Fair Trade Clothing Brands & Human Rights ... the Ethical Consumer Movement

[fashionista-ta]

^ Wow.

 

[lucy92]

Most of H&M’s “best” factories in Bangladesh still don’t have working fire exits
Marc Bain/qz.com

Factory fires pose one of the greatest dangers to Bangladesh’s garment workers.
After the 2013 factory collapse at Rana Plaza, more than 200 clothing brands from around the world signed a binding commitment to create (pdf) a Bangladeshi garment industry “in which no worker needs to fear fires, building collapses, or other accidents that could be prevented with reasonable health and safety measures.”
The first brand to sign the commitment was H&M, which is the single largest buyer of garments from Bangladesh. But a study released Oct. 1 (pdf) by the Clean Clothes Campaign, in collaboration with several labor groups, says the company is “dramatically behind schedule” in making actual improvements in the factories it sources from. Many of those delayed improvements would ensure worker safety in case of a fire.

What’s more worrisome, the report only looked at H&M’s “Platinum” and “Gold” suppliers—the factories that supposedly boast the highest standards in labor and environmental protections. They account for 56 of the 229 factories H&M uses in Bangladesh.
About 61% didn’t have fire exits that met the accord’s standards, which demand that fire exits have enclosed stairwells and fire-rated doors. Without those measures, exits can quickly fill with smoke in a fire, effectively trapping workers on a factory’s upper floors.
It’s not a small risk. Factory fires are a persistent hazard in Bangladesh, as the New York Times noted after the 2012 fire at Tazreen Fashions that killed 112 people.
“[Lack of appropriate fire exits] is the defect that has been the primary culprit in virtually every mass fatality fire in the Bangladesh garment industry,” the report states, estimating that this violation alone puts nearly 79,000 workers’ lives in danger.

Other major fire hazards included lockable doors, as well as sliding doors and collapsible gates, all of which can make it difficult for workers to escape quickly in an emergency.
The Clean Clothes campaign is a coalition of European organizations that advocates for garment workers’ rights. For this report, it collaborated with the International Labor Rights Forum, Maquila Solidarity Network, and Worker Rights Consortium, with research assistance from Fordham University’s School of Law.
A spokesperson for the Clean Clothes Campaign told Quartz the report focused on H&M because it is the largest buyer from Bangladesh, and therefore has significant leverage in the country.
H&M has also “communicated to consumers through their sustainability reports that all significant repairs are complete,” according to the spokesperson. The report was a way to independently check on those claims. Its analysis is based on publicly available information from factory-inspection reports and “corrective action plans” disclosed by the organization behind the accord.
H&M issued a press release in response, stating that every factory H&M sources from meets the accord’s minimum requirements for operation, and tthat “almost 60% of the remediation work is completed and we see good progress. However, the accord is experiencing some delays of the planned remediation process.”
In a separate statement to Quartz, a company spokesperson explained that delays are due to technical and structural issues in the factories that “require more time and access to technology not available in Bangladesh.”that progress is happening, if slowly.
It says in the factories where it’s the lead brand sourcing there A heavy workload for the inspection experts was also a factor.
H&M has shown a commitment to improving conditions for workers in its contracted factories. A few weeks ago, it introduced a “fair wage program” in its Asian factories that will boost workers’ pay. But as long as it continues operations in factories without proper fire safety, tens of thousands of lives are in danger.

 

[fashionista-ta]

^ H&M's platinum and gold would turn your finger green.

 

[misstarshine]

That is awful. I won't be buying from them again

 

[VogueDisciple93]

The kids who have to sew to survive
By Darragh MacIntyre
BBC Panorama

The first time you see a child hunched over a sewing machine in a hot, airless factory will never leave you.

The boy, no more than 11 or 12, peeked up at me with just the trace of a smile before he dipped his head again, back to work. It felt like a punch in the gut.

I'd been told that child labour was endemic in Turkey. But I wasn't prepared for the reality of it. Or the scale of it. One basement workshop was almost entirely staffed with children, many of whom couldn't have been more than seven or eight years old, the very picture of Dickensian misery.

I was in Istanbul investigating allegations that Syrian refugees and children are being exploited by the garment industry. And specifically that many are working on clothes destined for our High Street.

This undercover investigation was unusually tricky. Secret filming is illegal in Turkey and we were halfway through our investigation when a state of emergency was declared in the country. We were routinely stopped and questioned by police. Our secret filming equipment had to be kept out of sight.

And yet finding Syrian refugees and children making branded clothes for the UK market was relatively straightforward.

Only a tiny percentage of the estimated 3 million Syrians who have sought refuge in Turkey have the necessary work permits. To survive, they have to work illegally, without any rights, and for low wages. A made-to-measure workforce for the garment industry, and a reminder that one person's plight is often another's opportunity.

I was able to see how this exploitation works for myself. It was just before 08:00. A group of people had gathered on a street corner on the outskirts of Istanbul, all desperate for a day's work.

We filmed through the blacked-out windows of our van a dozen yards away as a middleman picked this day's workforce, selecting them one by one. Those who were chosen boarded a bus to take them to a factory.

We know now that up to seven of the workers on board were Syrian refugees. One was just fifteen. Another, we'll call him Omar, was our source.

We followed behind until the bus stopped outside a factory in an industrial zone a few miles away. This factory was known to us. We'd been told it made clothes for some of the world's leading brands.

Later that evening, Omar met up with me. He showed me the labels from the clothes he'd been working on, that day. I recognised them instantly. So would you. The brand could hardly be better-known in the UK.

Over the next few weeks, I got to know Omar and his friends. Like all the Syrians I spoke to, they knew they were being exploited, but they knew there was very little they could do about it.

Some of them were being paid a little over £1 an hour, well below the Turkish minimum wage. The 15-year-old boy told me he wanted to be in school but he couldn't afford not to work. So he was spending more than 12 hours a day ironing clothes that are then shipped to the UK.

All the brands I contacted about this programme say they regularly inspect the factories making their clothes to guarantee standards. Some of these audits are unannounced. But the Syrian boys explained how the factories got round this problem.

When the auditors arrive, they are hidden out of sight. And when the auditors leave, they go back to work. As simple as that. Some of the brands acknowledge the inherent failings in the auditing process and are now trying to tie up with trade unions and NGOs to combat abuses.

Other factories may never be visited by auditors because as far as the brands are concerned, they don't make their clothes. They're part of the chain of sub-contractors who make up much of the garment industry in Turkey.

They take orders from so-called first-tier factories - official suppliers to the brands - but often without the knowledge of the brands themselves.

This is where you'll find the worst abuses of Syrian refugees and children. We decided to follow delivery vans from one of the first-tier factories hoping they would lead us down their supply chain.

Our plan was successful but also darkly disappointing. We filmed outside one of the sub-contractors as a small boy carried and dragged bags of material as big as himself to one of the vans. He couldn't have been more than 12.

We go inside posing as the owners of a new fashion business. In the manager's office we immediately spot a jacket that has been made for a British clothing retailer. It's whisked away. Later, after browbeating the owners to let us see the factory floor, we get sight of the young boy again.

He's carefully folding clothes at an ironing station. He looks up briefly and then looks down to his work again. And he's far from alone - there are half a dozen Syrian children of around his age in the workshop.

Efforts are being made to get them into education but it's estimated that as many as 400,000 are working, many of them in the garment industry.

I've spoken to some of the parents of these children. They don't want their kids working, but they say they simply don't have a choice.

One boy, just 13, told me he was between jobs. He had spent the morning looking for work when we spoke. No luck. I asked him what he would do now. Tears rolled slowly down his cheek as he told me that if he didn't work, he couldn't live.

Our evidence confirms that big fashion brands are profiting from refugees and their children. All the brands involved say they are completely opposed to child labour and any exploitation of Syrian refugees.

But our investigation shows they sometimes don't know how or where their clothes are being made. And until the brands know exactly who is making their clothes, then this type of exploitation is almost certain to continue.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-37693173

This just breaks my heart.

There is a longer 30 minute version on BBC for those in the UK http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0813kpq.

 

[VogueDisciple93]

Fashion brands ignore 'endemic' abuse of Syrian refugees in Turkey - watchdog
By Timothy Large

LONDON (Thomson Reuters Foundation) - Big fashion brands are failing to protect Syrian refugees from "endemic" abuse in Turkish clothing factories supplying European retailers, a monitoring group said on Tuesday.

Child labour, pitiful pay and dangerous conditions are among the risks facing undocumented Syrian refugees working in Turkey's garment industry, according to the Business and Human Rights Resource Centre.

The London-based charity surveyed 38 major brands with Turkish factories in their supply chains on steps they are taking to protect vulnerable refugee workers from exploitation.

