Garment workers need to be paid fairly

Those who create our clothes should earn enough to cover their basic needs and enjoy a decent standard of living. That should be common sense, right? Yet, this basic principle is often overlooked, and millions of garment workers around the world aren’t paid enough to cover their basic necessities—earning on average 45% less than they need to survive.

The reality is, there’s no evidence that the vast majority of major brands pay living wages. In fact, according to our data here at Good On You—fashion’s most rigorous and comprehensive ratings system—a whopping 86% the world’s most profitable fashion brands either don’t disclose anything about living wages or are confirmed to not pay living wages at any stage of the supply chain.

Something needs to change, and the demand for living wages for garment workers is finally garnering the attention it deserves. But what is a living wage, exactly? How is it calculated? How can it help garment workers? And most importantly, how can consumers and citizens help make a change? Let’s have a look.

What is a living wage?

A “living wage” is the minimum pay required for workers and their families to have a decent life. Not to be mistaken for “minimum wages”, which simply refer to the lowest legal amount employers are allowed to pay employees in any given area. Minimum wages often don’t meet workers’ basic needs, and not all countries have a lower minimum wage limit.

In China, the legal minimum salary remains well under a living wage, and many workers remain in poverty—although many garment workers are paid more than a living wage. In Bangladesh, Vietnam, and Indonesia, typical wages are only one quarter to one half of what a worker needs for a decent life. An Oxfam 2019 report also found that 0% of Bangladeshi garment workers and 1% of Vietnamese garment workers earned a living wage.

The living wage movement took off in Baltimore in 1994 when the city passed living wage laws, when it became clear that many of the people living in Baltimore’s homeless shelters were employed in full time jobs. Campaigners found that sustaining a decent quality of life on the city’s minimum wage was impossible.

According to Jon Gertner, this response indicated the basic belief “that no one who works full time should have to live in poverty.” Simply put, the logic behind the push for a living wage is based on the rather instinctive assumption that a person who works long, hard hours should be rewarded for not having to live below the poverty line. Although most governments and companies support this in principle, the reality is often far bleaker.

How are living wages calculated?

There are two widely accepted methodologies:

1. The Asia Floor Wage Alliance brings together unions and labour activists and has calculated minimum living wages in many Asian countries
2. The Anker Method is named after Richard and Martha Anker, who developed the method in partnership with the Global Living Wage Coalition. While the Anker method can produce a somewhat lower wage outcome, it is designed to be applicable to most less developed countries in a range of situations.

Both calculations factor in a low-cost but nutritious diet for a small family, basic acceptable housing, other essential expenses such as health and clothing, and a small margin for unexpected circumstances.

A snapshot of the living wage campaign in Bangladesh

There are many legitimate concerns about the ethics and impacts of the fashion industry—especially in low- and lower-middle income countries (LMICs)—but that doesn’t mean that the fashion industry hasn’t also brought benefits to countries such as Bangladesh.

According to Sarah Labowitz and Dorothée Baumann-Pauly, “Since the arrival of the garment sector in the late 1970s, the country’s poverty rate has fallen from 70% to less than 40%, accompanied by increases in life expectancy, literacy, and per capita food intake.” Certainly a pleasing statistic.

“It is precisely this paternalistic perspective that keeps Bangladesh’s 4.2 million RMG workers trapped in a debt-riddled cycle of low wage labour and diminishing participation in civil society driven by excessive and exhausting overtime. Meanwhile, a lack of robust regulation means that retailers in the Global North are able to avoid accountability for improving the working conditions of the very jobs they create,” argues Ruth MacGlip in her article for Good On You.

But there is a reason many companies have flocked to Bangladesh and other LMICs in recent years. First, structural power imbalances and systemic racism, remnants of colonialisation that still benefit fashion brands. Then, from a traditional business perspective, high productivity and low overheads are always important, but the question remains: “How is it possible to make clothing so very cheaply?”

The answer is: it’s not, unless brands choose to drastically cut corners and turn a blind eye to the impact on people, the planet, and animals. Which is exactly what’s happening. In fact, many people in the cut-make-trim part of the fashion supply chain work in unsafe factories and live in deplorable conditions. Workers’ living conditions may not be a direct legal responsibility of the large international corporations that own the major high street brands—but then again, if their healthy profits flow from the fact that people are living in abject poverty, surely they have to take responsibility? The living wage campaign aims to overcome this injustice by calling on companies to ensure their profits don’t come at the cost of their employees’ living conditions.

Living wages in the sportswear sector

The Clean Clothes Campaign and Collectif Ethique sur l’Étiquette have conducted research on the wages and conditions of workers in the sportswear sector. They found that Adidas and Nike do not pay living wages, and worse, they are moving production away from China, where wages are steadily growing to countries like Vietnam, Cambodia, and Indonesia with lower-wage standards and where human rights violations are more common.

