New Documentary: The World According to H&M

[BerlinRocks]

I've just watched an extraordinary investigation documentary about H&M : The World According to H&M. After I watched it I've said to myself, and my boyfriend : "Ok I'm done with them. It is boycott time, darling."

Here is the link to the video The World according to H&M (it's a French documentary, though, with no sub.)
Here is the summary (Translation by Google

Admit it, suddenly it wriggles and not a little to the side of your wallet right? Of ours. Fashion and quality at the best price, this is the magic equation hammered red iron Scandinavian brand. 66 years after its birth, the most courted princess of the kingdom of Sweden aligns its 3,000 stores and 15 billion euros in sales in the window of the world. 1.7 billion profit in 2012, what shamelessly parading alongside the stars of the major global financial centers.

Front, a success story immaculate. Glitter prestigious partnerships: creators made in sewing, international organizations and NGOs property in every respect. An ideal son, Karl-Johan Persson, current leader and great-grand-son of the founder, as an emissary of the widow and working with the governments of producing countries. A communication strategy foolproof way steamroller, killing in the bud any false note.

Such as workshops suppliers in smoke in Bangladesh, and with their employees; or unions that go to the front in the European subsidiaries of the group to denounce opaque practices driven from the headquarters in Stockholm.

Because in closets brand is another song that is playing, a relentless and streamlined business logic to the extreme. From one end to the other of the world H & M, we'll take you to discover its secrets hidden beneath the label.

Multiplication of branches, loans and internal circulation through subsidiaries appropriately institutions within our most tax friendly neighbors: in Europe we undress the unsung mounts that allow the brand to increase its profits, while operating quietly generous subsidies from the European Union. We will tell you also how it is trying to muzzle the few voices within it against his brutal methods of management.

Far from the gleaming rays of French shops, we'll let you enter the much less colorful world of 700 suppliers H & M worldwide. In Asia, where nearly 80% of production, but also in Ethiopia, a new Eldorado textile low-cost, we will tell you how the brand, while hiding behind a fierce social-washing, washes of any responsibility outsourcing risks excessive. At the risk of getting into bed, totally irresponsible, with more than doubtful partners.

I also googled "boycott h&m" and realized there are actually protests to boycott h&m, but mostly because they are doing business in Israel........
I mean, ok, good for y'all.

But what about Ethiopia, where the company wants to delocalize from Bangladesh to lower the cost of production even more (no minimum salary exist in Ethiopia, so basically they can pay them $1 a day, or a month....) ?
(in general, Read this about Ethiopia, that is interesting. http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2013/mar/14/why-are-we-funding-abuse-ethiopia/)

And what about workers' terrible conditions of labor ? I mean a thousand people died last in that building in Bangladesh.... H&M was probably not part of it, but in the documentary we see that some H&M factories over there were built in the same condition, and are already showing damage signs.

What about the fact that H&M actually pay NO taxes in Bangladesh ?

And what about they fire 100 people in France ? What about their new "business plan" so they pay less taxes in France, too ? (France has lost over 180.000.000 Euros in taxes since 2007, because of this....).


I don't understand how well known eco-friendly designers, such as McCartney or Marant, decided to work for this company. Money profit can't explain everything. You have to have a certain ethic, girls ....

*if there is a similar thread, please feel free to move it there. But we can probably think of something more general about what to do to make things change..... #HippiesPleaseUseTheBackdoor

 

[AD011620]

Well, I never buy anything from H&M and now I won't even be tempted! Thanks for sharing this!

 

[isa.b.elle.]

Many thanks for sharing this sadly I'm not surprised, I never bought anything at HM and I never will... conscious collection my a

 

[*k.a.t.e*]

I'm a buyer for a large retailer in the UK and we manufacture a lot out of Bangladesh, among other countries in the far east.

As questionable as the conditions are in these factories, they are actually giving people a job. The conditions, while bad compared to our standards in the West, are actually often better than the workers living conditions and they are improving all the time with the ETI and other initiatives.

It happened with Nike previously that they were accused of child labour, and consequently shut that particular factory down. Child labour is rarely as black and white as we think of it - the working age of the country was much lower than ours and the children were on apprenticeships but still, 900 people lost their jobs and were forced into working the streets to earn money.