"A handful of leading brands, like NEXT and New Look, demonstrate it is a moral imperative, and commercially viable, to treat refugees with respect," Phil Bloomer, the watchdog's executive director, said in a statement.

"The great majority of brands are doing too little. They should learn rapidly from these leaders to outlaw abuse of refugees in their supply chains, and insist their suppliers provide decent work for all their workers."

Almost 3 million refugees - more than half aged under 18 - have fled to Turkey to escape war in Syria. Many work illegally in Turkey's garment industry, which supplies $17 billion in clothing and shoes a year, mostly to Europe, especially Germany.

A Reuters investigation this year found evidence of Syrian refugee children in Turkey working in clothes factories in illegal conditions. Turkey bans children under 15 from working.

A BBC Panorama investigation broadcast on Monday found that Syrian refugee children had been working in factories making clothes for British high street retailer Marks & Spencer (M&S) and online store ASOS.

An M&S spokesperson told Reuters before the BBC report aired: "We had previously found no evidence of Syrian workers employed in factories that supply us, so we were very disappointed by these findings, which are extremely serious and are unacceptable to M&S."

ASOS Chief Executive Officer Nick Beighton said in a statement: "The issues Panorama raises aren't with our approved factories, who we audit. It's with unapproved outsourcing to factories we don't know about. This will continue to be a problem until we know where every garment is made and however difficult, that's what ultimately we’ve got to achieve."

WORK PERMITS

The Business and Human Rights Resource Centre said many brands justified inaction on labour exploitation by denying the existence of refugees of any age in their supply chains.

In its survey, drawn up with trade unions and rights advocates, only nine brands reported that they had found unregistered Syrian refugees on factory floors.

Those brands were ASOS, C&A, H&M, KiK, LC Waikiki, Primark, New Look, NEXT and Otto Group.

Until this year, Syrians were not entitled to work permits, so many refugees worked informally.

Turkey started to issue permits in January, but the Business and Human Rights Resource Centre said "the vast majority of Syrian refugees continue to work without legal protections, making them vulnerable to abuse".

It said ASOS, C&A, Esprit, GAP, Inditex, LC Waikiki, Mothercare, New Look, Otto Group, Primark, Tesco, Tchibo and White Stuff all now expect suppliers to support unregistered refugees to get work permits.

"This is a positive shift given many brands previously cited a zero tolerance policy towards unregistered refugees working in factories, leading to their dismissal - the worst outcome for their welfare," the charity said in a report.

It praised NEXT, New Look and Mothercare for having detailed plans for protecting refugees and for paying a minimum wage even when Syrians are employed without work permits.

The monitoring group criticised standard methods used to make sure supply chains are free from labour exploitation, in which brands announce in advance audits of so-called first-tier suppliers.

Rights groups say a lot of abuse occurs at the murkier ends of supply chains when suppliers subcontract production from third-party factories that are much harder to keep track of.

The Business and Human Rights Resource Centre noted that Adidas, C&A, Debenhams, LC Waikiki, Puma, Inditex, ASOS, H&M and NEXT audited sub-contractors below the first tier. But it said much more needed to be done.

The survey showed a minority of brands were taking collective action on exploitation in Turkey through the Ethical Trading Initiative, an alliance of trade unions, firms and charities promoting workers' rights, the group said.

"Disappointingly, six brands did not respond to the (survey) questions - Gerry Weber, Lidl, Mexx, New Yorker, River Island and Sainsbury's," it added in its report.

Nobody was immediately available for comment at New Yorker, Mexx or Lidl. A River Island spokeswoman declined to comment.

A Sainsbury's spokesperson told Thomson Reuters Foundation: "We expect our suppliers, both in the UK and abroad, to follow our Code of Conduct for Ethical Trade, which incorporates the Base Code of the Ethical Trading Initiative."

A spokeswoman for Gerry Weber said in an email: "We have raised awareness with our suppliers for the issue and are furthermore on site with our own staff. Additionally we realise audits with independent third parties."

Arcadia, Burberry, s.Oliver, SuperGroup, VF Corp and Walmart only provided short statements in response to the survey, the Business and Human Rights Resource Centre said.

(Reporting by Timothy Large; additional reporting by Zabihullah Noori; editing by Ros Russell; Please credit the Thomson Reuters Foundation, the charitable arm of Thomson Reuters, which covers humanitarian news, women's rights, trafficking and climate change. Visit www.trust.org)

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-europe-migrants-refugees-retailers-idUKKCN12O2RZ

 

[lucy92]

A Danish TV news program has discovered that H&M has burned 60 tons of new, unsold apparel since 2013.This is just in Denmark and does not include the garments that they destroy in 40 other countries.

