Run Run Away

Question:

I’ve yet to read anyone’s response to the recent trip to Asian factories by a group of graduate students from Dartmouth University (I

It’s hard to response to this because Nike has not released the report yet. Last time I called, it is still being printed.  Nike made many press announcements and established nation-wide conference calls for reporters to drumbeat this report on Oct 17 (a day before the International Nike protest), yet a month later, the report is still not released yet.  However, an internal Nike document was leaked to the NY Times and this document has many details that contradict the Dartmouth study.  You can see this document on http://www.corpwatch.org. think).  Basically, this group determined that the working conditions that everyone and their brother have been so upset about are actually quite good, and extremely good relative to the normal conditions

I’m not sure how you get this impression.  The Nike PR did not mention anything about working conditions.  According to conversation with the press, these students did not interview any Vietnamese factory workers or even collect paystubs from them.  They obtain an average wage figure directly from factory manager. I’m not so sure what is normal condition for you.  But I can tell you this much about how other US companies operate in Vietnam.  Both Pepsi and Coca Cola paid $80 per month.  They also have English classes for their workers. There has not been even one strike at the Coca or Pepsi plants.  Contrary, there has been at least 15 strikes at Nike factories in Vietnam since opening days.  Dara O’ Rourke at TRAC, a UN consultant recently surveyed 50 manufacturing facilities in Vietnam, and found that the Nike factories in Vietnam paid the lowest, have the worst records in terms of chemical poisons and carcinogens as well as industrial safety.  There are no incident of worker abuse at factories of CocaCola, Pepsi, Mitsubishi, Honda, P&G etc. But at Nike factories, we have one worker convicted for worker abuse; one is facing a 6 month jail sentence for abuse; one has escaped from VN and is being extradited for sexual harassment; and numerous incidents of corporal punishments. Not to mention that the Nike factory workers are able to put some of their earnings toward savings plans, and have plenty of money to buy necessary items (which, by the way, cost an amazing amount less than in the U.S.).  If anyone would

The Nike internal document contradicted this claim.  In this document, based on interviews with 50 workers at one factory, Nike found that a majority of them spent up to 100% of their basic salary on food.  Based on the Nike Press release, the Tuck study consider the areas where Nike factories are located as rural areas and the comparision to determine whether discretionary income is generated or not is based on this premise.  Nike factories are located in Dong Nai which is 50 miles from Hochiminh City. One Nike factory is located in Cu Chi which is right in Hochiminh City. The economies of these areas are linked to HCMC.  Once the factories move into these exporting zones, housing and food prices go up accordingly.  The per capital income in HCMC is approximately $1000.  The Nike workers are getting $570 per year. I want to counter this claim that everything is cheap in Vietnam.  The only thing that is cheap in Vietnam is food.  Everything else you get what you paid for.  For $6 a month, a Nike factory worker get to share a small room with 6 other workers and they all sleep in bunk beds stacking up to the ceiling.  They have no cooking facilities, no bathroom, no running water, no electricity etc.  A biccyle costs about $100.  A motorcycle costs about $3000.  To rent a studio, they have to shell out about $40 per month.  These workers get $45 per month.  Electricity, water, TV, radio all costs more than in the US. For clarifcation, the group of students are from Tuck Business School at Dartmouth University.  All of them are MBA students.  (I also earned an MBA in finance from NYU)  So their expertise in labor monitoring is probably the same as mine which is not very much.  They all were paid by Nike to do a study on a "living wage" of Nike factory workers for Nike.  Imagine MBA students determining a "living" wage, and that’s good enough for Nike in terms of scholarship.  (Normally, these MBA students would consider having a 4WD is necessary for living.  But in this study, they consider sharing a small room with 6 other persons is good enough for a Vietnamese)  The study is a class assignment.  The Tuck School and Dartmouth University is not sponsoring this study.  Nike is basically using the good name of Dartmouth university to gain respectability for its horrible labor practices. Regards, Thuyen Nguyen

Response:

Greg writes: I’ve yet to read anyone’s response to the recent trip to Asian factories by a group of graduate students from Dartmouth University (I think).  Basically, this group determined that the working conditions that everyone and their brother have been so upset about are actually quite good, and extremely good relative to the normal conditions encountered by Asian factory workers.  Not to mention that the Nike factory workers are able to put some of their earnings toward savings plans, and have plenty of money to buy necessary items (which, by the way, cost an amazing amount less than in the U.S.).  If anyone would like to do the research, find the results of the students’ fact-finding trip, then comment accordingly, I’d love to hear what you have to say.  Otherwise, please limit your Nike bashing comments to fact based, intelligent discussion.  Thanks.

