Is Nike ethical?

The agency's charges against Nike date to 2024, when commission member, and current Trump-appointed chair, Andrea Lucas alleged that Nike had been engaging in a pattern of discriminatory practices, including “race-based workforce representation quotas,” and hiring, promotion, demotion and firing decisions that were a function of “disparate treatment against White employees, applicants, and training program participants."

EEOC alleges anti-white discrimination at Nike, seeks court enforcement of subpoena - ABC News

Nike under investigation by civil rights agency for alleged bias against white employees | AP News

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission disclosed the investigation in a motion filed in Missouri federal court demanding that Nike fully comply with a subpoena for information. The EEOC sought the company’s criteria for selecting employees for layoffs, how it tracks and uses worker race and ethnicity data, and information about programs which allegedly provided race-restricted mentoring, leadership, or career development opportunities, according to court documents.

The investigation against Nike, however, did not stem from a worker charge but from a complaint that Lucas filed herself in May 2024, alleging that the company was discriminating against white employees.

Plaintiffs argue that Nike raised prices to offset tariffs, then kept those higher prices after tariff refunds became available.

Nike Tariff Lawsuit Tests Pricing Story And Brand Trust For Investors

The EEOC has sought data on Nike’s employment decisions dating back years, including its criteria for selecting employees for layoffs, how it tracks and uses worker race and ethnicity data, and information about programs that allegedly provided race-restricted mentoring, leadership or career development opportunities, according to court documents.

Federal agency dropping Nike DEI subpoena that alleged company discriminated against white workers

“Given the EEOC’s current high-profile investigation into Nike over ‘systemic race discrimination allegations’ occurring partially as a result of the company’s diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, investors are right to be concerned about what further brand politicization could do to company performance,” the proposal states.

The shareholder proposal cites an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission investigation involving allegations of systemic race discrimination at Nike.

A federal judge in Missouri agreed on Thursday to dismiss a subpoena enforcement action against Nike after a federal anti-workplace discrimination agency said the company has complied with its investigation into diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies.

The EEOC has alleged that Nike has engaged in a “pattern or practice of disparate treatment against White employees, applicants, and training program participants” across a variety of areas in possible violation of Title VII, with Commissioner Andrea Lucas citing public statements regarding Nike’s commitment to a more diverse U.S. workforce as the basis for its charge.

Nike said it had already submitted thousands of pages of information to the EEOC in response to its inquiries. It has argued the investigation should be dropped because the company is being questioned about diversity policies that the federal agency previously supported.

EEOC investigating Nike over alleged discrimination against White workers - CBS News

The EEOC alleges in a court filing on Wednesday that Nike may have engaged in "a pattern or practice of disparate treatment against White employees, applicants and training program participants" with respect to hiring, promotion, workplace development and layoffs.

The EEOC said it is requesting information from Nike going back to 2018 over “race-based workforce representation quotas” and allegedly deciding layoffs and promotions at least in part due to race.

Federal agency probes Nike over alleged discrimination against White employees | CNN Business

According to the EEOC’s court filing, the agency is investigating systemic allegations of DEI-related intentional race discrimination, specifically that NIKE may have engaged in “a pattern or practice of disparate treatment against white employees, applicants and training program participants in hiring, promotion, demotion, or separation decisions, including selection for layoffs; internship programs; and mentoring, leadership development and other career development programs.”

ST. LOUIS – The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced today that the federal agency filed an action in federal court to compel NIKE, Inc. to produce information related to allegations that the company discriminated against white workers, including as a result of NIKE’s Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion-related 2025 Targets and other DEI-related objectives.

The EEOC said it is investigating systemic allegations that Nike discriminated against white employees, job applicants and participants in training programs through DEI-related practices.

Nike's stock hit a 12-year low after years of left-wing activism, from Colin Kaepernick to Dylan Mulvaney to an EEOC investigation into alleged race discrimination.

Then, in 2024, another former Nike senior director also filed a lawsuit against the company, alleging gender discrimination.

In 2018, four women filed a class action lawsuit against Nike for unequal pay and sexual harassment.

In a lawsuit filed in federal court for the District of Oregon on Wednesday, a former Nike employee alleges the company discriminated against her on the basis of age and gender.

Nike lawsuit: Nike faces new allegations of gender and age discrimination in suit from longtime employee

The allegations were not made by workers at Nike who believed they had been the targets of unfair treatment, however, as is typically the case in EEOC investigations.

Trump administration alleges Nike discriminated against white workers

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission disclosed the investigation in a motion filed in Missouri federal court demanding that Nike fully comply with a subpoena for information. The EEOC sought the company's criteria for selecting employees for layoffs, how it tracks and uses worker race and ethnicity data, and information about programs which allegedly provided race-restricted mentoring, leadership, or career development opportunities, according to court documents.

Nike faces federal probe over allegations of discrimination against white workers : NPR

The federal agency that safeguards hiring practices said on Wednesday that it was investigating Nike, the sportswear giant, for diversity efforts that it said amounted to discrimination against white workers.

Nike, Accused of Bias Against White Workers, Is Under Federal Investigation - The New York Times

Nike has a Interbrand-estimated9 brand value exceeding $33 billion, 41 percent of its roughly $80 billion market cap.10 Given the EEOC’s current high-profile investigation11 into Nike over "systemic race discrimination allegations" occurring partially as a result of the company's diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, investors are right to be concerned about what further brand politicization could do to company performance.

The US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has launched an investigation into Nike over allegations that the sports giant discriminated against white employees and job applicants.

US agency investigates Nike for alleged discrimination against white workers | Business | The Guardian

4 (UPI) -- The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a federal lawsuit seeking information regarding allegations of discrimination against athletic shoemaker Nike Inc.

The federal agency is investigating claims that accuse Nike of engaging in a "pattern or practice of disparate treatment against white employees, applicants and training program participants in hiring, promotion, demotion or separation decisions," the EEOC said in a news release.

Nike accused of discrimination via DEI programs - UPI.com

In 2024, Andrea Lucas, who now heads the EEOC but at the time was a commissioner, filed a discrimination charge against Nike alleging it discriminated against White employees based on their race.

Feb 4 (Reuters) - The U.S. agency that enforces laws ‌banning ​workplace discrimination said in a court filing ‌on Wednesday it is investigating Nike for allegedly discriminating against white people through its ​diversity policies.

agency that enforces laws ‌banning ​workplace discrimination said in a court filing ‌on Wednesday it is investigating Nike for allegedly discriminating against white people through its ​diversity policies.

EEOC investigations are typically prompted by complaints filed by workers, but ​the Nike probe stems from a relatively rare "commissioner's charge" initiated by Lucas in May 2024, according to Wednesday's filing in St. Louis, Missouri, federal court.

Nike Facing US Probe Over Alleged Discrimination Against White Workers

The EEOC said it was investigating ⁠whether Nike ⁠intentionally discriminated against white ⁠employees and job ​applicants, including by disproportionately targeting them for layoffs, and that it needed the information to ​determine whether Nike violated the ⁠law.

⁠agency that enforces laws banning ⁠workplace discrimination has dropped a lawsuit seeking to enforce a subpoena in ​an investigation of Nike's treatment of white employees, saying the company has handed over a trove of ‌information.

US Anti-Bias Agency Says Nike Complied With Subpoena, Drops Lawsuit

Snapshot: In 1998, a lawsuit was filed against Nike in California state court alleging unfair and deceptive practices for failing to disclose poor working conditions at Nike's overseas supplier factories.

Nike lawsuit (Kasky v Nike, re denial of labour abuses) - Business and Human Rights Centre

In April 1998, respondent Marc Kasky, a California resident, sued Nike for unfair and deceptive practices under California's Unfair Competition Law, Cal.

Nike was embarking on what it called a moonshot: doubling its business while halving its impact on the warming planet.

Because three of the four remaining plaintiffs settled their claims against Nike last year, the trial was mostly limited to Hender’s pay and promotion experience.

After a little more than a day of deliberations, a federal jury in Portland found Wednesday that Nike discriminated against former employee Heather Hender by paying her less than her male peers and promoting her more slowly.

Jury orders Nike to pay at least $7.5 million in damages in sex discrimination case - oregonlive.com

investigating whether Nike, Sanrio and Universal Studios are restricting cross border and online sales of merchandising products. We are going to examine whether the licensing and distribution practices of these three companies may be denying consumers access to wider choice and better deals in the Single Market". The investigations concern the licensing and distribution of merchandising products.

Antitrust: Commission fines Nike €12.5 million for restricting cross-border sales of merchandising products

It is in the context of Nike's role as a licensor for the manufacture and distribution of these licensed merchandise products that the Commission is imposing a fine. In June 2017, the Commission opened an antitrust investigation into certain licensing and distribution practices of Nike to assess whether it illegally restricted traders from selling licensed merchandise cross-border and online within the EU Single Market. The Commission investigation has found that Nike's non-exclusive licensing and distribution agreements breached EU competition rules: Nike imposed a number of direct measures restricting out-of-territory sales by licensees, such as clauses explicitly prohibiting these sales, obligations to refer orders for out-of-territory sales to Nike and clauses imposing double royalties for out-of-territory sales. - Nike enforced indirect measures to implement the out-of-territory restrictions, for instance threatening licensees with ending their contract if they sold out-of-territory, refusing to supply “official product” holograms if it feared that sales could be going towards other territories in the European Economic Area (EEA), and carrying out audits to ensure compliance with the restrictions. - In some cases, Nike used master licensees in each territory to grant sub-licences for the use of the different IPRs to third parties.

The fines therefore help to finance the EU and reduce the burden for taxpayers. Background to the investigation In June 2017, the Commission opened three separate antitrust investigations to ascertain whether certain licensing and distribution practices of Nike, Sanrio and Universal Studios illegally restricted traders from selling licensed merchandise cross-border and online within the EU Single Market. In March 2019, the Commission fined Nike €12.5 million for preventing traders from selling licensed merchandise to other countries within the EEA.

Antitrust: Commission opens formal investigations into Nike's, Sanrio's and Universal Studios' licensing and distribution practices The European Commission has launched three separate antitrust investigations into whether certain licensing and distribution practices of Nike, Sanrio and Universal Studios illegally restrict traders from selling licensed merchandise cross-border and online within the EU Single Market.

Antitrust: Commission fines Nike €12.5 million for restricting cross-border sales of merchandising products The European Commission has fined Nike €12.5 million for banning traders from selling licensed merchandise to other countries within the EEA.

Antitrust: Commission fines Nike €12.5 million for restricting cross-border sales of merchandising products

It is in the context of Nike's role as a licensor for the manufacture and distribution of these licensed merchandise products that the Commission is imposing a fine. In June 2017, the Commission opened an antitrust investigation into certain licensing and distribution practices of Nike to assess whether it illegally restricted traders from selling licensed merchandise cross-border and online within the EU Single Market. The Commission investigation has found that Nike's non-exclusive licensing and distribution agreements breached EU competition rules: Nike imposed a number of direct measures restricting out-of-territory sales by licensees, such as clauses explicitly prohibiting these sales, obligations to refer orders for out-of-territory sales to Nike and clauses imposing double royalties for out-of-territory sales. - Nike enforced indirect measures to implement the out-of-territory restrictions, for instance threatening licensees with ending their contract if they sold out-of-territory, refusing to supply “official product” holograms if it feared that sales could be going towards other territories in the European Economic Area (EEA), and carrying out audits to ensure compliance with the restrictions. - In some cases, Nike used master licensees in each territory to grant sub-licences for the use of the different IPRs to third parties.

No excerpt available. Read the original source for details.

(126) The Commission concludes that Nike’s conduct affected trade between Member States and had an anticompetitive object.

Proposed Florida Class Action Suit Alleges Nike Tracked, Shared Consumer Data

Proposed Florida Class Action Suit Alleges Nike Tracked, Shared Consumer Data | Law.com

Of course using offshore tax havens to shield profits from federal taxes is just one example of how Nike was able to pay barely more than half the statutory corporate tax rate over an eight-year period. The company avoided an additional $965 million in U.S. federal and state taxes between 2008 and 2015 using a loophole known as the “stock option loophole.”[5] Nike and other big corporations often compensate their executives with stock options (options to purchase shares of company stock at a discounted rate).

