Nike’s Sweatshop Factories

In 1972 when Nike was founded they contracted with several factories in Taiwan and South Korea. These factories were to manufacture shoes and other Nike related goods. The workers from these factories spend the next 20 years fighting their governments for the right to form labour unions and better wages. When workers acquired this new liberty to coordinate unions and wages rose, it left Nike to relocate most of their production to other countries such as China, Indonesia, and Vietnam. Countries where there is ample amount of cheap child labour and protective labour laws are not imposed. Within these countries it is illegal for workers to form independent trade unions. This is still apparent in China and Vietnam, and was in Indonesia until 1998, which is why Nike relocated there.

By the 1990’s stories of Nike’s sweatshop factors had hit the media. Many human rights groups took an interest after hearing stories of child labour, forced overtime and wages well below the poverty line. Other stories told of physical abuse from factory overseers, exposure to dangerous chemicals and poor air quality. Within the first two years that Nike was in Vietnam one factory overseer was convicted of physically abusing workers. Another management official fled the country in reaction to a police investigation due to sexual abuse charges. Plus a third was under investigation for abusing workers. These human rights activists hoped that media attention would bring about change from public pressure.  Education for Justice, Global Exchange and Students Against Sweatshop Labour were just a few of the major organizations fighting against Nike. Within the shoes manufacturing industry Nike is not the only company to partake in sweatshop use. However, Nike’s contracted workers filed more wage violation complaints than any other shoe company, plus it is one of the leading roles in the industry, thus all of the organizations focused their energy on Nike. The organizations hoped that global pressure would motivate Nike to change, and other smaller companies in the industry to follow.

Well into the 90’s it was no longer organizations protesting, but workers had jumped in on the action as well. Year after year Nike had gained government approval to pay employees much less than minimum rate. Factory officials convinced the government that it would be “hardship” for the factories to pay full wages. Nike went one further and gave new employees an apprentice rate for several months into their employment, which was even less than what they were paying everyone else. In Nike’s Indonesian factory in April 1997 more than 10 000 workers went on strike to protest low and unpaid wages.  At the same time 1300 workers at Nike’s Vietnam location went on strike hoping for a one cent an hour raise.  In China the next year over 3000 workers protested extremely low wages and dangerous working conditions. All of the workers from Nike’s locations protested even though they put themselves at huge personal risk. Protesting would result in losing their job and blacklisted from additional jobs. Moreover it could result in interrogation and imprisonment. 

Increasing public pressure persuaded Nike to improve their factory standards for their contracted workers. In 1998 the company replaced petroleum based chemicals with less dangerous alternatives. In 1999 the Indonesian locations had their wages raised above minimum rates. After this Nike agreed to let the Fair Labour Association conduct random inspections. Nike also set up independent factory monitoring with United States and international organizations. Nike deployed its own staff team. One hundred workers who were accountable for inspecting the company’s partner factories. These inspections rated the locations on many aspects. These varied from employee safety to humane working conditions. After inspection they would meet with factory administration to attend to any new problems. The organization’s approach has become successful. Reebok and Adidas have improved their overseas factories out of fear of involvement with the Nike occurrence; even though neither have been major targets of the campaigns.

By 2002 a company Code of Conduct was released to all Nike factories which regulated the working conditions and safety requirements. In 2004 labour and health standards were improved even more reported the company’s Responsibility Report. This report went on to describe Nike’s monitoring plans and intended upcoming advancements. This report was seen as a huge win for the many workers and human right organizations. With the report Nike included a complete list of worldwide factories and their addresses. This allowed for any third party organization to monitor and investigate their factories at any given time. Even though all of the improvements have been seen as a step in the right direction the movement against Nike hasn’t ended. According to the Education for Justice organization Nike still has their contracted workers working hours longer than those acceptable by the Code of Conduct. They also state that in up to 50% of their locations workers are still forced to work a 7 day work week and earn less than minimum wage.

This image symbolizes that there are still sweatshops and child labour present in third world countries today. This also represents how big corporations, such as Nike or Dole, will exploit these third world countries without a concern for the people who reside there.