fair-labour buzzwords distract consumers from fashion companies’ ethical records

by:Chengbai     2020-05-02
\"Our future is intertwined,\" Gap\'s sustainability page says . \".
\"It looks good, it does a good job, it feels good,\" H & M declared . \".
Religious Reform in Los Angeles
\"Nudity is one of the most sustainable choices. We’re 2.
The website of the fashion company is a vague and moral jungle. sounding self-description.
When they brag about \"ethical sourcing\" and \"positive impact,\" these companies try to reassure consumers and investors that the brand\'s commitment to \"transparency\" and \"sustainability --
Two popular buzzwords in modern marketing.
Some people who advertise complex graphics claim that their global supply chain is bare.
Others have shown undeciphable legends that mark the icons of their sustainable attributes.
Garment manufacturers lack a common definition of what is \"sustainability\", \"transparency\" or \"ethical sourcing.
\"In the absence of uniform standards, each company can independently assess its moral record and be free to give itself all the honors they like.
Read more: Ivanka Trump
Branded garment workers endure long hours of work and low payNygard is out of date due to transparency in the supply chain: Canadian tires stand out four years after the Rana Plaza disaster
But it rewards smart marketing and storytelling, not actual monitoring and accountability --
It makes it impossible for consumers to identify brands that meet high labor standards and those that only talk about it.
As explained in a recent report by Human Rights Watch, the transparency practices of apparel companies\' supply chains vary widely.
Many chose to publish details of their labor and human rights practices.
Others simply refused to release information about the supplier\'s factory.
Most companies measure their efforts.
Promote your own policies or code of conduct
But, according to new research from New York University\'s Stern Center for Business and Human Rights, do not assess whether these efforts have achieved the promised results.
\"It is important to have strong policies on workplace safety or wages, but that does not guarantee that workers are actually safe and wages are sufficient,\" said Kathy O\'Connor . \"
The report was written.
This leaves consumers clueless about the types of labor standards they support.
\"It\'s hard to distinguish,\" said Dorothy Bowman --
Pauly, director of research at New York University\'s Center for Business and Human Rights.
\"The facade looks the same.
\"With the exposure of the factory\'s harsh working conditions for the production of clothing and shoes for Ivanka Trump\'s fashion collection, this issue has gained new attention.
According to activists at China Labor Watch, the factories are heavily in arrears with workers\' wages, forcing them to overwork, making headlines when they are arrested by the Chinese government.
The regulator had previously alerted the brand to alleged labor abuse that it ignored.
This is not the first time: the Fair Labor Association also found that another factory that produced Ivanka products violated more than 20 international labor standards and paid workers no more than one dollar an hour.
While Trump\'s company lags behind other big brands, it\'s not alone.
Less than two decades ago, the major clothing companies did not disclose any information about the supplier\'s factory.
At the end of 1990, this began to change after Nike was reviewed for labor abuse.
Phil Knight.
The chief executive lamented that the brand \"has become synonymous with slave wages, forced overtime and arbitrary abuse \".
Nike and Adidas announced the names and addresses of all factories in 2005.
Batagonia, Levi Strauss and Puma followed.
But transparency is not enough, Bowman. Pauly warned.
Her obsession with the word leads companies to confuse transparency with accountability, she argues.
\"You can disclose a lot of information, but is it the right information to have the factory responsible?
Does anyone pick up this information and act on it?
The framework for common standards already exists.
International Labor Organization (ILO), a U. N.
As part of the International Union, the aircraft was established in 1919, creating and maintaining a system of international labor standards that set out the basic principles and the right to work.
Monitoring mechanisms also exist.
Fair Labor Association (FLA), a non-
The profits set up in 1999 as a collaborative effort by universities, civil society organizations and businesses evolved from a task force created by President Bill Clinton following the child labor and sweatshop scandal.
It uses ILO standards to monitor the company\'s supply chain and protect workers.
Participate in the company registration two or three-
After the annual implementation schedule, they opened the factory door to FLA for evaluation.
\"We evaluated field operations, internal systems, worker conditions against benchmarks,\" said FLA President Sharon wiksman . \".
They will be certified if the company meets the standards
This process must be updated every three years through a new assessment.
The problem is that FLA certification has not yet become mainstream.
Only 23 apparel and footwear companies are currently certified. Twenty-
Seven other people are seeking certification.
But this is still a small part of a company\'s thousands of industries.
At the same time, the current system allows companies to continue to profit from exploited labor.
Many brands, self-proclaimed
Monitor, focusing only on factories that have direct agreements with them, ignores the chain of unauthorized subcontracting to smaller plants.
More than 2013 workers died after the collapse of 1,100 square building in Rana, Bangladesh, and more than 200 brands signed the Bangladesh agreement and the Bangladesh Workplace Safety Alliance, promising to raise safety standards during the 2018 summer.
However, a study by the University of BRAC in Dhaka shows that these initiatives aimed at ensuring plant safety cover only about 2,000 of the country\'s 8,000 garment factories.
This means that about 3 million workers have worked hard in factories outside the Bangladesh monitoring and remediation mechanism.
\"These brands know,\" Bowman. Pauly said.
\"The orders they place exceed the capacity of the facilities they audit.
This is a well-known secret.
\"An assessment by New York University Stern found that only 79 factories passed the third place four years later --
Inspection of the party established by the agreement and alliance.
The rest remains heavily behind schedule in addressing structural, fire and electrical issues.
True commitment to sustainable development
And not just a display of it.
The entire supply chain needs to be monitored and willing to meet international recognized standards.
For most brands, it\'s still more than they\'re ready to do.
Pressure from the public and companies that meet the standards may change this.
Custom message
Chat Online 编辑模式下无法使用
Chat Online inputting...