Source: The Fashion Law:

"On June 15, 2017, H&M sent a truck with 1580 kilo [3483 pounds] cartons filled with garments for incineration" to a Danish waste disposal facility, according to a striking new investigation from Danish television channel TV2’s Operation X program. This is just a small part of larger practice by the Swedish fashion giant, per TV2, which has accused H&M of burning roughly 12 tons of garments every year over the past several years.

If the network’s allegations are, in fact, true (and H&M says they absolutely are not), they could prove a significant blow to H&M, which has widely publicized its sustainability efforts, which include a “conscious†collection and widespread recycling efforts.

According to TV2, which began investigating H&M in June, KARA/NOVEREN – a waste disposal company in Denmark – has incinerated over 60 tons of new, unworn apparel from H&M since 2013. These hundreds of thousands of garments consist of reusable/recyclable materials, Operation X has held.

H&M has spoken out in response to TV2’s investigation. A spokesman for the retailer stated on Monday: "The clothes featured in the program are stopped orders that had been sent to incineration because of mold or not complying with our strict chemical restrictions, which is [in] accordance with our routines for stopped orders."

Operation X claims to have uncovered some of the exact same garments in H&M stores and had them tested for chemicals. “According to the tests, the [garments] sent for incineration did not contain any harmful levels of chemicals and normal deposits of bacteria, similar to what one would expect to [those] sold in stores," investigators associated with TV2 revealed this week.

H&M has since stated that the tests performed by Operation X differ from - and are less extensive than - those that it commissioned "external laboratories" to conduct. As of Monday, the retailer made the results of its tests – which revealed traces of mold and "increased levels of lead" – publicly available on its website.

The retailer's spokesman further noted: "Circularity is at the core of our sustainability strategy and we work hard to ensure that we maximize the use and the value of our products in line with the principles of the circular economy and waste hierarchy."

The H&M representative stated that "products that have not been sold late at full cost are offered to customers at favorable prices. We also have the opportunity to move goods between different stores and markets, as well as save products for the coming season. As a last option, we can also sell unsold products to external buyers."

As noted by FashionUnited, “This is not the first time that H&M stands accused of destroying usable clothing. In early 2010, the Swedish fashion retailer was accused of cutting up and dumping unwanted garments at a store on 35th Street in New York in a New York Times expose. At the time, H&M vowed that it would make sure these practices would neverhappen again.â€

 

[fashionista-ta]

H&M and sustainability in the same sentence are already a joke.

Can someone help me understand why they're doing this?

 

[eizhowa]

H&M and sustainability in the same sentence are already a joke.

Can someone help me understand why they're doing this?

My guess would be that they do the math, and figure out that burning the garments will cost less than recycling or donating, overall. Is that not how these things work?

 

[fashionista-ta]

Please, that cannot be true. First of all, they could get a tax write-off for donating them. They have to deliver the garments somewhere in either case. It simply cannot be less expensive to burn them. They could send them to another continent if they don't want the garments hanging around in their market.

Designers don't do this, to my knowledge ... I buy their leftovers on Yoox all the time. It's not like H&M is some great brand that can't be diluted. I'm kind of mystified ...

 

[eizhowa]

Please, that cannot be true. First of all, they could get a tax write-off for donating them. They have to deliver the garments somewhere in either case. It simply cannot be less expensive to burn them. They could send them to another continent if they don't want the garments hanging around in their market.

Designers don't do this, to my knowledge ... I buy their leftovers on Yoox all the time. It's not like H&M is some great brand that can't be diluted. I'm kind of mystified ...

They pay taxes?

 

[fashionista-ta]

I hope the tax law in Sweden is better than ours. I don't really know anything about European corporate tax law, I must admit.

 

[eizhowa]

I hope the tax law in Sweden is better than ours. I don't really know anything about European corporiate tax law, I must admit.

It is easy to use tax havens. IKEA only started paying taxes to Sweden in 2015, for example. I guess the founder finally figured he was rich enough!

H&M claims 26% of their earnings go to tax payment, but it seems they pay different taxes in different countries so it is difficult to guess what would be the most economical. All countries would need its own policy.

Depending on how tax deduction for clothes donated from Denmark to a foreign charity is calculated, it is possible that it is the most economical... despite their high taxes.

It seems so unlikely that a business so focused on cutting costs would chose the more expensive alternative.