The idea of ethics in any workplace is a complex one in the sense that it involves thinking’s and feelings in the human element (DeTienne and Lewis, 2005). In most cases, moral obligations make a pathway for rational decisions in many case scenarios. When a person acts as an employer, there are different obligations and responsibilities they have towards their employee. The moral obligation towards the employee should serve as a guide to the employer’s decision making.
The employees in the Nike company factory indicate that their employment is the only thing they have and even if they are not comfortable with the wages they receive, they do not have an option to get a different kind of a job. The western value should be inflicted in this society because every individual has a right to proper working conditions and a decent salary to sustain their basic needs. Social responsibility is a case of ethical theory where any person is responsible and accountable for fulfilling their civic duty in the society (Carrigan and Attalla, 2001). The Nike employees cannot do without the jobs they have now, but on the other hand, any human being who cares about social responsibility, humility and business ethics should lend out their hands to assist in improving the employee’s lives.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
In this case scenario, Nike had the opportunity to comment on the allegations of their employment ethics, but they kept turning the journalists away. The C.E.O. of the company indicated directly that he does not want to have any conversation about the issue. Their actions are contrary to their open door policy. Even though they did not comment on the matter, their behavior led to a discussion of their ethical standpoint which is extortion of poor workers, environmental violation as well as deprivation of proper human work conditions.
The video is a clear indicator that Nike does not care for the employees in the factory, but they have high regard of how well the product is doing in the market. Their actions, in this scenario, speak louder than their words in that; they force the workers to work for ninety hours a week in a poor working environment and pay them very little money that does not meet their basic needs. The reason they move the factories to third world countries is that they know that they will get cheap labor and this means more profit for them, and this is a contributing factor to show that their ethical standards are deplorable. They do not wish to comply with the American work ethics standards.
After this documentary in 2011, Nike took the initiative to admit to the unethical ways they treated their employees. Since then they have put much effort into encouraging the contract factories to abide by their new code of conduct. The company C.E.O. announced that Nike would increase the minimum wage of the factory workers and he also indicated that he would increase monitoring in all the factories ( TeamSweat, 2011). He also stated that he would adapt to the American OSHA environmental air standards from all the companies. In line with their standard ethical improvement, Nike created the Fair Labor Association which is a non-profit organization that combines companies and human right representatives which allocate independent supervision. The company also made it possible to issue factory audits as well as repeat visits to any factories with problems. Nike also continues to release full details of its commitment, audit data and standards as part of their social responsibility.
In conclusion, after watching this video, my opinion of Nike is entirely different because the company did not maintain any balance between the ecosystems and the economy. My buying habits of Nike products would change because if the journalists had not exposed them, they would still be violating the work ethics of their employees.
References
Carrigan, M., & Attalla, A. (2001). The myth of the ethical consumer–do ethics matter in purchase behaviour?. Journal of Consumer Marketing , 18 (7), 560-578.
DeTienne, K. B., & Lewis, L. W. (2005). The pragmatic and ethical barriers to corporate social responsibility disclosure: The Nike case. Journal of Business Ethics , 60 (4), 359-376.
TeamSweat. (2011, July 28). Nike Sweatshops: Behind the Swoosh [Video File]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5uYCWVfuPQ
