The Six Items Challenge - Join The Fashion Fast!

You know how it is. You have a wardrobe absolutely stuffed with clothes and yet somehow you always end up wearing the same stuff. Those go-to items that fit and feel the way you like. Your signature look.

What if that situation was a pledge you could make to help out other people? Could you, if it absolutely came down to it, spend six weeks in just six items of clothing?

That's the challenge that Labour Behind The Label are issuing to raise funds this spring, while kicking back at the demon of fast fashion. We're consuming more and more, while paying less and less. Cheap clothing promotes waste and enables the exploitation of the workers who are forced to work to punishing deadlines. By choosing to not buy clothes we don't need, we can make a stand. The Six Item Challenge is a fashion fast against fast fashion.

Now, don't panic. A pair of shoes is not going to constitute two items. Undies, accessories and footwear are exempt, as is active and sporting wear. This is not the Sack-Cloth And Ashes Challenge. Labour Behind The Label are asking you to think carefully about a capsule wardrobe, and how the same item can be used in different settings - from work to play to party. Which, to be frank, is a useful skill to learn.

Are you game? If so, hit up the link below to sign up. The Challenge will take place during Lent (that's March 1st to 24th April for you non-churchy types) so you have plenty of time to sort out your super six items.

Go lean with your clothing choices this spring. It might just train your brain into new ways of looking at your wardrobe.

http://labourbehindthelabel.org/get-involved/fundraise-for-us/the-six-items-challenge/

The Post-Charity Landscape

After a, let's say challenging, year for the Third Sector, there are some radical rethinks going on about the whole nature of charities in the 21st century. No-one doubts that they have a big role to play. The big question is how they position and sell themselves in the Britain of the future. Or even, how many of them there should be. 

At think-tank NPC's conference in London last week, head of the British Red Cross Mike Adamson had some tough words for anyone who believes that it can be business as usual for the Third Sector. He even questioned the use of the word 'charity':

"I think the word charity is very unhelpful, actually. I think we have a problem with terminology, because the problem is that when the Daily Mail attacks it uses the word charity, but the future is about values-led organisations, both small and large."

Take note of the phrase 'values-led organisations', because it'll start to pop up a lot over the next year or so. Mike's right, of course. People view the idea of 'a charity' dimly, while at the same time they're more than happy to fund-raise or volunteer for a cause. Just look at the success of JustGiving. The end result remains the same, but the terminology changes. Although to me, the term 'value-led organisation' is clunky in the extreme.

Mike also questions whether there is a need for so many charitable organisations in the current environment. He says:

"There are far too many of us charities, in my view, but we do need to create movements and make a difference through getting organised, and sometimes you do need organisations to do that."

He also urged the way to do this was to:

 "broaden alliances and collaboration to achieve as much impact as we possibly can".

Now, that's a tricky one. The obvious inference to take from that would be that the head of one of the country's biggest charities is looking to make a landgrab on causes that are smaller and less able to cope with bumps in revenue. Callous, or simply realistic?

David Robinson, of Community Links is even more blunt about how the charitable sector needs to reinvent itself.

"Is there a role for charities in the future? No, I don’t think so – not specifically.
"I think there is a role for values-led organisations, and I think we have to rethink how we divide up the sectors. I think our old ideas of statutory organisations, voluntary organisations and businesses are redundant. We need to think much more creatively about forms of organisation that are values-led."

See, there's that phrase again. It's hard not to see the wisdom in all of this, though. The business of raising cash for good causes is becoming ever more cut-throat and media-savvy. Understanding and responding to that is a task that will test any, ahem, values-led organisation over the next few years. The Victorian ideal of charity is changing with every passing year. Let's hope the sector can mutate and survive, for all our sakes.

Sort Your Sock Stuff Out!

Yes, I'm banging on about socks again. But bear with me. This is important stuff.

Did you know that 616 million socks are discarded in the UK every year? That's an awful lot of material going straight to landfill, which could easily be re-used. But how do you go about it?

The lovely folk at Love Your Clothes have a solution for you. Well, in fact they have 101 ways in which you can give a little love to those sad, neglected items at the back of the sock drawer. From cushions to draft excluders, dog toys to wrist protectors, there are a multitude of uses for your old feet furniture.

