Its not easy being a consumer in the global economy. Moral dilemmas confront you at every turn. Was this pair of space-age Nike shoes produced in an Asian sweatshop? Dare I sheathe my feet in the product of modern-day slave labour? Should I boycott? Then again, who am I to pass judgment on the workplace norms of other people? “Exploitation” is a culturally relative concept, isnt it? Why do I have to deal with this now? Why dont those Asian governments enforce fair working conditions and leave me to frolic carefree through my local mall? And for crying out loud, why, if the labour is so cheap over there, do these Nike sneakers cost $200?
This last question, though less existentially weighty, probably has more impact on people–and on Nike–than any other. Even activists who are organizing awareness campaigns about Nikes labour practices have to admit it. “Ultimately, I dont think Nikes recent downturn in sales has that much to do with their sweatshop practices,” says Toronto labour activist Bob Jeffcott, commenting on Nikes recent troubles with its bottom line. “People just find it outrageous that theyre paying so much for a pair of running shoes.”
But as far as Jeffcott is concerned, even that question is a step in the right direction, because it means Nikes carefully crafted image is falling apart. And that, ultimately, is what the anti-Nike awareness campaign–including the international day of protest against Nike, which takes place this Saturday, April 18–is all about. Nikes not selling shoes, Jeffcott explains, its selling a manufactured identity. Once people question that identity in any way, theyre more open to his message: Nikes not just taking you to the cleaners, its taking 500,000 Asian sweatshop workers to the cleaners with you.
But if people choose not to buy Nike, a report issued late last year says that there is really no alternative. The report, by Hong Kongs Asia Monitor Resource Centre, states that in some Chinese sweatshops workers spend half the day producing Nike shoes, the other half producing Adidas. Reebok also relies heavily on Asian sweatshops. Does anyone make an ethical shoe anymore? “No,” says Jacques Bertrand of Montreal-based Development and Peace. “They just make money.”
>>>Whether for reasons of political awareness, retail price, market saturation or fashion whimsy, Nike is a company in trouble. One month ago, the worlds leading athletic footwear corporation announced that quarterly profits were down 69 per cent from the previous year. Footwear sales globally are the slowest theyve been in a decade. Nike was forced to lay off 1,600 of the 22,000 people it employs directly. (Nikes Asian manufacturing is handled by sub-contractors, so those half-million sweatshop workers are technically not Nike employees.) Company spokesperson Vada Manager points out that Nikes quarterly revenues are still well over $2 billion. Manager admits that the anti-Nike campaigns–like the letter-writing campaign organized by Bertrand which resulted in 147,000 letters of protest flooding Nike headquarters–are a factor in Nikes recent troubles, but says the impact is “unquantifiable.”
”
Nike is in need of a new leader as the company continues to innovate the way it does to transform the workplace, a challenge that has been exacerbated by a weak economy. For Nike, this new leadership must be a combination of technology, leadership and strategic acumen. Our leadership is built on working with top talent to ensure our global footprint is maintained.
”
Nike today announced, for the 11th consecutive year, a series of strategic initiatives designed to deliver a new generation of innovation, both for the brand and the organization. The team in place includes:
”.
We have developed new leadership at Nike and have already started preparing for a future at the company with over $32 billion of internal corporate investment and our current CEO, Edmondson, will make significant headway in this new position. All of us are very excited about our company and the opportunities that are available, but we are also working very hard to strengthen our work environment to deliver value to our employees and brands throughout the world in a way that is consistent with its own values and values as set forth in our brand website.
”
The partnership with Nike was a vital part in our partnership to further improve global business and deliver Nike to our clients as soon as possible.
We believe Nike’s leadership is both valuable and vital for our brand.
Pete Peterson, who has been our co-founder for 10 years, is in charge of managing all aspects of manufacturing, finance, marketing, and global operations. Peterson is also the current Chief Operating Officer of Enlil and the former VP of Performance, General, and Worldwide Operations.
Although the Nike brand is no longer in danger of being destroyed, Nike is confident we can make good on our goal of reaching our goal of $40 billion in global profits by 2020, and are confident the company can deliver this in a way that is sustainable.
Although we’ve always supported Nike and its growth through acquisitions and partnerships, we have also always considered investing in the world’s best brands where our customers can focus their attention. We believe we have a clear vision for leadership to create sustainable growth in our global business.
By meeting this target, we could take the next step to enhance our business and our company’s global competitiveness as well as ensure a world class product line with a long-term proven record of excellence.
,
Our commitment to our customers will keep all partners in our business focused on achieving their unique vision at the best possible price.
As in previous years, we remain committed to building this generation of global leaders who represent the best in customer service to all customers on all devices, not just Nike employees, both in terms of technology and innovation.
,
Our mission will be to provide the best global product and service experience for all of our customers at the highest level. We will engage our stakeholders, develop high level discussions and deliver the best in a number of strategic services, including performance measurement, product quality assurance and service level control and delivery capabilities.
Perhaps, but the political campaigns have been remarkably effective in raising awareness of Asian sweatshop practices. The story has become a favourite of mainstream U.S. media: Nikes sub-contractors are mostly based in Taiwan, Hong Kong or South Korea, but they set up shop in Indonesia, China or Vietnam, where labour standards are less strict. Workers, mostly young women, some barely teenagers at age 13, work 12-hour days for less than minimum wage. Stories of physical and sexual abuse abound. In China, the subcontractors withhold employees first month of wages as a bond to keep them from leaving. When Indonesia raised its minimum wage by 20 cents to $2.46 U.S. a day, Nike executive Jim Small publicly stated that “Indonesia is pricing itself out of the market.”
In response to the campaigns, Nike spends a lot of money creating good spin, an attempt to prop up its “Just Do It”/”Yes I Can” empowerment image, despite mounting evidence to the contrary. It hired international