Samsung's Response to Allegations of Labor Abuse

Company Contact:

Mr. DongJin Koh

Title: Chief Executive Officer

Phone number: 82-31-200-1114

Samsung Issues Clarification on allegation of labour abuse in its unit based in Vietnam

Suwon-si, South Korea – 16 November 20210: Last week, we learned of the allegation of exploitation of our labour forces in our manufacturing unit based in Thai Nguyen. Last week on 12 November 2021, a blog article written by one Benjamin Selwyn, a professor of international relations and international development at the University of Sussex, Brighton, UK has mentioned Samsung in Vietnam with an alleged record of labour rights violations (Selwyn, 2021). The article cited the 2018 United Nations Human Rights report regarding threats against factory workers and labour activists to allege that there is a widespread maltreatment of its mainly female workforce. The report cited a survey findings by the Centre for Research on Gender, Family, and Environment in Development (CGFED) and the International POPs Elimination Network (IPEN). They reported that women, who were surveyed, were exposed to adverse health consequences due to unhealthy working conditions, such as miscarriages, fainting and extreme fatigue. They reported that the workers are have been exposed to toxic chemicals (The UN Human Rights: Office of the High Commissioner, 2018). Samsung categorically rejects the allegations in the reports. The report on the conditions of the worker is groundless. We regret that the mentioned reports were prepared without visiting the factory. The sample size of women was only 45, which is too small a size to represent over 160,000 workers in our factories in Vietnam. Thus, the sample size is not adequate to draw a general conclusion about the working conditions of women in the concerned factory. Further, Samsung’s manufacturing process does not involve any activity that exposes workers to any toxic chemicals.

Samsung holds itself accountable for ensuring the working conditions are safe and sound for the workers. Our concerns are with the workers, especially our women staff, who, in any way, are undergoing health issues. Samsung has invested in its workers. It has built boarding houses, medical centers and kitchens. It is proud to be able to provide safe working environment

We take this opportunity to establish more suitable provisions targeting the pregnant women workers in the manufacturing sites. We will ensure that pregnant workers have access to necessary time off for antenatal care, maternity leave, break time, and a safe space free from health risks. We understand that pregnant women are higher risk of serious illness in relation to Covid-19. We will issue relevant Working Safely guidance to the manufacturing sites to make the workplace safe. We will conduct a routine risk assessments subject to statutory health and safety requirements. We will ensure to give extra consideration regarding new and expectant mothers, who will not be part of any work processes and conditions that expose them to any health risks. A suitable alternative working condition will be provided, including appropriate break time.

We would like to inform our employees and well-wishers of Samsung to be cautious of any misinformation available in the public domain. We request to please visit our official site to read about any of our company’s updates. In case of any queries, our designated officials would be glad to answer them.

The key behind making an effective rhetoric appeal is to be persuasive. Persuasiveness comes from a judicious use of data and emotional appeal. The use of data facilitates an effective persuasion. This builds an interpersonal relation without any crossed transactions (James, 2017, pp. 10-27). Organisations use rhetoric to communicate with the public in social, political, legal, and economic factors (Holtz-Bacha & Kaid, 2008). Rhetorical theory may take an institutional perspective to define the approaches and missteps of an organisation while engaging the public. This is seen when organisations adopt best practices by focussing on the values, audience, claims and other such aspects, and build a dialogue with the public where they listen and gather inputs (Gruber & Olman, 2019). While doing so, they may also expose the missteps of organisation. For example, organisational communication may only focussed on technological modernisation, but disregard the potential risks of the technology. They may adopt one-way communication on issues such as wildlife, but avoid public participation (Gruber & Olman, 2019). Thus, rhetorical theories can help organisation in building a persuasive communication with concerned stakeholders to develop, strengthen or change attitudes including the values and beliefs (Frandsen & Johansen, 2016, p. 96).

Aristotle defined the success of a communication rhetoric by referring to the speaker, the subject and the person being addressed (Cenere, et al., 2015, p. 53; Lockwood, 1996). He opined that any audience could be convinced to listen to message that is valid (Lawson, et al., 2019). The message can be valid if proof by ethos that appeals to the credibility and character of the speaker; pathos that appeals to emotional bond with the listeners; and logos that appeals to the logical and rational argument where the audience reason proof with data and facts (Cenere, et al., 2015; Aristotle, 2012). A rhetoric appeal can, thus, be either a logical, emotional or ethical appeal. It can be persuasive when the technique is a mixed involving feature-benefits, creating desire and building credibility (Cenere, et al., 2015; Aristotle, 2012).This is the mechanism adopted by Aristotle to provide a persuasive argument.