As part of the new drive to Sort Your Sock Stuff Out, LYC have released a video to point you in the right direction. It's a muppety-rap mash-up featuring a gang of–what else?–sock puppets. Watch the vid and you can enter a competition to win £750 in Virgin Experience vouchers!

So, just cos there's a hole in one of a matching pair, why throw out both? Do something fun with your socks... Or just be like me, and embrace the joy that is mismatched sock action. Get sock-sy with it!


Ok, I'll stop now. Enjoy the film, and check out the tips at http://loveyourclothes.org.uk/blogs/lost-socks

The Importance Of Branding To Ethical Business

These days, as any entrepreneur knows, it's not enough to have a great idea. You have to be able to market it in a way that lets people know as quickly as possible who you are and what you stand for.

In other words, you need a brand. This is doubly important if you're selling an ethical product or service.

Over on the Virgin Unite blog (Virgin are of course no slouches at this whole branding thing), some successful ethical business minds are offering useful and practical tips to help get you started. There's some real wisdom on display here.

Logos are desperately important. The right image can convey a lot about your business in a single glance. Get the design right, and it'll work on everything from posters to badges to social media avatars. It's like a flag that announces you and your business. Again, Virgin have nailed this, to the point where even the red of the logo is used in uniforms and livery.

Talking about social media... It's essential, of course. It can give you an opportunity to connect much more deeply with people if you use vectors like Twitter and Instagram to not just sell a product, but tell a story. The House Of Wandering Silk, for example (@wanderingsilk) use Instagram to show work in progress, and to highlight the people who make their amazing raw silk scarves and saris. It helps that the photos they post are drop dead gorgeous, of course.

Transparency is vital. If anything, it's the keystone from which everything in an ethical business should be grounded. People Tree, who are a pioneer in the Eco-fashion business, know all about this. CEO Safia Minney explains:

"Being transparent about who made our products, pioneering environmental innovation and creating a positive social impact through making our products is the DNA of People Tree and you must communicate this to your consumers through every aspect of your brand.”

There's a chance as well to use your brand for good. As Rachel Faller of Tonlé makes clear:

"a successful brand is one that educates its customers, and then provides a solution."

Her rebranding of Tonlé in 2014 as a zero-waste company was launched with a series of hard-hitting videos that have been used as educational tools, providing what she calls a 'light-bulb' moment that can change people's attitudes in a moment.

Our View: Those of us that think marketing and branding is just the icing on the cake of business need to understand that things have changed. In an ever-crowding marketplace you need to stand out, and using clever branding tools, a sharp logo and smart use of social media can be the way to get your ethical business off the ground and engaged with customers who want to not just buy your stuff, but hear your story.

Who Really Pays For Cheap School Uniforms?

The school holidays have started, which means that, to the despair of kids everywhere, the shops are full of Back To School specials. That's the last thing they want to be reminded of during the long weeks of summer, surely.

A price war has kicked off around the most important item of any new school year: the uniform. Most supermarkets are offering full uniforms at prices that are not just knock-down, but fall-off-a-cliff. As The Guardian reports, if you shop at the right store, you can kit out your little darling for as little as £3.69.

Now, we've been down this road before. Long-time readers will remember the furore over the 99p dress, for example. Price wars are all about publicity (that Guardian article helpfully give a full lists of what shops are offering which bargains) and they're part of the dark art of getting customers in the door so they can spend more. Cheap school uniforms are a loss leader, timed to hit the shelves at the perfect point where worried parents are looking at the expense that comes with new gear for the new year. Anything that helps cut the price at the checkout is welcome.

The ethical cost is a different matter, of course. Encouragingly, consumers are becoming more savvy about how their cheap clothing items are sourced. There's an opportunity here. School uniforms can become a great educational tool. A gentle way of getting kids thinking about the thorny subject of global supply and demand, and how the people who make their clothes need to be paid and treated fairly.

Schools can help in more practical ways as well, by pointing out the places where parents can buy ethically sourced uniforms. They may be a little bit more expensive, but they're also more likely to last until your kids actively grow out of them. Second-hand and exchange schemes are also a great way of keeping uniforms in circulation and out of landfill.

I'm not saying that the cheap school uniform is a bad idea, of course. Morrison's offering has a 200 day guarantee on it, for example, which is hardly the action of a shop that doesn't have confidence in the quality of its wares. But, as ever, it's important to realise that cheap clothing has hidden costs. It's always worth asking how the supermarkets can afford to sell a full uniform for significantly less than a fiver, and who may be suffering to make British parents' lives that little bit cheaper this summer.

