"Room for Debate: The Human Cost of Cheap Clothing" (New York Times, Dec 2012)
The New York Times invited eight experts on globalisation, trade, workers' rights, business & human rights and corporate responsibility, to comment on "The Human Cost of Cheap Clothing" and issues of workplace safety in global supply chains in December 2012. The Times' introduction:
"Recent factory fires in Pakistan and Bangladesh have killed more than 400 people. Yet, the stricken garment manufacturers had apparently passed inspection — despite bars on windows and locked exits — and been deemed safe. These factories supply clothing to — and are in business because of — American companies like Wal-Mart and Sears. So where does the responsibility lie in improving worker safety, and what can be done about it?"
Below are excerpts fo the experts' contributions, with links to their full entries:
Company’s supply chains have now gone global, often managing more than 100,000 foreign suppliers on any given day. They source from developing countries, many of whom have lax --i f they exist at all -- government standards and regulations and an inability to enforce rules. In terms of gross domestic product, companies have now surpassed some countries when it comes to power and revenue. Western consumers demand more and more goods at lower and lower costs. Many keep up constantly with changing styles and trends, which in turn requires companies to place more and more pressure on their supply chains to keeps costs low, quality high and production on time.
However the expectations that companies operate in society’s best interest has never been higher.
There are real business costs to the company when workers die and factories are shut down, not to mention blows to its reputation.
It is simply unacceptable that many corporations respond to these tragedies with passive statements along the lines of “We were unaware.” Companies like Nike and Apple have learned this in spades, and as such, have improved both their safety guidelines and made their supply chains more transparent.
Indeed, the only responsible answer to a tragedy like the recent fire at Tazreen Fashions in Bangladesh is “We should have been aware, we are sympathetic to the loss of life, and here is our plan to mitigate such disaster moving forward.”
Earlier this fall Gap, Inc. introduced such a plan, its Four-Part Fire Safety Action Plan.
Responding early, accepting responsibly, developing an action plan and urging industry collaboration is the only way that companies will escape further loss of life and accidents in their supply chain.