OPPapers.com Essay Index >> Business >> Cases: Nike: The Sweatshop Debate
We have many free term papers and essays on Cases: Nike: The Sweatshop Debate. We also have a wide variety of research papers and book reports available to you for free. You can browse our collection of term papers or use our search engine.
Cases: Nike: The Sweatshop Debate 1. Should Nike be held responsible for working conditions in foreign factories that it does not own, but where sub-contractors
listed on the page for Week Four. 2. Case Study a. Select one of the following cases: 1) Cases: "Nike: The Sweatshop Debate" at the end of Part 2 (Video is not required
and in certain cases such goods may lose their value and brand loyalty due to bad quality of the fake good. Secondly, customer acceptance is a major issue. This stems
cases, these companies can go as far as setting up think-tanks with paid researches to produce information to support a company's practices, regardless of how harmful
one of the factories former Ambassador to the UN Andrew Young had previously visited, as part of a study tour of Nike suppliers sponsored by the company. In his report
Submitted by sushant_murarka on May 14, 2008
Category: Business
Words: 1073 | Pages: 5
Views: 1074
Popularity Rank: 6,547
Average Member Grade: N/A (Add a Comment / Grade this Paper)
1. Should Nike be held responsible for working conditions in foreign factories that it does not own, but where sub-contractors make products for Nike?
Although Nike may be technically removed from responsibility in some areas, it clearly has the obligation to be certain that exploitation by subcontractors do not occur. Certainly the pay and working conditions that the workers of subcontractors receive is due in large part to the contract that has been negotiated by Nike. If Nike had chosen to make improved working conditions a part of the arrangement, then those benefits may have been passed on to the workers. Still, Nike is a publicly owned firm whose goal is to improve the wealth of its shareholders. The workers in these Asian countries were happy, even eager, to accept the conditions that were provided as a manufacturer of Nike. The reason is that those wages were probably equal or superior to wages available from other sources. If Nike were to leave the country because of the pressures placed upon it, the workers would undoubtedly suffer greatly.
2. What labor standards regarding safety, working conditions, overtime, and the like, should Nike hold foreign factories to: those prevailing in that country, or those prevailing in the United States.
Clearly, Nike has the responsibility to hold suppliers to those conditions that prevail only in the supplying countries. If it insisted on prevailing conditions in the United States, there would be little reason for Nike to seek contractors from outside countries. However, through pressure or contractual concessions, it is possible for Nike to seek ways to improve the conditions of workers in supplying countries. In doing so, Nike may find that it receives some public relations benefit rather than undergoing the effort and the cost of developing defensive PR strategies.
3. An income of $2.28 a day, the base pay of Nike factory workers in Indonesia, is double...
You must Login to view the entire paper.
If you are not a member yet, Sign Up for free!