Breaking The Chain

The global supply chain. If there's one motor for the fast profit-driven ride that fast fashion has undertaken, it's the ability to source, manufacture and import goods from anywhere on the planet. Cheap labour and material have driven down prices (and, many would argue, quality) to the point where clothing is often now viewed as a 'buy, wear once and bin' convenience item.

But the global supply chain is a hugely complex beast, and it has its weak spots. The British Standards Institution (BSI) have just released their annual report which lists the threats and problems that give high street giants a multi-billion dollar headache every year. It makes for a fascinating read.

Take piracy. BSI estimates that over $22bn of losses last year were due to cargo theft. A new wrinkle is the massive growth in South Africa and China of raids on cargo trucks, easy pickings for the dandy highwayman. This type of vehicular crime was up 30% on last year, and is set to rise further as more naughty chaps get in on the road games.

Global warming and natural disasters are also a big problem for stretched supply chains. Weather disruptions from storms caused by El Niña have caused breaks in the chain totalling $33bn. This is before we start factoring in the potential losses from crop destruction that led to a strong showing from many global fashion brands at last year's big climate summit in Paris.

When you look at events on a global scale, you see how everything is connected. Terrorism and the refugee crisis all have impacts on the efficient movement of goods across the planet. Road, sea and rail links can become blocked, and terrorist events go after everything–transport hubs being a prime target, of course.

There are more subtle sources at play, too. The shift of manufacturing to South-East Asia and a general slowing in demand is hitting the Chinese labour market. The result? An uptick in industrial action, slowdowns and stoppages. Factory strikes in China were up nearly 60% last year, as owners struggled to pay their employees. The BSI also notes that even if things improve, strikes are still likely, as emboldened workers become less tolerant of abuses from their employers. These days, garment and footwear workers have access to tips on better jobs with improved pay and conditions thanks to mobile technology. The Chinese workforce is more likely than ever to vote with their feet if they find their management isn't up to scratch. It's just another example of how the most unexpected of influences can have huge effects on a global trade.

Our View: Global fashion is a multi-billion dollar industry, and it's clear there's a ton of money to be made–and lost. Business models depend more and more on just-in-time delivery, and factories and farms that play nicely with spreadsheets and carefully-modelled computer predictions. As we've seen, the world has a way of taking that idea and merrily stamping on its toes.

You can read the whole BSI report here.

 

Get Into Character with CLIC Sargent

It's a common saying that we all have a book in us. And we are a nation of readers, voraciously gobbling up everything from the latest Lee Child thriller to the historical fiction of Hilary Mantel. It's true to say we love a good story.

But have you ever fancied being a character in your favourite author's next book? Well, thanks to CLIC Sargent, the cancer charity for young people, your wish might just come true. Their Get Into Character auction is running now, and if you're a bookworm there are some cracking prizes to bid for. Big names like Paula Hawkins, author of The Girl On The Train, have promised that winning bidders will appear in their next novel as a character.

Now, they're not promising that you'll be the star of the piece, but how cool would it be to have your name in a novel? If thrillers aren't your thing, romantic writers such as Julie Cohen are also offering you the chance to appear in print, without all that tedious mucking about of actually writing a book.

There are plenty of other prizes on offer as well, from signed first editions to writing critiques from the likes of Claire Dyer (should you have gone to the bother of trying to get that book in you out into the open). Bibliophiles, there's really no excuse not to lay a bid down. You might just find yourself part of an awfully big adventure...

The CLIC Sargent Get Into Character charity auction is on now and runs until Mothering Sunday, March 6th. Hey, that could make a cool pressie for the bookworm mum in your life!

For more details and to get your bid on, check out the website: http://www.clicsargent.org.uk/content/get-character

 

Are H&M&S Failing In Their Ethical Promises?

Sometimes it feels like sustainable fashion has turned a corner, only to find a car barrelling directly at it. Take two of the most recognisable names on the high street–H&M and M&S (a pairing that just cries out for the acronym H&M&S). They regularly push their sustainable credentials, launching capsule collections and entering into collaborations with eco-fashionistas like Livia Firth.

