The Fashion System of Injustice

This is a guest blog post by Mary Beth Graham, events and policy advisor at the Scottish Women’s Convention, and my fellow volunteer at Fashion Revolution Scotland.

On the 1st of May, we celebrated International Workers’ Day. Also known as May Day or Labour Day, it serves as a reminder of “the struggles for dignity and justice at work that have gone before. And that the fight to improve the lives of working people continues.” Unfortunately, through this series, we’re learning that this fight is difficult to win, as fashion brands continue to avoid legal accountability and responsibility for the people harmed in the process of their profit-making. We have laid out the structure of international human rights law, which makes governing the transnational activities of corporations an almost impossible task.

To its credit, the United Nations have undertaken a number of attempts towards repair in this flawed legal system, responding to increasingly desperate calls from grassroots organisations and human rights advocates throughout the decades. The most successful of these efforts began in the early 2000s, when they appointed Professor John Ruggie to look directly at the relationship between business and human rights. He proceeded to work with the many affected, interconnected elements that we have discussed, including business, government, human rights victims and members of society. His work resulted in ‘The United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights’ (UNGPs), which were endorsed in 2011. The UNGPs pose that it is the State’s duty to protect human rights, the Corporation’s responsibility to respect human rights, and the State’s duty to provide access to remedy, a process within which the Corporation should also participate. This is all laid out really clearly in the quick video below, and I find the idea much easier to grasp if you place it into the context of the fashion industry, step by step!

These UNGPs proposed a structure of ‘Shared Responsibility,’ which sounds like a great solution, right? Everyone has their part to play. It’s made clear who has to do what. And, to top it off, the most vulnerable people in all of this, the workers, will be able to seek justice if either side fails to hold up their end of the bargain. But there was one big problem. This new framework brought forward no new legal obligations. Professor Ruggie defended this, reminding countries of their existing legal obligations to human rights treaties, and companies of their ‘expected conduct’ in respecting human rights. Indeed, his work brought resounding praise and endorsement from national governments and the global business community. But many human rights defenders felt otherwise, with Friends of the Earth’s Lucia Ortiz stating,

“Five years on, we see that companies are still engaged in operations and projects that violate these rights, and there is no efficient enforcement mechanism nor an instrument for redress for affected people. The UNGPs have not brought us any closer to getting access to justice and stop corporate impunity.”

At this point, I’d like to return to the definition of Fast Fashion quoted in Part One of this series, which reads, “Clothes that are made and sold cheaply, so that people can buy new clothes often.” Notice that the only ‘people’ mentioned here are the consumers. In the widespread understanding of the fashion industry, we have so often erased the human element of production. We have allowed the most vital people, the workers, to go unmentioned. To be made invisible. In turn, their involvement is forgotten, their experiences ignored, and their voices silenced.

This is why it is essential for us to demand awareness of #WhoMadeMyClothes, and in doing so, develop an understanding of what these people face in the name of fashion. It is why we need to look closer at the human rights violations taking place throughout the industry, and to recognise how the structure of international human rights law, and the framework of ‘Shared Responsibility’ fails so many. Here, I will outline the key issues with human rights observed in the wider sector, and then give brief insight into the experiences of workers in Bangladesh.

I will report on circumstances prior to the global pandemic, but strongly recommend you read about the unique, very serious impacts of Coronavirus on our industry through Fashion Revolution’s Report and Clean Clothes Campaign’s Live Blog. In the small(ish) space of this article, it is difficult to give each area the full extent of analysis deserved. Instead, I have suggested some further reading, sourced mainly from key organisations working to seek real, meaningful change within clothing and textiles. I hope this will be a useful resource, and provide you with plenty to read, learn and revolt as lockdown continues.

In the South Asian country of Bangladesh, garments make up roughly 84% of exports, which are thought to have generated more than $30 billion for their economy last year alone. Around 4.1 million people are employed in the country’s garment sector, though it is thought that more than 15 million people rely on this industry both directly and indirectly, with their 4,500+ garment factories also requiring roles such as truck drivers, port workers and food sellers. It’s imperative to note that 85% of the garment workers are women, a common gender majority found in garment workforces across the producing countries, and a predominant intersectional issue which will be focussed on in the next blog.

Lack of Living Wage

Article 23, Part 3 of the UDHR states, “Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.” War on Want, a movement committed to social justice, reflect this right in their demands for workers’ living wage - defining this as enough to provide a decent standard of living for both the worker and their families, earned in a fair, standard working week. They go on to clearly outline, “Such a wage must be sufficient to provide nutrition, shelter, clothing, health care and education. It should cover other expenses such as communication and travel that are an essential part of life in the modern world. And it should provide enough so that a worker can save a small amount each week.”

