Why Can’t Fashion Fix Its Labour Exploitation Problem?
Feb 25, 2025
auto_awesome
Sarah Kent, the sustainability editor at BOF, dives into the critical issues plaguing labor in fashion, revealing alarming cases of child labor in India and slavery in Taiwan. She discusses how exploitation is entrenched in socio-economic systems, making change challenging. Kent emphasizes the necessity of transparency in supply chains, as brands struggle to trace their cotton's origins. The conversation also touches on the responsibilities of major fashion brands and the impact of consumer choices on ethical practices, advocating for collective action to combat these systemic issues.
The persistent exploitation of workers in fashion remains a product of deeply rooted socio-economic challenges, demanding comprehensive solutions beyond mere industry reforms.
Lack of transparency in the fashion supply chain complicates ethical sourcing, as brands often cannot trace the origins of their materials effectively.
Deep dives
Persistent Labor Exploitation in Fashion Supply Chains
The fashion industry continues to grapple with systemic labor exploitation issues, with recent reports highlighting child labor in India's cotton fields and modern slavery in Taiwanese garment factories. Despite ongoing investigations and awareness, significant and lasting changes remain elusive, as these abuses often arise from deeply ingrained cultural practices and fragmented supply chains. In India, children as young as six are found working in so-called ethical cotton fields, exposed to toxic pesticides while contributing to the supply of clothing marketed as responsible. This ongoing situation underscores the need for more robust protections for workers, as existing systems primarily shield brands from liability rather than effectively safeguarding labor rights.
Challenges of Supply Chain Transparency
Brands often have little visibility into the origins of their raw materials, which complicates efforts to ensure ethical sourcing. The fragmented nature of the cotton supply chain, where many layers exist between brands and the actual farmers, makes it nearly impossible to trace the origin of cotton accurately. This lack of transparency enables brands to claim ethical practices while remaining unaware of the exploitation occurring further down the supply chain. Certification schemes, designed to assure ethical sourcing, frequently rely on self-disclosure, which can result in inadequate monitoring and a false sense of security for consumers.
The Role of Consumers and Brand Accountability
Consumers play a critical role in holding brands accountable for ethical practices, yet many remain unaware of the complexities involved in sourcing and production. Despite calls for more ethical shopping practices, the need for consumers to trust brands' claims becomes increasingly important; loss of trust could lead to apathy in purchasing ethical goods. While some brands are working collaboratively to address labor exploitation, issues like recruitment fees and the burden placed on migrant workers continue to exist. Initiatives by organizations like Transparenten aim to foster systemic changes across the industry, yet the challenges remain significant without widespread action from both consumers and brands.
The revelation this year of child labour in India’s cotton fields and modern-day slavery in Taiwanese garment factories is the latest scandal concerning worker treatment in fashion’s supply chain. New abuses keep emerging despite efforts by brands, manufacturers, activists, and governments to set clear labour guidelines. Watchdog groups try new tactics to combat the problem, but they face systemic forces far beyond fashion.
Sustainability editor Sarah Kent joins executive editor Brian Baskin and senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young to discuss the problematic labour dynamics underpinning the fashion system.
Key Insights:
Persistent abuse in fashion’s supply chains is not merely about isolated incidents but reflects deep-rooted socio-economic challenges. In India’s cotton industry, for example, many farmworkers come from extremely marginalised and impoverished communities where exploitation is a norm rather than an exception. Families often work together under hazardous conditions, with little oversight or recourse. “So you're not just dealing with an issue of exploitation that is coming from the [fashion] industry, you're dealing with a culture that is ingrained in the way that community works – and that is a very difficult, complicated thing to try and manage, ” explains Kent.
Transparency in supply chains remains critical. Despite decades of advocacy, many brands struggle to verify the origins of their cotton. The global cotton supply chain’s complexity—where materials pass through multiple suppliers and traders—makes tracing raw cotton back to its source extremely difficult. “The traders will have been getting the cotton from ginners who will have got raw cotton from … maybe hundreds of thousands of small family farms aggregated it, ginned it, sold it onto a trader who then sells it up through the supply chain. So by the time it even gets to a spinning factory, tracing it back to the farm where it came from is really, really difficult,” says Kent.
In Taiwan’s textile industry, systemic issues like excessive recruitment fees burden migrant workers, yet change is stalling. Despite growing awareness and repeated calls for reform, manufacturers have little incentive to alter longstanding practices without coordinated industry action and regulatory intervention. As Kent notes, “Without other brands operating in Taiwan coming together and trying to do the same thing, the industry as a whole isn't going to move.” And without regulatory shifts, manufacturers have little reason to remove recruitment fee burdens from workers.
Consumer trust in ethical claims is vital for brands that present themselves as responsible. However, when ethical certifications and claims are diluted by inconsistent practices and opaque supply chains, consumers quickly lose faith. This erosion of trust can undermine efforts to promote responsible consumption. “If consumers lose trust in what is meant to be a signifier of doing better, then you risk people not caring at all,” Kent warns. “No one's going to pay more for a product that promises to be more responsible and more ethical when it's when they don't believe that it is.”