And yet, when it comes to promises around key ethical issues like a living wage for their foreign garment workers, both giant brands are failing. That is, according to activist group Labour Behind The Label, who have just published a report on the situation in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and India.

The findings make grim reading for those who believe that H&M&S are making a difference in getting sustainability into the mainstream. Labour Behind The Label found that in eight factories scattered around the research area, workers were still living in abject poverty. In many cases, workers were bringing home less than half the money they needed to live in anything other than slum conditions. Forced to buy food on credit, they have a permanent place on the debt spiral.

Anna McMullen, lead author on the report, is damning in her conclusions. She says:

“Both brands have hung their ethical credentials around this key human rights issue, to great applause, but without reporting clearly on the outcomes of the schemes. While consumers are left to trust that what was said is being done, many are left wondering about the real impact of the promises that were made.”

M&S, meanwhile, have been robust in defending their policies and the rollout of wage increases since 2010. A spokesman reported:

“There’s always more to be done due to the complex nature of the clothing supply chain and we cannot determine the wages paid to supplier employees. However, we are committed to ensuring our cost prices remain high enough to pay a fair living wage, training workers in financial literacy and worker rights, and playing our part in collaborating with other brands and governments to improve the sector.”

That defence tells us a lot, and explains in part the difficulty in making a supply chain fair to all. The business is so bewilderingly complex that it's impossible to guarantee the changes you make will be properly implemented. Oversight on the changes is next to impossible when employees are paid cash in hand through a piecework model of compensation.

However, H&M are still at an early stage in their scheme to improve worker conditions. Their roadmap to change was only published in 2013, and the programme is due to run until 2020. Labour Behind The Label urges H&M to look at what M&S have accomplished, and learn from their mistakes. A particular problem: benchmarks, or rather the lack of them. Currently, H&M are setting wage rates at their workers' “own opinion of what a decent living wage is.” This is pretty meaningless, and gives no real figures for trade unions to negotiate with. Setting proper, researched benchmarks and keeping things transparent are, the report concludes, by far the best way to ensure that garment workers in South East Asia are treated and paid fairly.

Our View: frankly, we think it's unrealistic to expect root-and-branch change in in ground supply chain practices overnight. When a single item of clothing can have its material sourced on one continent, its accessories on a second before being assembled in yet a third, ensuring fairness and transparency is an incredibly difficult job. Nevertheless, it's good that groups like Labour Behind The Label are keeping the big brands on task, and making sure that the rhetoric doesn't outstrip the reality.

You can read the full report here.

 

Oxfam Confronts The Charity Shop Dilemma

An interesting knock-on effect of the boom in fast fashion has been the hit that charity shops have taken. Clothes from shops like Primark are simply not fit for purpose after a few washes, which means those items are going straight in the bin instead of the recycle hopper. Added to that, people are buying fewer new clothes in general, and therefore hanging onto stuff that they would normally donate. Added to that, conflict in the Ukraine, traditionally a big market in second-hand and donated clothing, has seen a significant drop in demand and a glut of material in the marketplace.
The end result? Charity chains like Oxfam have seen a 3% slide in sales. And that's a problem for a business that has over 700 stores nationwide. What sort of a message does it send when even the charity shops start closing?
The problem for retailers in general is that we consumers have become much more savvy over the past couple of decades. The massive growth in online shopping has largely passed the charity market by–how do you cost-effectively market an individual donation? Meanwhile, the boom in discount stores like Aldi and Lidl, that can offer supermarket quality at pound-shop prices (including clothing), means that the traditional charity shop model has to change to survive.
Oxfam are now trailing discount stores in six locations, setting out its mix of donated fashion and homewares as well as its range of Fairtrade goods at cheap block prices–£1, £2 and £3. By getting people through the door, the idea is that they'll be enticed by the quality on offer and add Oxfam to their usual shopping mix.
It's not all bad news for Oxfam, of course. Their specialist Book And Music stores are havens for the specialist market, gathering rare vinyl and collectable literature in welcomingly inviting spaces. And although donations fell, public fundraising was up by 2.5%. An interesting response to those who feel charities are too invasive. In all, the charity's income actually rose by £12m last year.
Oxfam are at the leading edge of charity retail, and it'll be fascinating to see if other brands respond to the challenge. The tired notion of a shabby, unwelcoming charity shop as the last resort of the desperate is falling away, as smart shoppers see the benefits in buying pre-loved wares. There's a change in attitudes, to which the sector should respond imaginatively.