The garment industry is crucial to Bangladesh. As the OP mentioned, we all remember Rana Plaza (H&M weren't in that particular factory) where over 1000 people died in the factory collapse. Some of you may also remember a few weeks later a worked was pulled alive from the wreckage. It's common knowledge in Dhaka that that woman was planted and paid by the government because they needed 'a good news story'.

H&M's exports form 6% of Bangladesh's total GDP. That's a lot of jobs lost.

 

[Melisande]

So basically the excuse is that engaging in abuse, slavery and child labor is better than leaving these people to die?

The "providing jobs" story is one that is repeated over and over and over to excuse these practices, it's time we gave it more thought.

k.a.t.e., would you treat your friends and family like this if their lives were in danger? I know you wouldn't.

It is not even remotely a question of depriving them of jobs, the question is to treat them and pay them as the human beings they are...

...as the human beings WE are....

 

[VogueDisciple93]

I have not shopped at H&M, Zara, Gap, or many other fast retailers in a few years mostly for these reasons. I was working for Gap at the time of the building collapse and fires in Bangladesh and their insensitive reactions were a BIG reason I left the company.

Yes, these companies create jobs where they are needed, but it does not give them the right to treat these people however they please. These are people, people that deserve to be treated as humans no matter their country's fiscal performance. These people work HARD for their (SMALL) wages so they should be treated as valuable assets of the industry - without garment workers this multibillion business is brought crashing to its knees. And these jobs are temporary because these companies do not hesitate to pack up and move to another third world country that affords little regulation and taxes, under the guise of improving the country's economy while risking thousands of lives for low production costs.

There is so much wrong with fast retail that I avoid their stores at all costs. People are worked to the bone as modern slaves to create cheap, poorly constructed garments that consumers discard when they start to deteriorate or the trend has passed. Adding to the ecological waste that begun when the factories dump their hazardous chemicals and dyes into nearby rivers and fields leaving them inhabitable and impossible to cultivate.

Fast retailers are not the only ones guilty of such ethical and ecological shortcomings but they are some of the biggest offenders.

 

[eizhowa]

Thanks for sharing, Berlinrocks! I will watch this tonight

When H&M shuts down factories as a response to accusations of slave labor/bad working conditions etc. they are just handling the situation wrong. They won't be helping anyone. They have enough power and money to try to change the factory instead of just ending their dealings with a specific factory. A boycott with the goal to change how H&M deals with the factories shouldn't hurt the workers, but help them. Ending their contract with a factory sounds like an easy way out for H&M...

On the other side, I do think that if the companies are warning the factories that they will leave if the conditions aren't improved, then we can't really blame the companies for leaving when nothing changes. In that case we should blame the factories. However, if the companies are unwilling to pay more for the necessary elevated costs the factories will have, the factories don't really have a choice... So, I guess we would need to know more if we were to decide who is to blame for the situation...

Oh, Darn it, I think I have a H&M gift certificate with 5 usd on it. What to do, what to do...

 

[models_vlada]

The garment industry is crucial to Bangladesh. As the OP mentioned, we all remember Rana Plaza (H&M weren't in that particular factory) where over 1000 people died in the factory collapse. Some of you may also remember a few weeks later a worked was pulled alive from the wreckage. It's common knowledge in Dhaka that that woman was planted and paid by the government because they needed 'a good news story'.

H&M's exports form 6% of Bangladesh's total GDP. That's a lot of jobs lost.

This is true, sad but true. Watching things from another perspective it is good, since it allows us to understand why these things happens, and this is something that not only relates to the fashion industry, but to every single company who actually inititates activities in another country pursuing costs reduction by paying less to it's employees, but if the truth may be said, third world countries get really benefitied with this, since it creates multiple and stable jobs, in countries were unemployment rates are, and the few jobs that exist offer extreme working conditions, by the way, i'm not defending H&M, just saying that every single company pursues that, what needs to be adressed it's how can a company with such high earning profits not pay a little better or offer better working conditions, which it is also quite hard, because watching it from another perspective what's the incentive for H&M to improve the conditions of their workers when the CEOs are working in their offices not watching the reality and totally focused on profit goals.

This is in my opinion a bigger issue that not only affects fashion retailers but most global companies.

 

[*k.a.t.e*]

So basically the excuse is that engaging in abuse, slavery and child labor is better than leaving these people to die?

The "providing jobs" story is one that is repeated over and over and over to excuse these practices, it's time we gave it more thought.

k.a.t.e., would you treat your friends and family like this if their lives were in danger? I know you wouldn't.

It is not even remotely a question of depriving them of jobs, the question is to treat them and pay them as the human beings they are...

...as the human beings WE are....

I'm not condoning the factory conditions, we'd all love to be able to click our fingers and for their factory conditions to be what we'd expect in the Western world, but unfortunately it's not that simple. They're institutionally based and won't change overnight.

The 'providing jobs' story is used because it's a valid argument. The majority of factories, while they aren't up to our standards, still provide a wage to people who otherwise wouldn't have one. The conditions aren't ideal but the vast majority of factories are a safer place to work when compared to the alternative situation which when you go to these countries you see many people finding themselves in - working the streets doing god knows what or dying because they can't afford food.

 

[fashionista-ta]

Many thanks for sharing this sadly I'm not surprised, I never bought anything at HM and I never will... conscious collection my a

Exactly!!! They're about as conscious as Walmart is green. I have never darkened their door and never will. Fast fashion is not my thing.

 

[fashionista-ta]

I'm not condoning the factory conditions, we'd all love to be able to click our fingers and for their factory conditions to be what we'd expect in the Western world, but unfortunately it's not that simple. They're institutionally based and won't change overnight.

The 'providing jobs' story is used because it's a valid argument. The majority of factories, while they aren't up to our standards, still provide a wage to people who otherwise wouldn't have one. The conditions aren't ideal but the vast majority of factories are a safer place to work when compared to the alternative situation which when you go to these countries you see many people finding themselves in - working the streets doing god knows what or dying because they can't afford food.

What does 'institutionally based' mean? That everyone there is used to life totally sucking?


Conditions absolutely can change overnight, and all that's needed is someone with the will to make it happen.


Dumping a factory like this when publicity starts up is just as bad as using it in the first place, if the multinational is just shifting to another one like it someplace where they think there is no publicity yet.


There are so many examples of how to do this right--Rugmark, Edun, Maiyet. Rugmark inspects for child labor, and when they find an underage worker, they don't throw them out on the streets, they send them to school, all expenses paid.


It is pure BS to think that these problems are not solvable now. Every one of these factories must have multiple patrons who are fully familiar with proper working conditions, as they themselves have experienced them. What is lacking is the will and moral imperative to implement proper working conditions, and certainly part of the problem is the people who don't question how in the world they could possibly buy an entire new outfit for $25. And another big part of the problem is the thinking that 'Oh well, this is just the way it is.' Everything was the way it was until someone decided it had to change.

 

[Chanelcouture09]

I'm a buyer for a large retailer in the UK and we manufacture a lot out of Bangladesh, among other countries in the far east.

As questionable as the conditions are in these factories, they are actually giving people a job. The conditions, while bad compared to our standards in the West, are actually often better than the workers living conditions and they are improving all the time with the ETI and other initiatives.

It happened with Nike previously that they were accused of child labour, and consequently shut that particular factory down. Child labour is rarely as black and white as we think of it - the working age of the country was much lower than ours and the children were on apprenticeships but still, 900 people lost their jobs and were forced into working the streets to earn money.

The garment industry is crucial to Bangladesh. As the OP mentioned, we all remember Rana Plaza (H&M weren't in that particular factory) where over 1000 people died in the factory collapse. Some of you may also remember a few weeks later a worked was pulled alive from the wreckage. It's common knowledge in Dhaka that that woman was planted and paid by the government because they needed 'a good news story'.

H&M's exports form 6% of Bangladesh's total GDP. That's a lot of jobs lost.

What you've said there is hitting the nail on the head.

These countries aren't as well developed as ours, they don't have the same laws particularly in relation to human rights as we do in the west.

What consumers need to remember is with the conditions in these places getting improved will cost money so the overall cost of that fast fashion that you're buying from the likes of Primark or H&M won't be as cheap as you like it, it's a double edged sword that with cheap clothing comes some sacrifices because companies won't spend their money to improve something if they aren't getting a return on it, every penny is accounted for.

 

[Chanelcouture09]

Well, I never buy anything from H&M and now I won't even be tempted! Thanks for sharing this!

I don't either! and refuse to, I'd rather spend a little bit more on one piece that I'll wear a lot than a lot of pieces that are cheap and poorly made. It makes no sense.

 

[inwhiterooms]

Sad, but hardly surprising that this happens with mega-big brands.

Hopefully there's a version with English subtitles!

