~February 2000~

Nike, show workers that your commitment to human rights is genuine

The world's spotlight is shifted to Nike from its rivals now. This is not only because Nike is Number One in sales for the sportswear market, nor its sponsored athletes, Michael Jordan and Ronaldo, but also its sweet sounding announcement committing Nike to eliminating sweatshop production. However, it is questionable whether Nike is doing favor of the workers who produce Nike products in the world.

According to Nike, there are more than 500,000 workers in about 500 subcontracting factories for Nike in more than 20 countries. Most of them are in developing countries, which include China, Vietnam, Indonesia, and Thailand. It is repeatedly and widely reported that workers in these factories are grossly exploited, forced to work for very long hours but receive low wages. We do not find that such poor working conditions have been much improved under Nike's PR work in the recent years.

For the last few years, the Nike campaign launched by different trade unions (TUs) and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) is very successful to "threaten" Nike to tackle the demands of uprising consumer campaigns. Meanwhile, Nike has developed different ways to lessen the attack from NGOs and TUs. Nike takes an active role for its public image. It makes use of the media to publicize their achievement on protection of workers' rights and to convince consumers and the general public that they are turning over a new leaf.

Nike realizes that its Code of Conduct is no longer a unique weapon to win its rivals. Chased by Reebok and Adidas, Nike is actively involved in the Fair Labor Association (FLA) and Global Alliance (GA) to show its commitment to improve working conditions and the quality of young lives in the factories which produce for Nike. To combat the vigorous student movement against Nike sweatshops, Nike agreed to disclose "certain" factories around the world which are producing apparels for some U.S. universities and to sponsor a group of students to visit these factories. It was reported since spring in 1999 that Michael Jordan would act as an ambassador for Nike to visit the factories in Asia last summer (Up to now, it has not happened). In the last few months, Nike suggested creating an innovative communication mechanism with NGO community.

Nike indicates that it is open to all possibilities to do something good to improve the situation. But we should hold back and think for a while before jumping to conclusions.

Who are the audiences of Nike's great speeches? Who are the targets of its wonderful PR show?

From time to time Nike speaks to its consumers and the public in the North, instead of taking action to respond to the cries of workers in the South.

Workers are not the audiences and targets of Nike! What an underhand trick to fool everyone!

Communication with the workers

In a letter responding to the open letter endorsed by about fifty NGOs and TUs around the world, the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Nike, Phillip Knight, emphasized that Nike is willing to establish a mechanism for constructive dialogue with NGOs. Surely, such dialogue with NGOs is important. However, the whole problem should not be reduced as a matter of communication. Communication with NGOs will not be meaningful unless Nike set up a mechanism for communication with workers and a mechanism in which workers can express their basic rights freely.

In the past, Nike labor compliance representatives approached CIC several times to discuss working conditions in China. CIC makes it very clear that we will not speak for workers in China. It is Nike's obligation to identify the problems with workers. They should discuss with workers directly. In fact, workers are in the front line. Nobody can realize the situation better than workers do. NGOs should not/ cannot take over the roles of workers to communicate with transnational corporations (TNCs) without the endorsement/ blessing from workers.

It is clear that Nike should meet workers face to face and provide channels for workers to express their discontent. Moreover, workers should be guaranteed that their voices will be listened and they would not be victimized when they exercise the freedom of expression.

Nike's Code

Nike is always proud of its sophisticated Code. It is found, however, that the Code is poorly implemented.

It is ridiculous that in the largest country producing for Nike in the world, most workers in China know nothing of Nike's Code of Conduct and some workers even regard the Code as another set of factory regulations. It will bring harsher penalties to workers if they do not comply. For those who understand more about the Code, they are still forced to work overtime and they receive less overtime compensation than the legal standard. It is clear that the Nike's Code is just a piece of paper. Nike does not strictly implement its Code.

In September 1999, a disgraceful case was revealed in a garment factory in Cambodia that produces children's wear for Nike. Two copies of Nike's Codes of Conduct in hand-written Chinese were posted in the factory. Almost all workers are Khmers who do not know Chinese. The manager's excuse is that they did not have time to translate it into Khmer. What an ironic excuse! It is absolutely unacceptable.

A supervisor in the factory mentioned that Nike provided them with regular orders. It is clear that Nike and the factory have a long-term partnership, but nothing has been done for workers.

Is Nike intending to conceal protection for workers as ruled in the Code and further deprive them in order to make more profit? The Code is just for public relations, but the exploitation is widespread.

