Weaving ethics into clothes faces snags

This undated product image provided by Fair Indigo shows one of the company's product. Fair Indigo is an online retailer that sells clothes and accessories that are certified by Fair Trade U.S.A., including $59.90 pima organic cotton dresses, $45.90 faux wrap skirts and $100 floral ballet flats. (AP Photo/Fair Indigo)

This undated product image provided by Fair Indigo shows one of the company's product. Fair Indigo is an online retailer that sells clothes and accessories that are certified by Fair Trade U.S.A., including $59.90 pima organic cotton dresses, $45.90 faux wrap skirts and $100 floral ballet flats. (AP Photo/Fair Indigo)

Sunday, May 5, 2013

NEW YORK - Consumers can recycle waste, grow their own food and drive a fuel-efficient car. But being socially responsible isn’t so easy when it comes to clothes.

Last month’s building collapse in Bangladesh, which killed hundreds of clothing factory workers, put a spotlight on the fact that people in poor countries often risk their lives working in unsafe factories to make cheap Tshirts and underwear.

The disaster, which comes after a fire in another Bangladesh factory killed 112 people last November, also highlights something that can trouble socially conscious shoppers: It’s nearly impossible to make sure the clothes they buy come from factories with safe working conditions.

Very few companies sell clothing that’s so-called ethically made, or marketed as being made in factories that maintain safe working conditions. Ethically made clothes make up a tiny fraction of 1 percent of the overall $1 trillion global fashion industry. And with a few exceptions, such as the 250-store clothing chain American Apparel Inc., most aren’t national brands.

It’s even more difficult to figure out if clothes are made in safe factories if they’re bought from retailers that don’t specifically market their clothes as ethically made. That’s because major chains typically use a complex web of suppliers in countries such as Bangladesh, which often contract business to other facto-ries. That means the retailers themselves don’t always know the origin of clothes when they’re made overseas.

And even a made-in-USA label only provides a small amount of assurance for a socially conscious shopper. The tailors who assembled the skirt may have had good working conditions. But the fabric might have been woven overseas by people who don’t.

“For the consumer, it’s virtually impossible to know whether the product was manufactured in safe conditions,” said Craig Johnson, president of Customer Growth Partners, a retail consultancy. “For U.S.-made labels, you have good assurance, but the farther you get away from the U.S., the less confidence you have.”

Most global retailers have standards for workplace safety in the factories that make their clothes. And the companies typically require that contractors and subcontractors follow these guidelines. But policing factories around the world is a costly, time-consuming process that’s difficult to manage.

There were five factories alone in the building that collapsed in Bangladesh. They produced clothing for big name retailers, including British retailer Primark, Children’s Place and Canadian company Loblaw Inc., which markets the Joe Fresh clothing line.

“I have seen factories in [Bangladesh and other countries], and I know how difficult it is to monitor the factories to see they are safe,” says Walter Loeb, a New York-based retail consultant.

And some experts say that retailers have little incentive to be more proactive because the public isn’t pushing them to do so.

America’s Research Group, which interviews 10,000 to 15,000 consumers a week mostly on behalf of retailers, said that even in the aftermath of the two deadly tragedies in Bangladesh, shoppers seemed more concerned with fit and price than whether their clothes were made in factories where workers are safe and make reasonable wages.

C. Britt Beemer, chairman of the firm, said when he polls shoppers about their biggest concerns, they rarely mention “where something is made” or “abuses” in the factories in other countries.

“We have seen no consumer reaction to any charges about harmful working conditions,” he said.

In light of the recent disasters, though, some experts and retailers said things are slowly changing. They said more shoppers are starting to pay attention to labels and where their clothes are made.

Swati Argade, a clothing designer who promotes her Bhoomki boutique in the Brooklyn borough of New York City as “ethically fashioned,” said people have been more conscious about their clothing’s origin.

The store, which means “of the earth” in Hindi, sells apparel ranging from $18 organic-cotton underwear to $1,000 coats that are primarily made in Indian or Peruvian factories owned by their workers or that are designed by New York City designers.

“After the November fire in Bangladesh, many customers say it made them more aware of the things they buy and who makes them,” Argade said.

Some retailers are also beginning to do more to ease shoppers’ consciences.

Bentonville-based Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the world’s largest retailer, said in January that it would cut ties with any factory that failed an inspection, instead of giving warnings first as had been its practice. The Gap Inc., which owns the Gap, Old Navy and Banana Republic chains, hired its own chief fire inspector to oversee factories that make its clothing in Bangladesh.

Still, Wal-Mart, Gap and many other global retailers continue to back off from a union-sponsored proposal to improve safety throughout Bangladesh’s $20 billion garment industry. As part of the legally binding agreement, retailers would be liable when there’s a factory fire and would have to pay factory owners more to make repairs.

Fair Trade U.S.A. is a nonprofit that was founded in 1998 to audit products to make sure workers overseas are paid fair wages and work in safe conditions. The group is hoping to appeal to shoppers who care about where their clothing is made. In 2010, it expanded the list of products that it certifies beyond coffee, sugar and spices to include clothing.

The organization, known for its black, green and white label with an image of a person holding a bowl in front of a globe, said it’s working with small businesses such as PrAna, which sells yoga pants and other sportswear items to merchants such as REI and Zappos. It also said it’s in discussions with other big-name brands that it declined to name.

To use the group’s label on their products, companies have to follow certain safety and wage standards based on established industry auditing groups, including the International Labor Organization. They include such things as paying workers based on a formula that allows them to meet basic cost-of-living needs.

Local nongovernment groups train the retailers’ workers on their rights. And workers are provided a grievance process to report problems directly to the Fair Trade organization.

Still, well under 1 percent of clothing sold in the U.S. is stamped with the group’s label. And shoppers will find that clothing certified by the group is typically about 5 percent more expensive.

Fair Indigo is an online retailer that sells clothes and accessories certified by FairTrade U.S.A., including pima organic-cotton dresses, faux wrap skirts and floral ballet flats.

Rob Behnke, Fair Indigo’s co-founder and president, said some shoppers are calling in and mentioning the latest fatalities in Bangladesh. The retailer, which generates annual sales of just under $10 million, had a 35 percent rise in revenue compared with last year after the disaster. That was in line with the 38 percent revenue surge it had during the November-December season, after the factory fire.

Behnke said that the company’s catalog and website - which feature some of the garment workers in countries such as Peru - are resonating with shoppers.

“We are connecting consumers with the garment workers on a personal level,” he says. “We are showing that the garment workers are just like you and me.”

While some retailers are working to improve safety overseas, others are making a made-in-USA pitch.

Los Angeles-based American Apparel, which says it knits, dyes, cuts and sews all of its products in-house in California, touts “sweatshop free” working conditions on its website. The company highlights how it pays decent wages, offers subsidized lunches, free onsite massages and an onsite medical clinic.

American Apparel officials didn’t return phone calls for this article, but in an interview in November, the company’s founder and chief executive, Dov Charney, said that companies can control working conditions, but they need to bring the production to the United States.

“When the company knows the face of its worker, that’s important,” Charney said.

Business, Pages 63 on 05/05/2013