Ethics

The case study is based on Nike shoes and their unfair trade practices in third world countries. Nike pays below sustenance salaries to workers in Vietnam, China etc.

Topic
Who has not worn Nike shoes  It has become world renowned for its sports gear. Nike originated in the US based near Beaverton, Oregon. It began as Knight, Inc. and in 1971 the Nike name and trademark Swoosh was devised.

Nike goods, mainly its trademark shoes are made in countries other than USA. In the 1970s most Nike shoes were made in South Korea and Taiwan. After rapid industrialization in these countries, Nike went to Indonesia, China and most recently Vietnam. These countries have no protective labor laws, endless supplies of cheap labor, and authoritarian leaders who outlaw independent labor unions. China has the worlds largest population while Vietnam is a cash strapped nation. The workers in these third world countries were exploited for their availability, ignorance, helplessness and extreme poverty.

Currently, even after worldwide furor and cyber campaigns, Nike is still manufacturing shoes in the under developed nations. Countries in South America like Brazil, are now manufacturing the shoes.
Nike engages with a broad range of stakeholders on an ongoing basis, including civil society, industry, government, consumers and shareholders. Some of the stakeholders are Anne Kelly the director of governance programs of CERES, Peter Graf the chief sustainability officer of SAP etc. With such credentials to boot, Nike has a lot to offer the industrial world.(1)

According to Gina A. Warren, VP Global Diversity  Inclusion, Nikes vision is Diversity and Inclusion is fundamental to Nikes performance. Its what makes us better. Its what makes us smarter. It helps our business grow and helps us connect with consumers. (2) It seems, diversity only lends to Nikes profits and not to the profits of the third world countries. Workers have repeatedly complained about low salaries and inhuman work conditions.

Nikes Code of Conduct says In the area of human rights...in the communities in which we do business - we seek to do not only what is required, but what is expected of a leader. A leader cannot put profits before human rights.

If Nike sets up factories in developing countries, development is on the cards, because the workers need jobs. But physical and verbal abuse by Nike factory supervisors should not be part of it. Overtime hours per month are put in by these workers because they dont even make minimum wage at the Nike factories in China and Vietnam.

Nike should pull up its act. The catch line for Nike goes, Designed for sport. Crafted for Life. Nike should strive to maintain its top quality but not at the cost of its moral ethics. With net income of 243.8 million (3) in the first quarter of 2009, Nike can definitely pay a more decent wage to its workers.

An alternative to exploiting workers is to pay them a decent wage as per their living standard index. This will make the brand more egalitarian. Sports is an equal arena field. So Nike should play by the rules.