News, views and top stories in your inbox. Don't miss our must-read newsletter Sign up Thank you for subscribing We have more newsletters Show me See our privacy notice Invalid Email

With the Three Lions in their hearts and on their chests, thousands of diehard England fans will be roaring on Wayne Rooney and co at the World Cup in Brazil in June.

Many will be decked in the new 2014 England shirt, brought out by Nike for £90 each this week in plenty of time for the tournament. But the reality behind the shirts is as far from the magic of Rio’s Maracanã stadium as can be.

A look at the label reveals the kits are made in poverty-hit Indonesia, where an estimated 171,000 people keep Nike’s huge supply line going in 40 factories.

World Cup shirts are, according to rival French manufacturers Ultra Petita, made for around £4 in Far East countries like Indonesia. The company said it would cost £17 to make the same shirt in Europe.

And while Rooney makes £300,000 a week for kicking a football, those who make the shirt on his back take home the average hourly rate of 5,642 rupiah – just 30p.

Graciela Romero, from anti-poverty charity War on Want, says: “Nike factory workers, struggling to raise their families on far below a living wage, will see the £90 price tag on England’s World Cup shirts as a kick in the teeth for them and their supporters.”

Nike justify the price by pointing to the research and development that goes into the kits and technology that includes using material from eight recycled plastic water bottles in each shirt. A £60 version is also available.

Even David Cameron waded into the row this week, saying the shirt was “too expensive” and “taking advantage of parents” pestered by their children.

Ms Romero adds: “David Cameron is right to say the shirt price takes advantage of fans. But he should act to stop brands sold here exploiting the people who buy them.”

Workers complain the factory wages – set not by Nike but by the Indonesian authorities – are too little to feed and clothe their families. Most stay silent, fearful that speaking out will mean they are sacked.

After massive protests last year, Nike workers in the Indonesian capital Jakarta won a 44% minimum wage rise to 2.2million rupiah – £117 – a month. But factory bosses began shedding jobs to and rural workers are still much worse off.

Aida, a seamstress at a Nike factory in Indonesia, said: “I sew a Nike sweatshirt roughly every 30 seconds, handling 120 every hour at the factory. I and my workmates have to live on £117 a month, well below a living wage to afford decent food, housing and health care, and education for families with children.

“One sweatshirt sells for almost 40% of what I earn for a month. Nike makes huge profits from our work, but fails to ensure a living wage for us. The company should follow Nike’s slogan and, ‘Just do it’.”

Anti-Nike campaigners Team Sweat say a living wage for a single worker in Indonesia would be around £190 a month.

The Nike headquarters, in Oregon, Portland, is a serene lakeside super-office, a shimmering structure of glass and sleek curves from which president Mark Parker – paid £9.2million in 2013 – oversees the £15.6billion a year business, turning £1.5billion profit last year. The contrast to conditions in the hot, dusty Indonesian factories is stark.

(Image: PA)

Nike is not alone in using Far East suppliers to aid production and has been dogged by allegations of child labour and brutal conditions by pressure groups.

In the past decade, as labour costs rose in Japan, South Korea and Taiwan – Nike began ordering from China, Thailand, Indonesia, Vietnam and Cambodia.

But claims of torment and terrible working conditions followed.

In 2011, workers at the Sukabumi plant, about 60 miles from Jakarta, claimed supervisors threw shoes at them, slapped them, kicked them and called them dogs and pigs. Others were made to stand in the sun for hours after missing their target.

One Indonesian Nike subsidiary, the PT Nikomas plant in Serang, paid out £650,000 in 2012 in a dispute over unpaid overtime to 4,000 workers.

Nike’s own reports have uncovered shocking truths. One said punishments for being late in Indonesian factories included being made to scrub toilets or run around factory grounds.

The Global Alliance for Workers and Communities reported workers being coerced into sex and assembly-line workers being fondled by managers.

In a largely young female workforce, 30% of staff at the factory told of being bullied and sexually molested. Nike admitted finding “abusive treatment”, either physical or verbal, in many of the Nike plants and launched a project to beat it.

And last January, workers in Sukabumi alleged high-ranking members of the Indonesian military intimidated them into signing a petition saying that the contractor did not have to pay the new minimum wage.

Nike said it immediately launched an investigation.

But some workers are keen to take lower pay rather than be out of a job, and not everyone sees Nike’s arrival as a negative.

Professor Gerardo Sicat, from the University of the Philippines School of Economics, said: “Globally, Indonesians feel a psychic sense of having arrived, producing a product that almost everybody wants to own.

"The Nike factories are a component of permissive national policies involving employment. They have helped to rescue thousands of families from poverty and the malnutrition and illiteracy of their children.

“Many workers in Indonesia, facing potential loss of their jobs, have supported the request of the Nike plants to be exempted from the requirement of the minimum wage. Many would prefer to receive less rather than suffer loss of their jobs.”

In a statement, Nike said it held all its suppliers in 43 countries to a “very high standard” with a code of conduct aligned with the UN International Bill of Human Rights.

It added: “When we learn of potential violations of our code we investigate thoroughly and work with the factory involved immediately.”

Nike took charge of kitting out England in a £25million deal with the FA last year, taking over from Umbro, which it owned, but has since sold on.

It said revenue from the new kit goes back to the FA to help promote every level of the game from grass roots up.

Nike shelled out £550million on athlete endorsements last year, sponsoring sports stars including golfer Tiger Woods, tennis player Maria Sharapova and footballer Cristiano Ronaldo.

(Image: Getty)

Comment By Clive Efford, Labour MP for Eltham and Shadow Minister for Sport

The anger generated by the £90 England shirt is symptomatic of the wider issue of the game’s traditional fan base being edged out by the growing costs of being a supporter.

I believe it is time to ask the fans whether they are happy with the direction in which our game is being taken.

Should it be left to be buffeted by commercial decisions while fans merely hang on for as long as their finances allow, or should we take a look at what fans are doing in other countries and press for change?

I fear the costs of being a regular supporter are becoming too high for people on average incomes.

Criticism of this growing commercialism brings warnings of undermining the success of the Premier League.

It is like the era before the banking crisis when everyone feared criticising the people who ran our banks.