 

[educo]

Thanks for sharing, Berlinrocks! I will watch this tonight

When H&M shuts down factories as a response to accusations of slave labor/bad working conditions etc. they are just handling the situation wrong. They won't be helping anyone. They have enough power and money to try to change the factory instead of just ending their dealings with a specific factory. A boycott with the goal to change how H&M deals with the factories shouldn't hurt the workers, but help them. Ending their contract with a factory sounds like an easy way out for H&M...

On the other side, I do think that if the companies are warning the factories that they will leave if the conditions aren't improved, then we can't really blame the companies for leaving when nothing changes. In that case we should blame the factories. However, if the companies are unwilling to pay more for the necessary elevated costs the factories will have, the factories don't really have a choice... So, I guess we would need to know more if we were to decide who is to blame for the situation...

Oh, Darn it, I think I have a H&M gift certificate with 5 usd on it. What to do, what to do...

I used to work on the production side of the business for a large company and factories don't make as much money as you think they do. Certainly not in the billions as H&M has reported. I remember fighting with the factories over PENNIES per garment because the margin was that tight and to be honest, sometimes we lost money on styles.

But telling the factories to improve their conditions doesn't solve the problem. If the conditions are improved, prices WILL go up. If the factories improve with better wages, older workers, etc..where do you think the costs are gonna get passed to? The factory is not going to absorb the cost. We had this problem with one of our factories in China, the middle class was changing and people were actually starting to make real money and no one wanted to work in a damn factory like their relatives did. So those who did, demanded higher wages. When the factory came back to us, we had to scramble to find another factory that could produce at the price we wanted to pay. Where did we go? Indonesia. Even then, we lost money, but it was a lot less than what we were to lose by continuing to produce in China.

I used to work for a Nike subsidiary who's main retail outlet was Walmart. You wouldn't believe the prices I was forcing down their throats to match. All because it had to be offered at $9.99.

The answer truly lies with the consumer. If the consumer stops buying cheap sh*t, the company stops making it. If the company stops making it, the factories have to keep up in order to stay in business. That's how it works. No amount of regulations or whatever on a factory will work because there will be one company (ahem, WALMART) that will overstep those regulations. They WILL find another factory, and going by how much we were producing for Walmart on this single brand, a factory is gonna make sure they keep that business. No one is gonna step up to big producers like Walmart, Nike, or H&M because they'll grease anyone they need to in order to continue producing items on their terms.

 

[BerlinRocks]

But telling the factories to improve their conditions doesn't solve the problem. If the conditions are improved, prices WILL go up. If the factories improve with better wages, older workers, etc..where do you think the costs are gonna get passed to? The factory is not going to absorb the cost.

What ?
So because some people in the Western world must be able to afford a tank top for $5, some people on the other side of the world have to be treated as slaves ?
I promised myself not to come back here and write, because of some stupid global-capitalist/neo-colonialist/and-other-stuff-in-ism and a major point i didn't appreciate (see the end of this post) ... but nobody can say that. that shouldn't be an excuse.

but you raised some good points :

in China, the middle class was changing and people were actually starting to make real money and no one wanted to work in a damn factory like their relatives did.

and now they go to cheaper place (Ethiopia, for instance). so in a few decades or so, some countries could be like officially labelled "slave country". very nice. and we are called democracy, and want to spread our super universal-humanitarian ideas across the world. but, hey, not all the world. some must remain our pets. right ?

The answer truly lies with the consumer.

EXACTLY !
* or we should probably (re?) open some factories in western countries ? but as you said "no one wanted to work in a damn factory like their relatives did." everybody wants a "glamourous" job, now. ohlala.

That's why the title in the first place was "Should we boycott H&M ?". It was probably not a good edited title, but it was changed to a random generic title, and not by me.....

 

[fashionista-ta]

I used to work on the production side of the business for a large company and factories don't make as much money as you think they do. Certainly not in the billions as H&M has reported. I remember fighting with the factories over PENNIES per garment because the margin was that tight and to be honest, sometimes we lost money on styles.

But telling the factories to improve their conditions doesn't solve the problem. If the conditions are improved, prices WILL go up. If the factories improve with better wages, older workers, etc..where do you think the costs are gonna get passed to? The factory is not going to absorb the cost. We had this problem with one of our factories in China, the middle class was changing and people were actually starting to make real money and no one wanted to work in a damn factory like their relatives did. So those who did, demanded higher wages. When the factory came back to us, we had to scramble to find another factory that could produce at the price we wanted to pay. Where did we go? Indonesia. Even then, we lost money, but it was a lot less than what we were to lose by continuing to produce in China.