Communication with NGOs

According to the research by CIC in summer 1999, the Sewon Shoes factory which produces Nike sports shoes in Jiaozhou had poor fire installation. Iron cages covered all windows of the factory. Workers lost one of main ways to escape once fire comes. This case was publicized in the open letter to Phillip Knight, the CEO of Nike, in late September 1999.

Several weeks later, however, a labor compliance representative of Nike walked into CIC to follow up the case. He was unhappy and complained that CIC had not informed him about the case before it had been publicized. We were surprised by this. Nike claims to have regular monitoring of its business partners but it knew nothing about this poor fire installation which had existed for a long time. Nike should know of the situation rather NGO should inform Nike beforehand. More importantly, we are not just concerned about the workers who are directly affected by these specific problems. We are also worried about the half million workers employed in Nike's suppliers in the world. Nike claims that a system is being used in which workers' safety and rights will be guaranteed, but it is clear to us that this is only a lip service.

It is our duty to make such evidences and the sufferings of workers known to the world. This is the only way to pressure Nike to improve the conditions and to prevent workers from further exploitation. We are completely opposed to making deals under the table both with any TNCs and others wishing to exploit vulnerable workers.

Communication with Subcontractors

A big fire engulfed in the Sewon Shoes factory in 1995. After that, the Local Government Fire Service Department strongly criticized the factory in the local newspaper. Surprisingly, the labor compliance representative of Nike shared that he knew nothing about the condemnation from the local government. Again, this is contradictory to Nike's claims of having close monitoring on and good communication with its subcontractors.

As one of the largest transnational corporations in the world, Nike has no excuse for its ignorance of such important documents to which CIC, a small labor NGO, can access. The documents are not only pieces of paper but also discussion about the lives and deaths of the workers. From the photos in July 1999, the windows of the factory were barred and the number of fire exits was limited. Nothing had been done even after the official criticism. Workers are still living in the nightmare of the fire.

Nike does not strictly monitor its business partners, but rather blames us of no prior notice before releasing information. It is totally irresponsible.

Disclosed Factory vs. Undisclosed Factory

In the face of the demand for information about its suppliers by NGOs and student groups around the world for years, Nike eventually released a list of some suppliers producing for certain universities in early October 1999.

However, we should not clap hands so early. In order to make things clear, a research was conducted in November 1999 to compare the working conditions of the disclosed factories with an undisclosed factory.

The result is as follows:

Disclosed factory versus Undisclosed factory

It is clear that our reservation is reasonable. The working conditions in Supercap (Nike disclosed factories), are better than that in Hung Wah/ Hung Yip (the undisclosed factory). What is the implication? It is easily associated that Nike only discloses model factories in which workers enjoy better treatment as specified in national labor laws and Nike's own Code.

The public may be happy that the achievement of their long-standing demands is met. In reality, however, it is only a game of cheating: selecting several model factories or cleaning up some factories before disclosure. Meanwhile, most workers in the other subcontractors are still suffering from poor working conditions and poverty wages. Like Hung Wah/Hung Yip, workers are forced to work for 83.5 hours a week. It is more than a double of the legal standard. Overtime compensation is underpaid. In order to minimize the turnover rate in the factory, one-month wage is always withheld by the management. What a disturbing fact: poor workers with pennies are being robbed by wealthy global manufacturers! It is not an occasional case. Nike should not fool the public again!

Conclusion

We believe that Nike has performed a public relation exercise through the media. It hopes that its notoriety for the use of sweatshop labor would be forgotten. However, to gain the wholehearted applause of people all over the world, Nike should take real action to protect workers?rights. It is worthless to be boastful without constructive actions.

We strongly demand

1. Nike should communicate with workers directly instead of consulting selected NGOs. Nike should create a 2-way channel to communicate with workers. Workers must be guaranteed to be accessible to the information/ news from Nike and the factory. As the same time, they can voice out their ideas freely and they will not be victimized.
2. Nike should ensure all its subcontractors strictly implement the Chinese Labor Laws and its Code of Conduct.
3. Nike should allow NGOs to provide awareness trainings for all workers inside factory. Workers should be empowered to monitor the factory by themselves because these roles should not be taken over by outsiders (e.g. social auditors).
4. Regarding to the working conditions in China, Nike should invite its subcontractors, legal experts, government officials, academics, and international community to a meeting to clarify all the misunderstandings over the implementation of labor laws in China.
5. Nike should disclose all subcontractors' locations and relevant information.

Nike, shows workers that your commitment to human rights is genuine!