Greg, the bashing you are crying about is about facts, here again you want to  believe everything nike puts out in the press and not that of news agencies,  consumer report groups, independent agencies and labor groups.. From Campaign for Labor Rights; Nike still has refused to release the wage-and-needs study it commissioned from Dartmouth College. Nike so far has released only a summary of the document, with great fanfare in the press. According to the study’s authors, Nike employees not only make a living wage but they have significant amounts of discretionary income. Human rights advocates point out, however, that Nike continues to resist a provision for a living wage being included in the accord of the Apparel Industry Partnership. If Nike truly were paying a living wage, say these advocates, then why does the company not agree to such a provision in the accord? Nike representatives met with four journalists at about the same time it released a summary of the Dartmouth report. In that meeting, a Nike spokesperson claimed that a family of four could live on the Indonesian minimum wage. The government of Indonesia has stated that the minimum wage there is inadequate to meet the needs of even a single worker. We pass along part of a recent UPI story. California State Assemblywoman Dion Aroner joins a growing list of prominent people who are coming forward to denounce Nike’s labor practices. Other recent events included: A letter to Nike from a women’s coalition including: the National Organization for Women, the Ms. Foundation for Women, the Feminist Majority and author Alice Walker. A sign-on letter to Nike being circulated in the U.S. House of Representatives by Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Marcy Kaptur (D-OH). Nike labor practices hit at Capitol SACRAMENTO, Oct. 28 (UPI) _ State Assemblywoman Dion Aroner has launched a public awareness campaign aimed at persuading the Nike Co. to stop what she says is the exploitation of women workers at Asian shoe factories. The Berkeley Democrat held a Capitol news conference today to call attention to the so-called sweatshop issue, although she stopped short of calling for a boycott of Nike products. Aroner says U.S. consumers targeted by Nike’s current “female empowerment” ads must decide for themselves whether to buy $100 Nike shoes. But she suggested they may not buy them once they learn the human cost to Asian women who comprise 90 percent of the labor force that make the shoes. University of North Carolina (Chapel Hill) students from the Nike Awareness Campaign met on October 31 with former North Carolina basketball coach Dean Smith to discuss their opposition to the school’s $7.1 million contract with Nike. Smith now has a personal contract with Nike to promote the company’s products. Students who participated in the meeting found Smith cooperative although he has relied entirely on Nike sources for information about the company’s labor practices. David/IndyRunr                

Response:

Sam, I copied this directly from the news report so I don’t know the  congressmen who initiated it.  I believe it was in one of the Anti Nike news  forms posted on here at one time.  I don’t neccesary like the government  getting involved in alot of things either but when in comes to things like  this, the old South Africa, Cuba etc. they need to make a stand.  The one  point I just cannot get over is Nikes refusal to admit this.  After all this  time and all these facts they set here and tell us this is not happening, now  they even have Michael Jordan lying for them. Nike is not a company to  support. David/IndyRunr                

Response:

Sam, I copied this directly from the news report so I don’t know the congressmen who initiated it.  I believe it was in one of the Anti Nike news forms posted on here at one time.  I don’t neccesary like the government getting involved in alot of things either but when in comes to things like this, the old South Africa, Cuba etc. they need to make a stand.  The one point I just cannot get over is Nikes refusal to admit this.  After all this time and all these facts they set here and tell us this is not happening, now they even have Michael Jordan lying for them. Nike is not a company to support. David/IndyRunr                

I’ve yet to read anyone’s response to the recent trip to Asian factories by a group of graduate students from Dartmouth University (I think).  Basically, this group determined that the working conditions that everyone and their brother have been so upset about are actually quite good, and extremely good relative to the normal conditions encountered by Asian factory workers.  Not to mention that the Nike factory workers are able to put some of their earnings toward savings plans, and have plenty of money to buy necessary items (which, by the way, cost an amazing amount less than in the U.S.).  If anyone would like to do the research, find the results of the students’ fact-finding trip, then comment accordingly, I’d love to hear what you have to say.  Otherwise, please limit your Nike bashing comments to fact based, intelligent discussion.  Thanks. Greg Pressler

Response:

(Adds press conference on Capitol Hill, paras 6-7) NEW YORK, Nov 9 (Reuters) – An audit of a Vietnamese factory producing 400,000  shoes a month for Nike Inc. indicates that many unsafe conditions existed when  the audit was conducted a year ago. The report by auditors Ernst & Young found that the largely female workforce at  the Korean-owned Tae Kwang Vina Industrial Ltd. Co. factory, in the Bien Hoa  Industrial Zone, was exposed to carcinogens. It also said employees were  forced to work up to 65 hours a week, for which they earned only slightly more  than $10. The factory employs about 10,000 workers, most of them 18 to 24 years old. It  was built in 1995. Recommendations from the November 1996 inspection were submitted to Nike in  January 1997. Ernst & Young’s report was designed for internal use only. But a workers’ rights group, the San Francisco-based Transnational Resource and  Action Center, was given a copy of the audit, which it made available to  Reuters in New York. Separately, two lawmakers on Sunday released a letter to Nike President Philip  Knight signed by 53 members of Congress and demanding that the company begin  reinvesting in America and treat its workers in Third World countries with  respect. "As members of the U.S. Congress, we are deeply disappointed and embarrassed  that a company like Nike, headquartered in the United States, could be so  directly involved in the ruthless exploitation of hundreds of thousands of  desperate Third World workers, most of whom are women," they wrote in the  letter. Major problems detailed in the auditor’s report centered on unprotected use of  dangerous materials and poor air quality. In the factory’s stitching shop, where approximately 2,000 people worked,  "there are only four main doors which are not sufficent." "The electrical  ventilators and natural air booths can not reduce too much heat and dust  inside," it noted. The report also said the ventilation system in the mixing chemical warehouse  did not work efficiently and repairs were needed to reduce dust from harmful  chemical powders. It also said steps should be taken to improve the storing, handling and use of  the solvent toluene, which was found in the air around the factory at six to  177 times the amount allowed by Vietnamese regulations. The report cited 48 cases in which employees were required to work above  maximum hours and 104 cases in which workers were under 18. It noted a  discrepancy between the factory’s overtime policy and Vietnamese law. After learning the audit had been made public, Vada Manager, senior manager for  Nike public relations, said: "A select few have criticized us for not paying  them to conduct our monitoring and challenged the independence of auditing  firms like Ernst & Young and Price Waterhouse. Clearly, this report is not a  whitewash." "By the recommendations cited in this audit and the steps Nike has taken to  improve the working conditions, it is clear that our system works," Manager  said. Nike said that in March 1997 ventilation was improved in the factory’s shops  and the factory switched from toluene and other chemical solvents to the  water-based assembly of footwear. As of April 1997, Nike said the factory had complied with its own code calling  for no more than 60 hours per week of work and it had also complied with  Vietnamese laws pertaining to average working hours and the amount of overtime  per month. The audit said specific safety instructions in hazardous areas such as the  press and mixing departments were not adequately displayed and fire  extinguishers were not accessible in the cafeteria and boiler shop. By  September 1997, those concerns had been addressed, Nike said. The report also said over half the workers in certain areas were not wearing  protective equipment. That issue too had been addressed by September 1997,  Nike said. "Nike was the first company in our industry to utilize ongoing independent  monitoring and has been doing so since 1994, because we care about our  workers’ health and safety in the workplace," Dusty Kidd, who heads Nike labor  practices, said. "These … audits guide us to the areas where we must exert  pressure to ensure that improvements are made." The Transnational Resource and Action Center, in its report on the audit,  titled "Smoke From a Hired Gun," said that Ernst & Young’s methodology was  highly deficient and that independent interviews with workers at the plant  showed conditions were far worse than portrayed.  NEW YORK, Nov 9 (Reuters) – An audit of a Vietnamese factory producing 400,000  shoes a month for Nike Inc <NKE.N. indicates that many unsafe conditions existed when the audit was conducted a  year ago. The report by auditors Ernst & Young found that the largely female workforce at  the Korean-owned Tae Kwang Vina Industrial Ltd. Co. factory, in the Bien Hoa  Industrial Zone, was exposured to carcinogens, forced to work up to 65 hours a  week and earned only slightly more than $10 a week. The factory employs about 10,000 with the average ranging from 18 to 24 years.  It was built in 1995. Recommendations from the November 1996 inspection were submitted to Nike in  January 1997. Ernst & Young’s report was slated for internal use only. However, a workers’ rights group, the San Francisco-based Transnational  Resource and Action Center, was given a copy of the audit which it made  available to Reuters in New York. Major problems detailed in the report concerned the unprotected use of  dangerous materials and poor air quality. In the factory’s stitching shop, where approximately 2,000 people worked,  "there are only four main doors which are not sufficent. The electrical  ventilators and natural air booths can not reduce too much heat and dust  inside." The report also said the ventilation system in the mixing chemical warehouse  "does not work efficiently and required repair to reduce dust of harmful  chemical powders that can affect workers’ health." Also, it said steps should be taken to improve the storing, handling and use of  the chemical-based solvent Toluene, which was found in the air around the  factory at six to 177 times the amount allowed by Vietnamese regulations. The report cited 48 cases where employees were required to work above maximum  hours, and 104 cases where workers were under 18. It noted a discrepancy  between the factory’s overtime policy and Vietnamese law. After learning the audit had been made public, Vada Manager, senior manager for  Nike public relations, said: "A select few have criticized us for not paying  them to conduct our monitoring, and challenged the independence of auditing  firms like Ernst & Young and Price Waterhouse. Clearly, this report is not a  whitewash. "By the recommendations cited in this audit and the steps Nike has taken to  improve the working conditions, it is clear that our system works," Manager  said. Nike said that in March 1997 ventilation was improved in the factory’s shops.  Also, the factory converted its Toluene and other chemical solvents to  water-based assembly of footwear. As of April 1997, Nike said in a statement released late Friday, the factory  had complied with its own code calling for no more than 60 hours per week of  work, and it had also complied with Vietnamese laws pertaining to average  working hours and overtime per month. The audit said specific safety instructions in hazardous places, like press and  mixing, were not adequately displayed, and fire extinguishers were not  accessible in the cafeteria and boiler shop. By Sept. 1997, those concerns had  been addressed, Nike said. Finally, the report determined the medical staff was too small to serve the  entire workforce. Nike said it was in the process of ensuring that annual  health check-ups were occurring. The report also stated over half the workforce in certain areas were not  wearing protective equipment. That issue, too, had been addressed by Sept.  1997, Nike said. "Nike was the first company in our industry to utilize on-going independent  monitoring and has been doing so since 1994, because we care about our  workers’ health and safety in the workplace," said Dusty Kidd, Director of  NIKE’s Labor Practices. "These vigorous third-party audits guide us to the  areas where we must exert pressure to ensure that improvements are made." TRAC, in its report on Earnst & Young’s report, "Smoke from a Hired Gun,"  prepared by research associate Dara O’Rourke, found the auditor’s methodology  to be highly deficient and said his own interviews with workers at the Nike  plant revealed conditions far worse than the auditors portrayed. REUTERS 15:43 11-09-97 David/IndyRunr                

