NIKE's Labour Troubles
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
Nike Case Study
The creators of Nike Phil Knight and Bill Bowerman began in 1964, they used be name Blue Ribbon Sports. Little be known an athlete and track coach at University of Oregon would be on their way to create one of the most well known athletic brands today. At first, they began as an athletic Japanese shoe supplier and then eventually became what we know now as Nike. To this day they are the main supplier of athletic clothing, shoes, accessories today!
Reebok and Nike are the two largest athletic footwear companies in the world. Much of their work is focused on product design and marketing, not on production of the shoes. Starting in the 1970s, Nike and Reebok really began using Asian contractors (mainly in Taiwan and South Korea) to manufacture their shoes because this offered the advantages of lowered costs and flexibility in terms of how many different kinds of shoes could be produced, but many questions have been raised in regards to the treatment of workers in the Asian countries and corporate responsibility for these human rights. With worldwide sales revenues at $25.33B for the 2013 fiscal year (June-May), Nike would rank higher than many countries, including Honduras, Nicaragua, Jamaica, and Afghanistan, in national GDP according to the 2014 IMF World Economic Outlook. As a result, companies like Nike, Apple, and Sony dominate not only their own industries but also dominate the world economy and as a result have more actual power, even abroad, than the governments of all but the largest countries. As the profits of these companies rise, the world economy grows, and as they fall, the world economy suffers. Any policy changes they implement internally have a huge impact on the economy as a whole.
We are often unaware or pick to disregard the problem of child labor in sweatshops. However, even though most people are not conscious of this, it is a reality that many children are deprived of their childhood and are enforced to work. It has been estimated by the International Labor Organization (2013) that 250 million children between the ages of five and fourteen work in emerging countries. More than half of these child laborers are hired in Asia, others work in Africa and Latin America mostly.
As we can see in the essay, “The Noble Feat of Nike” by Johan Norberg, the globalization of companies like Nike isn’t all bad. There is some positive light to it, for example, the fact that workers are finally making enough money to live a decent life and send their children to school. In addition to this, workers are guaranteed jobs and don’t have to endure the tough labor of working on farms in the harsh weather conditions. So from these effects we can conclude that the globalization of Nike in third world countries like Nike isn’t a disadvantage to these workers, in fact it serves as an advantage.
This paper describes the legal, cultural, and ethical challenges that confronted the global business presented in the Nike sweatshop debate case study. The paper determines the various roles that the Vietnamese government played in this global business operation. This paper summarizes the strategic and operational challenges facing global managers illustrated in the Nike sweatshop case.
With Nike stubbornly sticking to it’s “not our problem attitude” criticism and outrage only increased. With all its media coverage, Nike’s initial response – “We don’t make shoes” – “was becoming harder and harder to sustain.” (Spar, Page 2) Washington took interest into the allegations with “several senators and representatives suggesting solutions to the issue of overseas labor abuse.” (Spar, Page 6)
Boggan, S. (2001, 10 20). Nike admits to mistakes over child labor. Retrieved from https://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/1020-01.htm
Child labour has been discussed wildly since 1973.(Kolk and Tulderb, 2002). Child labour is a serious problem for international organisaitons. There are six companies in the report of Kolk and Tulderb, (2002), such as, Levi Strauss, Nike, Gap, C&A, WE and H&M. All of them have their own codes of child labour. The minimum age is 14 and the range of minimum age to employment is between 14 and 18. Some of the six organisations according to the host-country law as standard and some of them use the standard of International Labour Organisation (ILO). However, child labour still happens in the world, especially in developing countries and poor areas. Emergence of child labour depends on the local law, local culture, the extent of development, people’s living standards and so on. Since 1992, Nike had increased the minimum age from 14 to 18. (Kolk, Tulderb, 2004). However, in 2001, child labour had been found in Cambodia, they worked for Gap and Nike. (BBC, 2001). Code of child labour is important, but the more important point is following the code. Kolk and Tulderb (2002) supported the code made by those six organisations, also they believed that strong and effective regulatory system, self-discipline of enterprises, moral constraints, corporate responsibility, support from local government, would be more effective to avoid the emergence of child
Sweatshops Unveiled
“An estimated 211 million children between the ages of 5 and 14 are working around the world, according to the international labor organization” (“Stop Child and Forced Labor”). Sweatshops are a dilemma that the world has been dealing with for quite a while. Contrary to popular belief, sweatshops still exist and cause damage worldwide. Numerous amounts of businessmen and women believe that sweatshops are a necessary aspect in order for the global economy to grow. However, that is not the case; it actually is the opposite (ILRF).