Get Paid To Play Nice

We bang on about supply chain here at the Pier, but with good reason. The global fashion industry is a broad church, taking in worshippers from all sides. Your new shirt could be made from Indian cotton, sewn in Bangladesh, with buttons and fixings coming from China. There are dozens of different processes in a piece of modern clothing, that can mean it travels thousands of miles before it makes the final trip from the shop to your wardrobe. 

With that, of course, comes the potential for abuse. It's incredibly difficult for a big-name brand to guarantee that all the steps in the production of a given garment are carried out ethically and responsibly. Inspections, checks and contractual obligations can only go so far, and can be easily abused. It seems an impossible task to have a transparent and accountable supply chain if you're a global player. 

That's a situation that one of the biggest names in fashion, Levi Strauss, is trying to change, and they're doing it by using their significant financial clout. Quietly announced last November, they are making an offer to their suppliers that will be pretty hard to resist. 

Levi's have brokered a deal with the World Bank that allows them to offer low-cost funding to their suppliers from the International Finance Corporation if they sign up to and promise to abide by the brand's CSR: the sweetly named "Terms Of Engagement". These are some of the most worker-friendly guidelines on the market, using internationally recognised human and labour rights standards, like the Universal Declaration Of Human Rights. 

The rates offered by the IFC are some of the most competitive out there, and are highly attractive to players in markets like South Asia, where competition is fierce and funding is hard to find. In early meetings with suppliers in Bangladesh and Pakistan, all Levi's vendors expressed interest in taking up the scheme.

The program has been very cleverly put together. It uses Levi's existing audit program, so no extra training or new processes are required. Vendors can simply sign up and carry on. 

But the smart bit comes with the terms of the deal. It's been designed on a sliding scale, that isn't weighted towards a particular benefit--that is, you don't get a preferential deal just for allowing your workers to unionise. The more boxes on the list of Terms Of Engagement you tick, the better your score. More importantly, there are penalties for non-compliance. Meaning that if you comply with the TOE completely and provably, you get bonuses and discounts. In short, it's in a supplier's best financial interests to do the right thing. Levi's call this "the race to the top". Rewarding suppliers for doing the right thing is a surprisingly radical move in fashion, but there's evidence that it could be the lever needed to get solid compliance to a set of labour, human rights and environmental terms that would otherwise have been unthinkable.

Levi's take no prisoners in their CSR record, losing out only to Patagonia in sustainability, and scoring off the chart when it comes to auditing their suppliers. This is good news for those who wonder how accountable Levi's factories will be once they've signed up. 

Levi's record in some areas, such as indigenous rights in Cambodia, are less stellar, but this new program shows a company that is willing to admit its mistakes and show that it has learned from them. Are we about to see a situation where factories in the global supply chain compete to see just how ethical they can be? It'll be fascinating to find out! 

The New Normal

We've talked before about the need for ethical fashion to become more than just a niche product. At the moment it's a kind of worthy sub-genre that, if we were in the movie world, would be world cinema or documentaries when compared to the giant ugly blockbusters that the fashion behemoths spit out.
Worse still, ethical fashion can be seen as not just worthy but expensive. By the simple act of paying artisans a proper working wage, unit costs go up, which means the price of the finished item goes up, which means you can never be seen as a cheap and cheerful everyday choice.
It doesn't help that, if brands do decide to launch ethical collections, they do so while effectively ghettoising the range. It's kept in its own little stable away from the main shop floor, where its poor delicate sensibilities might be ruffled by the clothes on the rest of the racks. By making these collections 'special', 'exclusive' or worst of all, 'limited edition', the best intentions of the big-name store are ruined. The range withers on the vine, excluded, ignored and eventually cancelled for want of sales. "We tried," the brands will say, "but no-one wanted to buy the clothes." Not surprising if the stuff's 20% more expensive and stuck on a standee at the back of the store.
In order for ethical fashion to succeed, it needs to become, well, normal. It needs to become the choice that people make without thinking, the item that people reach for because it's the first thing on the rack, and isn't unusually priced. We have a long way to go before that happens, of course. But one way of getting the message out, counter-intuitive though it might seem, is not to get the message out. Rather than push out the message about how eco-friendly and socially responsible your clothes are, why not just make the best clothes you can to the highest ethical standards you can, and see what happens when they are forced to stand up for themselves?
There are few people out there that will buy clothes because they're worthy, and the era of the eco-warrior who was proud to wear itchy, badly-dyed goat-hair jumpers is, thankfully, past. People don't wear clothes because of the label. They buy them because they're comfortable and they look good. I'm not saying marketing isn't important. But a piece has to be more than its advertising campaign.
A recent piece in the Guardian highlighted designers at London Fashion Week who were working with short supply chains, a close relationship with their factories and clever use of recycled materials without making a fuss about it. These guys are start-ups, but they see a sustainable model not as a choice, but as the only logical way of working. Daniela Felder of German label Felder Felder says:

