The cost of buying cheap...

ash28

Generali wrote: »

Yes, free markets will sort this out if consumers take responsibility for what they buy.

Betamax went by the wayside because people wanted to buy VHS (yeah !!!!!!, ha).

If you want chickens to have nice lives only buy chickens that have had nice lives. If you want children to die so you can buy cheap clothes then buy clothes from child killers (e.g. New Look and Primark).

That's the great thing about capitalism. You can vote with your wallet in favour of or against factory owners that want to kill mothers and their children. I tend to vote against that stuff. How will you all vote?

Again that's a bit harsh....especially about New Look......

Using tables from the Ethical Consumer, which rates high street shops on range of issues - treatment of workers being one of them, New Look Organic came 2nd out of 29 stores and New Look 3rd.

Top was Bonmarche.....bottom was Asda George - as Asda is owned by Walmart that wasn't entirely a surprise.

23/29 was Primark just below River Island clothing, Marks and Spencer clothing and John Lewis clothing and above Tesco, Sainsburys and Asda.

http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/buyers guides/clothing/clothesshops.aspx

To label either Primark or New Look as child killers is unfair.....especially to New Look....just because a company sells cheap clothing it doesn't necessarily make it an unethical retailer....you just seem to think it does. If people are happy to pay more money for clothing made by a company that charges a lot of money for clothing made under similar conditions then that is for them, their conscience and their pocket.

It isn't just the clothing manufacture that's questionable but also the source of the raw materials....cotton for instance....Uzbekistan exports cotton to China, India and Bangladesh....Uzbekistan also until very recently used enforced child labour to harvest the cotton...no cotton picking - no high school. I think the child labour may have been banned very recently but enforced adult labour is still used.

It's easy for a company to have a policy about ethics but another thing for them to actually do anything about it. And too many of them seem to pay lip service to their policies. And I don't just mean the Primarks. The big fashion houses are probably the worst offenders. Just because someone is prepared to pay several hundred pounds for an item of clothing it doesn't mean it's been ethically produced....often quite the opposite with many big fashion houses falling below the level of Primark and the UK supermarkets.

It's the whole supply chain not just the garment manufacture that should be under scrutiny.

And surprisingly the most ethical supermarket in the UK is the Coop and not M&S or Waitrose as I'd have guessed.

CLAPTON

the concept of a ethical consumer is a rather bizarre one

surely first comes an ethical person

and of course an ethical person believes in equal distribution of income world wide; to each according to their needs and from each according to their abilities

until such time comes the unintended consequences of 'fair trade' type movements somewhat undermines their claim to being any more ethical than other type of trade.

Generali

CLAPTON wrote: »

the concept of a ethical consumer is a rather bizarre one

surely first comes an ethical person

and of course an ethical person believes in equal distribution of income world wide; to each according to their needs and from each according to their abilities

until such time comes the unintended consequences of 'fair trade' type movements somewhat undermines their claim to being any more ethical than other type of trade.

Why would it be ethical to believe in equal distribution of income? If we are all equal under the law we can never have income distributed equally.

ash28

CLAPTON wrote: »

the concept of a ethical consumer is a rather bizarre one

surely first comes an ethical person

and of course an ethical person believes in equal distribution of income world wide; to each according to their needs and from each according to their abilities

until such time comes the unintended consequences of 'fair trade' type movements somewhat undermines their claim to being any more ethical than other type of trade.

I don't believe that an being ethical means you are a socialist and want global redistribution of income, IMHO it means having respect for other human beings (or other sentient beings) and not just using them as a means to an end.

I know people who try never to use supermarkets and try and use smaller independent retailers, I know people who only ever buy free range chicken because although the end result is the same the chicken has a better life than a battery chicken. Similar for pork, outdoor reared pigs as opposed to caged pigs. Personally I generally use a local butcher for meat, it's all sourced locally (within the county) and is quite often a better price than the supermarkets....but people are brainwashed into thinking the supermarkets are always cheaper and that often isn't true.

And if someone feels strongly enough to try and avoid some of the big clothing retailers because they feel their overseas workers are treated badly or because of environmental issues...that's for them to decide. Personally I was surprised at how poorly M&S and John Lewis fared in the clothing stakes - a bit disappointed too, I would have thought they would have up among the best of them not among the worst. I don't use Primark or the supermarkets for clothes but I do use M&S and John Lewis.

On the other hand I do understand the reasons why there are a lot of child workers in some countries.....in some cases it's either work or starve and I know what I would rather they did and it isn't starve. Though in Bangaldesh I think the legal age for working in a clothing factory is 16.....whether the contractors our big retailers use flout the law I don't know...but if they do it goes back to the big retailers having policies in place that they pay more than lip service to. The school leaving age is around 10 in Bangladesh and many don't even reach that, children generally work on the informal economy, local factories and brickworks for the local market.....children as young as 5 can be breaking bricks.

