Nike

I reposted it out of the blue because there was another post with more info yesterday that got deleted. I see that it didn't make any sense to non poloists, but the whole polo scene knows exactly what it's about. The request to have it deleted was political. This post clearly has relevance to London bike polo.

OP hasn't owned a pair of Nike's for decades, has been organizing against sweatshops for 15 years, was arrested for civil disobedience doing so, and buys union made shoes.

Please move it back. Thank you.

The discussion was moved to an LHBPA thread and was expertly handled by nik, this thread is more of a generic Nike bashing thread I think? As you were.

What can Nike do for bike polo? Are they wanting to promote and build it. Create courts across the world enabling more people to be involved. Supporting local communities and providing activity so kids have something to do?
Or do they just want a cool advert which shows they're on trend etc and will not care about the sport afterwards?

Despite some of their practises (top 10 corporate criminal!), if they're actually offering something in return then it may be worth something to the future of Bike Polo?

There are global companies and then there are Nike. And Nestle. And Shell. etc etc.

It's a really interesting discussion.

When you start looking at ethical practises and manufacturing it opens up a whole new can of worms. Where is your polo equipment made and how? It's good just to pay a bit more attention.

You are only allowed Crocs and Birkenstocks

Phew!

nailed it

NikePolo™

Where is your polo equipment made and how? It's good just to pay a bit more attention.

This bit is well worth paying attention to. If we're going to be against Corporatecunts™ as a community, we can't really use the same manufacturing crimes, non?

I tried to build my Polobike by people that earned a fair wage. Everything was sorted except for brakes, cables, and the chain (Taiwan), or so I thought. Even Thomson, Hope, Lee Cooper et al. will use parts (bolts, usually) or materials that are machined or mined by essentially slave labour.

It fucking sucks but it's how it is I suppose. If you really want to rail against this become self sufficient and fuck off to the woods. Problem with this is, eventually, Corporatecunts™ will want somethign from the land you're on and you'll be made to disappear.

I'm not in a fantastically optimistic frame of mind regarding humans lately, does it show?

99.9% of humans are absolute cunts, Jimmy...

There's no need to be pessimistic, that's just a FACT...

At least you tried to source as much stuff as possible from the least bad companies. Mining has zero respect for it's workers. I quit a job when I was in London because they were going to start doing marketing for a massive mining conglomerate's CSR stuff. I could not stand the idea, and quit.

Yeah, the point is that it's good to try to understand the labor (and environmental) conditions of the things that you buy, and to try to eliminate the worst offenders and find better companies and sources. Nobody can buy every single thing sweat-free, but this does not mean people should not try to make improvements where they can.

Publicly criticizing high profile companies such as Nike -- which was one of the pioneers of global outsourcing to sweatshops -- is entirely legitimate, even if one uses sweatshop computer hardware and phones with blood minerals in them.

Are Taiwanese factory workers treated that badly? I thought Taiwan had a fairly high standard of living and reasonable pay and conditions...

In the last 5 years most of the cheap bike stuff has been moved over to china, Thailand, Bangladesh et al. I assumed that is because wages are relatively high in Taiwan.

someone delete this

This is a forum for polo, not spouting peoples poloitical opinions. It is also a first place that people will look and it doesn't present a good image of the sport.

I'm seeing it in the polo forum, why is that?

Polotics suck! Lets all go do something better with our lives and stop spouting our bollocks opinions on the internet

Comedy genius...

Anyone got any ethically sourced, organic cocaine hookups?

someone delete this

Because free speech is for losers!

This is a forum for polo, not spouting peoples poloitical opinions. It is also a first place that people will look and it doesn't present a good image of the sport.

Because Rob decides what looks good for the sport and what does not; sucking corporate cock is good for bike polo, and questioning the business practices of companies we associate with is bad!

I'm seeing it in the polo forum, why is that?

Polotics suck! Lets all go do something better with our lives and stop spouting our bollocks opinions on the internet

Because being concerned about the lives of teenage Asian girls working under oppressive conditions for pennies a day is just polotics! And bollocks! And we have better things to do with our lives than worry about how the people who make the stuff we buy are treated!

http://www.nosweat.org.uk/story/2011/07/19/nike-faces-new-worker-abuse-claims-includes-petition

"The 10,000 mostly female workers at the Taiwanese-operated Pou Chen plant make around 50 cents an hour. That’s enough, for food and bunkhouse-type lodging, but little else. Some workers interviewed by the AP in March and April described being hit or scratched in the arm — one man until he bled. Others said they were fired after filing complaints."

