Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
negative impacts of climate change
negative impacts of climate change
climate change and its impact
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: negative impacts of climate change
Human Rights Violations of the Nike Corporation There is a running battle with activists, especially on the internet, to keep corporations and governments focused on human rights and the environment. Recent activity has centered around International Monetary Fund and World Bank. A victory for these such groups came recently when Starbucks Corporation agreed to a deal that could triple wages for thousands of coffee farmers. One battle that has been going on steadily for a long time with few signs of relief is against the Nike Corporation. Activists charge Nike with having unsafe working conditions, treating its employees improperly, not paying its workers enough wages and forcing people to work overtime and without breaks. There have been several reported cases of abuse at Nike factories in Vietnam. One report claimed that on International Women’s Day of 1997 in Vietnam fifty-six women were forced to run around the factory grounds at Pouchen. Twelve of the women fainted and were taken to a hospital by friends. CBS News reported that fifteen female workers were hit on the head by their supervisor for poor sewing. Two of these women needed to be sent to hospitals after the beatings. This report also charged that fourty0five workers were forced to kneel on the ground for twenty0five minutes with their hands in the air. A Korean supervisor even fled the country after accusations that he molested some of his workers surfaced. Workers also told CBS News that the daily quota for products made is purposefully set unrealistically high. The workers are forced to work over 600 hours of overtime per year. If the workers do not except the hours he or she will get a warning and after three warning he or she will be fired. One activist group found that Nike workers were working about twenty-seven days per month plus forty to sixty hours of overtime. There were even moths found when workers were forced to work over one hundred hours of overtime. An activist group called Boycott Nike reports that workers in Nike’s Vietnamese factories are not allowed to use the bathroom more than once per eight-hour shift and they may not drink water more than twice per shift. It is common for workers in these factories to faint from exhaustion, heat, fumes and poor nutrition during their shifts. Nike workers are reportedly paid an average of twenty cents per hour or $1.60 a day. Workers told Vietnam Labor Watch that the cost of three meals per day in CuChi is about $2. This wage is even lower than Vietnam’s own minimum wage. During their fist month as Nike workers earn $37.
The first reason why it should be a matter of a concern to Green Plc is that the workers are underpaid and are forced to be in a harsh working condition. To illustrate this issue, Nike factory workers in Tangerang, Indonesia were paid basic wage of 1,250,000 rupiah (73.94 pounds) and this
Corporations in the United States have proved time and time again that they are all about profit and not about what is good for America. One example of this is the fact that many corporations have factories in other countries, or buy from other corporations that do. Nike (an athletic shoe and clothing company) produces most of their shoes and apparel in factories in other countries, including Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, China, Vietnam and Malaysia. According to Nike’s factory disclosure list released May 2011, only 49 of it’s over 700 factories are located in the U.S. (Nike, Inc.) This means that thousands of jobs that could be filled by needy Americans are instead being filled by workers in other countries. This reason that Nike and other corporations outsource is very simple, it is very cheap to do so. In an excerpt from Jeffrey St. Clair's book “Born Under a Bad Sky” the author describes the vast differences between Nike’s production costs and retail prices. “In Vietnam, it costs Nike only $1.50 to manufactu...
Large corporations such as Nike, Gap, and Reebok and many others from the United States have moved their factories to undeveloped nations; barely pay their employees enough to live on. Countries such as China, Indonesia, and Haiti have readily abundant cheap labor. There should be labor laws or an obligation of respecting workers to provide decent working conditions, fair wages, and safety standards.
The Human Rights Watch is an independent organization that is working to defend and protect human right. Our mission statement is to “scrupulously investigate abuses, expose the facts widely, and pressure those with power to respect rights and secure justice. Human Rights Watch is an independent, international organization that works as part of a vibrant movement to uphold human dignity and advance the cause of human rights for all.” (“Human Rights Watch,” 2014).
Nike publicizes itself as one of the leading industries in corporate responsibility. However, they do not comply with several human rights obligations overseas in countries like Thailand, Pakistan, China, Vietnam and Indonesia. In these countries, production facilities called sweatshops have been running for almost 35 years employing workers as young as 13 years of age. The conditions of these factories are adverse to say the least and deprive workers of the moral human rights they should be entitled to. Sweatshops are unethical, immoral and demonstrate Nike’s ignorance towards their social responsibilities abroad. Within these facilities, workers endure stressfully long days under undesirable conditions, often with no breaks and very little pay. While this is going on overseas, sponsored athletes are being paid million dollar salaries here in North America. Although Nike’s reputation has been foiled through the tabloids regarding this issue, they have been making a substantial effort to “clean up” production messes in the East.
Jack Donnelly, Alison D. Renteln, and Abdullahi Ahmed An-Naim all have different opinions when it comes to human rights and the exact way we should go about discussing human rights. The debate between the scholars and me come from the debate between the two principles of Liberal Universalism and Cultural Relativism. In my own opinion, I believe that it discussing human rights has to involve both theories and a cross-cultural discussion between us all so that we can come to an agreement when looking for a solution in certain cases.
