Work Environment conditions
According to me Nike should not be wholly responsible for the working conditions in some of the Asian countries, because Nike completely do not own the factories. The work and the manufacturing are subcontracted to a local or domestic company in that particular country. Although Nike may be technically removed from responsibility in some areas, it clearly has the obligation to be certain that exploitation by subcontractors do not occur.
As a world’s biggest and largest manufacturing company of sports and athletic gear they should have some Moral responsibilities and Ethics in doing the business. Surely the pay and working conditions that the workers of subcontractors receive is unpaid in large part to the contract that has been negotiated by Nike. If Nike had chosen to make improved working conditions a part of the arrangement, them those benefits may have been passed on to the workers. Still, Nike is a publicly owned firm whose goal is to improve the wealth of its shareholders. The workers in these Asian countries were happy, even eager, to accept the conditions that were provided as a manufacturer of Nike. The reason is that those wages were probably equal or superior to wages available from other sources. If Nike were to leave the country because of the pressures placed upon it, the workers would undoubtedly suffer greatly.
Labor standards Nike has the responsibility to hold subcontractors to those conditions that exist only in thesubcontracted countries. Nike has to follow the rules and conditions of the host country and seeto that they do not violate or break any rules in that country. If it insisted on prevailingconditions in the United States, there would be little reason for Nike to seek contractors fromoutside countries. However, through pressure or contractual concessions, it is possible for Nike to seek ways to improve