New Remedy for Retaliation at Hong Seng (Nike)

December 18, 2025

Dear University Colleagues,
 
I write to share an important update regarding the long-running case involving labor rights violations at Hong Seng Knitting (Hong Seng) in Thailand, including the filing of false criminal charges against a worker leader—named Kyaw San Oo—in retaliation for questioning the factory’s labor practices.
 
We are pleased to report that Nike has agreed to compensation for Kyaw San Oo in the amount of $42,000 for the retaliatory harm he suffered, as documented in the WRC’s 2020 investigation at Hong Seng. This is vastly more than the roughly $1,800 Nike agreed to last year, based on the recommendation of the Fair Labor Association (FLA) in its 2024 report on the case.
 
Nike’s decision to provide compensation at this high level stands in direct contradiction to the conclusions in the FLA’s report, which found no violation of its standards and did not recognize the criminal complaint against Kyaw San Oo as retaliation. The FLA’s report also supported the factory’s position that migrant workers volunteered to give up their wages, and it declared that no wage theft had occurred—conclusions that are irreconcilable with the scale of compensation Nike has now provided to the affected workforce.
 
Kyaw San Oo reached out to the WRC team, after being advised of this additional compensation, to request our advice and assistance concerning the transfer and receipt of the funds into his possession. We have been assisting him and can report that some, but not yet all, of the funds have been received.
 
By vastly increasing its compensation to Kyaw San Oo, Nike is now providing remedy at Hong Seng at a scale that vindicates the findings documented in the WRC’s 2020 investigation. This validates the WRC’s independent, in-house investigative methodology, as exemplified by the work of our excellent team in Thailand, and reinforces the importance of insisting on meaningful remedies, grounded in applicable law, when worker rights are violated—even when the companies involved deny the violations and the need for remedy. Every worker at Hong Seng harmed by the wage theft has now received significant compensation, and Kyaw San Oo has finally received a remedy consistent with the severity of the retaliation he endured.
 
This action by Nike represents a significant, if belated, affirmation of the fundamental principle that workers must not face criminal charges, or any form of retaliation, for standing up for their rights and those of their coworkers. The compensation reflects the gravity of the harms suffered by Kyaw San Oo and his family, who were forced to flee Thailand to escape unjust imprisonment. It constitutes a clear rejection of the criminal complaint filed against him by factory management after he called on the factory to pay workers what they were legally owed.
 
It is also a welcome reversal of the position Nike held for nearly five years that no remedy was needed. We credit Nike for taking this important step.
 
It is important to note that Nike’s commitment to proper compensation for Kyaw San Oo resulted from sustained pressure from Nazma Akter, President of the Sommilito Garments Sramik Federation in Bangladesh, who, until recently, served as a trade union representative on the FLA’s Board of Directors. We understand that Nazma pressed vigorously for the FLA to revisit its findings on the Hong Seng case, ultimately precipitating a drastic revision of Nike’s initial response by increasing the proposed compensation by 23 times. While this intervention succeeded in securing a revised level of remedy, the FLA declined to make other changes she sought, including rescinding its report to remove its defense of the criminal complaint against Kyaw San Oo from the public domain. Nazma resigned from the FLA Board in protest. I share this with you because it provides context for the extraordinary decision of Nike to so drastically increase its compensation to Kyaw San Oo.
 
While this outcome affirms the substance of the WRC’s investigative findings, it is important to note that the remedies ultimately secured do not represent the full scope of compensation that would be required under applicable law.
 
As you know, the WRC documented the wage violations at Hong Seng in 2020, as well as Hong Seng’s use of the Thai police and threats of criminal prosecution to suppress workers who questioned its actions. When Hong Seng and Nike did not agree to remediation for more than a very few workers, the WRC continued to press this case over a period of years.
 
We did so with an awareness that the implications reach far beyond Hong Seng Knitting. Allowing such brutal retaliation against a worker leader to go unremedied would have set a dangerous precedent for the treatment of workers in similarly vulnerable positions who attempt to organize or stand up for their rights at garment factories. This is especially important in Thailand and the Asia region more broadly, where we are increasingly seeing attempts to criminalize peaceful worker protest. Other factory owners were watching this case: upholding clear standards at Hong Seng was essential to safeguarding workers’ rights at collegiate factories across Thailand and the region. Such cases raise broader concerns about the protection of workers who act as defenders of labor and human rights, particularly where legal systems are misused to suppress organizing and dissent.
 
Our dogged pursuit of redress for Kyaw San Oo and the other workers at Hong Seng also reflects our commitment to ensuring that when violations are identified, remedy is secured. This is the framework we have employed consistently through 25 years of labor rights work on behalf of our university affiliates.
 
This commitment is central to the credibility and impact we achieve and the unique role we play in upholding university labor standards. It is why we have been able to secure more than $100 million in unpaid compensation for garment workers at other factories around the world during the five years that we have worked on Hong Seng.

We deeply appreciate the partnership with our affiliate universities that makes this progress possible and ensures that when the rights of workers making university logo product are violated, redress is achieved and rights are restored. We also recognize the many labor rights advocates and corporate accountability groups around the world that worked on the Hong Seng case and the vital efforts of student activists in support of strong enforcement of university standards at Hong Seng and other collegiate factories.
 
Please feel free to contact us if you would like a more detailed briefing on this case or its broader implications.
 
At the OECD Forum in February 2026, we will discuss this and other examples of our progress combating the criminalization of human rights defense and worker organizing. We will highlight university labor codes as among the most powerful tools available for protecting workers’ rights in global garment supply chains.
 
Sincerely,
 
Scott Nova
Executive Director