Hello, can you please help me answer some questions related to the below case study. Thank you.

Case Study: How Nike Solved its Sweatshop Problem

"It wasn't that long ago that Nike was being shamed in public for its labor practices to the point where it badly tarnished the company's image and hurt sales.

The recent factory collapse in Bangladesh was a reminder that even though Nike managed to turn around its image, large parts of the industry still haven't changed much at all.

Nike was an early target for the very reason it's been so successful. Its business model was based on outsourcing its manufacturing, using the money it saved on aggressive marketing campaigns.

Nike has managed toturn its image around.Nike hasn't been completely successful in bringing factories into line,but there's no denying that the company has executed one of the greatest image turnarounds in recent decades.

Here's the timeline of how Nike became a global symbol of abusive labor practices, then managed to turn things around:

After prices rose and labor organized in Korea and Taiwan, Nike begins to urge contractors to move to Indonesia, China, and Vietnam.

1991: Problems start in 1991 when activist Jeff Ballinger publishes a report documenting low wages and poor working conditions in Indonesia.

Nike first formally responds to complaints with a factory code of conduct.

1992: Ballinger publishes an expos of Nike.His harper's articlehighlights an Indonesian worker who worked for a Nike subcontractor for 14 cents an hour, less than Indonesia's minimum wage, and documented other abuses.

1992-1993:Protestsat the Barcelona Olympics in 1992, CBS' 1993 interview of Nike factory workers, and Ballinger's NGO "Press For Change" provokes a wave of mainstream media attention.

1996: Kathy Lee Gifford's clothing line is shown to be made by children in poor labor conditions. Her teary apology and activism makes it a national issue.

1996: Nike establishes a departmenttasked with working to improve the lives of factory laborers.

1997: Efforts at promotion become occasions for public outrage. The company expands its "Niketown" retail stores, only to see increasing protests. Sports media begin challenging spokespeople like Michael Jordan.

Abuses continue to emerge, like a report that alleging that a Vietnamese sub-contractor ran women outside until they collapsed for failing to wear regulation shoes.

Nike tasks diplomat and activist Andrew Young withexamining its labor practices abroad. His reportiscriticized for being soft on Nike. Critics object to the fact that he didn't address low wages, used Nike interpreters to translate, and was accompanied by Nike officials on factory visits. Since Young's report was largely favorable, Nike is quick to publicize it, which increases backlash.

1997:College studentsaround the country began protesting the company.

1998: Nike faces weak demand and unrelenting criticism. It has to lay off workers, and begins to realize it needs to change.

The real shift beginswith a May 1998 speechby then-CEO Phil Knight."The Nike product has become synonymous with slave wages, forced overtime, and arbitrary abuse," Knight said. "I truly believe the American consumer doesn't want to buy products made under abusive conditions."

At that speech, he announces Nike will raise the minimum age of workers; significantly increase monitoring; and will adapt U.S. OSHA clean air standards in all factories.

1999: Nike begins creatingthe Fair Labor Association, a non-profit group that combines companies, and human rights and labor representatives to establish independent monitoring and a code of conduct, including a minimum age and a 60-hour work week, and pushes other brands to join.

2002-2004: The company performssome 600 factory audits between 2002 and 2004, including repeat visits to problematic factories.

2004:Human rights activists acknowledgethat increased monitoring efforts at least deal with some of the worst problems, like locked factory doors and unsafe chemicals, but issues still remain.

2005: Nike becomes the first in its industry to publish a complete list of the factories it contracts with.

2005: Nike publishesa detailed reportrevealing conditions and pay in its factories and acknowledging widespread issues, particularly in its south Asian factories.

2005-Present: The company continues to post its commitments, standards, and audit data as part of its corporate social responsibility reports.

Nike wasn't the only or worst company to use sweatshops. But it was the one everybody knew. Transparency doesn't change ongoingreports of abuses, still-low wages, or tragedies like the one in Bangladesh.

But by becoming a leader instead of denying every allegation, Nike has mostly managed to put the most difficult chapter in its history behind it and other companies who outsource could stand to learn a few things from Nike's turnaround."

Questions:

1. In the case of Nike, what's the first thing a CEO of Nike should do, as a business leader?

2. An income of $2.28 a day, the base pay of Nike factory workers in Indonesia, is double the daily income of about half the working population. Half of all adults in Indonesia are farmers, who receive less than $1 a day.

Given this, is it correct to criticize Nike for low pay rates for subcontractors in Indonesia? And Should Nike be held responsible for working conditions in foreign factories that it does not own, but where sub-contractors make products for Nike?

Answer this question considering Business Ethics and leader's roles.

3. If sweatshops are a global problem, what might be a global solution to this problem?

Let's suppose that you are the CEO in Nike or Adidas. How will you resolve this problem as a leader of this industry?