"Working closely with our factory is crucial to get the right result but also because of the relationship we work with people we trust, it’s personal, there is genuine love and care."

More importantly, though, these smaller operators can move quickly and have the ability to experiment and try new things. Here, perhaps, is the key. Ekatherina Kukhareva, for example, is using computer-controlled flat-knitting techniques to cut her waste output down to scraps. There's no need to compromise. They can see the cracks in the current model, and manoeuvre smoothly around and through them. As pioneers for potentially game-changing working practices, designers like Felder Felder and Kukhareva are shaping the future dialogue between fashion house, factory and consumer, making sustainability the new normal.

Adidas: A Strikingly New Approach To Industrial Dispute

We know the story. Impoverished garment workers caught in a struggle for fair pay and conditions against a corrupt and greedy management, bankrolled by a distant multinational who only cares that the contracts go out on time and budget. I've told it on the blog so very many times.

The thing with any perceived truth is that it's never the whole story. A recent strike by factory workers in China twisted the tale in a very surprising way.

Employees at Taiwanese shoe manufacturer Yue Yuen downed tools after finding out that the company had been underpaying its social security contributions. Thousands walked out in a strike that's being called one of the biggest in the history of industrial action. But it was supervisors who first noticed the issue, and confronted senior plant officials over the problem. Even more unusually, some of the big-name Western brands who had a lot to lose from the Yue Yuen walkout sided vocally with the workers. Both Nike and Adidas have made it clear that they would not move production from the plant, choosing instead to support the strikers.

Even more astonishingly, Adidas has offered support and entered into negotiations with the Chinese government to secure the release of two of the leading figures in the strike following their arrest. In a statement to The Guardian, Adidas said:

"With respect to the arrest of two workers' representatives, Mr Zhang and Mr Lin, we were engaged with several labour rights groups in Southern China, to try to determine where they were being detained and offered our support to secure their release. We also wrote to the Dongguan mayoral office, calling for his immediate release."

Despite the heavy financial hit to Yue Yuen, estimated at $27 million, it's fascinating to see the big names siding with workers in industrial disputes. Let's not kid ourselves that this is the dawn of a new caring sharing corporate structure. But the multinationals are starting to see, I think, that it's in their own best interests to keep skilled garment workers happy and healthy. Strikes are bad for business. It makes sense to stop them happening, and if that means putting pressure on the factory owners to pay and treat their workers fairly, then so be it. It's heartening to see corporate pressure flexing in the right direction for a change.

