The athletic apparel industry in which Nike is involved is a major money maker in the United States, but the fact that none of the factories are located in North America has brought some heat to the company. Nike controls more than 40 percent of the U.S. Market for sports related goods, but doesn’t have a single sneaker factory in this country (Miller 1). Nike continues to make millions of dollars yet exploits workers overseas by paying them very little, while requiring long hours without overtime pay in factories that are not up to “American” standard. Nike subcontractors employ nearly 500,000 workers in plants in Indonesia, China and Vietnam (Saporito 1). The exploitation of workers in Third World counties, where the majority of Nike’s labor is done sparks a controversial issue. People question why is it that Nike continues these practices. According to “Just do it, Nike,” Nike seems especially fond of doing business in undemocratic countries like China and Indonesia, where the military can be relied upon to “crack heads” if workers get out of line (Miller 2). The military monitoring has been a large controversy due to the fact that these are often Chinese working against other Chinese workers, or Vietnamese against their own people also. For Nike there are two benefits: it it’s a cheap way to monitor in an overseas factory and it creates a sheaper labor workforce. In turn making the labor cheaper for Nike. This makes it possible for Nike workers from the states to work on other things and only tour the factories when nessecary. While still assuming a stable workforce without good pay. The critics of Nikes labor practices have taken tours and witnessed the mistreatment firsthand. Time magazine reported saying,” The plants were found to be modern and clean, well lighted and ventilated and paying a decent wage by local standards—although by no means are they trouble free. Make no mistake: these are factories not amusement parks, and even in developing Asia, where jobs are scarce and getting scarcer, this is not the job of choice.” (Saporito 1) The wages that the workers overseas are paid is nothing when compared to how much we pay for a pair of shoes or the profit that CEO Phil Knight is making off his sportswear giant he once operated out of the back of his car as a college student. “A big issue that surrounds sweatshops is wage.
All of my life I have considered myself as a person who loves children. I enjoy playing with them, helping them, and just being around them. So when I first agreed with corporations who use child labor I shocked myself completely. After examining two articles; one “The Case for Sweatshops”, by David R. Henderson, and two “Sweatshops or a Shot at a Better Life”, by Cathy Young, I came to the conclusion that in some cases when young children work under proper conditions it can keep them out of the streets and be helpful to them and their families.
The General Accountability Office defines a sweatshop as a “multiple labor law violator.” A sweatshop violates laws pertaining to benefits, working hours, and wages (“Toxic Uniforms”). To make more money, companies move their sweatshop factories to different locations and try to find the cheapest locations with the least regulations (“Sweatshops”). There are not as many sweatshop factories in the United States because the industries have been transferred overseas where the labor is cheaper and there are weaker regulations. In the United States, sweatshops are hidden from the public, with poor immigrant workers who are unable to speak out against the injustices (“Subsidizing Sweatshops”). Workers in sweatshops are forced to work overtime, earn below a living wage, do not earn benefits, and encounter verbal, physical and sexual abuse. Macy’s, JCPenney, Kohl’s, The
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.
Sweatshops are factories that violate two or more human rights. Sweatshops are known in the media and politically as dangerous places for workers to work in and are infamous for paying minimum wages for long hours of labour. The first source is a quote that states that Nike has helped improve Vietnamese’s’ workers lives by helping them be able to afford luxuries they did not have access to before such as scooters, bicycles and even cars. The source is showing sweatshops in a positive light stating how before sweatshops were established in developing countries, Vietnamese citizens were very poor and underprivileged. The source continues to say that the moment when sweatshops came to Vietnam, workers started to get more profit and their lives eventually went uphill from their due to being able to afford more necessities and luxuries; one of them being a vehicle, which makes their commute to work much faster which in turn increases their quality of life. The source demonstrates this point by mentioning that this is all due to globalization. Because of globalization, multinationals are able to make investments in developing countries which in turn offers the sweatshops and the employees better technology, better working skills and an improvement in their education which overall helps raise the sweatshops’ productivity which results in an increase
“Sweatshops Are the Norm in the Global Apparel Industry. We’re Standing up to Change That.” International Labor Rights Forum. N.p., n.d. Web. 6 Feb. 2014. .
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
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...
Americans do not realize the amount of clothing we wear on a daily basis is actually made in Cambodia, such as Adidas and even the Gap. The women that work for these sweatshops in Cambodia sew for 50 cents an hour, which is what allows stores in America, such as H&M to sell inexpensive clothing (Winn, 2015). The conditions these Cambodian workers face are a noisy, loud, and extremely hot environment where people are known for having huge fainting attacks. When workers were on strike a year ago, authorities actually shot multiple people just because they were trying to raise their pay. There is plenty of evidence of abuse captured through many interviews of workers from different factories, and is not just a rarity these places see often or hear of. Factories hire children, fire pregnant women because they are slow and use the bathroom to much, scream at regular workers if they use the toilet more than two times a day, scam hard working employees with not paying them their money they worked for and more, and workers are sent home and replaced if 2,000 shirts are not stitched in one day. Expectations are unrealistic and not suitable for employees to be working each day for more than ten
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.
In this Case Study Analyses, an objective SWOT Analyses will be done to help identify potential strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats within the Nike Corporation.
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.
manufacturing products overseas, specifically in Bangladesh. The focal point of the article was how Nike was attempting to achieve the lowest possible manufacturing costs while still maintaining worker safety and producing high-quality products. Both consequences and benefits of manufacturing in foreign companies was discussed in the article. In addition to how manufacturing costs affect the financial outlook of the company, the article addressed how having factories in less-developed countries has an impact on public opinion of Nike.
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...
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.