Nike sweatshop
Introduction Nike is dealings with its international vendors provide an example of corporate action with regard to the different levels of responsibility that Business Ethics (BE) and Corporate Social Responsibility provide. When problems surfaced regarding the abuse of employees and unfair wages in the factories producing Nike products human rights activists pressured Nike to assume responsibility for the employees of its independent contractors. At that time, Nike¡¦s contractors agreed upon a code of conduct and the monitoring of health and safety standards. ... Hence, Nike essentially accepted responsibility for preventing harm to any worker associated with manufacturing its products. As pressure and publicity increased through the mid-1990s, Nike extended its activities. ... And in Pakistan, Nike took a creative approach to the problem of child labor in factories producing soccer balls by paying to educate those children rather than letting them work. Nike thereby broadened its level of responsibility beyond merely preventing harm to promote child education and better working conditions in the international communities in which it operates. Sweatshop Allegations What is a "sweatshop"? ... In this report, two recent cases about Nike¡¦s sweatshop allegations will be studied to look into the problem of sweatshop of Nike. ... Nike vs Kasky settled out of court. ... The case began in 1998 when former athlete Marc Kasky sued Nike for "false advertising" because of public statements the company had made. ... " The specific issue being addressed by the Supreme Court is whether public statements made by Nike in response to allegations of sweatshop abuses are ¡§commercial speech¡¨ or free speech. Whether Nike¡¦s public statements on social and environmental matters are true or false is not at issue in the Supreme Court case. ... " The Supreme Court ruling meant that Nike would have had to defend itself in the California courts against Kaskys claim. However, on September 12 Nike and Kasky issued a joint statement. ... As part of the settlement, Nike has agreed to make additional workplace-related program investments totalling $US1. ... Case 2: ¡§We are not machines¡¨ and Nike¡¦s response In March 2002 Oxfam Community Aid Abroad, part of an international campaign to persuade Nike and other transnational corporations to respect workers basic rights, released We Are Not Machines, a report on wages and conditions in Nike and Adidas contract factories in Indonesia. ... The Global Alliance is funded by Nike to run a program of assessment, training and development in less than 30 of the more than 900 factories which make the companys products. Nevertheless, Oxfam Community Aid Abroad¡¦s reply pointed out that the Global Alliance does not require Nike to address two of the key issues: „X that workers wages are adequate to meet their families basic needs, or „X that their union rights are respected. ... For the Global Alliances research, Nike specifically asked the researchers not to conduct in-depth interviews with union representatives. ... We wrote to the Global Alliance in January 2000 proposing that the two organisations cooperate to ensure that workers right to freedom of association is respected in Nike contract factories. ... Code of Ethic The Nike Company claims its workers and factories are under controlled system. Drafted in 1991 and distributed to contract factories in 1992, Nike¡¦s Code of Conduct was a first step in a conscious strategy to improve working conditions in factories.