these circumstances sounds nothing short of brutal. This is the life of the Foxconn workers. They have to work intense long hours with little to no vacation. In addition, they get paid very low wages despite the monumental workload they have to slog through each and every day - their monthly salary is the equivalent of around $400. It is no surprise that a shockingly high number of Foxconn employees have committed suicide over the past couple of years. Let's compare and contrast these jobs to those of the managerial class. Although the higher level workers at Apple definitely work hard, it is not nearly as brutal as the work of the factory workers. In addition, their salaries are far higher than those of the Foxconn employees. Managers, for example, make $80,691 per year. However, the working conditions involved in the production of the iPhone isn’t the only harsh truth.

Another sociological theory that can be seen in the production of the iPhone is commodity fetishism. Commodity fetishism happens when a product has a value and many people romanticize that value. It appears with many popular products, particularly very trendy products such as Airpods or Yeezys. The iPhone strongly embodies qualities of commodity fetishism; everybody who uses the iPhone often says that they “must have it.” For example, many owners of iPhones would likely consider themselves unable to manage without their iPhone. In this example, they are compelled to believe that the iPhone is a part of them, when in actuality that is just a perception. The advertising for iPhones seems to embody this concept as well. If one were to watch the commercial advertisements for iPhones, he or she may notice the commodity fetishism that appears in them. The ads depict many glamorous looking people using iPhones along with hip music playing in the background. This is meant to make people feel cool when using the iPhone, thus contributing to the fetisism of iPhones. And although not everybody may think of iPhones this way, it is a fact that Apple has used this approach with their advertisements ever since 1984 when they released the famous commercial launching the Macintosh.

Even though the iPhone may be known for exhibiting characteristics of conflict theory and commodity fetishism, many other products of today do so as well. There are plenty of other examples of businesses where the Proletariat workers go through much trouble in contrast to the Bourgeoisie workers and things are presented to look much better than they are. One company that is known for tactics like that is Disney; a business that is made to look very happy-go-lucky but actually is very regimented and hierarchical. Furthermore, most would probably agree that Proletariat conflict theory and commodity fetishism are connected, as with many successful businesses workers and consumers are unfortunately often exploited. Perhaps companies would improve these aspects of their businesses if more consumers consider these sociological theories when deciding what to buy.