Penneys' Bosses Make Millions in Profits from Slave Labour

by AndyS Sat May 10, 2014 13:29

Penneys/Primark actually are one of the leaders in large company prevention of slave labor. their methods of sourcing their manufacturers is similar to a travel agent. they request from an agent a manufacturing plant, with strict importance on fair trade just like how we would ask a travel agent for a house by the beach with two beds etc. The agent sources a plant meeting the criteria Penneys?Primark set out. Penneys/Primark comply with all legislation in the matter, however if the agent which is a third party attempts to use slave labor none of the profits goes to Penneys/Primark, instead the 3rd party profit. Penneys/Primark pay for fair trade and expect to get it. Penneys send out inspections to ensure slave labor is not happening but nothin is preventing the agents bringing them to the wrong factory. When they don't; as we all saw a few years ago with the collapse of the factory due to poor working conditions Penneys/Primark were first to sign a contract to enforce improvement to their suppliers work places. Other leading companies were far later then Penneys/Primark. So if your going to give out about anyone get your hands on the third party agents. who are misleading companies to exploit profits which are found in supplying with slave labor but demanding fair trade prices.

by peacock Mon Nov 25, 2013 14:21

Ethical shops where are they,even high end designers use slave labour,even look at sports brands like nikey etc..

It is very hard to find ethical clothing from the promoters to the production of the actual clothes themselves..

What i would like to see is a list of ethical clothing lines,and then make up my own mind on it.Until then the jury is out,i wouldnt say its just pennys and tescos,they are two brands you singled out there are many many more than those two.

It's very hard to buy clothes without having control and the right information as to where it is sourced and under what conditions it is made,it doesnt exactly say it on the label you know,so don't get on your high moral horse blaming people in the west for all this.

If indians decide to treat their workers poorly,that is their responsiblity too,pennys and tesco cannot oversee what is going on all the time,but i agree with the fact they may be complicit,but they are not actively telling the indian slave drivers to conduct themselves in this manner.

Even lidl were involved in contracts to slave driving indians,not that im shocked im just saying that it is widespread.

The arcadia group also covering topshop and other brands were involved in underpaying and overworking their sales assistants in the uk,and outsourcing production to india..

Its hard to know who to entrust your money to without it being funded for those sorts of unethical activities.

People will naturallly go for the cheaper brands,who tend to use outsourcing to maximise profits even companies like topshop,evans etc outsource to other poorer countries to have their designs made.

None of these uk clothing designs are even made in the uk anymore,well very few of them,you might find the odd wollen mills made in the country of where the design originated,but even scottish wollen mills outsourced to india for a lot of designs,i saw recently in a dispatches channel four programme.

So just because you buy expensive doesnt mean its ethical,every clothing companies interest is in maximising profits regardless of ethics..

by Pedcach Sat Nov 23, 2013 20:04 Simon.lindsay at live dot co dot uk

I just buy from markets and charity shops. I'm young and have poser friends and I don't stand out from them and look like a tramp. People chuck away perfect clothes so just buy them. And if your buying new buy from an ethical shop. Probably better quality and will
Last longer too!

by Marlboro man Wed Jan 24, 2007 19:55

Some points

“The point you are missing is that whether the goods are taken off the shelves by 'western governments'. The bosses, or indirectly by consumers refusing to buy them, the net result is that Irish consumers will have to pay more for their clothes”

I thought you where advocating Personal responsibility on this issue? Would that not involve consumers refusing to buy these goods?
What are you saying? We will ultimately have to pay more for clothes? Do you not see the vicious circle you have just predicted?
This issue is a wealth distribution issue and is much bigger than simply choosing where to shop.
Citing the solution is with consumer habits alone and neglecting the major cause of poverty (Western Governments, IMO, The World Bank, Multi-National Corporations and their manipulation of these vulnerable economies) puts you firmly in the apologist camp in my view.

“The Quinsworth bosses only stock these goods because Irish consumers buy them. So, stop blaming the bosses and the government.. Take responsibility for your own actions as a consumer.”

Again you have completely ignored those who are unwaged on low fixed income or have immense financial difficulties. What are they to do? They HAVE no choice.
It could also be argued that these families are forced to buy these goods through the discriminate policies of these very same Governments. But that’s another story

by fahfah22 Wed Jan 24, 2007 18:59

Dear Marlboro Man,

The point you are missing is that whether the goods are taken off the shelves by 'western governents'. the bosses, or indirectly by consumers refusing to buy them, the net result is that Irish consumers will have to pay more for their clothes.

The Quinsworth bosses only stock these goods because Irish consumers buy them. So, stop blaming the bosses and the government.. Take responsibility for your own actions as a consumer.

by Starstruck Wed Jan 24, 2007 18:38

Good piece above by the SY..
Hardly surprising but still revealing--

by Steve Wed Jan 24, 2007 11:48

"The SP rightly refers to the super-exploitation of immigrant workers in this country. However it contradicts itself by opposing any proposal to restrict the levels of immigration that make that exploitation possible. By all means demand that workers are given proper wages and conditions but that is IMPOSSIBLE in a situation where the country is literally flooded in cheap labour."