The campaigners are calling on Nike and Adidas to establish a roadmap with specific targets to guarantee payment of a living wage to all workers in their supply chain with clear time commitments. They also call for the brands to make living wages possible through long-term commitments to their suppliers’ factories, to publish annual statements of the actual wages paid and the results of all social audits of suppliers’ factories, and to support the efforts of unions to negotiate fair wages in supplier countries.

Does a living wage guarantee a better life?

There’s a danger that where wages are increased, local service providers will increase the price of rent and groceries. This means that unless it is implemented meaningfully, an increase in wages may not fully translate into an improved quality of life. And if such an increase is not across the board, then increases at one factory may mean losing work due to retrenchment if international brands move their orders to cheaper competitors.

This is why brands must coordinate with unions, governments, and others to address the problem. Brands should also commit for the long term to suppliers that do the right thing by their workers.

Additionally, it is essential to make sure that costs aren’t cut elsewhere due to the wage increase—if brands continue to squeeze them on price, factory owners may offset increases in wages with a decrease in safety measures within the factory. But one thing we can say for sure: if wages are not increased, the workers who make our clothes are condemned to a life of poverty and danger.

Who is responsible for making a change?

It’s clear that protecting the rights of fashion’s lowest-paid workers is essential. But who is responsible for trying to improve the system? Should companies and consumers be responsible for living conditions in factories, or should they fall under the jurisdiction of the government and local authorities?

Recently, increasing numbers of major brands have publicly promised to do the right thing by garment workers, attempting to repent for decades of investigations into the murky reality of fashion supply chains. But according to the latest Fashion Transparency Index, 96% of brands still do not publish the number of workers in their supply chain paid a living wage.

“The truth is, we do not have time to wait any longer for voluntary measures and empty promises from individual brands. The industry needs to be held accountable by law,” says Ruth MacGlip. “One place to start is in the EU, the largest clothing and textiles importer in the world. The EU has the responsibility to ensure that all clothing, whether made domestically or overseas, is made in safe conditions with fair pay. This is not about Western governments ‘fixing’ problems in recently industrialised countries, but instead building real corporate accountability for the problems caused by brands in the first place,” argues MacGlip.

What about brands?

“Wages for production will scarcely exceed 3% of the price you pay in the shop”, reports the Clean Clothes Campaign, so it would cost very little for brands to change pay a living wage. And even if big brands passed the entire cost of paying living wages on to consumers, it would only cost an extra 1% of the retail price—that’s just 10 cents for a $10 t-shirt—for living wages to be paid to the people who make our clothes.

According to Oxfam, brands should first get the basics right on human rights—publish a list of their suppliers, respect workers’ rights to organise via unions, establish effective grievance processes, and empower women workers with positive policies and targets.

On living wages, they should:

• Make a credible commitment to paying a living wage
• Publish a living wage roadmap
• Implement and monitor living wages in the supply chain

Oxfam publishes a company tracker that monitors 16 large brands available in Australia, including Cotton On, Country Road, Just Jeans, and H&M. At the time of writing, nine of the 16 companies were recorded as meeting the transparency requirement. Still, only six had made any commitment to paying a living wage.

What can you do as a shopper?

Oxfam is calling on consumers to send a message to brands asking them to commit to paying a living wage and move forward to implement that commitment. Why not sign the Oxfam pledge to:

• Stand in solidarity with the women who make our clothes
• Let big brands know loud and clear that the women working in their factories and making our clothes must be paid a living wage.

Final thoughts

The tragic events at Rana Plaza didn’t occur simply because the structure of the building was unsafe. Rather, it was possible because the very structures that inform interactions between workers and management are highly unstable and unequal. After Rana Plaza, big companies donated millions, intended as compensation for victims—but surely it would make more sense to provide a decent wage and safe working conditions in the first place?

Despite the fact that the cost of living in certain countries may be lower, the salaries paid in the textile industry still don’t provide an adequate level of comfort for a worker to exist with basic dignity, hygiene, or health. No matter which way we look at it, no matter where we place the blame—when we purchase fast fashion, we are often participating in a system that leads to the chronic exploitation and humiliation of some of the world’s most vulnerable inhabitants.

Good On You believes in supporting companies that protect and nurture employees at all levels of the supply chain. Check out some of our “Good” and “Great” rated brands to discover the ways some companies are working to support developing economies, protect their workers, and produce clothing that looks good, too.

The post What Is a Living Wage and How Does It Benefit Garment Workers? appeared first on Good On You.

What is bamboo fabric?

