A recent Sunday Times investigation into conditions in the factories of Leicester’s garment district revealed breaches of social distancing requirements and COVID-19 positive workers being ordered to report to work. Long-standing labour rights violations were also uncovered – workers reported pay as low as £3 per hour, harassment and bullying in the workplace, and the exploitation of the precarious living conditions of migrant and minority ethnic workers. Whilst the findings of the Sunday Times undercover journalist shocked many, this information is not new.
In fact, reports of such conditions in Leicester go back as far as 2014, and many MPs, workers, and activists acknowledge these conditions as an open industry secret. To some, a “Made in the UK” label may signal a high quality item manufactured under fair and legal working conditions, but, as attention turns to conditions in Leicester, the facts point to a wider and growing problem in the structure and practices of the global garment industry – a problem that the British garment industry cannot seem to escape.
LEICESTER CONDITIONS REVEALED
Leicester once stood proudly at the forefront of the British garment industry, as a place where skilled workers were respected, paid a decent wage, and received good terms and conditions of work. But with the turn of the century, outsourcing of garment labour to developing countries like Sri Lanka became more commonplace. This began a cycle of lower wages driving demand for lower prices. In turn, this forced wages closer to home to take a hit, and the high-quality factories and contracts Leicester was once known for began to deteriorate. With the rise of fast fashion and growing consumer demand for clothing that aligns with quickly changing social media trends, speed has become the main goal of the industry. As Nitin Passi, founder of online fast fashion brand Missguided explains, “Speed is our main USP and the UK is as quick as you can get it”.
Recent reports indicate wages as low as £3 per hour in Leicester garment factories; however, an earlier University of Leicester study, in 2014, also recorded comparable figures. This study presented pay far below the national minimum wage, with virtually all wages being paid cash-in-hand, and a near complete absence of employment contracts in Leicester factories. Verbal abuse and threats towards workers by factory management were also widely reported, even referred to as a constant “torture” endured by workers.
Whilst these conditions are certainly enforced most directly by factory owners and managers, the report highlighted the fact that lead firms’ buying practices and arrangements consistently undermined efforts of factory owners to improve conditions. It is important to recognise that such practices determine prices paid for garments, lead times given to factories, and terms of contracts - particularly in the garment industry, which operates as a buyer-driven supply chain with a starkly asymmetrical power imbalance.
The brand linked to the most recent labour rights violations in Leicester factories is online fast fashion retailer Boohoo, a company that owns brands including PrettyLittleThing and Nasty Gal. Boohoo is known forpractices that pressure factory owners into agreeing to low prices for orders. For example, Boohoo would hold open negotiations with multiple owners competing for orders in the same room as well as negotiate prices for orders that are clearly too low to allow factory owners to pay workers even the UK minimum wage (£8.72 for those 25 and older at time of writing). Despite Boohoo claiming not to have been aware of Leicester factory conditions, multiple reports cite fashion brands’ problematic purchasing practices as the main driver of labour rights abuses in the garment industry.
Following recent reports, Boohoo states that it has hired an unnamed third party to launch an investigation into allegations and asserts that it will terminate relationships with all factories that they find to be violating labour laws. The glaring problem with this response, however, is that Boohoo is effectively denying its own responsibility for the factory conditions. These statements avoid addressing how its own purchasing practices have forced wages and conditions in factories down. Cutting ties with these factories and inevitably moving production to other similarly set-up factories still flying under the radar does nothing to solve the problem. Yet, such a move does allow Boohoo to continue offering extremely low prices at the expense of workers’ rights, health, and welfare.
Brands like New Look cutting ties with Leicester factories, and reducing UK suppliers dramatically in general, has led to factories relying on brands like Boohoo that do not enforce labour standards for business. There is a clear problem with the practice of cutting ties with factories rather than increasing prices paid for garments, both morally and practically. For workers’ rights to be prioritised, this response must change.
EXPLOITATION AS AN INDUSTRY NORM
Whilst the conditions revealed in Leicester are shocking to many, they are not exceptional in the global garment industry and in fact reflect something of an industry norm. UK consumers have been purchasing goods made under similar conditions in factories in Myanmar, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and many more for decades. Recent reports also reflect illegal conditions of low pay, unsafe conditions, and informal employment in Los Angeles. Similarly, reports present garment workers being required to report to work despite COVID-19 restrictions and not being given PPE.
Reports on decent work and purchasing practices in global supply chains by the International Labour Organisation (ILO) highlight the prevalence of unregulated factories, unauthorised subcontracting, forced labour, and child labour as a result of fashion brands’ continued prerssuing for low prices. The ILO also emphasises the role of fashion brands in upholding domestic minimum wage requirements – according to their survey, only 17% of brands were willing to adjust their prices to accommodate for increases in national minimum wage requirements in Bangladesh.
Similar to the case of Boohoo severing ties with factories in Leicester, the ILO points out the paradoxical nature of brands pressuring governments to increase minimum wages, whilst also refusing to increase the prices they pay to factories in order to allow them to pay such wages. This paradox suggests that pressuring governments and cutting ties with factories “discovered” to be paying illegally low wages are not genuine bids to improve labour conditions for garment workers. These actions are more so attempts to reassure customers and generate an image of corporate social responsibility.
Similarly, the recent news of corporations like ASOS and Amazon severing their ties to Boohoo sidesteps the issue by directing attention primarily to Boohoo and away from themselves while any consumer could easily discover that ASOS and Amazon are also known to perpetuate similar practices.
TIME FOR INTERVENTION
The recent investigation by the Sunday Times into labour standards in Leicester’s garment factories signalsserious problems to many in the UK, and a brief look into reports on the matter from the past five years throws up a serious question: why didn’t the British government act on this issue years ago? Even last year in a session on the Environmental Audit Committee’s Fixing Fashion Report, where labour rights issues like these were brought to the attention of the UK government, it rejected every single proposal for action and reform made by the Committee.
Widening the lens to look at the global garment industry indicates that these are not just issues in the microcosm of Leicester. In fact, extremely low wages, workplace threats and harassment, and a lack of formal employment contracts all arise as industry standards in most countries with large garment industries. These issues are all linked to the growth of the fast fashion industry and the accelerating lead times given from design to store shelf and driven by the rise in demand for quickly-accessible garments reflective of social media trends.
Whilst fast fashion brands like Boohoo and many others can be seen as driving these damaging and illegal practices, we cannot look to them for a solution - no amount of corporate social responsibility statements, self-reporting, or voluntary investigations will solve these issues. Labour laws must be enforced by governments, and this must be done through dedicating political will and funds into improving union representation, worker conditions, and pay in the sector – particularly for women and migrant workers.
Siân is a Human Rights master’s student at University College London. She currently works coordinating a network of UK supporters for AdvocAid, an NGO providing holistic access to justice for women and girls in Sierra Leone. Her research interests include human rights and global supply chains, the garment industry, gender, and global health.