Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Why is corporate social responsibility important to the socio-economic world
Nike and child labor violations
Influence of media on society
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
For as long as American companies have been moving factories to other countries, we have all heard stories of violations of worker’s rights. The case of Nike and its former Honduran workers is just one example of this growing problem. In 2009, two factories that made shirts for Nike closed their doors, causing 1,800 workers to lose their jobs. To make matters worse, the companies that ran the two factories, Hugger and Vision Tex, refused to pay those workers the severance and compensation they were due according to Honduran law. At first, Nike sympathized with the workers who lost their jobs, but after public backlash from university students in the US, Nike succumbed to public pressure and agreed to pay the workers what they were owed. It …show more content…
However, I think that it is irrelevant in this case. What does matter in this case is perception, and the perception born out of this debacle was that Nike violates worker’s rights. Once that perception takes hold with the public, the only good option is to placate the masses and give in to their demands. As I stated above, bad press can ruin a company’s reputation and could even have the potential to ruin the company. By giving in to the demands of the protestors, Nike was able to save their reputation by proving that they do not support violations of worker’s rights. I personally believe that there is merit in students protesting and being activists. By being vocal and protesting, students are able to change their world in ways that weren’t possible for past generations. With the rise of social media, a cause can spread around the globe like wildfire. No longer content with, “that’s just the way it is,” young people of this generation are standing up and saying, “No more.” Using social media, young people have adopted a tactic of “calling out” bad behavior, and are able to drum up worldwide support for whatever cause they are
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 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
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.
Across the globe, an estimated 168 million children from developing countries employed in sweatshops.(Rogue) Sweatshops have become an integral part of U.S business corporations in the modern age. These corporations use the cheap labor of overseas factories to generate massive profit margins in the states, while taking advantage of those in poverty elsewhere. Many large athletic clothing corporations, namely Nike, Adidas, and the Jordan brand, have come under fire for outsourcing a majority of their work overseas. The most common criticism has come from the horrendous conditions and barely any pay. This topic struck home with me not just because it is involved with my field of study in business management, but also because of how it affects me as a consumer of such products. My ethical question is “should businesses be forced to maintain certain standards for overseas workers?”. By examining the standards a business should maintain, the ethical dilemma of profit versus
Nike has been under a great deal of pressure to correct the misdoings that have been done regarding production facilities in the East. As Nike is responsible for these plants, their reputation has been tainted with increasing public debate about ethical matters. While Nike still promotes itself as one of the industry leaders in corporate social responsibility, workers in Asia are still forced to work excessively long hours in substandard environments and are not paid enough to meet the basic needs for themselves or their families. They are faced to a life of poverty and are unfortunate subjects to harassment and violent threats if they make any attempt to form unions or tell journalists about labour abuses in their factories. Phil Knight’s speech regarding Nike’s steps to improving human rights in Asian countries was a step in the right direction for Nike, but it would have been much more effective had Nike fully followed through with these initiatives.
Nike’s sweatshop manufacturing practices which can be seen through media have shown people that this company goes under the good guys images, these images which are displayed in their commercials show people that their employees are treated well and their happy in their working environment.
Nike has always been a company that's been questioned ethically. People have heard about the stories of the sweatshops in Southeast Asia exploiting adolescent employees for unreasonably small amounts of money. This had blemished Nike’s reputation several years ago, but since then, it has strived to become a truly respectable company. Located on Nike's website you can find Phil Knight's credo about ethics. It is as follows:
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.
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...
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.
Another area of concern is the discrepancy of differences in East Asian worker regulations and wages compared to the North American standards. Much speculation has gone toward attacking Nike for their blatant disregard of American labour ethics, but Nike is having difficulty explaining their justification of meeting offshore requirements. For example, the legal age in Indonesia was 14, an age at which compulsory Schooling has ended. Nike was criticized for apparently having girls at this age working in their factories (which wasn’t true), and was shunned for inhuman labour practices according to American standards.
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.