Since 2011 Nike ran the ad for Kaepernick. Spellings (2018) of The Cut says, “Nike has done bang-up job of reversing that image. Business of Fashion and Morgan Stanley have both hailed the company for its sustainability efforts. Nike has an entire site dedicated to its social impact with stories, stats, and pictures of happy people working in its factories. Now, by aligning itself with Kaepernick, Nike stands for a new kind of activism and has new power” (Spellings, 2018). Spellings (2018) goes on to say that there is a glaring omission in Nike’s new CSR image, and that is workers rights. She specifically says that it is transparency problem in the product chain for Nike. Nike will not say what it pays the factory workers, and no effort to try to raise the wages so that the workers can have at least a slightly better life. When workers protest and try to unionize to protect their rights and put up a united front, Nike has them beaten and jailed.
Nike claims to be an environmentally sustainable company. Its headquarters are located in Oregon, one of the states that is a leader in environmental standards. Nike’s focus on environmental issues makes them seem as if they practice CSR, but only in the areas they choose. Workers’ rights does not appear to be one of the chosen areas for Nike. In an excerpt from its 2017 Code of Conduct it says, “We expect all our suppliers to share our commitment to respecting the rights of workers—with particular care for the unique vulnerabilities and needs of worker groups such as women, migrants and temporary workers—and to advancing the welfare of workers and communities” (Nike, 2017). Nike does not take responsibility for their workers but pushes the responsibility onto their suppliers. They do not say what they do if suppliers do not meet their expectations when it comes to these standards of conduct. Nike should be taking the responsibility by not buying from suppliers who do not treat their workers fair. Of course, Nike does not say anything about their own factories where it is their responsibility to ensure workers’ rights.
4. I do view Nike differently. I vaguely remember someone once telling me that Nike was not an ethical company, but I do not remember why they thought that. My guess is that it was about the workers’ rights issues that Nike seems to have done little to change since the 2011 video. Nike has great slogans like “Just do it,” which means not to make excuses or to be afraid, but just get out there. Nike does not believe its slogans because if they did they would look at the conditions in which their factory workers lived and do something to improve their lives. Apparently, Knight is living in the past with an antiquated view of business ethics and practices because he believes that he is doing something really great for the workers in the poor country where the Nike factories exist. In his provision of jobs for these factory workers, he should have considered a fairer wage. It would not have taken much except for empathy. When one of the plant managers sees one of his or her workers for 12 hours per day every day just so the worker can survive, he or she should know that there is someone at home missing that worker. That knowledge should lead them to pay the factory worker enough so that he or she does not have to put in such long hours and can have a better work-life balance and a more comfortable life in exchange for working hard to make Nike products that provide wealth for Nike’s owners and shareholders. I do not buy Nike products because they are too expensive, and if I someday become fabulously wealthy, I still will not buy Nike products.
Order this paper