This fast growing grass has made its mark as an “eco-crop”. From construction to homewares to fabrics, bamboo is having its moment in the limelight. But given that some claims associated with bamboo have been disputed, such as its sustainability, UV protection, and antibacterial properties, is it really the miracle crop many are claiming it to be? Is bamboo fabric sustainable?

Growing the bamboo

It starts out looking good. Bamboo can be a easily sustained and maintained: a fast-growing grass, it requires no fertiliser and self-regenerates from its own roots, so it doesn’t need to be replanted. When compared to cotton cultivation, which requires large amounts of water, pesticides, and labour, the advantages are pretty clear.

But before you run off to restock your wardrobe, there are a few things to consider. For starters, although bamboo is fast-growing and requires no pesticides, that doesn’t mean that it is being grown responsibly. The majority of bamboo is grown in China, and there is limited information regarding how intensively bamboo is being harvested, or what sort of land clearing might be underway in order to make way for the bamboo. Also, although bamboo doesn’t need pesticides, there is no guarantee that they are not being used to maximise outputs. However, in the last few years the Chinese government has cracked down on these more intensive processes and it is now considered extremely bad practice in the industry, which is great progress.

Creating the fabric

Okay, you think, so bamboo might have some issues, but it still uses way less chemicals, and is better than cotton, right? While this is almost certainly true for the cultivation phase, the same can’t necessarily be said about the manufacturing process.

There are several ways to turn bamboo into a fabric. The first process involves combing out the bamboo fibres and spinning these into thread. This results in a slightly coarse fabric that is usually called “bamboo linen”. Creating this “linen” is labour intensive and expensive and the result isn’t suitable for the soft, intimate products for which bamboo is most in demand.

The second and much more popular method is the process used to make the silky soft bamboo fabric you find in sheets, underwear, and more. This “bamboo rayon” is produced through a highly intensive chemical process, similar to the process used to turn wood chips into rayon. This is where the sustainability of bamboo gets a little… prickly. Rayon is essentially a raw material converted through a chemical process. The source of the cellulose can be cotton, wood, and yep, bamboo.

Bamboo rayon is most commonly made through what is known as the viscose process, which involves dissolving cellulose material (in this case, bamboo) in a chemical solution to produce a pulpy viscous substance. This is then pushed through a spinneret, and “spun” into the fibres that can then be made into threads and fabrics. The chemicals used in this process like caustic soda and carbon disulfide are highly toxic and a risk to human health. About 50% of hazardous waste from rayon production (including the bamboo variety) cannot be recaptured and reused, but that doesn’t mean they are being dumped directly into the environment. Thankfully, wet processors in the last three years have been made to revamp their practices and there has been a great deal of improvement in chemical management and waste treatment.

The resulting bamboo viscose fabric is highly breathable, and much stretchier than cotton, making it perfect for garments that sit close to the skin like underwear and socks. It’s also easy to weave into fabrics with high thread counts to create a thin yet strong material suitable for a wide range of uses, from dresses to sheets.

As a side note, sadly there is no conclusive evidence that many of the claimed qualities of bamboo, such as its antibacterial properties or UV resistance, are still present in the fibre after it has been put through such an intensive process.

It’s worth considering a similar fibre called lyocell (also known by the brand name TENCEL Lyocell) which uses a closed-loop process to recapture and reuse 99% of the chemical solution. TENCEL Lyocell is often made from more sustainably farmed eucalyptus trees, and the fabric was awarded the “European Award for the Environment” by the European Union. The lyocell process can also be used to create fabric from bamboo, and this fabric is usually called bamboo lyocell, so look out for this label on clothes, though very few brands are using it at this stage. Boody is one top rated brand using such a fabric. It is worth noting that while the industry is pushing for lower-impact options like TENCEL Lyocell and bamboo lyocell, they still only make up a small portion of the fabric available on the market, so realistically we should be continuing to work with the viscose industry to improve standard practices since the chances are it will never be replaced completely.

So is bamboo fabric sustainable or not?

Bamboo itself can be a highly sustainable crop, if grown under the right conditions. While most bamboo fabrics on the market are a form of rayon where the manufacturing process is intensive and involves harmful chemicals, recent years have seen an improvement in how these chemicals are managed, which is a step in the right direction. Bamboo fabrics are certainly a step up from polyester and conventional cotton, so as long as the brand is transparent about its origins, it can be a safe bet as a more sustainable option for garments.

While bamboo lyocell is likely a better alternative, it’s harder to find. For some types of clothing, look for lower-impact fabrics like organic hemp. In other cases, organic cotton or TENCEL Lyocell will be a better choice from the point of view of the environment, all other things being equal, especially the fabric dyeing process.

It’s important for shopper to know that the majority of products labelled as “bamboo” are actually rayon, involve intensive chemical emissions, and likely without the same beneficial properties as the unprocessed bamboo plant. And as Sewport explains, “Since bamboo fabric made with the viscose rayon process is transformed into a semi-synthetic substance, it is impossible for this substance to be considered organic. Be wary of companies that claim to offer organic bamboo rayon.”

But bamboo fabric has potential—it can be much less costly to produce than cotton, can avoid the extensive use of pesticides found in non-organic cotton production, and production can be far less chemically intensive than polyester. Buying from responsible and transparent brands can also help to mitigate some of this risk.

There’s a lot of work being done to develop and make widely available cost-effective and environmentally-responsible ways of creating the soft and silky bamboo fabrics that we’re dreaming of, so it’s one to keep an eye on.

Learn about more lower-impact materials

The post Material Guide: Is Bamboo Fabric a More Sustainable Option for Fashion? appeared first on Good On You.

While Uniqlo presents a timeless and high-quality aesthetic, how do its ethics hold up? How ethical is Uniqlo? Here’s why the brand is rated our middling score of “It’s a Start” overall. This article is based on the Uniqlo rating, which was published in March 2023 and may not reflect claims the brand has made since then. Our ratings analysts are constantly rerating the thousands of brands you can check on our directory.

Is giant Uniqlo doing enough?

Uniqlo has an easy to wear casual look, and when it gets cold those cardigans can look pretty compelling. Its clothes may be more enduring than the usual “new styles every week” shtick of other big brands, but is there more to the story? We’re here to answer the question: how ethical is Uniqlo?

Uniqlo’s founder, Tadashi Yanai, was ranked Japan’s richest man in 2022, a spot he has held for years. The multinational retailer first opened its doors in Hiroshima in 1984 and emphasises low-cost, everyday fashion that doesn’t go out of style. And it seems it’s picked a winning formula, boasting around 2,300 Uniqlo stores worldwide. But let’s look at the story behind that cashmere sweater you bought in three different colours.

Environmental impact

When it comes to the environment, Uniqlo has received a score of “It’s a Start”, as it has taken some steps in the right direction. For example, it has a repair and reuse program in place and it offers clothing recycling to consumers to help address end-of-life textile waste. It uses a few lower-impact materials, and reduces water use in some spots along its supply chain.

The brand has set a science-based climate change target to reduce emissions in its supply chain, which is an improvement from previous ratings. The Science Based Targets Initiative (SBTi), which defines and facilitates SBTs, describes science-based climate change targets as providing “companies with a clearly-defined path to reduce emissions in line with the Paris Agreement goals.” Sadly, Uniqlo does not report the progress towards meeting its targets.

Labour conditions

Uniqlo’s labour rating has gone up from “Not Good Enough” to “It’s a Start”. It scores 41-50% in the Fashion Transparency Index. Its social auditing program covering its entire final production stage is accredited by Fair Labor Association (FLA).

A real disappointment here is that there is still no evidence Uniqlo ensures payment of a living wage, which puts a damper on the fact that the brand disclosed adequate policies to protect suppliers and workers from the impacts of COVID-19. Workers ought to be taken care of at all times, not just in light of a pandemic.

To make matters worse, the brand has been caught up in an ongoing worker’s rights case for years, and owes Indonesian garment workers $5.5m worth of severance pay. Uniqlo must take responsibility for the people in its supply chain before it can be considered a more ethical company—and it can certainly afford to do so.

Animal welfare

Unfortunately, Uniqlo’s animal rating has decreased from “It’s a Start” to “Not Good Enough”. The brand gets a big thumbs up for banning the use of fur, angora, shearling, and karakul, and for committing to eliminate other animal products like mohair. It also has a formal animal welfare policy aligned with Five Freedoms and uses some recycled down.

However, it still uses leather, exotic animal hair, and silk, even if it traces animal products to the first stage of production (farms). It also uses wool and has a policy to source wool from non-mulesed sheep but doesn’t provide any evidence to verify its claims.

Overall rating: It’s a Start

Uniqlo has been rated “It’s a Start” overall, based on research from our expert ratings team here at Good On You. While Uniqlo has set some decent environmental policies in place and has made a start for workers, there’s no evidence it’s providing fair wages, and it still has a lot of work to across the board do before it can be considered a “Good” or “Great” brand.

At the end of the day, Uniqlo is still very much a part of the unsustainable fast fashion industry. Its promotion of “disposable” fashion and constant rotations of new trends and products has a huge environmental impact. An increasing amount of cheap clothing ends up in landfill after a few wears due to these reasons.

The clothing manufacturing process regularly involves the use of toxic dyes, solvents, and pesticides, is responsible for significant carbon emissions, and uses much of the world’s fresh water and land resources. While this is an industry-wide problem, there are more clothes pumped through the system by the fast fashion brands—and it’s not clear the sustainability initiatives of Uniqlo are enough to compensate.

So, while those cheaper price tags may be tempting, they are often a good indicator of the poor quality of the materials. They also highlight that the people making those clothes are working in conditions that, while improving, are not where they should be.

Note that Good On You ratings consider hundreds of issues, and it is not possible to list every relevant issue in a summary of the brand’s performance. For more information, see our How We Rate page and our FAQs.

See the rating.

Good swaps

“Good” and “Great” alternatives to Uniqlo

The post How Ethical Is Uniqlo? appeared first on Good On You.

Hemp fabric has undergone an image transformation in recent years, as shoppers and brands alike are learning of its versatility, strength, and potential sustainability. 

Hemp on the high ground

Hemp is the sober cousin of marijuana, and industrial hemp contains only a tiny amount of the psychoactive component of cannabis, so the only high you’ll get from hemp fabric is the moral high-ground you’ll stand on knowing you’re wearing a  more sustainable fabric.

In fact, industrial hemp is the fashion equivalent of the boring sibling who wants to stay home every weekend and knit socks for fun. But despite its boring properties, hemp’s association with cannabis has copped it a bad rep over the years.

It also doesn’t help that hemp clothing has been historically associated with baggy grunge-style clothing in khaki hues. Not that there’s anything wrong with hippy clothing if that’s the goal, but the trend certainly hasn’t done much to improve hemp’s image among the general populace.

But hemp has started to redeem its image in recent years, and its potential is undeniable. The environmental benefits of hemp cultivation, combined with its durable characteristics as a fabric, mean it can feature in clothing that both feels and looks great, by even the highest of standards.

So what is hemp?

Hemp has a very long history of being used as a fibre. In fact, it has been cultivated for thousands of years and on almost every continent. It has been used in clothing, ropes, and sails. Rumour has it that the word “canvas” is derived from “cannabis”.

Hemp is a type of bast fibre which means it’s one of a number of plant-based fibres derived from the stems of plants such as flax (where linen comes from), jute, and stinging nettle. The fabric has various natural advantages such as keeping you warm in winter, cool in summer, and even protecting you from UV rays.

The fibre produced from pure hemp is similar to linen in texture. It can also be blended with other plant-based fibres to create fabrics with the durability of hemp and the softness of cotton or bamboo. Extremely versatile, materials produced from hemp fibres can be used for a variety of fabrics, “from jersey to denim to hessian to canvas”, according to Textile Exchange.

But why all the fuss about the little green leaf? Is it really any different to its alternatives?

What makes hemp fabric a more sustainable option?

It’s no coincidence that hemp bears the nickname weed. A densely and quickly growing plant, hemp literally chokes out any competing plants. This means harsh chemical herbicides aren’t necessary. Hemp also naturally reduces pests, so no pesticides are usually needed. Amazingly, it also returns 60-70% of the nutrients it takes from the soil. As Textile Exchange points out, since hemp plants have deep root systems, soil quality is replenished, which in turn captures carbon from the atmosphere.

Not only is hemp gentle on the earth, it also requires very little water, especially when compared to cotton, which, according to Slate uses “about 50% more water per season than hemp.” But that’s not all. According to the same article, “when you add processing into the equation, cotton uses more than four times as much water as hemp.”

Hemp also requires a relatively small amount of land to cultivate. According to the Guide to Sustainable Textiles, this means it can produce up to double the fibre yield per hectare than cotton. It also makes a great addition to crop rotations throughout the year for farmers.

However, it’s important to be aware that hemp does not always mean organic, and many farmers still use environmentally damaging fertiliser. When going for hemp, make sure it’s organic and thoroughly study the brand you’re considering buying from.

So from an environmental perspective, the benefits of hemp are pretty clear. But how does it compare once we start processing the raw product into a fabric?

How is hemp turned into a fabric?

Hemp fabric is made from the long strands of fibre that make up the stalk of the plant. These fibres are separated from the bark through a process called “retting.”  These fibres are then spun together to produce a continuous thread that can be woven into a fabric. The processing methods for hemp were originally developed in the early 1900s, and are only now being updated and expanded to meet rising demand.

The various stages of the process can be done organically through a mechanical process that requires no chemicals. However, many companies now produce hemp fabric chemically, in a process that is much more intensive on the environment, but faster and cheaper to create. Often you can tell that a hemp fabric has gone through this intensive process if it is labelled as “hemp viscose”, which normally involves the same harmful processing with toxic chemicals as regular viscose. Some companies may use the less impactful lyocell process, so it is worth double checking before purchasing something made of hemp.

Cost of production is another factor to consider, says Textile Exchange. Since hemp is bulky, transporting it to processing centres can be “expensive and energy-intensive”. Shorter, localised supply chains are one possible solution here.

