Tuesday, July 24, 2007

where the hell is NIKE PR?

Nike came into focus in Indonesia because it stopped ordering shoes from 2 firms (owned by a lady) that employs 14,000 people because Nike thinks that those firms have been continuously underperforming and would like to shift order to other firms (possibly within Indonesia or to other countries).

Nike is obviously just a buyer. Those firms, owned by the same lady, are the employer of 14,000 people, thus they are the ones who should be responsible for recruiting, paying, training, and managing production. On the contrary, from a business contract point of view, Nike has no slightest obligation to navigate the fate of those workers.

So far public opinion is split between those who understood that this is a an employment contract issue between two firms and their employee, versus those who think Nike is the actual employer.

Luckily many good op-eds have come forward to say that the owner of those firm is manipulating her turf card, 14,000 workers, to get the best out of this chaos.

But where is NIKE PR? How come I have not seen a sober and rational explanation behind what is going on? Is it really the case that shoes produced by those firms are lemons? Or is it Nike who is looking ways to shift to suppliers in other countries?

Whichever the reason is.. Where the hell is Nike PR effort??


  1. So far as I'm aware of, tingkat ribut2 baru sebatas nasional, alias hanya di Indonesia saja. Nike, sees itself as an unsatisfied customer, and they thought that they have the right to end a contract with a producer.

    I think last week their CSR Communications personnel already provided a statement on this issue

    And it already has a bad name in CSR anyway, one more wouldn't hurt. (Must be tough job working at their CSR department.)

  2. welcome to term of corrupted quality.

  3. I think Tempo has a nice investigation on this matter. It reported that CCM has been stealing Nike's market by producing beyond the level of order. It was revealed when the Customs caught the containers and charged them for leaking the tax-free goods out of bonded zone.
    The owner -helped by her connection in Istana- tried to push dirjen bea cukai to release them (by blaming on the labor of course). But being backed up by SMI, he's quite confident.

    My question is, what role Nike is playing? Why Nike's statement is about quality while the report said that Nike is upset about this stealing story. To save both faces?