The company avoided an additional $965 million in U.S. federal and state taxes between 2008 and 2015 using a loophole known as the “stock option loophole.”[5] Nike and other big corporations often compensate their executives with stock options (options to purchase shares of company stock at a discounted rate).

Nike to Cut 775 Distribution Center Jobs As It Accelerates Automation - Business Insider

Sportswear giant Nike is set to cut hundreds of jobs as it consolidates its US distribution center operations.

CPSC, NIKE Announce Recall of Children's Athletic Shoes

CPSC, NIKE Announce Recall of Children's Athletic Shoes

CPSC, NIKE USA Inc. Announce Recall of Jordan Trunner Cross-Training Shoes

CPSC, NIKE USA Inc. Announce Recall of Jordan Trunner Cross-Training Shoes

CPSC, NIKE USA Inc. Announce Recall of Jordan Trunner Cross-Training Shoes

CPSC, NIKE USA Inc. Announce Recall of Jordan Trunner Cross-Training Shoes

Nike Recalls Football Helmet Chin Straps Which Can Break and Pose Risk of Serious Injury

Nike Recalls Football Helmet Chin Straps Which Can Break and Pose Risk of Serious Injury

“Nike previously identified an incident involving a third-party service provider that resulted in unauthorized access to limited consumer information.

California woman files class action lawsuit against Nike after data breach

Nike has consistently disputed those accounts.

Nike Just Abandoned the Strategy That Defined Its Past 5 Years—and 775 Workers Are Paying the Price

But before the layoffs, Nike had missed its own targets for reducing its contribution to global warming.

Nike (NYSE:NKE) is facing a nationwide class-action lawsuit alleging it failed to adequately protect customer data in a recent breach.

Nike Data Breach Lawsuit Adds Fresh Risk To Valuation And Brand Trust

The SEC investigation on Nike was confirmed by Scott Wilson, a former lawyer who represented Nike, on the witness stand, Bloomberg said.

The investigation was disclosed at the extortion case of Avenatti, who is charged with threatening to publicize accusations that Nike illegally paid families of college basketball recruits unless the apparel company paid him and another lawyer $15 million to $25 million to conduct an internal probe.

[4] ITEP, “Tax Avoidance: Nike “Just Did It” Again, Moving $1.5 Billion Offshore Last Year” (July 21, 2017).

In fact, Nike reports having 54 subsidiaries in places that are widely considered to be tax havens.[3] For instance, in past years, the company reported about a dozen subsidiaries in Bermuda[4], a tax-free British territory, even though it does not operate any stores in Bermuda. It is likely that instead, these subsidiaries were set up to house Nike’s trademarks so that the U.S. parent company can then pay royalties to those subsidiaries (which will not be taxed in Bermuda) and subtract these payments from its own U.S. tax bill as business expenses.

On a conference call in December 2006, Nike CEO Mark Parker mentioned 'a more favourable long-term tax agreement in Europe' that had 'secured a big advantage' for the company, leaked documents from offshore law firm Appleby show.

The flow of trademark royalties had helped Nike build up $6.6 billion in offshore profits by June 2014.

Internal Appleby files show how much of Nike International's affairs were run by senior executives, lawyers and accountants at Nike's headquarters in Beaverton, Ore.

In November 2017, ICIJ reporting revealed how Nike’s first tax ruling, in 2006, allowed large royalty payments to be made from Nike in the Netherlands to a subsidiary in the tax haven of Bermuda.

Nike fails to stop EU probe on billions in alleged tax dodging

Footwear giant Nike cannot stop a probe into possible multibillion dollar tax avoidance, one of Europe’s highest courts ruled this week.

The European Commission opened the probe into Nike’s Dutch tax arrangements in 2019 following an investigation by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists and more than 300 journalists.

Nike fails to stop EU probe on billions in alleged tax dodging - ICIJ