Thursday, October 23, 1997
USAC resolution condemns Nike, ASUCLA will not end relations
Association to continue selling products made by shoe
company
By Stefanie Wong
Daily Bruin Staff
The Nike swoosh – an international symbol for the behemoth
company that makes shoes and clothing … or a sign of low wages,
harassment, child labor and poor working conditions?
In light of the international allegations made against Nike, the
undergraduate students association council (USAC) decided to add
their two cents Tuesday by passing a resolution "condemn(ing) Nike
for lowering human rights standards to maximize profits."
"USAC supports the rights of workers around the world to work in
a safe, healthy and secure workplace at a living wage," the
resolution reads.
With the increased focus of this year’s council on globalization
and corporate responsibility, USAC felt it was necessary to bring
the issue to the forefront of UCLA.
"I’ve been aware of the campaign for a while so we’ve just been
finding out more information," said External Vice President Stacy
Lee, one of the three council members who proposed the resolution
to USAC.
"It’s not a secret that (Nike) targets students of color,"
making it an issue for the students here, she added.
The Nike Corporation has denied allegations that they use
sweatshop labor, and have instituted a corporate code of
conduct.
Last year, the Vietnamese Student Union and the Asian Pacific
Coalition hosted the first campaigns against and informative
sessions about Nike’s possible labor violations in Asian
countries.
These two organizations, along with the African Student Union,
the Environmental Coalition, Raza Women and Samahang Pilipino,
supported the USAC resolution.
"From the very get go we were in support, and proud that USAC
took that stance," said Samahang Pilipino Chairperson Mark Ng.
"Corporations and their relationships between the university
need to be kept accountable by students," he added.
Future campus-wide campaigns to educate students about the Nike
situation are in the works between USAC and the supportive student
groups.
While the resolution also encouraged students, faculty and
administrators to further explore the issue, certain policies of
the student’s association (ASUCLA) were also addressed.
This past summer, ASUCLA adopted an anti-sweatshop policy which
would discontinue the sale of all goods made in unsafe and
unhealthy workplaces and environments.
In order for this to occur, the offending company must be in
violation of the Apparel Industry Partnership Workplace Code of
Conduct or other state and federal laws that protect workers.
Also, the violation must be verified by a recognized monitoring
agency.
Only in this case will ASUCLA act and either request that
changes be made in the company’s labor practices or discontinue
business relations.
In the case of Nike, ASUCLA may not be able to address the
situation because the labor problems are not domestic.
"(It’s) not likely that international violations will be
addressed," Lee said.
But ASUCLA’s anti-sweatshop policy does address both domestic
and international labor practices, according to ASUCLA Executive
Director Patricia Eastman.
"Our anti-sweat shop policy is intended to cover violations both
domestically and overseas," Eastman said. "The spirit of the policy
is worldwide."
However, the association cannot act against Nike without
verification from a recognized monitoring agency. Currently, no
international monitoring group exists.
"According to our policy, ASUCLA doesn’t serve as a monitoring
agency," Eastman said.
"We rely on recognized authorized agencies to do so … and
currently there’s only monitoring agencies (working on) domestic
compliance," she added.