“They throw shoes and other things at us” said a 23-year-old woman in the embroidery division. “They growl and slap us when they get angry."

"At the PT Amara Footwear factory located just outside Jakarta, where another Taiwanese contractor makes Converse shoes, a supervisor ordered six female workers to stand in the blazing sun after they failed to meet their target of completing 60 dozen pairs of shoes on time."

http://www.globalexchange.org/sweatfree/nike/faq

Why pick on Nike, if other shoe companies are just as bad?
First of all, we heard many, many complaints from Nike workers and local labor groups. The AFL-CIO office in Indonesia, for example, said that Nike factory workers filed more complaints about wage violations than any other shoe company. In the first two years that Nike was in Vietnam, one factory official was convicted of physically abusing workers, another fled the country during a police investigation of sexual abuse charges and a third was under indictment for abusing workers, as reported in The New York Times.

Secondly, it's important to pick a company that can afford the cost of improvements. Nike is so profitable and sells its shoes for such high prices that it can well afford to double the workers' wages without increasing the retail price.

Thirdly, Nike is the biggest shoe company in the world and puts itself forth as an industry leader. Their Code of Conduct says: "in the area of human rights... in the communities in which we do business, we seek to do not only what is required, but what is expected of a leader." By targeting the industry leader, we hoped to make changes throughout the whole industry. This strategy has proven effective. Reebok, for example, has been making improvements in its overseas factories even though it has not been the target of a major campaign. Adidas, fearful of being tarred with the Nike brush, is starting to make changes as well.

I do agree with all of this, the only Nike thing I've bought in over 10 years is a pair of ankle protectors, and I felt a bit bad about that. This corporate cock does sound tasty though.

http://www.nosweat.org.uk/story/2011/07/19/nike-faces-new-worker-abuse-claims-includes-petition

"The 10,000 mostly female workers at the Taiwanese-operated Pou Chen plant make around 50 cents an hour.

So they Taiwanese are basically just doing what Western democracies do: outsource their brutality?

Must say I found the conversation interesting, but also abit of a de-ja-vous. The way our lifestyle is makes up part of the machine – if you don’t own any Nike shoes maybe you own some Converse shoes (which are owned by Nike). You may not eat Cadbury’s and you go for the more ethical looking Green & Black’s which is owned by Cadbury’s anyway. What I am trying to say is that there is no escape, but at least when it comes to a group or collective it is good to think of these issues.

Regarding Nike and London Polo… I really do not think Nike can contribute to polo’s survival as a sport. Nike is interested in a cool looking promo. It may make it a fad for a few months. That won’t make the sport sustainable. In my opinion, these big corporations just want to use polo (more underground scenes) as a platform to promote themselves. Does the polo community want to be part of selling Nike goods, and contributing in an indirect way to Nike profits? I think whatever the money payback from Nike to polo, the answer should be no.

Keep polo away from being a platform of commercialism and profits of horrible unethical corporations. This won’t save the world but at least you know that the polo association is run without a link to that.

By the way, I am not saying that I personally have an ethical way of life . I do not. But this should not be a question about individuals. It is a question about how the Polo group is run and what links it makes. (likewise this should not be a question of would this save the world... these questions just divert the attention away from the simple question of how would you like the group to run and what sort of links would you like to create? Commercial? Corporate?)

Big society has no interest in the whims/opinions of small society. This thread only serves to promote Nike and to air our individual relationships with the hyper-real.

My opinion is that people should concentrate on their local environment (small society) whilst also being conscious (and informed) consumers.

Nike may take a fleeting interest in bike polo and we should decide how to act as a community (serving the informed majority), in this way any potential funding serves everyone in as positive way as possible, or is refused by the community as a whole... this happened in the LHBPA thread.

Nike could "own" bike polo in the blink of an eye and most players would probably go along with it, meh (it's not as if it would matter either way).

What I am trying to say is that there is no escape

Chukker's point that any change/decision is a small improvement is still a valid opinion to hold. It doesn't matter how small the larger effect may be. Just do it.

OP better not own any Nikes btw..

Hippy, you're confusing purchase and endorsement, 2 different things.

Hippy is clearly confused, otherwise he would not have taken my post that was totally relevant for the polo scene outside of the polo forum to a different location where it made no sense.

Also, anyone who would allow themselves to be called hippy his a poor, confused person indeed.

Not in London but agree totally on the 'NO' decision, our community does not need the support of these corporate vultures.

Hippy.