The purpose of this analysis is to consider, compare and examine data from the case "Nike: The Sweatshop Debate  written by Charles W. L. Hill. This data will then be associated with "Ethics in International Business  which is chapter 4 of the book "International Business: Competing in the Global Marketplace  written as well by Charles W. L. Hill. This chapter has information that would be irrelevant to our Nike case analysis, so it will be centered in two powerful variables. The variables are: Employment Practices and Human Rights. In today's business domain, a company's moral conduct is endlessly under the microscope; and more precisely, the bigger the company, the more powerful the magnification. Immoral conduct and what some scholars even describe as malicious performance, has been observed as a habit of some international companies. Shockingly, one of the most identifiable companies in the globe was once at the front of inquiry for its unprincipled conducts. Established in 1972, Nike, one of the controlling companies of athletic shoes and apparel, who has gotten billions of dollars in profits and sold its goods in more than 140 countries, got into this problem. First world country companies have had the fabulous idea to outsource their manufacturing with the advantage of low-cost workforce, and Nike was charged of for mistreating its external labor in sweatshops. Now, it would not be practical if this analysis doesn't start with basic definitions to make this lecture even simpler. L. Hill states that Employment Practices are the conditions that the host nation (multinational companies) applies in the home nation (third world countries). There is no law that states if to apply that of the home or host nation, it basically falls in the decision of the multinational. While many scholars suggest that pay and work conditions should be the same across nations, how much divergence is acceptable? Third world countries are used to 12-hour workdays with lower wages and an obvious lack of protection against their safety. Does this mean that multinational companies should take it as an advantage? There are a whole lot of disagreements in this last question and we are going to show the facts so a final conclusion could be made. This topic takes us to another one that is relatively cl