Aristotle’s mechanism is useful to make an argument as it enables the authoring-agent to introduce the rhetoric components in a visual image, which may be challenging to expose the discourse in a written text (Gurung & Limbu, 2013, p. 253; Aristotle, 1991). Thus, he used the character of the speaker, the disposition of the audience and the speech itself to persuade (Marincola & Golden, 1997, p. 129). This is a visualisation process to make the argument where all the three elements are necessary and are not separate (Gurung & Limbu, 2013, p. 253; Aristotle, 1991).

Aristotle’s approach involves non-argumentative mechanisms, such as the need to stimulate emotions, to persuade the audience (Gilbert, 2013; Rapp, 2002). At the same time, he used argumentative mechanisms, which is logos. However, this presents a major conflict between these mechanisms. His approach prioritises the speaker and uses non-argumentative mechanisms as accidental supports to the process of persuasion. His approach also treats the audience with a lack of respect for their knowledge when he suggested the three elements as necessary demonstrating deficiencies in the audience (Rapp, 2002). In that regard, Weber’s theory on rational choices could fill this gap in Aristotle’s mechanism. The fact-value distinction proposition by Weber focuses on rational action, which is free and meaningful. This quality distinguishers human actions from other events (Gale Research Company, 1997, p. 358). It is, however, true that most human behaviour falls below the threshold of truly human. Thus, for a human action to be meaningful, it must be conscious oriented and rational to some purpose (Brubaker, 2013; Boucock, 2000).

According to Weber, people obey either through empathy, inspiration, persuasion using a rational argument, or by a combination of the three (Parki, 2014, p. 79). According to him, there are two types of rational action. Firstly, the purposive rational action is determined by the expectations regarding the objects and humans’ behaviour in an environment. The expectations are used as the means to attain the actor’s own rationally pursued and calculated ends (Weber, 1968, p. 24). This includes the most efficient way of attaining the end, which does not carry any moral concerns. There is only a technical consideration. Ethics have no place to play. Secondly, the value-rational action is determined by the conscious belief for the own consideration of ethical, religious or aesthetic behaviour, which is independent of its prospects of success (Weber, 1968, pp. 24-5). Here, the ends are either valued or morally justified (Villiers, 2018, p. 139).]

The rhetorical theory of rational choice possesses a greater explanatory power (Stoljar, 2000, p. 97). This is seen in powerful economic explanations of behaviour in terms of a compelling ideal of a familiar and socially sanctioned human agency covering a wide range of social setting (Antony, 2018). A rational actor is self-transparent, knowing what they want and possessing conscious desires; opportunistic in taking initiatives to pursue their goals; self-reliant expecting others to look after themselves; and calculating with focus on probability and no wishful thinking with focus on means to achieve their ends. The rational theory, thus, proposes an autonomous and self-confidant actor (Antony, 2018).

Accordingly, a rational actor does not conform to a norm out of a sense of obligation, which may not have any relation with morality. A rhetorically rational actor or an agent always possess the sense that the choice is up to them irrespective of any compelling adverse situation. They make their own claims on their own account and do not provide any excuses for refusing to comply to expected norms as they have confidence in their self-knowledge (Antony, 2018). Thus, they will conform only in their interest (Becker & Becker, 2013, p. 1243; Gonenc, 2002).

The press release statement of Samsung could see the adoption of ethos, which is seen in the statement that Samsung is proud to ensure safe and sound the working conditions by investing in its workers, including boarding houses, medical centers and kitchens. The press release statement demonstrates the credibility and character of Samsung and its policies for its workers. It also appeals to build an emotional bond with the listeners when it states that specific consideration will be given to pregnant and expectant mothers. This is seen in the elaborated measures to that effect and safety measures for them given the risks arising from the COVID-19 pandemic. The press release statement also appeals to logical and rational argument. It stated data contradicting the report of the CGFED and IPEN.

The use of data to contradict the reports demonstrate the use of a rational mechanism. This is a persuasive argument appealing to the emotion and using appropriate data. At the same time, the mechanism adopted in the press release statement is also a misstep. It is more focused on the credibility and character of Samsung by brushing aside the real issue and plight of those women who were part of the sample surveyed. The problem is real and there is a potential pending risks in the future. In that manner, it is a one-way communication that is not inclusive of the workers participation. Hence, it is not an ethical appeal, and the rhetoric may not be effective.

