The UW Daily is reporting that Nike has "failed to abide by the UW’s Code of Conduct, according to a unanimous vote made last Thursday by the UW’s Advisory Committee for Trademark and Licensing (ACTL), a committee appointed by President Mark Emmert and made up of UW faculty, students and staff."
The Daily also reports that "The UW will once again ask the state to redirect revenue coming from tourism taxes already levied on King County hotels, motels, car rentals and restaurants toward a remodel of Husky Stadium,
It is difficult to comprehend how Dr. Wise, effectively the chief executive officer of the UW, can not be in conflict as a board member of Nike
Read more:
from UW Daily:
Upholding the code
UW committee finds Nike in violation of UW's Code of Conduct
By Celina Kareiva
Nike, one of the UW’s largest apparel manufacturers, has failed to abide by the UW’s Code of Conduct, according to a unanimous vote made last Thursday by the UW’s Advisory Committee for Trademark and Licensing (ACTL), a committee appointed by President Mark Emmert and made up of UW faculty, students and staff.
“In the cases in Honduras, Nike breached the Code by failing to take any effective action after its contractors in Honduras closed down these two factories without paying workers as required by law,” explained professor Angelina Godoy, who advises ACTL and studies human rights in Central America. “But under the University of Washington’s Code, licensees are required to remediate these abuses when they occur. Nike has failed to do this in these cases.”
A letter response from Honduran workers reported that 60 percent of Hugger de Honduras’ production in 2008 was for Nike, and Vision Tex said that 43 percent of the 2.2 million units produced in 2008 were for Nike, both of whose factories laid off 1,800 workers.
The Worker’s Rights Consortium, which monitors conditions in these factories, states that the employees never received their $2.1 million in severance pay.
“It outlines in the Code of Conduct that Nike is responsible for all of our apparel for the entire supply chain,” said Student Labor Action Project (SLAP) member Pete Gallagher. “Nike didn’t have a direct working relationship with the factories, but according to the Code of Conduct, they are responsible because it took place in Nike’s supply chain.”
The Code of Conduct safeguards workers’ rights who produce logo apparel for the university. It demands that any company that does contracted business with the UW must adhere to its conditions.
For members of SLAP, it’s an issue of human rights. Isabel Brown, another member of the student group, believes that the university has particular leverage with Nike.
“We’re not necessarily saying that Nike needs to pay the workers or that the university can never do business with Nike, but somebody … in the supply chain needs to pay the workers their severance compensation,” Brown said. “We are hoping that Nike understands we’re serious about enforcing our Code of Conduct and that if they screw up again, UW will cut the contract.”
However, the school’s lucrative business deal may stand in the way of any further action. The UW’s athletic department has a basic licensing agreement with Nike to produce $1 million of general apparel. UW sports teams also have a 10-year agreement worth upwards of $33.8 million.
Just this spring, SLAP helped convince the UW to sever contracts with Russell Athletic after Honduran workers were unjustly fired for unionizing and attempting to negotiate with factory owners. Russell Athletic announced in November that it was reopening the factory under the name Nueva Dia and rehiring all 1,200 workers.
SLAP is hopeful that the committee’s recent recommendation will produce a similar effect.
“As the victory against Russell proves, cutting the contract with Nike is the most powerful and direct leverage possessed by the university to ensure that Nike follows the Code of Conduct,” said SLAP advocate Maggie Schupp in a press release from mid-November.
Nike responded to the accusations before the committee came to the decision in November, stating that it was concerned about factory conditions and would try to find ways to compensate the employees.
“Nike representatives made an explicit promise to help the workers of one factory obtain access to the factory in order to sell remaining machinery and product and apply the proceeds to their due terminal compensation, but so far, there has been no success in getting the gates unlocked.”
Margaret Levi, co-chair of ACTL, said he’s not sure what Emmert will do with the committee’s vote.
“I don’t know what [Emmert’s] decision will be. It will depend on when he has time to review the situation, though we will stress the urgency of it,” Levi said. “These workers are suffering, and I believe he understands that and is concerned. Whether he will find Nike in violation of the Code, I can’t tell you.”
From here, ACTL will recommend that Emmert re-evaluate the school’s contract with Nike.
“The process by which you do that is you first put [Nike] on notice and ask them to remediate their violation,” Levi said. “If they don’t meet the Code satisfactorily, then there’s another point of consideration about what to do next. Ultimately, it could result in a severance of contract, but that’s only in a very extreme case.”
UW spokesperson Norm Arkans said there is no formal process beyond this stage. Tomorrow President Emmert will meet with co-chairs Margaret Levi and Katherine Herche to discuss the issue at hand. Emmert will consider ACTL’s recommendation. If he chooses to place Nike on notice, Emmert will then produce a deadline by which time Nike must remediate.
Reach reporter Celina Kareiva at news@dailyuw.com.
- Show quoted text -
No comments:
Post a Comment