The impact of the fabric doesn’t just stop once it has been woven, either. Once the fabric has been created, it may be dyed, which again can result in various environmental outcomes, depending on the technique used.

So the production phase is a bit less clear-cut. Although hemp is a more eco-friendly crop to grow, we still need to be sure that the process being used to turn the plant into a fabric is lower-impact. Producers have a responsibility to ensure their manufacturing process considers the environment, workers, and consumers, along with profitability.

So, what’s the verdict?

The good news is that hemp generally constitutes a more sustainable, lower-impact crop that can be converted into fabric responsibly. It’s important to make sure, however, that companies are not just greenwashing their hemp. Wondering where to start looking?

Check out these brands using hemp, rated “Good” or “Great” in the Good On You directory:

The post Material Guide: How Sustainable Is Hemp Fabric? appeared first on Good On You.

Cotton is a natural fibre found in many wardrobe staples such as jeans and t-shirts. Compared to other common clothing fibres such as synthetic polyester, semi-synthetic rayon, and bamboo, cotton has the advantage of being a completely natural product, which means it’s biodegradable.

Although cotton is a naturally occurring fibre, its production is nevertheless haunted by claims of pollution, exploitation, and slavery—yes, even today.

The most abundantly produced natural fibre in the world, it is estimated that 25 million tons of cotton are produced every year. With so much cotton being grown globally, it’s crucial to take a closer look at some of the issues, concerns, and solutions to the production of this so-called “white gold” and answer once and for all—is cotton sustainable and ethical?

Cotton: the thirsty crop

Here’s the double-edged sword of cotton production—it requires a lot of water to grow and is primarily grown in arid conditions. This means that not only are vast amounts of water used to grow cotton for clothes every year, but the production is also contributing to sea basins drying up. This “virtual water” needs to be considered when purchasing cotton products. According to studies, it can take thousands of litres of water to produce enough cotton for just one t-shirt, so there’s a lot to account for!

However, this high level of water wastage isn’t only due to irrigation—it is also commonly a result of inefficient water usage and pollution due to pesticide use (more on pesticides later).

Another way water gets polluted is by the use of chemicals in the production and dyeing processes. It is costly to safely dispose of the hazardous chemicals often used in fabric dyeing, and pressure to produce clothing more cheaply often results in the contamination of river systems. In China, it is estimated that 70% of the rivers and lakes are contaminated by the 2.5 billion gallons of wastewater produced by the fashion industry.

When buying cotton goods, it’s essential to be aware of these many litres of “virtual water.” It may sound arbitrary, but think about it this way—in India alone, a country where 100 million people have no access to safe drinking water, the water used in cotton production would be sufficient to provide 85% of the country’s 1.24 billion people with 100 litres of water every day for a year!

The big deal with GMO cotton

There are some scary statistics surrounding cotton farming in the 21st century. Genetically modified (GMO) cotton seeds now account for 89% of the cotton planted in India—and by 2015, more than 12,500 Indian cotton farmers had died by suicide.

The link between these two figures might not be obvious. However, it has been suggested that the introduction of GMO cotton has tangibly worsened the lives of Indian farmers.

Although GMO cotton is not directly responsible for these tragic deaths, the fact is that they are a major contributing factor to the web of debt in which many Indian farmers find themselves inextricably caught.

So, what’s the problem with GMO cotton? In brief, the idea behind these cotton seeds is that they contain Bt toxins, which are supposed to be resistant to various pests—specifically the bollworm—which can be catastrophic for cotton.

The problems arise when it comes to replanting: GMO cotton seeds have been modified so they can’t reproduce, meaning that farmers can’t retain seeds for the following crop but must buy new seeds each year. On top of this, due to the high demand for cotton seeds and government-regulated prices, many farmers must buy their Bt cotton seeds on the black market for prices much higher than the market value (about three to eight times the cost of conventional seeds). Because many small-scale farmers cannot take loans from larger organisations, they are pushed into the arms of private money lenders with higher interest rates.

In addition to all this, although Bt cotton is supposed to prevent pests, reports have indicated that it may not be all it’s cracked up to be. Monsanto sells Bt cotton seeds, and farmers must also purchase pesticides from the same company to manage the resulting cotton crops. Many chemicals in these sprays are banned in the West yet are used by farmers without protective wear or training!

Tragically, often when farmers do die by suicide, it is by swallowing the pesticides they cannot afford to pay off.

The human cost

With its roots in the slave trade, the cotton industry certainly has a dubious past. But what about now?

The industry can’t seem to shake off the allegations of child slavery and forced labour at various stages of the process. However, we’ve seen some recent progress, with the International Labour Organisation stating that most forced labour has been eliminated from Uzbekistan’s cotton fields.