Following Webers, the statement should have been more of a fact and value driven combining empathy, inspiration and a rational argument. It would meet its expectation of being an employer that provides a safe working environment. A data driven approach would provide a more technical consideration that demonstrates transparency with no sift of focus on the question of whether or not Samsung is ethical or moral regarding the issue in hand. Thus, the rational choice of making the claims would have remained with Samsung with no autonomy provided to a third party to make future claims.

The components of the rhetoric theory and rational theory have enabled to review the stye of communication and the potential impact that it has on the readers and potential exposure to risks. While reviewing Aristotle’s mechanism in regard to the current press release statement, it has enabled to weigh the impact of ethos, pathos and logos over the goals expected our of the statement. For instance, the review demonstrates the need of a fact-driven rational argument. This is because the issue of those 45 women getting affected health wise by the working conditions is still a potential issue that cannot be ignored. Thus, the rhetoric about providing a safe working environment may not be aligned with the realities. What if a survey covering a large number of women workers verifies the report? Thus, an emotional appeal and appeal focus on the character of the speaker will not serve the expected objective if the argument is not rational driven.

To conclude, the purpose of the analysis is to examine whether the drafted press release has the right missed of components, explained by Aristotle’s rhetoric theory and Weber’s rational theory. The analyse has found the press release statement with a certain level of persuasion comprising a mix of logical, emotional or ethical appeal. It shows the character of Samsung building desire in regard to the working environment. It would have been more persuasive if it could build credibility by verifying the facts and data and being transparent in its policies in practices concerning care especially for pregnant and expecting expectant mothers.

Take a deeper dive into Safeguarding Children in High-Risk Environments with our additional resources.

Bibliography

Antony, L., 2018. A Mind Of One's Own Feminist Essays On Reason And Objectivity. s.l.:Taylor & Francis.

Aristotle, 1991. The Art of Rhetoric. s.l.:Penguin Books Limited.

Aristotle, 2012. The Art of Rhetoric. London: HarperCollins.

Becker, C. B. & Becker, L. C., 2013. Encyclopedia of Ethics. s.l.:Taylor & Francis.

Boucock, C., 2000. In the Grip of Freedom Law and Modernity in Max Weber. s.l.:University of Toronto Press.

Brubaker, R., 2013. The Limits of Rationality. s.l.:Taylor & Francis.

Cenere, P., Gill, R., Lawson, C. & Lewis, M., 2015. Communication Skills for Business Professionals. s.l.:Cambridge University Press.

Frandsen, F. & Johansen, W., 2016. Organizational Crisis Communication A Multivocal Approach. s.l.:SAGE Publications.

Gale Research Company, 1997. Twentieth-century Literary Criticism. s.l.:Gale Research Company.

Gilbert, M. A., 2013. Coalescent Argumentation. s.l.:Taylor & Francis.

Gonenc, L., 2002. Prospects for Constitutionalism in Post-Communist Countries. s.l.:Springer Netherlands.

Gurung, B. & Limbu, M., 2013. Emerging Pedagogies in the Networked Knowledge Society Practices Integrating Social Media and Globalization. s.l.:IGI Global.

Holtz-Bacha, C. & Kaid, L. L., 2008. Encyclopedia of Political Communication Volume 1. s.l.:SAGE Publications.

James, P. S., 2017. Organisational Behaviour. s.l.:Pearson India.

Lawson, C., Gill, R., Feekery, A. & Witsel, M., 2019. Communication Skills for Business Professionals. s.l.:Cambridge University Press

Lockwood, R., 1996. The Reader's Figure Epideictic Rhetoric in Plato, Aristotle, Bossuet, Racine and Pascal. s.l.:Librairie Droz.

Marincola, J. & Golden, L., 1997. Authority and Tradition in Ancient Historiography. s.l.:Cambridge University Press.

Olman, D. R. G. a. L. C., 2019. he Routledge Handbook of Language and Science. s.l.:Taylor & Francis.

Parki, F., 2014. Max Weber. s.l.:Taylor & Francis.

Rapp, C., 2002. Aristotle’s rhetoric. [Online] Available at: http://seop.illc.uva.nl/entries/aristotle-rhetoric/ [Accessed 16 11 2021].

Stoljar, N., 2000. Relational Autonomy. s.l.:Oxford University Press.

Villiers, E. D., 2018. Revisiting Max Weber's Ethic of Responsibility. s.l.:Mohr Siebeck.

Weber, M., 1968. The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. London: Unwin University Books.