I used to work for a Nike subsidiary who's main retail outlet was Walmart. You wouldn't believe the prices I was forcing down their throats to match. All because it had to be offered at $9.99.

The answer truly lies with the consumer. If the consumer stops buying cheap sh*t, the company stops making it. If the company stops making it, the factories have to keep up in order to stay in business. That's how it works. No amount of regulations or whatever on a factory will work because there will be one company (ahem, WALMART) that will overstep those regulations. They WILL find another factory, and going by how much we were producing for Walmart on this single brand, a factory is gonna make sure they keep that business. No one is gonna step up to big producers like Walmart, Nike, or H&M because they'll grease anyone they need to in order to continue producing items on their terms.

I boycott Walmart, and I don't buy fast fashion. I am not feeding this problem, but I don't think it's enough to throw up our hands and say that the cheapskates who don't care (and I would add the marketeers who pander to them) are the cause of the problem, and that's that.


I believe there absolutely must be a way for people who give a damn about whether people on the other side of the world are burning to death to win this. Import laws are one way.


I'll never forget the bit (forget which late-night show it was from) where "You must be this tall" to work in Kathy Lee Gifford's sweatshop ... humor is another way to win. We need Tina Fey on this ...

 

[educo]

What ?
So because some people in the Western world must be able to afford a tank top for $5, some people on the other side of the world have to be treated as slaves ?
I promised myself not to come back here and write, because of some stupid global-capitalist/neo-colonialist/and-other-stuff-in-ism and a major point i didn't appreciate (see the end of this post) ... but nobody can say that. that shouldn't be an excuse.

but you raised some good points :

:

I didn't say it was okay, I'm just saying that's the reality. No one, should work in awful, life threatening conditions. But if we demand the factories to step up and change, and they say, "well to introduce these conditions, we have to hire more qualified workers who are willing to work in a factory. If not, we have to find age appropriate workers and train them. On top of that, inspections cost money. And who knows who is in charge of inspections, and who I have to pay off in order to keep my business open because they might just pick on me because they can get money out of me, even if my conditions are perfect." This is the reality if these countries, most of the operations there ARE CORRUPTED. And unfortunately, the worldwide public takes advantage of this in the form of cheap prices. We are a world of consumers, not makers, like back in the day. This isn't just about the working conditions of these factories. It's about consumerism on a whole and the domino effect that created worldwide. When I used to work for a manufacturer for QVC, you should see the charges we would get from customs because of a mistake the factory made or because qvc didn't get it super perfect so they felt the need to raise hell. To have someone make sure THAT one operation is going smoothly costs money. Dealing with custom officials and international testing and all that sh*t is an ordeal. And that's not even the last step. All to make sure it's not tied to a controversial factory. Or when I'm dealing with buyers who are having conniptions over a $3 difference on a jacket. Now, in order to not lose the sale on that buy, I gotta go back to factory and battle with them over $3 (more like $1 on the cost level). If the factory is NOT employing kids, they'll laugh at me. If they ARE employing kids, they'll match my price. Which was the case when I was dealing with Walmart product.

So, how do these companies get away with this? By forging relationships. I couldn't get into a denim factory with my prices because Forever 21 locked them down with prices and volume QVC couldn't compete with. At the end of the day, these retailers want to move the most product in the cheapest and smoothest way possible. If that means kids are being used to produce the clothing, then so be it because Mama from middle America is gonna complain that the price went up $5 and all hell will break loose. Not to mention that at the end of the day, the profit return IS the bottom line for these companies, not human rights.

.
and now they go to cheaper place (Ethiopia, for instance). so in a few decades or so, some countries could be like officially labelled "slave country". very nice. and we are called democracy, and want to spread our super universal-humanitarian ideas across the world. but, hey, not all the world. some must remain our pets. right ?
:

This is how business and capitalism works, it will go where it feels it needs to go. Remember, we are talking about companies that don't really care about human rights, otherwise, they wouldn't offer a whole outfit for $30. The problem is, unfortunately, it's not "cool" to have a blue collar job with technical skills, when your next door neighbor is making millions off the stick market or computers. So, who are they gonna employ to make the cheap clothing everyone loves buying every week? Kids, or those too old to do anything else, or those who are not literate enough to go to college. This is how it is in these 3rd world countries. This is something that we are are guilty of perpetuating, from clothes, to furniture. I mean, I see forums talking about how expensive H&M designer collections are and now, we are willing to pay more? These collections are not selling out, so in reality, we're not willing to pay more money. People are going crazy lining up overnight for these sh*tty *** collections at Target. That doesn't make sense to me at all. Like I said, I'm not justifying or excusing what these companies or factories do. It's just how it is. I've worked in factories all my life, because my aunt used to run factories here in NYC.

EXACTLY !
* or we should probably (re?) open some factories in western countries ? but as you said "no one wanted to work in a damn factory like their relatives did." everybody wants a "glamourous" job, now. ohlala.

That's why the title in the first place was "Should we boycott H&M ?". It was probably not a good edited title, but it was changed to a random generic title, and not by me.....

The good news, factories ARE opening in America again, providing jobs to people who are willing to work in them, because factory life in not glamorous. I think it's very rewarding and fulfilling, but that's just me. You will see that the prices will be significantly higher than what you'd find at these fast fashion retailers, but that's because we're supporting a decent wage for people along with a safe working environment. The best thing we can do is support our local economy or companies who are working with artisanal villages that are empowering the workers. We can also boycott fast fashion retailers and hope they will revisit their relationships with their manufacturers urging them to change. I wish people would pay more for clothing, and learn to live with less "disposable fashion".

 

[educo]

I boycott Walmart, and I don't buy fast fashion. I am not feeding this problem, but I don't think it's enough to throw up our hands and say that the cheapskates who don't care (and I would add the marketeers who pander to them) are the cause of the problem, and that's that.


I believe there absolutely must be a way for people who give a damn about whether people on the other side of the world are burning to death to win this. Import laws are one way.


I'll never forget the bit (forget which late-night show it was from) where "You must be this tall" to work in Kathy Lee Gifford's sweatshop ... humor is another way to win. We need Tina Fey on this ...

Import laws are very important but that is a much bigger issue. That won't help if it's become too expensive to import to begin with. I calculate duty in every garment price as well. Depending on the material, it can go as high as 27%. If the company has to maintain prices that the customer is WILLING to pay for that brand and the duties price the product out of that threshold, either the company will eat the loss, OR, the company will get the goods made even cheaper to maintain a margin. This is why I said the CONSUMER truly has the power to change the company. The unfortunate thing is that when the product is that cheap, most consumers don't care because that purchase left them with more money in their pocket.

A book I recommend about how complicated and convoluted this side of the business is called The Global Guide To Winning the Great Garment War by David Birnbaum.

 

[eizhowa]

I used to work on the production side of the business for a large company and factories don't make as much money as you think they do. Certainly not in the billions as H&M has reported. I remember fighting with the factories over PENNIES per garment because the margin was that tight and to be honest, sometimes we lost money on styles.

But telling the factories to improve their conditions doesn't solve the problem. If the conditions are improved, prices WILL go up. If the factories improve with better wages, older workers, etc..where do you think the costs are gonna get passed to? The factory is not going to absorb the cost. We had this problem with one of our factories in China, the middle class was changing and people were actually starting to make real money and no one wanted to work in a damn factory like their relatives did. So those who did, demanded higher wages. When the factory came back to us, we had to scramble to find another factory that could produce at the price we wanted to pay. Where did we go? Indonesia. Even then, we lost money, but it was a lot less than what we were to lose by continuing to produce in China.

I used to work for a Nike subsidiary who's main retail outlet was Walmart. You wouldn't believe the prices I was forcing down their throats to match. All because it had to be offered at $9.99.

The answer truly lies with the consumer. If the consumer stops buying cheap sh*t, the company stops making it. If the company stops making it, the factories have to keep up in order to stay in business. That's how it works. No amount of regulations or whatever on a factory will work because there will be one company (ahem, WALMART) that will overstep those regulations. They WILL find another factory, and going by how much we were producing for Walmart on this single brand, a factory is gonna make sure they keep that business. No one is gonna step up to big producers like Walmart, Nike, or H&M because they'll grease anyone they need to in order to continue producing items on their terms.

I thought I would just clarify that when I say "They" in the second paragraph, I was reffering to H&M, not the factories. I see now that my writing was not very clear on this point. I do understand that factories are not as able to change the situation as the big brands.