Nike Case Study
“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
1. Should Nike be held responsible for working conditions in foreign factories that it does not own, but where sub-contractors make product for Nike?
Yes, but I do not believe that the firm is 100% responsible since it is the sub-contractors who operate and create conditions for workers. Low-cost manufacturing is Nike’s strategy, and it is realized by outsourcing the manufacturing process to cheap labor countries. If Nike were responsible for all of working conditions of workers at sub-contractors’ factories, it would cost more to make shoes. However, I think that Nike should monitor minimum working conditions so that workers will not die from Karachi, which might be lead to a big issue.
2. What labor standards regarding safety, working conditions, overtime and the like should Nike hold foreign factories to: those prevailing in that country, or those prevailing in the United States?
Nike should hold the standards regarding safety and working conditions that are prevailing in that country. However, when the sweatshop workers try to tolerate the conditions and wages, firms that are making investment in that country should not intervene the movement. In countries around the world, garment w...
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.
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.
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...
This paper will give a brief introduction about the history of Nike Sweatshops which will shed the light on their public image and their manufacturing process. It will further move to the suggested alternatives, what facts impact them, their stakeholder and their impact on the economic as well as social basis. In the end, it will discuss if the given choices are legal and ethical or not.
... 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.
First, we want Nike to play a role in effecting positive, systemic change in working conditions within our industries. If our efforts lead to a workplace oasis -- one solitary and shining example in a desert of poor conditions -- then we’ve not succeeded. Even if that single shining example were to exist (and we’re not claiming it does), we’ve learned that positive changes won’t last unless the landscape changes. Our challenge is to work with the industry and our contract manufacturers to collectively address these systemic non-compliance issues that our data so highlight. This is one of the key reasons we made the decision to disclose our supply base; we believe this could encourage other companies to do the same. Our belief is that in disclosing, the industry will find ways to better share knowledge and learnings. This, in turn, will facilitate the building of further partnership approaches that are built on best practice and gradually lead us to standard codes, standard approaches to monitoring, standard reporting and standard parameters for transparency. It’s our belief that for market forces to enable responsible competitiveness, consumers must be able to reward brands and suppliers using fact-based information. Compliance efforts need to be optimized, made affordable and demonstrate real return if better working conditions are to become widespread. Disclosure of our supply chain is done in an effort to jump-start disclosure and collaboration throughout the industry and support efforts towards that final goal of market forces, providing the tipping point for the mainstreaming of best practice.
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.
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...
Many people in our society today are constantly asking, "Why do sweatshops exist?" The answer to this question is that companies like Nike and Wal-Mart use sweatshops to produce their goods for a much cheaper rate, to reduce the cost of their products. The problem with sweatshops is that the workers are subject to hard work in often times poor conditions for minimal pay. But although many people may condemn sweatshops, there are some advantages that many people overlook when arguing against sweatshops and their practices.
Also I think the writer is trying to get the consumer to write to the companies and tell them, to remind them, what their subcontractors is not right or fair. " The workers are lucky - One senior Nike employee told researchers: I don't think the workers in our factories are treated badly… Working conditions are
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.
Nike has been accused of using child labor in the production of its soccer balls and shoes for Nike in Pakistan. While Pakistan has laws against child labor, the government has taken very little action to terminate it. It is said that only a boycott by the United States and other nations will have any impact on child-based industries. In addition, the U.S constitution states that child labor is an illegal and inhumane practice and any U.S. company found guilty practicing and encouraging it will be prosecuted. The World Trade Organization (WTO) prohibits member nations, like the United States, from discriminating against the importation of goods made by children.
The reason that I reach these judgments, for the most unethical decision, Nike lacks of social responsibilities in term of both legal and ethical responsibilities. Although, there were some people agree with sweatshops because it was better than the firm leaves the workers, it was the best of the workers’ only bad options or it was a path from poverty to greater wealth, but if at least Nike improved their workers working standards, it would help to better increase their quality of lives.
The U.S had failed to qualify for the Olympics, again. Even still the popularity is slowly growing in the U.S. but could use a boost since it has not always been a pastime like it is among other countries. Currently to boost the sport, the United States has imported international players a great cost, and a cost of more than money, a cost of progress. Another hindrance to the national team is regulations of youth soccer and the development of up-and-coming talent within a country lacking in youth soccer academies. Some of these issues can be solved. Popularity can be raised through proper marketing. Youth academies and rule changes can help with player progression. Another way to help is to curb the amount of international players brought in at the college level through scholarship salary caps. Many people believe the U.S. Men’s National Soccer Team has been improving in recent years, but compared to the rest of the world, there is much room for development and progression of talent. While these methods to feasible to change how America plays soccer at a worldly level some people may refute that the strategies would not make any notable
Soccer is an international sport that has gained popularity in the United States. From the people involved, the rules of gameplay, and its invention, soccer has certainly left its mark.