Response:

I heard the report about the carcinogens and am sorry to hear it.  I think Nike would be better off to set up plants and run them themselves rather than contracting the work out.  But some other factors both me more: Oh god, Congress meddling again!!!!  I guess they have nothing better to do (perhaps reducing taxes here so that companies can make products here would be a good start–or getting rid of laws in states that require union membership–Americans are pricing themselves out of jobs). (Adds press conference on Capitol Hill, paras 6-7) The report by auditors Ernst & Young found that the largely female workforce at the Korean-owned Tae Kwang Vina Industrial Ltd. Co. factory, in the Bien Hoa Industrial Zone, was exposed to carcinogens. It also said employees were forced to work up to 65 hours a week, for which they earned only slightly more than $10.

        My dad once told me that nobody will ever get anywhere working only 40 hours a week. I guess that farmers also violate this rule since no farmer I ever met works 40 hours a week. The factory employs about 10,000 workers, most of them 18 to 24 years old. It was built in 1995.

        This must violate some law that requires more children to be working. Separately, two lawmakers on Sunday released a letter to Nike President Philip Knight signed by 53 members of Congress and demanding that the company begin reinvesting in America and treat its workers in Third World countries with respect.

        Who were the 2 lawmakers?  Members of Congress DEMANDING that a private company reinvest in the US????  This is an outrage (I am being serious here).  Who were these guys (or women).  Post their names and states and part affiliation……         Perhaps they will sick Reno and the DOJ on Nike for something (or worse the IRS).         Let’s see didn’t Congress pass NAFTA and other "free trade" legislation? "As members of the U.S. Congress, we are deeply disappointed and embarrassed that a company like Nike, headquartered in the United States, could be so directly involved in the ruthless exploitation of hundreds of thousands of desperate Third World workers, most of whom are women," they wrote in the letter.

        If they were mostly men would it not be bad.  I guess these bozos do not believe in equal rights for women.  Ruthless:  slavery in Africa and the genocide in Bosnia is ruthless.  The workers can find another job.

Response: