OPPapers.com

Nike - The Sweatshop Debate

Nike: The sweatshop debate
                                             
name: Dauwe Vercamer
Student number: 20776757
Course: UGBA 178 International Business
Dauwe Vercamer
20776757
Should Nike be held responsible for working conditions in foreign factories that it does not
ownm but where subcontractors make products for Nike?
In many ways, it seems obvious to me that Nike should be held responsible for working conditions in foreign
companies where products for Nike are made. In my opinion a company is not only responsible for itsʼ own
employees but also for the employees that produce for them even though theyʼre not in their own company. I
think that every part of the supply chain is partially responsible for the entire supply chain. As Nike is the
most visible and wealthiest part of the supply chain, it carries the biggest responsibility. In this way, I oppose
Friedmansʼ view that the only social responsibility a company has is to increase itsʼ profits.
The utalitarian approach dictates that a business decision (f.e. to subcontract to a foreign company) should
only have more good consequences than bad ones to be executed. I disagree on this view. In my opinion the
company should look at the big picture and make sure that every one benefits from the decision. This means
I am agreeing with the difference principle which states that inequalites between employees can be justified
if at least the least-advantaged benefits.
Another approach I can relate to is the Kantian approach. People are not machines and should not be
treated as such. This means Nike should treat every one who is involved with its products as a human being.
Therefore the company should give everybody at least the wage they require to have a normal, good life.
They should also give them working condititions work living in.
It is however wrong to give them full responsibility. The subcontractor has a big deal of the responsibility as
well as they are the...