In the classic boomerang, a violation against human rights is committed by the state causing internal and external protests to occur, the state is then pressured to succumb to the demands of the people and enact change (Godoy, Feb 07). When applied to the Wells Fargo/Seattle case the boomerang misses the initial step because abuse has yet to happen and the final step because Wells Fargo did not follow the demands of the protestors.
In Latin America, the boomerang was a powerful tool used to tackle civil and political rights violations. One such occurrence was in Guatemala, where Nike contracts factories to make their apparel. There were several human rights violations in which people were not being paid adequate wages, workers worked for extended hours and working conditions were not safe (Rodríguez-Garavito, 2005). Workers unionized resulting in the factory closing its doors and firing the workers, who then go to worker rights groups, such as the Workers Rights Consortium (WRC), that try to hold brands like Nike accountable for their actions. This step involves …show more content…
It was not pressured into withdrawing its contribution to the DAPL. It is important to note that Seattle is just one city in the sense that the University of Washington is just a university. A university could cut ties with a brand, but there are still hundreds of other universities that will use it. Seattle cutting ties with Wells Fargo is a tremendous step forward, hopefully other cities will follow suit, but the pipeline project has 16 other banks that are lending money to it or have some kind of relationship (Egan, 2017). It may be a minor bump in the road, but unless other cities also sever ties, Wells Fargo will continue to fund the pipeline
In Latin America, the boomerang was a powerful tool used to tackle civil and political rights violations. One such occurrence was in Guatemala, where Nike contracts factories to make their apparel. There were several human rights violations in which people were not being paid adequate wages, workers worked for extended hours and working conditions were not safe (Rodríguez-Garavito, 2005). Workers unionized resulting in the factory closing its doors and firing the workers, who then go to worker rights groups, such as the Workers Rights Consortium (WRC), that try to hold brands like Nike accountable for their actions. This step involves …show more content…
It was not pressured into withdrawing its contribution to the DAPL. It is important to note that Seattle is just one city in the sense that the University of Washington is just a university. A university could cut ties with a brand, but there are still hundreds of other universities that will use it. Seattle cutting ties with Wells Fargo is a tremendous step forward, hopefully other cities will follow suit, but the pipeline project has 16 other banks that are lending money to it or have some kind of relationship (Egan, 2017). It may be a minor bump in the road, but unless other cities also sever ties, Wells Fargo will continue to fund the pipeline