Nike Ethical Dilemma

Ethical dilemma is an issue involving moral principles with no castigate or amiss(p)(p). There will always have debates on whether one matter is considered being right or to some rafts perspective, it might be wrong. Take for example in Singapore, more people will be against the idea of abortion as it is the uniform as murder. However, there be also some who are non against the idea. In fact, abortions were considered legal so long the pregnancy does not put across 6 calendar months.It actually depends on ones conscience and moral to how they look at the matter. In this paper, the ethical issues we will be showing will be on Nike child tote. NIKE inc, a well-known marking in the market that specialize in sporting goods has been reported that the producer engaged, were using children as labour from as young as 10 year of age. These children were for the making of sporting equipments such as soccer ball, clothe and clothes in Pakistan and Cambodia. Using children as lab our were seemed morally wrong for more people.It is considered as exploitation of children as they were deprived of their educational and person rights. However, in the eye of the developing countries, known as third-world countries, child labors were seen absolutely fine with unlike crusades behind their point of views. The main factor bestow to child labour was mainly due to the p everyplacety face in these developing countries. These children worked so in order to earn money to agree their families where parents do not earn enough to accompaniment the families (Catherine, 2010).Therefore, there are no doubt these children was not send to school for appropriate education. From the championship point of views, is Nike wrong by engaging these makers for the production of sporting products? Well, it depends. Firstly, strictly from business point of view, the manufacturer has an agreement with Nike. This means the manufacturer has to execute the amount of soccer balls to be ready for sale at an concord time or within a time frame.Nike main clientele was the final product, soccer ball, and had no wish to interfere or alternatively was unaware of the working situation in Pakistan In support of the unawareness of the labour, report have shown that one of the manufacturers such as Saga Sports was secretly outsourcing many balls to casual worker where sewing of these balls took place in their homes in which Nike were unaware of, thus, monitoring and keeping track of the labour situation be highly difficult (Clark, 2006). Children ages were also easily forged since birth records do not exist in Pakistan. As such, Nike ight have employed them according to the data given to them which they assume is correct and real. From another point of view, Nike was actually providing line of merchandise opportunities to the developing countries where their goal encourages children to start working as early as the age of 10 due to insufficient money earn from par ents to support the families. In this point of view, Nike actually did a great help in term of improving the country poverty condition. I believe that the culture and the practices of child labour in Pakistan were present way before Nike was involved. enunciate also Glengarry Glen Ross by David MametSo, technically speaking, Nike was not wrong to employ this manufacturer as Nike could not and will not have control over these cultural issues. In this case, Nike does not have sufficient good reason to terminate the services of these manufacturers and therefore, Nike strictly were evaluating manufacturer based on their allow chain performance. All other issues such as the age classify to use for labour, Nike technically speaking can choose not to interfere in the child labour issue even if it has the power or discretion to do so.Therefore, Nike does not seem to be morally wrong in the continuation of confederation with the manufacturer in Pakistan. Take a look from another perspecti ve, Nike may be morally wrong for the partnership with these suppliers. As everyone is aware, children should be receiving proper education when they are young and not working. Nike action has not only tarnished their images but as well displace a message globally, in supporting the use of children as labour in these developing countries should Nike continue to engage these manufacturers.It is definitely an ethical dilemma in a business situation with the strong reasons on two sides on the employment of these manufacturers. Nike has to make a decision somehow. 2. Proposed Solution The proposed solution was to implement a manufacturer selection system where Nike could place strain on the labour selection, specifically, the age group. The purpose of the selection systems was to ensure that no children were to be use in these manufacturing factories.Terms and condition will be tell in the agreement contract where Nike has the rights to take legal action against manufacturer when c ontract were breach. Nike should also closely monitor the labour situation by conducting regular checks at factories so as to ensure that the standard sets were follow. tender and representative from Nike could conduct surprise check on these factories with goals to prevent or reduced manufacturer from deviating from the agreement on the labour requirement.Towards the extreme side, Nike has the right to terminate manufacturer that has repeatedly not adhere to the agreement signed. It 2006, Nike complete one of the manufacturer in Pakistan namely, Saga Sports after a six month investigation revealed of the non-compliance of the labour standard and requirement set by Nike. With the various proposed solution and some measurements to take into consideration, Nike could definitely enjoy the benefit of outsourcing and at the same time not destroying the children bright futures.