The fashion for sandblasted jeans is an issue...there are 2 ways to sand blast jeans....one is literally sandblasting which knackers the lungs of the sandblaster the other is by hand....one is unsafe for the worker but relatively quick and other while safe for the worker is more labour intensive and takes longer...if I was buying a pair I'd rather be paying a pound or two more and buy the more "ethically" produced pair.

I used to work for a global business that was (is still) family owned and they used to visit the various plants around the world on a fairly regular basis....the visits were always known about in advance and as we knew the things they didn't like to see, we made sure they never saw them...although they were there, just not on a visit. All it would have taken would have been an unannounced visit and all would have been revealed.

CLAPTON

Generali wrote: »

Why would it be ethical to believe in equal distribution of income? If we are all equal under the law we can never have income distributed equally.

Why does an 'ethical' person believe in a 'little bit' more for some poor worker abroad but doesn't believe in a 'lot more'?

The discussion isn't about being ethical; it's about feeling virtuous and good.

I have no problem with that, but there is nothing ethical about not buying products that are produced by child labour or non 'fair' trade coffee without knowledge of the alternatives facing the poor people affected.

fc123

I thought I would post up a comment from trade paper Drapers as he wrote from an insiders point of view.


http://www.drapersonline.com/5048655.article

Readers' comments (3)

• Anonymous | 29 April 2013 3:37 pm
  Before we point fingers at Primark or any other retailer sourcing from Bangladesh ...one should take a closer look at Bangladesh’s Governments lack of ambition. With over 4000 factories and one of the country’s biggest foreign currency earners and employers...what has the Government done to protect, secure and create an environment for global retailers to be associated with the Country.
• 
  It is not global retailers who add pricing pressure- costings are very logical - majority of all raw materials are the same in any other part of the world. The only advantage is GSP and monthly salary cost- all other factors are virtually the same in any other part of the world.
• 
  In Bangladesh each factory requires a min of 16 certificates each from different government agencies to trade; the level of corruption involved to ‘buy’ these certificates is beyond belief; the level of bureaucracy created by agency staff if the factory owners do not provide ‘financial incentives is beyond understanding. There is not a single political member of the ruling party or the opposition who in some way or other does not have a vested interest in the garment Industry.
• 
  Let’s be clear on what is driving the real pressure on pricing ...one thing for sure it is not the global retailers; the pricing pressure is driven by Greed and Corruption at every stage;
• 
  • Greed: from factory owners (driving the latest high end four wheel drives and living lavish lifestyles) drain the business
  • Corruption: merchandisers in sourcing offices who take anything from 5% to 10% commission form factory owners to placing orders.
  • Corruption: customs departments for incoming raw materials to be released with the minimum amount of bureaucracy hindrances.
  • Corruption: Sourcing office QC’s who charge 1 taka per piece they approve- if their demand is not met the goods go for continuous re-screening.
  • Corruption: factory merchandisers who receive kick backs from polybag to carton suppliers for orders placed.
  • Lack of respect for legislation: how many factories trade in buildings that have been condemned – inspectors paid to look the other way.
  • Factory owners are forced to keep monthly salaries down to compensate for the cost of corruption.
  What has the Bangladesh government done to support the industry?
  • How many apparel parks have been created to support the industry?
  • Why not one government agency to manage the compliance for factory set up?
  • What infrastructure projects are in place to support the industry in the next 10 years?
  • How can a country with Foreign Reserves in excess of $14bn- do nothing to support global retailers who have contributed to Bangladesh’s growth?
  It is about time the Bangladesh Government takes responsibility and cleans up its act and stops accepting greed and corruption as a way of life; pointing fingers at the western retailers who work incredibility hard to support the country is not the solution.
• 
  One point to note- the bank on the ground floor sealed their offices as soon as they were informed of the cracks- staff were sent home...what other than greed and lack of responsibility for his work force did the owner force his workers to enter the building.

  ---

• Anonymous | 29 April 2013 3:46 pm
  While Primark and the other firms involved including the usa firms are trying their best to achieve proper and safe working conditions it is not always achieveable...when you chase price at the expense of all else these incidents while horific are bound to happen...as price forces the retailor to continue to search for new and cheaper markets ...its a cycle that is hard to stop...there is a cost to safety and proper working conditions and until the retailor feels that the consumer is willing to pay a reasonable price there will continue to be incidents like this..

Demonstrators target Primark as Bangladesh factory owner arrested

29 April 2013 | By Alex Lawson
Demonstrators targeted Primark’s Oxford Street store over the weekend as the owner of the factory complex, which collapsed in Bangladesh last week killing at least 377 people, was arrested.


Mohammed Sohel Rana, who had not been seen since Wednesday’s collapse of the eight storey building, which supplied clothing to multinational retailers including Primark and Mango, was flown back to the capital Dhaka by police helicopter from the country’s border. His wife had already been arrested.
Rana had approval to construct five floors but added three more floors illegally, it has been reported.
A further nine survivors were found yesterday, in addition to the 29 rescued alive on Saturday. However a fire broke out as rescuers tried to cut through steel yesterday injuring three people and killing one, the AFP agency reported.
The building housed five clothing factories employing 3,122 staff. It is not known how many people were in the building when it collapsed however 2,500 people have been accounted for.

Police have arrested three factory bosses – Mahmudur Rahman Tapash, chairman of New Wave Apparels, its managing director Bazlus Samad and Aminul Islam, chairman of Phantom Apparels – as well as two engineers who approved the building’s design.
Campaign group War on Want targeted Primark’s store at the west end of Oxford Street on Saturday carrying placards. They have called for the retailer to sign the Bangladesh Fire and Building Safety Agreement to end the “appallingly unsafe factory conditions” in the Asian nation

Primark said last week it is seeking an agreed methodology for testing the integrity of buildings where there are multiple factories on multiple floors with different tenants. “It is not easy to agree how this will be achieved, but this is what the company is seeking and it will ask the ETI [Ethical Trading Initiative] to look into this issue,” a Primark spokesman said

fc123

I have resisted writing on this thread as my post would become waaaaay too long and go on for hours .

I have visited many garment factories in the UK and Romania. I know manufactirers over here who source from China and Bangladesh and have many tales to tell of conditions in some.

The 1st thing to remember is that sitting at sewing machine for 8 hours or more every day is back breaking, mind numbing and a really hard way to earn a living. It wouldn't make a difference if that sewing machine was sited in a plush office suite in Canary Wharf, the actual job and drudgery is the same.

Factory environments are very dusty and noisy..they hum continually.

If I supply a national chain I have to sign a doc saying that all my sourcing is 'ethical'.....and then it's how ethical is defined.

I have personally visited every source of my supply chain (mainly to put a face to my business and to check them out).
Romania has similar problems to Bangladesh concerning local govt corruption. His electricity gets switched off regularly unless he pays a bribe. He has a 24 hour guard around his place, not to protect it from thieves but to protect it from local !!!!!/govt officials who want to charge him a fee to stop the building being damaged.
He pays his staff a higher than average wage and a few brighter girls are learning English so there are more of them to communicate with us, the customers.

I don't pay rock bottom for my goods....about 50% less that I pay my UK factory as my quantities are small (300 - 500 per option) and I am in the 'special bit' along with some top end Italian labels. We have our own line. I know the supervisors well + the machinists names.

He also manufactures for the bottom end of the High St but in volume. A blouse could be £2.30 (all in fabric and make) but he makes 10,000 units.....so the price can be that low just due to the volume.
It is far from being a sweatshop and is much nicer and cleaner than several I have visited in Leicester.

We often get pulled up on our prices by customers as they are seen as high. The reason they are higher is because we have to mix the costings with our UK made products (as I can't retail one @ a lower price as it was Romania made), we have development costs that aren't watered down by economy of scale and I use very good quality fabrics knitted in Italy and Turkey (both top end manufacturers).

I can't explain this to every customer who wants to pay £30 for my product rather than the £60 RP....so I don't

I have seen copies of my label in the USA made in China on sale @ $19 and there is someone in Russia who copies our product right down to the brand label with Made in England on it but they are made in China...and no, I can't sue them for breach of copyright.:)

wotsthat

Generali wrote: »

I call BS on that. It's US consumer groups that have pulled up Nike, Foxconn (Apple) and Gap on how their third party subsidiaries' workers are treated.

There's more media interest that's all. Maybe that's led by consumer groups or maybe in a world of 24 hour news ethical trading issues are more likely to be reported.

My own anecdotal evidence from visiting Asian factories and bumping into American peers is that they are less likely to even step inside the production areas of a plant - their agendae tend to be more office based.

US working practice are skewed more towards the employer compared to the UK or Europe. I see no reason to suggest that they lead the way in progressing worker rights in Asia.

wotsthat

fc123 wrote: »

Romania has similar problems to Bangladesh concerning local govt corruption. His electricity gets switched off regularly unless he pays a bribe. He has a 24 hour guard around his place, not to protect it from thieves but to protect it from local !!!!!/govt officials who want to charge him a fee to stop the building being damaged.

How do you reconcile this with the requirements of the bribery act? As I read it it creates an offence for bribes to be paid on your behalf.

Even in more advanced countries like Brazil corruption is endemic. They have a system meant to prevent amazonian wood species being used in factory steam generators. The way it works is that someone chops down a tree in the Amazon and bribes a local official to supply a certificate so it can be sold. After a few more bribes the wood ends up at the factory 100% correctly certificated, a local official turns up inspects the wood, notes a banned species and sticks his hand out....

grizzly1911

Primark occupied a floor of the collapsed building and workers there were suppliers to the brand.
A spokesman for the company said: "Primark shares 98% of its factories with other well-known retailers. Through the Ethical Trading Initiative, the company will continue to work to improve working conditions, as it has been for several years.
"The company accepts all its responsibilities in this disaster. It is providing assistance in the region, and will take further steps in due course."


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22327930


Not sure if Primark occupied the floor or their supplier?