	On the other hand, although Apple, Inc. has acknowledged issues that foreign workers are facing, they need to take human rights violations even more seriously. I believe that, rather than simply auditing foreign factories repeatedly, they need to create a follow-up plan for truly correcting the issues that they discover through audits. Perhaps this can be done through appointing some of Apple’s American managers or executives to positions that allow them to become more personally involved in managing foreign workers. Ideally, Apple would send some of their own trusted managers into these factories, which would allow for foreign workers to directly be managed in accordance with Apple’s policies and guidelines, just as workers would be in the United States. This option also allows for Apple to retain their existing foreign facilities and employees, which means that Apple’s foreign workers would remain employed, and facilities could be brought up to standard in order to create more workable conditions. 
Undoubtedly, by following this recommendation, Apple would still have to make a fairly large financial investment in the sense that they would have to deploy someone to each of their foreign facilities, and provide them with living arrangements in a foreign country. However, I think it is a doable, particularly over a period of time, and it is also important, as it would allow for a much more open line of communication between foreign factories and Apple’s home base in Cupertino, California. I believe that Apple has enough employees that they could find individuals who are willing and able to do such jobs, particularly if they are being offered additional benefits for doing so. In addition, some managers may even be motivated by the importance of the work, as they would be contributing to the health and wellbeing of a large number of foreign workers. Apple, Inc. could potentially choose managers that may have emigrated from these regions, and so they are familiar with what it is like to live there and are willing to do so again under a U.S. salary and additional benefits. Similarly, Apple, Inc. could choose managers who speak the regions’ native language, regardless of their race or ethnicity, so that they could easily communicate with the native workers. Adhering to these recommendations would greatly decrease the number of human rights issues that workers are facing in foreign countries, because factories would be consistently under watch and being held to significantly higher standards than what is typical in some foreign countries.
	In areas where is it not especially necessary, or where Apple, Inc. is simply unable to find a manager that is able or willing to oversee factories by actually physically being present at those factories, Apple, Inc. could establish another system that allows for a more open line of communication with the individual who is already managing the factory. This could be done through technology, as it is now fairly simple to communicate with others through a variety of virtual means. Apple could employ an American manager that is dedicated to consistently checking in with an on-site foreign manager. This could make it more difficult for the on-site manager to follow through with violating any important policies. Additionally, the American manager could regularly request interviews with employees and ask them about working conditions, training, and processes. It would essentially be as though a virtual audit was being conducted several times a week, which would give factories more of an incentive to adhere to policies. In addition, corporate could require that all factories retain proof that they have a quality management system in place, by maintaining certain documented information, which could easily be evaluated on a regular basis. If factories do not adhere to these standards, this is when Apple’s managers or executives should physically step in, in order to replace existing foreign managers or supervisors. 
