Crisis Strategy Brief: Nike and Alysia Montano

Description Of The Crisis

Alysia Montaño was known in 2014 for being “the pregnant runner” after competing in a race 8 months into her pregnancy. She recently released an opinion piece through the New York Times. According to her, when she told Nike that she wanted to have a baby, they told her that they would pause her contract and stop paying her. Additionally, she says that the U.S olympic committee strips their health insurance if they do not stay at the top of their game during their pregnancy. As a result, she started a maternity leave legislation so that pregnant athletes would not lose their health insurance. Montaño also mentions that within the contacts, there are confidentiality clauses and non-disclosure agreements to prevent people from talking about it and potentially change it.

The Times got their hands on a 2019 Nike Track and Field contract, which said that the company has the right to reduce an athlete’s pay “for any reason” if they don’t meet a specific performance threshold. The Times also included in their video that there are no exceptions for childbirth, pregnancy or maternity. Nike told the Times that there had been a reduction in payments for some pregnant athletes but it has since changed its approach to no longer penalize athletes for pregnancy.

See the New York Times video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYvhKDHsWRE

UPDATE: Olympian Allyson Felix has also released an Op-ed on the issue. Check it out here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLk5znZljTI

Nike’s PR Response

This is the response Nike gave after backlash:

My Recommendations

I really applaud Alysia for speaking up on something that should have more attention. However, if I were representing Nike, I would have advised them against releasing this statement. My statement would have been something like this:

“We recognize the issues Alysia Montaño and other female athletes have voiced. Nike stands behind all women and we are incredibly sorry for dropping the ball. We’re going to have a look at our policies and contracts to allow for better negotiating in the future.”

This does a few things. It takes a little heat off Nike while holding responsibility. It also acknowledges the critiques and mentions what the company is planning to do going forward.

In moving forward, I would recommend that Nike continuously speak on what their doing and what their concerns are moving forward. If they are still reducing payments, they should be open as to why and mention in rational logic the motive behind their decisions. If pregnant athletes have chosen to reduce training or stop altogether, perhaps they should voice this. In addition, they should consider alternatives for pregnant athletes who chose to reduce or stop training, such as increasing their attendance at press events or start a coalition for them.

A good idea that I would suggest is something like “Mother Runners,” which would be an initiative to get more new moms or pregnant women (with doctor’s approval) to exercise more. Have these pregnant athletes be spokesperson for this movement.

My Opinion

Personally, knowing how clumsy I am, I would be too scared to run like that in fear of tripping, falling, and possibly hurting my baby. Additionally, from my understanding (I’m not completely educated in sports business & law), track and field athletes are not salaried employees and are considered independent contractors who are being sponsored by Nike. This means doing press events and wearing the Nike brand in competition. So, it’s not totally unreasonable for Nike to reduce payment for female athletes who do not compete while pregnant. With Alysia Montaño, she competed during pregnancy, which means she should have been paid for that.

I know some women have very dangerous pregnancies, which causes them to not be able to exercise. Additionally, from a legal standpoint, other women see pregnant athletes doing strenuous exercises while pregnant and may attempt it themselves before asking a doctor. In this instance, they could very well sue Nike for promoting pregnant women in such a manner. One way Nike can protect itself is either by issuing disclaimers or discouraging it altogether – the latter being what they’ve seemed to go with. Perhaps allowing pregnant athletes to do more press events would be an alternative?

In my opinion, I know there are many pregnant women who are in great shape, but it can also be dangerous for some. Therefore, this is a sticky situation for Nike and I think they need to address their concerns publicly, not only to their athletes but also to their audience. I understand that Nike’s image is athletics and typically we don’t see pregnant women in that space. Perhaps there is a way to shine light on these underrepresented women without causing any potential harm to all parties.

Visit the Walden PR Blog for more public relations and crisis communications content.

Photo by bruce mars on Unsplash