Wages for garment workers in Bangladesh have long been a highly contentious issue, but in the last few years they have particularly taken focus, gaining significant, worldwide media attention. In December 2018, the minimum wage increased from 5,300 taka ($63 USD) to 8,000 taka ($96 USD) per month. While a wage rise of 51% may seem impressive at first glance, workers and union leaders titled the rise ‘outrageous’ considering their initial demands for a 16,000 taka minimum wage, which still falls short of the living wage calculation for Bangladesh. Tens of thousands of garment workers went on strike in December and January and took to the streets protesting the decision. They were met with excessive force from police, who used rubber bullets, tear gas and water cannons to disperse crowds, and later proceeded to raid homes of garment workers, shooting with rubber bullets. One worker was killed. When thousands attempted to return to work, they were either arrested or dismissed in retaliation, with factory owners blacklisting individuals to ensure they’d struggle to find future employment elsewhere.

Modest increases for lower and mid-range worker grades were announced, but the minimum wage remained the same, less than half of a calculated living wage for Bangladesh.

Image Source: Human Rights Watch/AP Photo

Excessive Overtime Work

Article 24 of the UDHR states, “Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.” Dangerously low wages, combined with unrealistic deadlines set by brands (and agreed to by factory management) have created a fashion manufacturing industry where working hours are long, unsafe and unacceptable. It has been found that workers are regularly forced to stay later, according to last minute demands from managers, with no choice, as their refusal can so easily lead to dismissal.

In Bangladesh, a Fair Wear Foundation study between 2012 and 2015, found that 97% of the garment factories they interviewed relied on excessive overtime hours being worked by staff, with 60 hour weeks, across seven days, a typical occurrence. Workers are offered different levels of overtime each week, dependent on production targets, which means their ability to take home a wage that meets their needs fluctuates constantly, increasing anxiety, stress, and vulnerability to reach for short-term help in emergencies, such as high interest loans. Devastatingly, it has been found that the average age of workers leaving the garment sector is between 30-35, as “they become physically weak from working under extreme pressure for so long.”

Image Source: Mengxin Li for Human Rights Watch

Failures in Occupational Health & Safety

Article 23, Part 1 of the UDHR states, “Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.” Clean Clothes Campaign say that despite over 100 years of increasing regulations and international legal progress, “workers continue to lose their health and lives while stitching our clothes.” Three distinct, devastating tragedies brought worldwide attention to health and safety issues relating to the garment industry - the factory fire in Ali Enterprises in Pakistan, which killed 250 people, the factory fire in Tazreen Fashions in Bangladesh, which killed at least 112 people, and the collapse of Rana Plaza in Bangladesh, which killed 1,138 people.

But the threats to safety, and resulting health impacts, go far deeper than the factory structures alone, with estimates of around 27 million workers in our global supply chains are suffering from work-related disease or illness. Starvation wages, combined with long, strenuous working hours and poor air ventilation, mean fainting is a common occurrence. People are exposed to toxic chemicals, reverberating noise and repetitive muscle movement. Workers are forced to use low-quality equipment or receive inadequate training for hazardous machinery, increasing likelihood of injuries such as burns and puncture wounds. Lack of sufficient rest breaks lead to ergonomic injuries and musculoskeletal disorders, as well as poor nutrition and chronic dehydration. Verbal, psychological harassment and violent abuse are used by management as means of worker control. The people who make our clothes in fast fashion supply chains deal with an unsafe, unfair and appalling work environment on almost every level. This area is universally destructive. We must fight for change.

Lack of Worker Voice

Article 23, Part 4 of the UDHR states, “Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.” The ability to organise with your fellow workers is vital in every industry. Trade unions allow workers to negotiate pay and conditions, voice concerns or disagreements and seek resolutions, and their defence and support is particularly vital when employers make big decisions relating to disciplinaries or dismissals. In short, a Union helps workers defend their rights. In a manufacturing industry as deplorable as fashion, Unionisation would be one huge step towards transformation.

Yet, in Bangladesh, those supporting unions, or attempting to create them, are met with intimidation, harrassment and even dismissal. Human Rights Watch report only 10% of factories across the country have registered unions, with the state government frequently refusing applications for their set-up. Trade Union leaders recently spoke of their concerns relating to governmental intervention and police crackdowns, particularly during protests. In current circumstances, we are seeing workers thrown out of jobs and denied wages. When individuals stand alone against these powers, they are threatened, silenced, or punished. One garment worker and factory union leader, Mosammat Shorifunnesa, says “The trade union is not just an organisation, it is a bond between the deprived and the voiceless that enables us to have collective power.”

Child Labour

While children are not specifically focussed on in The UDHR, a large number of international human rights instruments focus on the protection of the child, and there is a widespread understanding that imposing labour on children undermines very many of their basic human rights. The incredibly complex and opaque supply chain system within the fashion industry creates a shadowy place to hide the horrors of child labour. In 2014, one report found that young women’s families in South India were being promised well-paid jobs, a safe home, proper nutrition, an education, and generous wage renumeration, all for girls who would instead end up in “appalling conditions…and the worst forms of child labour.”

Across Bangladesh, children, very many of them young females, are sent to factories to work to relieve their family of starvation. One report estimates as many as 3.5 million children between the ages of 5 and 17 work in the garment industry there. Another report, in 2016, found that 15% of children aged between just 6 and 14 worked, on average, 64 hours per week. The many dangers discussed above, relating to Occupational Health and Safety, are greatly increased when involving children. These children lose out on their basic rights to health and to an education. They lose out on their childhood.