Ballinger's Essay

The public outcries against Nike’s practices stem around the unethical mistreatments of—and significantly low wages given to—factory workers in less-developed Asian countries. According to Debora Spar’s article, Hitting the Wall, activist Jeff Ballinger hypothesizes that Nike’s objectives to minimize costs as a competitive advantage has actually led to these unfair treatments as well as multiple counts of other human rights violations. While I do agree that extreme cost-cutting measures can lead to hostility and a sense of urgency among the affected individuals in a company, I do not wholly agree with Ballinger that this alone can lead to inhumane treatment. Especially since these acts happen in different nations, like Indonesia and China, mediators such as cultural differences, different ethical standards, and the difficulty to communicate internationally have likely all played important roles in Ballinger’s argument. Empirically, however, Ballinger has supported his hypothesis through years of research and surveys conducted on a multitude of Nike factory employees. In response to Ballinger’s arguments, Nike was not able come up with a very convincing response; Nike rejected all personal responsibility concerning its …show more content…
In Nike’s opinion, their ability to compete on cost depended on the low wages paid to their overseas manufacturing companies. However, if quality was emphasized over low-cost, then the company would be able to increase the wages yet still retain its customer base. Nike also believes its unfair for them to pay higher wages to their foreign employees when other companies do the same thing; this is a moral fallacy, and Nike should change their ways of thinking about wages in Vietnam and try to give them the equivalent of an average American citizen’s purchasing