Confessions of an H&M Addict

By Rachel Neumann, AlterNet. Posted July 1, 2005.

For those of us without much money but with a love of dressing up, H&M is our mecca. But anything that looks that good on you and doesn't cost much must be part of some deal with the devil, right? Especially if the tag says "Made in Cambodia."

I had long suspected H&M was engaged in unfair labor practices, but was afraid to find out. After my last trip to one of New York's H&M stores, the guilt was too much. So I started to do a little research.

I started with the H&M website, which had such a friendly and optimistic tone that I almost booked another flight back to New York. The company is donating a lot of money to tsunami relief and working on a project to stop the spread of HIV in Cambodia. Was this sop for a guilty conscience or a sign of a socially responsible business? After all, Exxon gives money to environmental groups while simultaneously destroying the environment. I pressed on.

Finally, I found the "Code of Conduct" page. Here's what it says:

"H&M does not have any factories of its own. Instead we buy all our garments and other goods from around 700 suppliers, primarily in Europe and Asia. Since we do not have direct control over this production we have drawn up guidelines for our suppliers, which together form our Code of Conduct. This Code of Conduct is partly based on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and ILO conventions on working conditions and rights at work. It is there so that we can be sure that our products are produced under good working conditions."

The code includes requirements concerning the working environment, a ban on child labour (that's "labor" to us Americans), fire safety, working hours, wages, and freedom of association. Apparently, H&M has regular inspections of the factories it works with. And what if they find violations of, say, child-labor laws, for example? The website assures me that they always act in the "best interests of the child." They don't define who decides the best interests of the child, but still, H&M goes on with a reasonably well-thought out explanation, that is in line with the policy encouraged by Child Workers in Asia and other activist and advocacy support groups:

"On each individual occasion our ultimate aim is to help the child to a better future. Our policy in respect of child labour must not result in children being kicked out of factories without any follow-up, with the risk that he or she will instead end up in heavier and more dangerous work or - in the worst case - in prostitution."

They go on to say if they find two incidents of child labor in the same factory, they cease their involvement with that factory (which leaves the children in that factory out of luck, I suppose.)

Next, I downloaded H&M's just released Corporate Social Responsibilty Report. The 2002 report has a cover sheet of a bunch of happy and well-dressed children, but by the 2004 report, these children have been replaced by a photograph of a young Asian woman with a grim expression and a blue apron. This seems emblematic of the company's new approach, which is a change from primarily monitoring factories to make sure they're following the rules to addressing the "root cause" of labor problems. I'm thrilled. My favorite clothing store is apparently as radical and interested in fomenting revolution as I am.

Rachel Neumann is Rights & Liberties editor at AlterNet.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »