Fashion brands shifting to PPE production: the potential consequences for the fashion industry’s most vulnerable
By: Kim Van Der Weerd
Tags: Manufacturing, Sustainable Fashion, Fashion Revolution, Covid 19, Labor

As major fashion brands shift to PPE production, consumers should ask for more details.

Photo by Kelly Sikkema on Unsplash

In the face of global pandemic, an ever-growing list of fashion brands have announced plans to shift production to face masks and other protective equipment for healthcare workers. And while these efforts are commendable and morally imperative, is there a hidden cost for the fashion supply chain’s most vulnerable?

Whilst brands tout their mask masking, they’ve also announced sweeping order cancellations for garment factories in Asia. Isn’t shifting to face mask production a win-win? Factories can keep their doors open while brands leverage their supply chains to address an urgent health crisis.

As the former manager of a Cambodian garment factory, I can attest to the fact that it might not be that simple. In an industry where the financial risk is disproportionately shouldered by those further down the supply chain, swapping out garment orders for face masks has the potential to put the supply chain’s most vulnerable even more at risk — not less. There is the potential for a win-win, but the devil is in the details.

Order cancellations by brands have forced factories into precarious financial situations. Factories are the ones who front the bill for production. They buy the raw materials and pay the people making the products. Most garment factories have small profit margins, which coupled with the up-front financing of production costs and bad payment terms means tight cash flow.

We’re not talking about cancellation of future orders, for which raw materials have yet to be purchased and peoples’ time yet to be paid. We’re talking about canceled orders for which the goods have already been produced, and for which only a handful of brands have committed to paying. Factory managers have tough decisions ahead and I’m already hearing stories about reduced hours and pay cuts from friends back in Cambodia.

When brands announce they are shifting to mask production, are they asking the same factories they’ve left even more cash strapped than usual to finance the production of face masks? Are factory managers being forced to choose between spending the little cash they have left on purchasing materials for masks versus making payroll on time?

There is significant and urgent demand for face masks. Maybe the only way for a factory to make payroll on time is to choose between a handful of unappealing options: subcontract to facilities who likely don’t meet stringent compliance criteria, hire additional workers on a short-term contract, or excessive overtime. Or maybe the choice is between investing in PPE for workers versus selling it to be able to pay their salaries.

Consumers deserve more detail. Who is paying for the raw materials to make masks? Are brands supporting factories with financing? After how many days will factories be paid for face masks? What kind of PPE will factory workers receive, and will brands help factories to pay for it? Are brands following the Covid-19 purchasing guidelines released by Better Buying? At the very least, will brands pay factories for canceled orders so that factories can use this to finance face mask production and invest in protective equipment their staff deserve to have?

Demand to know the names of the factories doing the face mask production, so credit can be given where credit’s due. Because the harsh reality of the industry is that the heroes resolving our PPE shortage are also the industry’s least visible and worst protected.

To find out when I’ve written something new, keep in touch.