What the bloody hell are you on about? This is about the super-exploitation of Far East workers. Comparing them to the ecomonic immigrants to this country is not only off-topic but a gross insult to the plight of those we are actually talkin about.
You have an axe to grind with the SP. You are in favour of a limit on immigration. Why not start another thread and discuss those issues there.

by observer Wed Jan 24, 2007 11:37

The SP rightly refers to the super-exploitation of immigrant workers in this country. However it contradicts itself by opposing any proposal to restrict the levels of immigration that make that exploitation possible. By all means demand that workers are given proper wages and conditions but that is IMPOSSIBLE in a situation where the country is literally flooded in cheap labour.

by Marlboro Man Wed Jan 24, 2007 10:48

Fahfah 22 is talking non-sense. Store discrimination is a luxury of the rich. It is they who have the means to shop wherever they see fit.
Paradoxically this is also fuelling the disgusting rise of ‘fashionable fair trade’ where famous philanthropic pop stars and the like merchandise clothes which retail at extortionate prices. Bono’s missus for example.
It’s still alright to exploit the Far East’s sweat shop economies because now we're installing air-conditioning.

Many people have no option but clothe their families from the likes of Pennies and Tesco. Or would you have them barefoot and in pelts?

This is not the responsibility of those who have no choice. It is the collective responsibility of western governments to tackle this inequality.

by RogerC Wed Jan 24, 2007 09:43

I agree with many of the points above. But one thing I must challenge. Producers here becoming competitive again doesn't have to deprive anyone of their income.
That implies that workers from countries like Bangladesh exist only to provide us with cheap clothes. If organisations like G8 and the WTO allowed smaller countries to develope their economies in a fair way then workers everywhere would get a fair days pay for a fair days work.

by fahfah22 Tue Jan 23, 2007 19:51

Or, ordinary people vote in millions for dirt-cheap clothes well knowing that they are the produce of child slave labour?

Or, if we stop buying these clothes, producers in the first world will become competitive again and third-world children and their families will be deprived of their only source of income?

Or the chainstore owners (mainly pension funds) are giving the first-world poor exactly what they want.

Or, why blame the owners of these stores - if you disagree with the conditions in third-world sweatshops, don't buy the stuff. It's YOUR responsibility.

by Limerick Socialist Youth Tue Jan 23, 2007 16:35

Had a big uprising against thee slave conditions in 2006. We are supporting them in their struggle, trying to build links between irish and bangladeshi workers etc.

Fighting slave labour - through workers action

Decent wages for all workers

by RogerC Tue Jan 23, 2007 13:51

I can't believe some of the comments above. "What do the workers think about this?" I'm quite sure they are NOT thinking "Wow isn't this great, another 80+ hours a week in a stinking deathtrap of a sweatshop so people in Ireland can have cheap clothes to wear" The whole point of a campaign like this is to raise awareness to the exploitation, and thus put pressure on the big companies.
Let's not get sidetracked by the old b**ls "If we don't buy these things they'll stop making them and then where will the workers be?"
If you don't mind being part of the exploitation circle, so be it. There's nothing more to say to you.
If you do happen to care then remember.
These companies have to make money. And this is where they have to make it. We have the power to make them act responsibily, but they are not going to respond to harsh words, or appeals to their better nature (They don't have one). They need to be hit where every capitalist hates to be hit.....in their profits.
Also don't be fooled into thinking that paying the producers a decent wage means the price has to go up here. Pay rises could easily be absorbed by their obscene profit margins.

by citizen Tue Jan 23, 2007 12:49

"If i then decide not to buy clothes made in a certain place it logically tends to alleviate the problem of shopping in that shop since i haven't bought anything."

this is without doubt the most nonsensical statement i have ever read on any messageboard anywhere.what are you talking about.

by Stuart Tue Jan 23, 2007 12:24

Generally I would buy garments from a country like Bangladesh on principle. The political activism should be directed towards the employers to improve working conditions within Bangladesh, not to diminish trade and reduce employment.

I'll stand corrected if the workers themselves come forward to back a campaign like this.

by another citizen Tue Jan 23, 2007 12:09

Generally i look at the label before buying the clothes, doesn't guarantee anything but its better than ignoring the problem. If i then decide not to buy clothes made in a certain place it logically tends to alleviate the problem of shopping in that shop since i haven't bought anything.

As for an article like this, it means i'll avoid penneys so there will be none of that hypocrisy you seem to fear will tarnish my ideals.

You can't always be sure that what you are buying is ethical but at least you can make the effort.

by citizen Tue Jan 23, 2007 11:55

where do you buy your clothes from and who do you think makes them?