Read on Twitter
so this is a kind of thing i've seen in other places too in industry; i'll call it "responsibility laundering"
i'll give a comparison in electronics manufacturing! https://twitter.com/VickerySec/status/1199953930513342464
i'll give a comparison in electronics manufacturing! https://twitter.com/VickerySec/status/1199953930513342464
let's say a company (we'll call them Stark Industries) is manufacturing a phone. Stark sets up strict rules about supplier behavior and how those suppliers treat workers, both for publicity reasons and to comply with legal requirements
Stark Industries then aggressively pushes deals with suppliers that do not actually give them enough money to be honest with the requirements.
if a supplier is revealed to have violated the rules... ah well, evil companies mistreating their workers, right? you're fired
if a supplier is revealed to have violated the rules... ah well, evil companies mistreating their workers, right? you're fired
same general idea: create a set of requirements to comply with legal or publicity constraints, pawn them off on someone who isn't on their direct payroll (whether customer, supplier, etc), but do so knowing people are unlikely to actually be able to meet the requirements
this is also how every single "gig work" startup functions
another one is Three Letter Pharmacy, known for placing literally impossible productivity demands on pharmacists, knowing that if a pharmacist makes a medical error as a result, it's their individual license at stake
effectively, you could call this entire approach "responsibility arbitrage"; finding ways to earn money by making other people take responsibility for the arbitrarily increased risk
i feel like this is one of the more understated problems of late capitalism; in the extreme cases, it can take the form of a massive net economic loss (e.g. offload $100 of risk for every $1 of extra profit), and it works because of power dynamics and regulatory capture