Then there are issues in places such as West and Central Africa and Brazil, where farmers cannot compete with the cost of US subsidised cotton. The World Trade Organisation conference in Nairobi in the summer of 2016 agreed to improve market access and eliminate export subsidies for cotton, but there’s still more work to be done.

Child labour is often used at various stages of the cotton production process, and even after the plants have been harvested, the conditions under which workers refine and process the raw cotton can amount to bonded labour.

If only there were a better way, right? Well, it just so happens there is.

What about organic cotton?

What’s all the hype over organic cotton? Apart from the fact that it doesn’t contain all those harmful chemicals (always a good starting point), organic cotton comes with other advantages. According to a study by Remake, hazardous pesticides applied during cotton manufacturing, including petroleum scours, heavy metals, flame retardants, ammonia, and formaldehyde, can also be detected in our clothes. So organic cotton isn’t just better for the health of the people growing it—it’s also considerably better for you to wear, too!

Organic cotton seeds are cheaper than Bt cotton, helping farmers escape the cycle of debt and poverty. And less pesticides = better for the environment, better for the farmers’ health, and better for you!

Of course, there is still the issue of how organic cotton is processed and turned into clothing, so it’s important to make sure that companies using organic cotton also have robust labour policies in place.

Some improvements

In 2018, 36 major brands, including Adidas, ASOS, H&M, and Burberry, pledged to use 100% sustainable cotton by 2025. This shows a growing demand for more sustainable cotton that reduces traditional cotton production’s social and environmental impacts, which is fantastic to see. What’s more, an increasing number of new solutions are seeing the light of day to help businesses trace their cotton: blockchain is one of these new technologies that can help the fashion industry become more ethical and sustainable. In fact, blockchain startup Bext360 has partnered with several fashion brands, such as C&A, PVH Corp, and Kering, as well as organisations including our good friends at Fashion For Good and C&A Foundation. They aim to bring more transparency to cotton supply chains by enabling businesses to verify the origins and ethics of the raw materials, fabrics, and garments they purchase.

If you’re interested in sustainable cotton, the CottonUP guide to sustainable cotton is a practical resource to inform and guide businesses looking to source better cotton, developed by several organisations aiming to increase the use of sustainable cotton internationally.

And remember, you can check out where companies stand on environmental and labour rights using the Good On You app and Directory to compare various brands’ stances on these issues. Of course, there are certain accreditations you can look for that make choosing fabrics that are sustainable at all levels of the production process easy. These include Fairtrade and Global Organic Textile Standard.

Here are a few of our favourite brands for organic cotton:

The post Material Guide: How Sustainable Is Cotton? appeared first on Good On You.

Play is the work of the child.

In a globalised world where factories are in a “race to the bottom” to provide cheap fashion fast, children are often involved in the supply chain. For unscrupulous businesses, they constitute a cheap, compliant, and easily exploited labour force.

The sad truth of child labour

Around 160 million children are employed worldwide, of whom an estimated 79 million are engaged in the kind of child labour the International Labour Organisation—and we—think should be eradicated.

UNICEF’s Article 32 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child states that “The government should protect children from work that is dangerous or might harm their health or their education.” This does not mean that children should not be allowed to do chores around the house or undertake suitable light work in the family business on the family farm, for instance. It does mean, however, that;

1. Children should not be put into situations that might be harmful to their health or general well being;
2. Asked to perform physically arduous tasks; or
3. Have their rights (including the right to play, relaxation, and an education) compromised.

Why does child labour exist?

The reason many companies choose to employ children is that they slip so easily under the radar. According to Sofie Ovaa of Stop Child Labour, one of the reasons children are so vulnerable is because “there is no supervision or social control mechanisms, no unions that can help them to bargain for better working conditions. These are very low-skilled workers without a voice, so they are easy targets.”

According to the 2019 Ethical Fashion Report, many companies are now aware of who their suppliers are at the final stage of manufacturing their clothing. “Although the majority of companies have begun tracing suppliers at these deeper stages of their supply chain, it is evident that many still have no knowledge of where their inputs and raw materials are being sourced. With less visibility, comes greater risk. The prominence of forced and child labour is well documented at these earlier stages of production.”

Child labour is a lose-lose situation

Because of their vulnerability, many companies will employ children in preference to adults. According to The Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations, “There is a clear link between child labour and low wages for adult workers, both in agriculture (cotton production) and in garment factories.” They argue that if “child labour was banned, labour would become more scarce, which would allow adult workers to negotiate better wages and improve labour conditions.”

This means that high levels of child labour may, in fact, correlate with adult unemployment and underemployment. If children are being paid less than adults to do the same job, families are worse off. If adults are paid a living wage, their children can have the opportunity to get an education, thus giving them more opportunities to break the cycle of poverty.

