FAQs

Can I get a list of companies that do not use sweatshops?

There is currently no list of brand names that do not use sweatshops. Because of the nature of the apparel industry that requires rapid change in styles with low costs to consumers, most retailers do not own the means of production but contract out to factories that will produce apparel, shoes, and accessories for them at low prices.

Unfortunately, today almost all retailers use exploited labor to produce their goods. While some manufacturers have taken steps to not use sweatshops, they are few in number and are usually limited to the sale of t-shirts or work uniforms. Below is a list of some of these manufacturers.

We encourage you as a consumer to become aware of the issues and actively let companies know that they need to take more steps to ensure that workers are not being exploited. This method has proven to be the most effective tool we have in stopping the abuse of apparel workers. By putting coordinated worldwide pressure on companies, they will eventually get the message that consumers do not want their goods produced in sweatshops.

The following are a list of some conscientious retailers:

• No Sweat
• Justice Clothing Co.
• No Sweat Apparel
• Unionwear

Aren't workers happy to have jobs in apparel factories? After all, don't these clothing companies provide lots of jobs, especially in developing countries?

Apparel companies have brought many new jobs to all parts of the developing world. These jobs are indeed welcome in these countries. However, workers also want to be treated with respect and expect to be able to support themselves and their families with their earnings. Having a job in apparel manufacturing should not mean having to be subjected to starvation wages, physical and verbal abuse, excessive overtime or a life threatening work environment. These conditions could easily be addressed by clothing companies. Furthermore, all major companies have the resources to ensure that their workers are earning living wages.

Isn't the pay in these factories enough to live according to the wage standards of other countries? In other words, don't the wages in these factories correspond to the local standard of living?

Most apparel manufacturing jobs are now outside of the U.S. , Canada , or Europe . However, even in the U.S. , Canada , and Europe there are some full-time workers receiving wages far below the poverty line.

The goal for workers is not to get the "American" apparel wage, but to make enough money to survive by local standards and to support their family. Most workers employed by sweatshops are not making anything near the sustainable wage rates or living wage for the country where they live and work.

Aren't sweatshops only a problem in developing countries?

The globalization of the economy has caused many manufacturing industries to move to developing countries, where wages are still far lower than for comparable work performed in developed countries. But sweatshops are opening up everywhere, including the U.S. , Canada , Europe and Russia . Multinational corporations are free to hunt for the lowest wages, which also means that workers are subjected to the worst working conditions, no union representation or legal protection. And factories with good conditions in the U.S. and Canada , as well as in other countries, are shutting down. By making competition contingent on labor costs, companies are forcing everyone into a "race to the bottom"; in order to maintain jobs in manufacturing workers must compete to see who will accept the lowest wages and the worst working conditions.



Are these sweatshops run directly by the companies whose clothing is produced in them?

No. This is one of the major factors that allows sweatshop conditions to continue and for retailers and brand names to refuse responsibility for these conditions. Most major apparel companies now use a vast web of contractors that assemble and distribute one type of item. Sometimes several of these contractors will be used to fully assemble a single item. This system makes it difficult to hold any single group responsible for sweatshop conditions. But retailers and brands know where their products are made and must be made aware of the conditions that allow their labor costs to remain so low.

Many of these contractors get the majority of their work from some of the largest retailers in the world. Gap and Walmart, for example, are highly valuable contracts to any factory that can secure them. If these two companies or any other large retailer were to pressure their contractors to improve their labor conditions, other contractors, as well as other retailers, would be forced to follow suit.

Why do anti-sweatshop groups target some companies, like Nike or Gap, if others are just as bad?

It is most effective to target the largest and most powerful companies for several reasons. First, their financial power often allows these companies to commit the most abusive labor and human rights violations without consequences. The major companies drive the industry at every level.

Second, in order to communicate the possibility for change, anti-sweatshop groups have to target companies that can afford to improve labor conditions. In most cases, a small change in the expenditures of a major clothing company would vastly improve the wages paid to the workers making their product. These changes could be made without changing the retail price of a garment.

Third, industry giants like Nike and Gap have both proclaimed to be leaders in the abolition of sweatshops. Many companies cite concern for human rights enforcement in their internal codes of conduct. Yet, their workers continue to tell a vastly different story.

Should companies who use sweatshops be the targets of boycotts?

Because most of the top clothing companies and brands continue to use sweatshop labor, it would be difficult for a boycott to effectively target all sweatshop offenders. Moreover, it is not necessary for an individual consumer to stop buying a particular brand or stop shopping at a particular store to support the anti-sweatshop movement. Retailers and manufacturers want to please consumers, especially young people, in order to keep their business in the future. If every consumer voiced concern to their favorite brand or store, through any means, those companies would be forced to reevaluate the conditions under which their products are produced.



What progress has the anti-sweatshop movement made?

The anti-sweatshop movement has been built by a variety of groups and has begun to take root all around the world. From students to religious groups to labor unions, the anti-sweatshop movement has been successful in building coalitions that have varied reasons to demand the elimination of sweatshops.

In the last two years, several major victories have been secured by student activists at a number of universities in the U.S. As a result of student activism, dozens of universities have agreed to adopt labor codes of conduct and demand full public disclosure of production locations by the companies that make and market university apparel.

Click here to connect to United Students Against Sweatshops

In Europe and the U.S. , a few local governments have begun efforts to prohibit the use of sweatshop labor in the production of apparel purchased for government use, such as police uniforms.

Click here to find out more about SweatFree Communities.