Discussion on:
View:
Show:
with so many people out of work in the US, all companies could benefit from bringing work back to the USA.
ridiculously high on-costs created by BS legislation for various reasons. The cost on compliance is very high for some, and manufacturers have to meet that cost and then pass it on.
here in Australia we have similar problems. Years back the ALP, owned and controlled by the union movement, passed laws that makes it almost impossible to sack anyone who's a full time employee; and even if you do have a case accepted under the law it costs a fortune to process. To give an example I know of:
An employee was caught on video tape stealing company goods. To sack them for theft they had to go through a system of warning them and then catching them another two times before they could kick them out the door. As if they're going to make catching them harder after being warned. On advice from an evil minded genius, they didn't go through the Human Relations processes at all. They took the matter to the police and let them police arrest and charge them with theft, and when the person went to prison for 6 months they were able to easily dismiss them for failure to turn up at work after being sent four notices to please explain. - - A very crazy way to get rid of a thief.
Anyway, one way small and medium businesses got around some of these crazy laws designed for huge corporations but applied to them was to employ a lot more part-time and casual staff. So after seeing this trend grow the ALP passed laws saying any part-time employed for more than a certain amount of time was deemed to be employed as permanent part-time. Thus part-timers started being placed on the same rosters as casuals and called casuals. When a casual was getting regular employment of enough hours or close to the period of being deemed permanent, they ceased getting rostered on for shifts for three months to reboot the count again. And the ALP wondered why the rate of employment of full-time staff was not rising, it simply wasn't economical for anyone but big business to employ them.
It costs more to employ a large list of casuals, but it's less than having one case of unfair dismissal. Those costs affect the business bottom line. As do costs to meet some of the other crazy laws out there.
Manufacture in the US and you have extra costs involved with meeting environmental laws, laws that don't exist in China. And that's just one item that would affect the operation. Union rules and interference is another.
here in Australia we have similar problems. Years back the ALP, owned and controlled by the union movement, passed laws that makes it almost impossible to sack anyone who's a full time employee; and even if you do have a case accepted under the law it costs a fortune to process. To give an example I know of:
An employee was caught on video tape stealing company goods. To sack them for theft they had to go through a system of warning them and then catching them another two times before they could kick them out the door. As if they're going to make catching them harder after being warned. On advice from an evil minded genius, they didn't go through the Human Relations processes at all. They took the matter to the police and let them police arrest and charge them with theft, and when the person went to prison for 6 months they were able to easily dismiss them for failure to turn up at work after being sent four notices to please explain. - - A very crazy way to get rid of a thief.
Anyway, one way small and medium businesses got around some of these crazy laws designed for huge corporations but applied to them was to employ a lot more part-time and casual staff. So after seeing this trend grow the ALP passed laws saying any part-time employed for more than a certain amount of time was deemed to be employed as permanent part-time. Thus part-timers started being placed on the same rosters as casuals and called casuals. When a casual was getting regular employment of enough hours or close to the period of being deemed permanent, they ceased getting rostered on for shifts for three months to reboot the count again. And the ALP wondered why the rate of employment of full-time staff was not rising, it simply wasn't economical for anyone but big business to employ them.
It costs more to employ a large list of casuals, but it's less than having one case of unfair dismissal. Those costs affect the business bottom line. As do costs to meet some of the other crazy laws out there.
Manufacture in the US and you have extra costs involved with meeting environmental laws, laws that don't exist in China. And that's just one item that would affect the operation. Union rules and interference is another.
Whilst made in USA may be a brand in the USA in the majority of Apple's markets it could be a turn off and may actually damage branding. Most people like apple because it is not an American brand but an international brand. We can all over the world claim to add some of the technology to the apple products. However what is important is that its profits go back to the USA. These profits will outstrip any financial gain to the US economy by manufacturing in the USA. Damaging the brand by aligning it with a certain country would hurt the US economy more. This stinks a bit of protectionism.
as an Aussie, like so many other Aussie, I know and have always associated Apple with the USA as a USA company since the days of Apple IIe. I don't know anyone who thinks of it as anything BUT a USA company and their products as USA products.
Heck so many of the Apple offerings are so US culture centric it's hard to think they have much of a real following outside the USA. It wasn't all that long ago Apple lost a major court case here in Australia because the new iPhone was advertised as 4G capable, at it wasn't Aussie 4G capable but US 4G capable. No one was surprised Apple had made this mistake as they didn't realise the phone system and many commands are NOT the same as the US ones.
Heck so many of the Apple offerings are so US culture centric it's hard to think they have much of a real following outside the USA. It wasn't all that long ago Apple lost a major court case here in Australia because the new iPhone was advertised as 4G capable, at it wasn't Aussie 4G capable but US 4G capable. No one was surprised Apple had made this mistake as they didn't realise the phone system and many commands are NOT the same as the US ones.
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