Peak Fast Fashion

I think it's clear to any casual observer that fashion has changed massively over the past 10-15 years. The old model, of fashion houses releasing two seasons of looks a years that gradually filtered down through the high-end ateliers to become part of the general pattern of clothing over an extended period, has gone for good. Nowadays, we see it, we want it. And technology and manufacturing processes have advanced to a point where that urge can be serviced, at a low, low price.
Fast fashion, which most observers agree was pioneered by Spanish clothing giant Zara, is a different beast altogether. It takes the catwalk not as inspiration, but as a blueprint for the new season's ranges. It can now take mere weeks for new designs to be in the shops. Sure, they won't have the precise cut and finish, or the luxurious materials of the clothes that Cara, Kate and co. show off, but the look is right. See how quickly the Christian Louboutin red-soled stilletto went from the fashion mags to the high street. For the most part, copyright claims and cease-and-desist orders simply don't work. Think of the fairground game Whack-a-Mole. Bop down one shop, another pops up. Fashion has always been an arena where ideas can't be protected. It's tough enough to keep the knock-off Adidas trackies off the streets. How do you prevent a particular cut or fabric print from percolating down to the masses?
The price of all this is, of course, twofold. You need a big, cheap workforce to get these clothes on the shelves, and it's best if you don't pay too much attention to the conditions of their factories, or their pay, or how old they are. Fast fashion is, for the most part, a humanitarian disaster zone.
There's another cost, and here's where things get interesting. The Zara model, focussing on the newest trends and clearing them off the shelves as soon as the next big thing arrives, has been so successfully copied by its competitors that our expectations of how long we should wear clothing for has changed. We throw away billions of pounds of clothes a year, knowing that because it's cheap (and frequently made from shoddy materials that won't last) that we can just bin it to make room for more. This is, of course, an environmental problem on a massive scale, but it's led to problems for Zara as well.
The brand's insistance on quick turnaround of ranges has led to huge overstocks of clothes that they can no longer get onto the racks. The solution? They've launched a new discount store brand, Lefties, that sells last season's clothes. But that's not really helping. Inditex, Zara's parent company, has seen profits flatline while cheeky newcomers like Primark and H&M have been doing increasingly good business in Spain, the brand's heartland.
If even Zara is feling the pinch as the fast fashion model accelerates, where next for everyone else? Could it be, as the public's attention moves to a more sustainable clothing philosophy in the face of a global recession that includes more focus on make-do-and-mend and the recycled/pre-loved idea, that we are seeing peak fast fashion? Can it be, as we start to insist that the workers that make our clothes are fairly paid and treated, that our hunger for cheap, fast clothing is finally starting to ebb?

Uncharitable Behaviour

Charities are in a tough place at the moment, and it's not going to get any easier. They are expected to pull up the slack as the public sector has its belt forcibly tightened in a governmental wedgie. They are expected to do this as their funding is cut and as donations drop due to the prevailing economic slump.
It amazes me that charities can do their jobs, not just in the current chilly financial climate, but at all. They're subject to one of the most unfair paradoxes around. We expect charities to raise money, but there are screams of horror should they hold any of it back for administration or, god forbid, growth.
Duncan Green of Oxfam lays out the problem neatly in a recent article for The Guardian. Charities, he says, are caught between a very big rock and a very hard place. They can't afford to attract the sort of managerial talent that would enable them to make more money for their chosen cause. Any charity that is seen to be "profligate" with their funds are in for an instant PR hosedown with raw sewage. How dare they hold back 3% of their funds to pay for staff and premises? How dare they think about actually growing, or investing in the future? Won't somebody think of the children?
This isn't just wrong-headed, it's actively dangerous. One in ten charities recently polled think that they will be drawing down the shutters in the next twelve months. Horrible, but hardly surprising when they're actively discouraged away from modern business practices that might just make the difference between survival of a much needed resource, or yet another cause on the scrapheap. Is it coincidental that the most successful charities (and let's be clear about the definition here; success in raising funds for their cause is what I mean) are the ones that have managed to rise above the snark and cant and run themselves along well-proven business lines.
Any charity that's worthy of the name will be doing all they can to minimise costs and maximise their usefulness to their chosen cause. That's straightforward enough. But if there is an opportunity to significantly raise their game, either through the hiring of skilled managers or investment in infrastructure, then surely it's a no-brainer to take a bit now and pay it back with interest later? The small-mindedness with which people view charities boggles my mind, and it's frankly unsustainable nowadays. If you want charities to succeed, if you want them to be part of The Big Society (gone a bit quiet on that front recently, hasn't it?) then you either need to give them appropriate funding, or the freedom to be able to raise it in whatever way they feel fit.
It really is about time that we gave charities a break. We need to wise up, and see them as business entities with responsibilities to their stakeholders, who need them to survive and thrive. A healthy Third Sector is a vital part of the UK's social welfare programme. We don't have the luxury of treating it with disdain or patronising neglect any more.
To finish, a repost of a TED talk that will always bear repeating, from financier, charity maven and activist Dan Pallotta.

.

Rethinking Charity

We think of the business and charity sectors as fundamentally different. But at their core, they have the same purpose; to make money for other people. For businesses, it's their shareholders. Charities are beholden to the good causes they help to support.

And yet, if a charity spends more than the absolute bare minimum on staffing, admin or heaven help us investment in the future, then we're on their necks like a pack of howling dogs. For the business sector, this is essential. Without it, a venture simply won't be able to survive. Why do we feel that charities are unable to do the same? In the long run, isn't it better for the people that any given charity is trying to help to have a strong, healthy organisation that's going to be much more productive and capable of doing the very thing they were formed to do?

