Nike has enhanced supplier transparency due to child labor

"Live out of your greatness." Although not an Olympic partner, Nike's marketing performance on the theme of this year's London Olympics made many people applaud, but in the 90s of last century, Nike was criticized by the public opinion because the supply chain problem was "not so great."

In June 1996, a 12-year-old Pakistani child laborer was crouching on hand-made photographs of exquisite Nike football and published in the American magazine Life. The magazine explained that his daily salary is only 2 dollars. This triggered consumer resistance to Nike products and Nike suffered a heavy blow.

The child labor incident also forced Nike to take measures to restrain manufacturers in its supply chain from committing serious violations of labor rights to restore consumer trust so that it later became one of the most proactive companies in improving working conditions: Nike helped create The apparel industry partnership organized and drafted the factory code of conduct. In 1999, the organization developed into the American Fair Labor Association.

Formulating codes of conduct and pioneering the promotion of labor rights in the industry has become a common practice for multinational corporations. However, different companies have great differences in terms of stringency, compliance and remedial measures, and factory audits are also different. As early as 2000, Nike released its overall survey results for the first time, but it was not until 2006 that it disclosed the details of all factories in the supply chain.

The list of overseas manufacturers Nike announced at the time included 124 in China, 73 in Thailand, 35 in South Korea, and 34 in Vietnam. In addition, there are factories in other parts of Asia and South America, Australia, Canada, and Italy. Nike spokesperson Lee Weinstein said that he hopes that the company’s public supplier’s behavior can promote the entire industry.

In the report, Nike also admitted that the overseas manufacturers that it cooperated with did have behaviors that forced workers to delay work and infringe upon the rights and interests of workers. Among them, Nike reviewed 569 overseas manufacturers in 2003 and 2004. According to the report, the factory problem in South Asia is more serious. Half of the local factories require workers to work more than 60 hours per week, of which more than 10% of the factories have imposed punishments on workers who refuse to work overtime; in addition, the report also pointed out that many South Asian factories also restrict workers' access to toilets during working hours and Drink water.

Nike's move is undoubtedly a challenge to the unspoken rules of the industry. Clothing and footwear companies often believe that the disclosure of information on foundries will undermine their competitiveness. And Hannah Jones, head of Nike’s Corporate Social Responsibility Department, said: “This unfavorable factor is insignificant. On the contrary, lack of transparency will hinder the inspection process.” Concealing information will make some companies The foundry factory was subject to multiple audits, while other factories completely escaped the relevant inspections.

Increasing transparency is a sign that some big companies have improved their image and attracted customers in recent years. They feel that a company with social responsibility can attract more consumers. According to the results of the latest social responsibility evaluation of the 100 largest companies in the world, consulting firm Account Ability showed that 72 companies publish social responsibility reports every year.

However, some critics believe that there is still a gap between Nike's requirement to completely fulfill its corporate social responsibility. Jeff Ballinger, a supporter of workers’ rights and interests, said that although Nike’s move has positive significance, it is more of a public display of the good side. As for the practical issues raised by workers, there are no specific solutions.