How Fast Fashion Manipulates People

Introduction

The fashion industry, known for its glamour and allure, conceals a dark underbelly characterized by the exploitation of sweatshop workers and environmental degradation. This essay delves into the factors most responsible for the tragic death of sweatshop workers in Rana Plaza and the catastrophic chromium pollution in the Kanpur River. It argues that major fashion companies bear the greatest responsibility for these issues, as they oppress sweatshop workers, maintain insecure working conditions, and exacerbate pollution in factories. This essay also highlights the urgent need for consumers to drive change in the industry by making informed choices that prioritize ethical practices.

The Exploitation of Sweatshop Workers

Major fashion companies often operate sweatshops where workers endure harsh conditions and exploitation. Despite claims that these companies create sustainable employment opportunities for impoverished individuals, these positions lack official guarantees and benefits. As Andrew Morgan points out in "The True Cost," because these companies do not officially employ workers, they evade responsibility for their welfare. This allows brands like H&M to overwork and underpay their unauthorized employees, even employing children as young as 14 for more than 12 hours a day. Such practices blatantly violate the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) Article 24, which stipulates the right to rest and leisure time. These companies, therefore, exploit workers illegally and deceitfully exploit their resources.

Moreover, the exploitation of sweatshop workers extends beyond child labor and excessively long hours. These workers often face dangerous working conditions with little to no access to proper safety measures. In many cases, they are forced to toil in cramped spaces with inadequate ventilation and safety equipment, putting their health and well-being at risk. This not only violates their basic human rights but also endangers their lives on a daily basis.

Insecure Working Conditions

While garment factories bear the responsibility for ensuring workers' safety, they are also victims of financial oppression by major corporations. The Dhaka garment factory owner, Arif Jebtik, laments in "The True Cost" that every day, he is oppressed by major corporations, compelling him to oppress his workers. This financial constraint leaves factories unable to make necessary safety improvements, leading to disregard for crucial safety measures. The tragic Rana Plaza factory collapse, which claimed over a thousand lives, resulted from insufficient financial support from major fashion brands. Although companies like H&M promised to improve workers' conditions, they deliberately delayed their actions. Rachel Abrams reveals in her article that progress on improving factory conditions has been slow, and companies continue to benefit from unfair and dangerous labor practices.

Moreover, the pursuit of cost-cutting measures by major fashion companies often leads to factories operating in substandard buildings and environments. These factories, pressured to meet tight production deadlines and cost targets set by fashion giants, are left with little choice but to compromise on worker safety. The consequences are catastrophic, as demonstrated by the Rana Plaza tragedy, which serves as a grim reminder of the human cost of the fashion industry's relentless pursuit of profit.

Prioritizing Profits Over Worker Welfare

Major fashion companies prioritize advertising and profit-maximization over improving working conditions for sweatshop workers. David Wilson argues in "Who Really Benefits From Sweatshops" that if these companies reduced their marketing expenses, they could allocate funds to double workers' wages and ensure safe working conditions. This demonstrates that these companies have the means to improve workers' conditions but opt for profit maximization through advertising. In essence, they treat human lives as replaceable commodities.

The relentless drive for profit is not confined to the mistreatment of workers alone. It also extends to the impact on the environment. Major fashion brands employ various strategies to increase sales, from celebrity endorsements to aggressive advertising campaigns. While these marketing tactics undoubtedly boost sales, they divert attention away from the ethical and environmental consequences of fast fashion.

Exacerbation of Pollution

Fashion companies exacerbate pollution in various regions, including the Kanpur River, as a consequence of the fast fashion trend. The insatiable demand for new clothing items, with some companies boasting 52 seasons a year, forces factories to produce more and more using harmful and destructive chemicals. Kanpur, known for its cheap leather production, has seen its environment suffer from chromium contamination due to increased demand from major brands. This situation highlights the negative consequences arising from these companies' demands, as they maximize profits without considering the environmental toll.

The relentless pursuit of fast fashion creates a vicious cycle of environmental degradation. Manufacturers are compelled to produce clothing at an unprecedented pace, leading to an overuse of resources and the release of harmful chemicals into the environment. These practices not only harm ecosystems but also jeopardize the health and well-being of communities living in close proximity to these factories. Major fashion companies are not only complicit in this environmental degradation but are often directly responsible for it.

Neglect of Environmental Consequences

Fashion companies fail to account for the environmental consequences of their production processes. In "The True Cost," Mike Schragger emphasizes that many resources used in clothing production, such as water, are not factored into production costs. This neglect has detrimental effects on local communities living close to factories, which suffer both from the negative output of factories and the absence of advanced filtering equipment. Workers in these factories remain unaware of the harm caused by pollution, ultimately bearing the brunt of its consequences.

The environmental consequences of fast fashion are far-reaching and have global implications. The production of textiles requires vast amounts of water, and the release of untreated wastewater into rivers and oceans contributes to water pollution. Additionally, the fashion industry is a significant contributor to greenhouse gas emissions due to its reliance on energy-intensive processes, transportation, and the disposal of textiles in landfills. These environmental impacts are not limited to the regions where clothing is produced but have a cascading effect on ecosystems and communities worldwide.

Consumer Responsibility and the Way Forward

Despite various factors influencing consumer decisions, individuals must assume the greatest responsibility for addressing environmental and human rights issues in the fashion industry. LUCY Siegle advocates in "The True Cost" that the fast fashion industry will only change when consumers ask ethical questions and inquire about the origins of their clothing. By making informed choices and rejecting products from unscrupulous sweatshops, consumers hold the power to slow down the fast fashion industry and prompt major fashion companies to reevaluate their practices and discover the true cost of their actions.

Consumers have the power to effect change through their purchasing decisions. When consumers prioritize ethical and sustainable fashion, they create a demand for transparency and responsible practices within the industry. Major fashion companies, driven by profit, are more likely to adapt and implement ethical standards when they perceive a shift in consumer preferences.

Conclusion

In conclusion, major fashion companies bear the greatest responsibility for the exploitation of sweatshop workers and the environmental pollution caused by their factories. Their actions violate human rights and exacerbate pollution, perpetuating a cycle of exploitation and harm. It is imperative for consumers to make ethical choices and demand transparency from these companies, as they ultimately have the power to drive positive change in the fashion industry. By doing so, we can hope to see a future where the true cost of fashion is not measured in the suffering of workers and environmental devastation but in ethical practices and sustainability. The fashion industry must transition towards a more responsible and sustainable model, one that respects the rights of workers and minimizes its environmental footprint. Only through collective efforts can we achieve a brighter, more ethical future for the fashion industry and those affected by it.