News about Our Work - 22 November 2019 Combating poverty and climate change are not mutually exclusive A response from the Clean Clothes Campaign (CCC) to Karl-Johan Persson, CEO of H&M. Recently, Karl-Johan Persson, CEO of H&M, warned in an interview Terrible social consequences. when consumers turn their backs on fast fashion in the face of the climate crisis[i]. In his distorted logic This leads to more poverty, as it puts economic growth and jobs at risk. Persson's claim that reducing consumption threatens the eradication of poverty must be contradicted. His claims are at best misguided and at worst fraudulentThey do not recognise the enormous social and environmental consequences of the global apparel industry. Call fashion brands to action with this campaign! © Public EyeWe do not have to choose between human rights or environmental protection. We cannot improve one without the other. To claim that environmental concerns are a threat to human rights is dangerous. The growing awareness of consumers is to be welcomed, not condemned. Fast fashion contributes to poverty The global apparel industry is based on the exploitation of cheap labor in developing countries. It is the greed of businesses and not the concern for the environment that stands in the way of poverty reduction. They make billions in profits with fashion at the lowest prices possible only through starvation wages, insecure working conditions and the suppression of trade unions. While Persson's private wealth is around $1.9 billion[ii]The average wage for a textile worker in Bangladesh, where H&M is one of the largest purchasers of clothing, is around $1000 per year.[iii]. In other words, a daily salary for a female worker who makes clothing for H&M is $3.64. Oxfam calculated that a CEO of one of the world's top five fashion brands only takes four days to earn what a Bangladeshi textile worker will earn in her life.[iv]. Persson's claim that the fast fashion model contributes to the eradication of poverty is outrageous considering that not a single worker is paid a living wage in his supplier factories[v]. In response to H&M's failure to deliver on its promise to pay a living wage by 2018, the Clean Clothes Campaign last year put forward a shareholder proposal that profits should flow into a living wage fund in 2018.[vi]. Not surprisingly, this proposal was rejected. Jetzt Video mit Youtube -Cookies laden Video laden Decent jobs and a living wage are needed to eradicate poverty, and the global apparel industry does not yet offer this. The myth that low-paid, labor-intensive clothing production is a source of development is a lie. Water consumption, pollution, carbon emissions and toxic chemicals, as well as excessive working hours, low wages and sexual harassment are the hallmarks of the apparel industry. What is needed is decent work. If fashion brands paid a living wage, workers and their families would not only have access to a decent life, but could do more as consumers themselves to end poverty than the spread of cheap and low-quality clothing production. "Since I've been campaigning for workers' rights for over 20 years, I'm no longer easily shocked, but with the brazenness and audacity of these statements, industry's beautification has reached a whole new level. If H&M were really interested in eradicating poverty, they would have to start paying workers a decent wage and not pretend that the disposable model Fast Fashion is saving the planet.Dominique Müller of Labour Behind the Label Climate crisis hits textile workers hardest FEMNET at the global climate strike on 20.09.2019. © FEMNETThe struggles against the climate crisis and against exploitation cannot be fought against each other. They are interdependent and symbiotic, and the Impacts of both crises hit the same people hardest: Climate change is driving migration to urban areas, where many will find exploitative jobs in the apparel industry[vii]. The United Nations emphasizes that it is precisely the poor in the cities of the Global South who are most vulnerable to the effects of the climate crisis.[viii]. We need companies that radically change their business models to better pay workers, reduce production and resource use, and redistribute the value chain. Only if companies put both people and the planet before profit, an end to poverty is possible. Further information FEMNET topic portal on livelihood wages Company check 2019: Subsistence wages in the global fashion industry (PDF file) To the CCC campaign page: www.turnaroundhm.org sources [i] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-27/h-m-ceo-sees-terrible-fallout-as-consumer-shaming-spreads[ii] https://www.forbes.com/profile/karl-johan-persson/#16eded0b2b48[iii] Based on the new minimum wage of 8000 Taka per month: https://wageindicator.org/salary/minimum-wage/bangladesh/archive/minimum-wages-in-bangladesh-with-effect-from-01-12-2018[iv] https://oi-files-d8-prod.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/file_attachments/bp-reward-work-not-wealth-220118-en.pdfhttps://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/richest-1-percent-bagged-82-percent-wealth-created-last-year-poorest-half-humanity[v] https://saubere-kleidung.de/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/PublicEye_Report-Firmencheck_D_def-high_web.pdf[vi] https://turnaroundhm.org/finale/[vii] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/climate-and-people/climate-change-fuelling-migration-crisis-bangladesh/[viii] http://unhabitat.org/urban-themes/climate-change/
