| This is the last CSR Newsletter of the Fall semester. Happy Holidays and I will see you in the New Year! |
The World Cup in Qatar, as usual, is a spectacle as much for what happens off the pitch than on it. Of particular interest in this World Cup has been the human/civil rights record of the host country, along with the plight of migrant workers who were central to building the infrastructure required for the competition to proceed. With this in mind, the article in the url below points out that the societal inequity that was essential for the competition to be held is not limited to the host country, but includes the complicit involvement of many who are likely criticizing the host country:
"As the World Cup in Qatar kicked off last week, millions of fans pulled on jerseys costing $90 to $150 that were sold by Nike and Adidas, the official outfitter of this year's tournament. Players, wearing new, brightly colored uniforms, slipped into shiny cleats and shoes that can retail for more than $200. But what did the people who made these items get paid? In the case of 7,800 workers at the Pou Chen Group factory in Yangon, Myanmar, a supplier of soccer shoes for Adidas, the answer is 4,800 kyat, or $2.27, per day."
Apparently, the workers in this Myanmar factory attempted to use the World Cup as leverage to raise the issue of their working conditions, in the hope of securing something better:
"After workers began a strike in October, demanding a daily wage of $3.78, factory managers called soldiers into the complex and later fired 26 workers. They included 16 members of the factory's union, who were believed to have led the strike of more than 2,000 employees."
Workers facing similar conditions elsewhere are utilizing social media effectively to raise their plight, with personal appeals to soccer stars caught in a no-win situation:
In Myanmar, and elsewhere, all of these factories are contractors, of course, so the line of responsibility to major sports brands is opaque:
"Most Western fashion and sportswear brands do not own production facilities, instead contracting with independent factories or suppliers, often in the Global South, to make their garments. This means they are not technically the employers of these workers, and therefore are not legally responsible for enforcing labor standards or human rights."
The level of hypocrisy that these major sports competitions expose (whether the World Cup, Olympics, Commonwealth Games, F1, or similar global/international events) is always both interesting and incredibly frustrating. Of course, these contradictions were always there but, while awareness appears to be growing, meaningful action in response is less obvious. Ultimately, organizations like FIFA have felt at liberty to break laws and social conventions throughout their existence (the corruption needed to secure the World Cup in Qatar is only the most recent and blatant example) with few concerns about being held to account for their actions (see also, John Oliver's passionate piece on the World Cup). While regulatory authorities are beginning to take specific legal action, major sponsors remain tied to their long-term contracts (not unwillingly, it seems). Given that these global sporting events are wrapped in patriotism, but driven by money, all stakeholders need to hold these sports organizations to account for anything meaningful to change, including the fans purchasing these expensive replica shirts. While the Qatar World Cup has revealed the faultlines more specifically and completely (as information today travels more transparently than ever before), I don't see any serious consequences for the actions that produce headlines such as the one in the article in the url below.
Take care
David
David Chandler
© Sage Publications, 2023
Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler6e
Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/
The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/
Luxury Soccer Jerseys, but Rock-Bottom Wages
By Elizabeth Paton
December 2, 2022
The New York Times
Late Edition – Final
B1, B5
