Nike Sweatshops: Behind the Swoosh

1. Trying to get the workers in Indonesia fair wages is not really inflicting Western values on them. Perhaps it is inflicting justice and fairness, but those are not just Western values. Every human wants to be treated fairly. It is a universal desire. Nike brought the Western values of greed and sweatshop slavery to the people of Indonesia. Perhaps they did not have jobs before Nike came, but Nike exploited their poverty and desire to have an income by not paying them a living wage. Nobody believes that they would be paid minimum wage by Western standards, but they should be paid a living wage that does not require them to work hours overtime just to survive. That is not a job; it is slavery.

Nike tried to deny that they were using sweatshop labor in the 1990s, but if they had nothing to hide then they should have allowed the Americans in who wanted to see what it was like inside the factories. Instead, Nike denied them access, sent security to threaten them and then follow them to their homes. This does not sound like a company with nothing to hide. Nike has the social responsibility to ensure that their workers are being treated fairly and not being threatened. Yet, when a worker tried to unionize, she was beaten and illegally jailed for doing something that every worker should have the right to do and that is seek a better work standard than below poverty wages, long hours and terrible conditions (Nike Sweatshops: Behind the Swoosh, 2011). Phil Knight acts as if he is a philanthropic person, but he does not show much kindness or caring to his own workforce. He is the one imposing the Western habit of greed rather than showing the universal trait of love and caring about one’s fellow human beings especially those who work to make their boss wealthy.

2. The case referenced in the YouTube video had to do with the sweatshop conditions in Nike factories in Indonesia in the 1990s. Today, there is more concern over the same issues. Bain (2017) of Quartz explains, “Nike contract factory in Hansae, Vietnam, suffered wage theft and verbal abuse, and labored for hours in temperatures well over the legal limit of 90 degrees . . . . Nike is also accused of cutting jobs at the Hansae factory and pulling production from a factory in Honduras with a strong union presence, resulting in hundreds of workers losing vital jobs (Bain, 2017). Nike also will not let an independent group called the Worker Rights Consortium inspect their factories. This makes not sense unless they have something to hide. This leads one to ask, what are Nike’s ethical standards?

Nike aligns itself with companies that share the same values. If they did not, the companies would not want to work with them. Someone who contracts with Nike either does not know or care how Nike makes so much money by not paying living wages or making sure their factories are not below the standards expected by basic human rights. Nike should be boycotted by both consumers and collaborators until they get their ethical house in order and stop exploiting workers in poor countries who are just trying to make a living. Nike tries to put on a face of corporate social responsibility, but where the rubber meets the tennis shoe, they do not demonstrate social responsibility even if in the Western world they have tried very hard to seem as if they do. For instance, they recently created an ad with Colin Kaepernick citing him as a courageous person, and he is, but it seems as if the Kaepernick ad says that people should see that Nike supports Kaepernick’s efforts at justice for African Americans. However, justice for the people of Indonesia, Honduras or Vietnam is not a concern, and it should be