Hitting the Wall: Nike and International Labor Practices

Despite past allegations of wrongdoings or controversy, Nike has continued to forge ahead in the market

Nike is one of the top sports clothing industry in the world. However, for years there are fresh allegation for Nike, which dogged by sweatshops and child labour (Daily Mail Reporter, 2011). On the 13 July 2011, Nike has revealed several cases of worker abused at factory.

Nike is one of the world’s largest producers, marketers, and sellers of athletic footwear, apparel, equipment, and accessories. The company manufactures Nike products in 142 factories across 15 countries. Most of its product is manufactured in foreign nations, including Vietnam, China, and Indonesia, followed by Argentina, India, Brazil, and Mexico (Nike, 2016). In 1991, activist Jeff Balling raised national concern over Nike’s business practices in Indonesia. In a Harper’s Bazaar expose in 1992, Balling called out Nike for using an Indonesian subcontractor who paid workers 14 cents an hour, while working in dismal factory conditions. The report created a near-immediate backlash against Nike, which continued until 1998, when Nike CEO,

The highly recognized name brand—Nike— fails to notice the faults that are happening in factories that are violating a few disturbing rules. The company’s reputation has decreased due to demands and claims Nike; implying that they utilize sweatshops to produce more products at a lower pay. The company has been sued numerous times for abusing and exploiting their employees in factories for years. Another problem that Nike has faced throughout the years was making employees work in poor environments that affected the health of many— which contributed to being abused by the manager for not going to work. Nike distributes and sells merchandise of high quality for a high value. The company is giving the satisfaction of quality service to their

One major key component that allowed Nike to get to the elite status they are today would have to be the expectations they have for their employees. In their code of ethics book they clearly state on the fifth page that “every employee must reflect standards of honesty, loyalty, trustworthiness, fairness, concern for others and accountability” (NIKE Code of Ethics). These expectations of their employees shows how much Nike values its company, and it ensures every employee knows what is expected of them. None of these expectations has hindered Nike’s ability to get employees. Most, if not all, of Nike’s employees claim there’s a great work environment at Nike, which all starts with the expectations they put on them in the beginning.

As a company, Nike is extremely profitable; it is the biggest shoe company and has become the fourth biggest industry leader. Nike can easily afford to increase wages of people that do labor work for the company without even the slightest loss but unfortunately chooses not to. According to the SEC, “In 2007, Nike’s advertising budget was $678 million. Realistically, Nike could pay all its individual workers enough to feed and clothe themselves and their families if it would just devote 1% of its advertising budget to workers' salaries each year!” (A background on…) In Nike’s Code of conduct, they state that in the area of human rights and in the communities in which they do their business, they want to do everything required of them as well as what is generally expected of a leader and thus by magnifying on the wrongs an industry leader commits, changes in the entire industry is expected.

Similarly, Nike’s corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices were in question. Truly, their CSR was insufficient and lacked in moral obligation to the communities in which they operated. Conversely, supervisors in the overseas factories were just trying to ensure they met production goals and kept costs low so Nike would continue to do business with them (Nisen, 2013). As a result, Nike expanded their compliance staff, invested in the training of staff and overseas suppliers, developed additional auditing protocols, hired third-party auditors to check their internal audits, and spent millions of dollars to improving working conditions in overseas factories who made Nike products (Locke, 2013). According to a case study, “Nike auditors and compliance staff to be serious, hardworking, and moved by genuine concern for workers and their rights” (Locke, 2013, p.

In 1997 it was reported by the New York Times that the manufacture plants in Vietnam were considered unsafe when it was discovered that workers were exposed to a high amount of carcinogens (Greenhouse, 2016). Exposure to Carcinogens cannot only cause respiratory problems but as well been linked to cause cancer. Many workers who worked at the plants suffered from such neglected conditions. The company faced backlash over backlash until the year 1998. Information of stakeholders ratings were not revealed because in this situation Nike did not own these factors they such worked with them. For eight years Nike did nothing to change such business habits or even accept fault for they believed it was the owners of these factories who should be held responsible. Throughout those eight years of silence Nike faced backlash by college students protesting against wearing Nike products, athletic spokesmen as well received backlash for having connection with Nike. Sales for Nike plummeted when everyone began to boycott the company.

The company Nike operates in over 50 different companies. This makes them a very large global company. Nike makes all kinds of products including gym shoes, clothing and apparel, equipment and accessories. “In 2004, Nike products were manufactured by more than 800 suppliers, employing over 600,000 workers in 51 countries” (Locke, Kochan, Romis & Qin, 2007, p. 6). Nike came under fire because of their workers that work outside the United States. In other countries, labor laws are unlike those within the United States. Large corporations often exploit the fact that they can pay laborers significantly less outside of the United States. Companies may also provide less than favorable working conditions to its labor force outside of the United States.

In many ways, it seems obvious to me that Nike should be held responsible for working conditions in foreign companies where products for Nike are made. In my opinion a company is not only responsible for itsʼ own employees but also for the employees that produce for them even though theyʼre not in their own company. I think that every part of the supply chain is partially responsible for the entire supply chain. As Nike is the

For years, Nike has been sourcing from factories that seek to meet the company 's minimum standards for good labor performance. The policy of Nike is to evaluate potential contracted factories before they enter the supply chain. Throughout their business relationship with Nike to assess compliance with high standards of social and environmental performance, including country-related risk for issues including forced labor, human trafficking and slavery Nike (n.d).

Nike has suffered attacks from a number of agencies and organizations throughout the world that claim that the workers who manufacture Nike shoes are denied the basic essentials of living—a fair wage and decent benefits. All

Nike should not be allowed to claim they are an ethical company especially when they are still outsourcing to impoverished countries in Asian. The company takes advantage of low living standards and lack of democracy in those countries. There was nonexistence of labor movements in countries like Indonesia. The government never allowed

They should be responsible for the legal, social and philanthropic aspects of its subcontracted factories. They are not paying their employees the legal minimum wage, caring about the working conditions and welfare of these employees and just not taking into consideration the well-being of others. Ten years ago, the company had been subjected to negative press, lawsuits, and demonstrations on college campuses alleging that the firm’s overseas contractors’ subject employees to work in inhumane conditions for low wages. With the introduction of the fair labour association and worker rights consortium, Nike is slowly trying to improve the working conditions on subcontracted factories and hopefully in 10 years, they would be able to re-establish themselves as a morally acceptable company.

Nike took advantage of that and disregarded that the people making their products at an extremely low price were actually humans. It was ethically wrong for Nike to not see those employees as actual people but saw them as a machine that produced products. They did not care to see how being underpaid affected a person’s family. They also did not see that children were working to support families and continued to work in terrible health conditions because they needed the money no matter the environment. The biggest issue was that the company had a total disregard for human life.