No because with shipping and import duties they are not cost effective for me I am in Ireland. However to be fair I recently bought from Amazon and there has been numerous cases with their treatment of employees. Although If adobe had been prepared to sell me a serial number they would have got my money directly.

I tend to buy battery farmed eggs as well, my computers originate in chinese factories and you can barely think of Apple without thinking of Foxcon and the conditions they work under it pretty much applies to all electronics manufacturers.

I'm drinking coffee i probably couldn't afford if the coffee workers were given a living wage with milk from cows who produce it for calves that may be already have been through the slaughter house. There isn't that much alternative is there?

Mean old cuss aint I, on the other hand I do a lot of work in the community I work for a community youth organisation and I help people out when I can. It's pretty much impossible to be morally perfect.

I have sympathy for the workers at B&H and B&H probably make enough to be able to treat employee's fairly, at least as fair as Adorama. B&H have around 2000 employees x Y amount wages adds up to a pretty massive turn over. It is hardly a Mom and Pop store.

Adorama seem able to compete without the same problems as B&H. To be fair Adorama Employees only seemed to be unhappy with some of the long shifts they were working and there wasn't enough toilets in one of their warehouses with no follow up since the initial story in February, it seems this has probably been sorted. So it seems Adorama is the better choice to buy from and work for.

I don't understand a lack of sympathy for other Americans by Americans
Adorama and B&H are similarly priced surely there must be some wriggle room for B&H to treat its employees fairly at least.

Ultimately its customers who bring the money to both of these companies if people choose Adorama over B&H and B&H feel the pinch then perhaps they may choose to address the issues raised by their workers. It could be cheaper in the long run. Better for America too to raise quality of life for its citizens isn't it?

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/14/nyregion/workers-at-bh-photo-video-citing-hazards-move-to-unionize.html

"While many buyers praise the company, it has sometimes had a rocky relationship with employees. In 2007, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission announced that B&H had agreed to pay $4.3 million to settle a discrimination case stemming from claims that the company paid Hispanic employees in its warehouses less than other workers and failed to promote them or provide health benefits. "

Thats what's being reported by the New York Times.

http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/3-24-09.cfm

"The EEOC’s lawsuit, filed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, alleged that B & H paid Hispanics in its warehouses in Manhattan and Brooklyn less than non-Hispanic workers and failed to promote them or provide health benefits because of their national origin (EEOC v. B & H Foto and Electronics Corp. No. 07 CV-9241 ). Under the court-approved consent decree, B & H agreed to cooperate with the EEOC in a claims process to distribute $4.3 million in monetary relief to 149 employees who were paid less, not promoted, or denied benefits because they are Hispanic."

Is the case number good enough for you?

http://www.law360.com/articles/37768/b-h-photo-pays-4-3m-to-settle-discrimination-suit

"The case is Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. B&H Foto & Electronics Corp., case number 07-cv-9241 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York."

http://hr.cch.com/news/employment/033009a.asp
"Judge Harold Baer of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York gave final approval to a $4.3 million consent decree between the EEOC and B & H Foto and Electronics Corp (B & H), the federal agency announced March 24, 2009. The decree resolves a Title VII national origin discrimination lawsuit filed by the EEOC on behalf of 149 Hispanic warehouse workers at one of the largest retail sellers of photographic, computer and electronic equipment in the New York metropolitan area (EEOC v B & H Foto & Electronics Corp, SDNY, No 07 CV-9241)."