Some may argue for the value of giving children opportunities to work and learn skills from a young age, such as apprenticeships that set them up with a trade for the rest of their lives. However, there is a big difference between helping out on a neighbour’s farm or learning a worthwhile trade and working for 12 hours in an unsafe and unsanitary factory.

There is arguably no part of the fashion industry that contributes to the well-being of a young child or gives them skills they could not equally learn later in life. On the more extreme end of the spectrum, where children work long hours for little pay, this can be seen as prohibitive to a child ever moving into more skilled employment as an adult, as they will never have the opportunity to gain skills in other areas.

Child labour in the cotton industry

Child labour can be found at all levels of the fashion industry, and nowhere is this more evident than cotton production. In the cotton industry, children have historically been used to cross-pollinate the cotton plants, to harvest the crop, and in spinning, weaving, and dyeing mills.

This has been particularly evident in Uzbekistan, where government workers reportedly forced children to spend the summer months picking cotton and even threatened them with expulsion from school if they did not comply. However, after the campaigning and backlash from international activist organisations in the past few years, the ILO has reported “a huge drop in the number of school children being used in the cotton harvest.”

In cotton mills in Southern India in the past, poor girls were often enticed to work in circumstances that are virtually bonded labour. Factory managers may even have had hormones put in their food to stop them from menstruating, as women are seen to be less productive during their menstrual period. However, according to a recent report, the Indian textile industry has “stepped up efforts to eradicate employment of child labour so as to keep their exports intact in the world markets.”

“Fast fashion has engendered a race to the bottom, pushing companies to find ever-cheaper sources of labour,” says a UNICEF report. “That cheap labour is freely available in many of the countries where textile and garment production takes place.”

Given that only 11% of brands included in the 2021 Fashion Transparency Index publish selected raw material suppliers, this raises concerns regarding the extent to which the average consumer unknowingly supports the exploitative measures in many parts of the supply chain.

What can we do?

The world we live in encompasses a vast amount of inequality, which no doubt exacerbates child labour and the exploitation of millions. As informed citizens, we have a responsibility to use our voices and our wallets to create change. If consumers refuse to buy products from companies known to use child labour, it becomes worthwhile for them to find other means of production. This has been shown to work in the past with companies like Nike, which reformed its labour policies due to consumer pressure.

Although it can sound very bleak, things have been improving. The number of children in child labour has declined by one-third since 2000, from 246 million to 160 million children. Around half of them (79 million) are in hazardous work (down from 170 million in 2000). This was particularly the case for girls engaged in child labour, the rate of which fell by 40% since 2000, compared to 25% for boys. Despite this, the ILO reports that “Global progress against child labour has stalled since 2016”, as seen in the numbers, which have unfortunately held steady.

Despite being somewhat overwhelming, these stats paint the beginnings of an encouraging story. And several accreditations, such as Fair Trade, work to eradicate the worst forms of child labour.

The debates surrounding child labour are complex, which is why they require careful attention. Marginalised children and adults both need better options to begin to break the cycle of poverty. As consumers, we can take responsibility for our small role in the system.

It is possible to pay workers a fair wage and still make beautiful, affordable fashion. By choosing to support companies that don’t exploit the world’s most vulnerable groups, we can send a strong message.

The post Child Labour In The Fashion Industry appeared first on Good On You.

Zara may be one of the largest retailers of trendy fashion in the world, but it’s “Not Good Enough” for people, the planet, and animals. Discover nine more sustainable alternatives to Zara.

Accessible? Yes. Responsible? Not quite

Many people credit Zara with perfecting the art of fast fashion. It is a pioneer of super-fast turnaround times from design, manufacture, order, and distribution. Its twice-weekly drops of new lines that quickly sell out—creating a sense of urgency to buy—got many of us hooked on shopping for entertainment’s sake. Zara has been a key driver of the massive, wasteful, polluting, exploiting, and unsustainable fashion industry we have today: not exactly a legacy to be proud of.

Zara gets a rating of “Not Good Enough” from us. It has introduced some measures to put its business on a better path, such as the Closing the Loop program, and publishes a detailed list of suppliers. However, it’s not enough and Zara’s business model can never be truly sustainable. Promoting such rapid consumption is inherently harmful to both people and the planet.

That’s why we’ve listed a few of our favourite “Good” and “Great” brands that between them cover all bases in terms of reliable wardrobe go-to items all while respecting the planet, animals, and the people who make their clothes. Here are nine more ethical brands you’ll love more than Zara.

More sustainable alternatives to Zara

The post 9 More Sustainable Alternatives to Zara You Should Know About appeared first on Good On You.