Human Rights Watch (HRW) is a global non-governmental organisation that works in a spirited movement to sustain and uphold human dignity. We aim to push the cause of human rights for all mankind. Our main headquarters are in New York, with additional offices in major cities globally. Our experienced staff members are skillful in many aspects, one of it being accurate when researching of human rights abuse. Our senior management team mainly consists of our Executive Director, Kenneth Roth, and our two Deputy Executive Directors, Michele Alexander and Carroll Bogert.
... ethics? Well, the honest answer would be to eliminate the sweatshops completely. This is unlikely because it would be very difficult for a company with such a broad reach in the corporate world to shut down its factories overseas. Companies will always continue to exploit lower wages as long as the opportunity is present. A possible way would be to improve their employee surroundings. Since Nike is benefiting from low wages, they should at least provide a safer working environment for its employees. No employee should ever be put at risk due to a lack of environmental awareness. Nike should also pay attention to wage laws that govern the area that they manufacture in. With all the profits Nike earns, it couldn’t possibly hurt them to pay their employees no less than minimum wage. Otherwise, any company that possesses such blatant greed will not last in the long run.
In June of 1996, Life magazine published a article about Nike’s child labor that was occurring in Pakistan. The article showed a little boy who was surrounded by pieces of Nike sports gear. The articles were shoes and soccer balls. Nike then knew then that they had to make some major changes in the way they were producing their items.
Nike does not merely sell products these days. They spend billions of dollars for advertising contracts with famous athletes like Tiger Woods to increase the value of the brand by associating the factor of lifestyle to their products. The company's image has been damaged many times by press releases as well as a variety of NGOs who have long pointed out the inhumane working conditions in the production facilities of sporting goods manufacturers. This leads to the question whether should Nike orientate the regulations of the suppliers to the labor standards in their respective countries or those in the United States? The labor conditions are so inhumane that Nike at least should try to converse to the US standard to improve the situation. The following analysis of an abstract of Nikes’ Responsibility Concept, including SHAPE and their Code of Conduct, should give an insight into the difficulties of the Sweatshops.
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 that occurs while several sport megastars are reaping in multimillion dollar contracts to promote Nike shoes. Over the years, Nike formulated tactics to deal with the problems of working conditions and compensation in subcontractors. It hired a strong consultant (Andrew Young), commissioned an independent audit of its subcontractors, and spelled out initiatives to improve those working conditions. Still, Nike’s critics were not satisfied. They protested on university campuses and accused Nike of continuing to hide the conditions of workers.
“Nike is criticized for using sweatshops in countries like Indonesia and Mexico. The company has been subject to much critical coverage of the often poor working conditions and the exploitativeness of the cheap overseas labor.” – answers.com
Pittman, B. (2012, September 14). Nike sweatshop history: Should action be taken?. Retrieved from https://sites.google.com/site/americanlaborcrises/labor-crises/nike-sweatshop-action
With the increasing awareness and publicity of poor working conditions in subcontracted factories in East Asia, Nike has stimulated an uprising of activist and watchdog groups working toward seeing these conditions changed. With Nike in the negative spotlight, various organizations have revolved around generating a negative outlook on Nike’s practices of social irresponsibility. Certain campaigns such as the “National Days of Consciousness” and “International Day of Protest” were organized to educate people on the deplorable working conditions in Nike’s Asian manufacturing plants, and were designed to get more people involved in global employment issues.
Phil Knight started his shoe company by selling shoes from the back of his car. As he became more successful in 1972 he branded the name Nike. In the 1980’s Nike Corporation quickly grew and established itself as a world leader in manufacturing and distributing athletic footwear and sports' attire. The Nike manufacturing model has followed is to outsource its manufacturing to developing nations in the Asia Pacific, Africa, South and Latin Americas; where labor is inexpensive. It quickly became known for its iconic “swoosh” and “Just do it” advertisements and products. Its highly successful advertising campaigns and brand developed its strong market share and consumer base. But, the road has not always been easy for Nike; in the late 1990’s they went through some challenging times when their brand become synonymous with slave wages and child labor abuses. During this period, Nike learned that it paramount that the company understands its stakeholders’ opinions and ensures their values are congruent with their stakeholders. Nike learned that their stakeholders were concerned with more than buying low cost products; their customers were also concerned with ethical and fair treatment of their workers. Because Nike was unwilling to face the ethical treatment of its employees, the company lost its loyal customers and damaged its reputation. Nike has bounced back since the late 1990’s and revived its reputation by focusing on its internal shortfalls and attacking its issues head on. Nike nearly collapsed from its missteps in the late 1990’s. They have learned from their mistakes and taken steps to quickly identify ethical issues before they become a crisis through ethics audits. This paper is based on the case study of Nike: From Sweatsh...