Farmers caned over fashion ethics

A social media skirmish has broken out between Farmers and ethical clothing fans.

Two days ago Kylie Richardson of Christchurch asked Farmers on Facebook how she could find out more about the manufacturing ethics behind its clothing brands, particularly for children.

‘‘There doesn’t seem to be any information available online. I’d like to know which brands (if any) pay their workers a living wage and uphold excellent safety standards and follow environmentally friendly manufacturing practices,’’ she wrote.

Farmers replied that the information was ‘‘commercially sensitive so we are unable to comment’’.

But that wasn’t sufficient for some Facebook commenters who urged the chain to establish some ethical credentials.

One, Sarah Wolf, said she doubted the information was commercially sensitive.

‘‘In my experience, if the brands themselves aren’t bragging about their supply chain, including information on their sites about how they do things and have an ethics policy in place and available for you to read, then they are probably hiding a lot.

‘‘The ethical brands are pretty transparent about what efforts they are making. Unfortunately there are many boxes to tick, and fashion and sustainability generally are at odds.’’

Farmers declined to comment further.

Clothing companies’ supply chains have been put under the spotlight since the Rana Plaza factory collapse, which killed 1132 Bangladeshi workers in 2013.

One of the biggest campaigns to put pressure on companies is an annual report by Baptist World Aid Australia, which grades major clothing brands on their knowledge about their suppliers, their workers’ conditions and whether they get fair wages.

Glassons was graded a F in 2015 for not disclosing its data but it was upgraded to a C+ last year.

However, Dr Maureen Bensonrea, an international business and marketing lecturer at Auckland University, said Farmers’ sourcing strategies might well be commercially sensitive. Supply-chain audits were ‘‘by no means’’ standard practice among retailers and enforcement was a big problem in developing countries, she said.

Global brands such as Zara, which has an A-grade from Baptist World Aid, had the purchasing power to exert over their supply chains but many companies struggled.

‘‘So on one hand, firms are doing a lot to address these issues but on the other hand, there’s only so much a company can do.’’

Consumers were also having difficulty getting the information they wanted about clothing manufacturing, and it was driving a rise in alternative companies which did adhere to sustainable and ethical values.

Brands were signing up to programmes which took a stand on health and safety and workers’ rights in developing countries.

There were also ‘‘slow-fashion’’ companies, a reaction to the fastfashion movement, which prized ethical values and transparency over competitive pricing and turnover.

The trouble was that not all consumers knew about them or could afford them, she said.