As charities are asked to do more with less funding and fewer resources in Cameron's laughable Big Society, it's time for us to reconsider charity, and more specifically our attitude towards it. Today, rather, than waffle on at length, I want to point you in the direction of a TED talk by activist and fundraiser Dan Pallotta, which calls for just such a rethink--and more importantly, how it might be achieved.

If you have any interest at all in the future of fundraising, then I urge you to set aside twenty minutes and watch this video. It might just change the world of charity for you.

Innovation, American Style

You might remember that last month I celebrated the Ethical Fashion Forum's Innovation UK Awards, showcasing the best in forward thinking British ethical fashion.

There's more good news, as the EFF have branched out this year, and have just announced the winners of their Innovation US Awards. Ranging from Afia's smart updating of traditional Ghanain deigns for the American market, to Carrie Parry's effortlessly classic designs made from impeccably sourced materials, the winners of this new award all show outstanding initiative in helping the communities behind the clothing, as well as creating fashion that is stylish and wearable in it's own right.

I'm especially drawn to Soham Dave's insistance on hand-crafted and biodegradable materials. This is teamed with their support of the local artisans that make the clothes, turning them from a workforce into empowered entrepreneurs. This connection between the craftspeople and the final customer is a vital part of the sustainable process, and it's great to see companies like Soham Dave take that link so seriously.

All the Innovation US winners will be showcased at the Nolcha Fashion Week in New York in September.

Read more about the award and all the winners on the Innovation US page.

Start Your Engines!

Bet you didn't know that Pier 32 sponsor a racing team. It's part of our ongoing involvement with the local community in our base of North-East Surrey. It might not be Formula One... yet... but single-make kart racing has more than enough thrills and spills to entertain even the most discerning of petrolheads.
We're supporting James Emmerson, helping to put him through a three year training programme which will lead to a single-seat license.
Pier 32 Racing's debut on the track will be this weekend, where James will be taking part in the largest single-make kart racing event in the UK, the Maxxis Formula TKM Festival. This promises to be an action packed event, and everyone at Pier 32 wishes James a tankful of luck. The event will be shown on Raceworld through Sky Sports, so keep an eye open for the distinctive black and red Pier 32 livery on your tellybox.
The Maxxis Formula TKM Festival takes place at the Kimbolton International Circuit in Cambridgeshire from the 12th-14th August.
For more info, visit the Pier 32 Racing site.

Innovative Winners

Every year, the Ethical Fashion Forum holds it's InnovationUK Award, in which it recognises and celebrates a British designer or brand that has made outstanding progress in the ethical arena. As you can imagine, the quality of entrants is extremely high.

The winners this year have just been announced, and the list is eclectic and rich with talent. A.L.A.S., winner of the Pure Spirit Award, make sleep and lounge wear from 100% organic cotton, which is sourced, spun, woven and dyed in India, using a local fairly paid workforce. Accessories Award winner Caipora's jewellery, made from reclaimed Brazillian hard woods inlaid with precious metals, is cleanly contemporary and compassionately stylish. But all the winners have one thing in common. Their ethical credentials are impeccable and the clothes and accessories look fantastic.

The Innovation Award is a major step up for the winners, who now get the chance to exhibit at major eco-fashion shows in the autumn. Congratulations to A.L.A.S., Caipora and all the others. Mind you, I reckon all the shortlisted contenders are worth your attention, both as firm supporters of the ethical way, and for bringing a little bit of beauty into the world. Personally, I've got my eye on one of 959's recycled seatbelt bags, hint hint...

Win an Ethical Organic T-Shirt - first numbers now drawn!

You may have noticed the new banner on our home page - from this week, on selected orders of WRAP ethically produced t-shirts, we have been attaching Pier 32 tags that carry a unique number. Starting this week too, and every week for the next 52 weeks, three numbers will be published on this site each week and if one of those numbers matches the tag in your WRAP clothing then you win a ethically produced, WRAP certified, organic cotton t-shirt.

More details: Win an ethically produced organic t-shirt

Without further ado, here are the first three numbers..... 8530, 2229, 1171

Remember to keep these Pier 32 tags and check back in the weeks ahead - if not a winner yet, you could be soon.