H&M has come under fire after a Swedish broadcast, ‘Kalla Fakta’ (‘Cold Facts’), claimed the high-street retailer wasn’t doing enough to prevent exploitation of its workers.
H&M is one of the world’s biggest clothing chains and it is flourishing. In last year alone , it made a profit of over 15 billion kronor (1.4 billion pounds), while their textile workers in Cambodia do not have enough money to cover basic needs such as food and water. At the same time, H&M claims to be committed to social responsibility, but is it really?

Cambodia is one of H&M’s most important supplier countries. The monthly salary in a Cambodian factory is about 41 pounds. Deuar Sophon, one of the factory workers interviewed in the documentary, works about 70 hours a week, which adds up to 15 pence an hour. This pay is too low for a family to live on, and it is common for workers in the textile industry to take out loans in order to have enough money for food.

H&M claims their vision is that ‘all business operations shall be run in a way that is economically, socially and environmentally sustainable’, but takes no responsibility for the factories from which they buy their fabric. H&M takes full responsibility only after the clothing has been made and shipped off to Europe.

But don’t get me wrong: H&M is not the only company with a few skeletons in the closet. An increasing number of companies have decided to publicise their ethical guidelines, however there is no guarantee for customers that the suppliers will follow them. Labour behind the Label, a charity which frequently publishes reports to raise awareness of working conditions for garment workers, showed that several companies, including top high street retailer Gap, are only just beginning to accept the idea of a living wage.

In Bangladesh, H&M has demanded higher minimum wages from the government, but ‘Cold facts’ shows this to be an exception. H&M outsources its manufacturing to many other countries, so this effort confined to Bangladesh seems to be only a half-hearted PR stunt.
‘We will continue to use our influence and demand minimum wages be increased wherever they are not enough to live on’, H&M writes on their website. However, they fail to produce any evidence of this happening or even a plan for how they are going to implement this in the future.

Helena Helmersson, head of sustainability at H&M, says it’s positive that the workers are making their voices heard and that striking is a part of that process. Nevertheless, H&M dissociates itself from any responsibility. She explains that 75% of the factories are represented by unions. But what about when their voices don’t get heard? Where their voices might go unheard, ours could make all the difference.

Anti-fur campaigns reached a peak in the 1980s and 1990s, based on the opinion that fur is cruel and unnecessary: an attitude that has infected the fashion business. Also, eco-friendly clothes have become increasingly popular, a trend that H&M followed up in 2004 when they launched their first ‘conscious collection’. It was part of a mission to incorporate more sustainable fabrics into their apparel, and probably their quest to be seen as a sustainable company. The approach to design, sourcing and manufacturing in the fashion business has been changed by the consumer before, why aren’t we doing it again?

The fashion industry represents an opportunity for widespread poverty reduction, but this opportunity that has been ignored for years. By spending money in shops that don’t pay their workers a living wage we are indirectly supporting the exploitation of workers. Consumers can’t dissociate themselves from all responsibility. A climate for political reform needs to be created. Cheap fashion is something none of us can afford.