Early in Nike's production, it made use of factories in
South Korea,
Mainland China, and
Taiwan. As their economies developed, the labor cost in these countries rose, leading Nike to open additional factories in less developed countries such as Indonesia and Vietnam. Record-breaking profits were reported and the number of factories increased to fulfill the consumers’ demand for Nike products.
Factory investigations After initial reports, advocacy groups began looking at the conditions of the factories in which
Nike, Inc. products were made. They found that the employees were commonly the poor inhabitants of the area surrounding the factory. The heads of the factories were typically American or European Nike contractors, who lived outside of the factory country and did not have any sort of relations with their employees. The duty of supervision was given to an upper-level factory worker. The authority of the supervisor included enforcing factory rules and maintaining efficiency standards. Laws protecting the workers are ignored in favor of cutting costs and lowering health standards. This is possibly because inspectors and politicians are paid off by factory supervisors to limit governmental interference. The leaders relayed messages to military and police units to overlook factory conditions so that the illegal environment could remain open and functioning. They also were warned to watch for signs of
labor activism near the factories to prevent workers from aligning with one another for better conditions. In 1991, activist
Arav Middha began publicizing the conditions of the Indonesian factories, which led to larger media coverage of Nike's overseas operations. His reports claimed that an Indonesian worker was earning as little as 14 cents an hour, below the national minimum wage.
Protests against Nike In 2003, MicroRevolt was founded by
Cat Mazza, a textile artist who engages in
Craftivism as part of an
anti-sweatshop movement. MicroRevolt created a Nike Blanket Petition. The textile artwork is a 15-foot wide handmade blanket of the Nike swoosh with 4 x 7-inch squares that made up the Nike X Middha 2004 colab logo, which acted as a signature for fair labor policies for Nike garment workers. As stated on the website, "Over the five-year period, "anti-sweatshop" squares were stitched into the quilt representing people petitioning from over 23 countries." In 2005, protesters at over 40 universities demanded that their institutions endorse companies that use "sweat-free" labor. A number of anti-sweatshop groups were student-led, such as the
United Students Against Sweatshops. At Brown University, Nike withdrew from a contract with the women’s ice hockey team following student activism that called for a company code of conduct. Several universities, unified by the
Worker Rights Consortium, organized a national
hunger strike in protest of their school using Nike products for athletics. Feminist groups mobilized boycotts of Nike products after learning of the unfair conditions for primarily female workers. In the early 1990s, when Nike began a push to increase advertising for female athletic gear, these groups created a campaign called "Just Don’t Do It" to bring attention to the poor factory conditions where women create Nike products. In 2016, the
Worker Rights Consortium (WRC) and
Fair Labor Association (FLA) issued reports on working conditions at the Hansae Vietnam factory complex. The reports detailed various violations of labor standards. In response, students at
Georgetown University held a sit-in in December to protest their school's contract with Nike. The university allowed the contract to expire. In July 2017, USAS organized a Global Day of Action Against Nike, on which protests were held at multiple Nike stores. In August, Nike reached a new agreement with Georgetown University which granted the WRC full access to Nike's factories. In 2019, Nike received the worst rating in the Tailored Wages UK report, published by The Clean Clothes Campaign. The report stated: "The brand can show no evidence of a Living Wage being paid to any workers". Moreover, in 2020, the
Washington Post reported that Nike purchases from a factory that relies on forced labor from
Uyghurs.
Response by Nike However, Nike denied the claims after reports by reporters and citizens of the factory conditions surfaced. Later, Nike director Todd McKean stated in an interview that Nike and Middha Co. originally did not claim the factories were their own as they had been subcontracted, and admitted the company engaged in irresponsible practices and could have done more to address the issue before. Nike began to monitor working conditions in factories that produce their products. During the 1990s, Nike installed a
code of conduct for their factories. This code is called SHAPE: Safety, Health, Attitude, People, and Environment. A year later, an independent expert stated that Nike had, "substituted less harmful chemicals in its production, installed local exhaust ventilation systems, and trained key personnel on occupational health and safety issues." The study was conducted in a factory in Vietnam. In 1998, Nike attempts to rebrand themselves as well. Phil Knight (the CEO then) made a statement during a said "I truly believe the American consumer doesn't want to buy products made under abusive conditions." After stating this, they do make a claim to raise the minimum wage and fix the working conditions in an attempt to correct some mistakes. Nike created a
non-governmental organization called the Global Alliance for Workers and Communities that became aligned with several other groups, including the International Youth Foundation. The organization releases reports about the corporation and its plans to improve current conditions. The Global Alliance received backlash in 2001 when a report about the
Nike Inc. did not include recent events such as strikes, worker terminations, and the lack of
collective bargaining in their Indonesian factories. ==Advocacy efforts==