UKH

There is a debate on instagram at the moment regarding how a company can portray they are ethically driven to provide eco friendly, locally sourced clothing, and hold transparency as one of their key values. The same company´s website doesn't recognize any involvement with using cheap non european labour. However their latest post show factories in Bihar. Its seems they don't want to acknowledge this allegation, but it does question what lengths these clothing companies go to to cut cost, while disregarding their own core beliefs.luy

To what degree can a company deceive us in believing one thing while there actual operation show different? is it all just marketing, to what extent should we allow ourselves to be deceived

https://www.3rdrockclothing.com/pages/our-values-ethos-mission 

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bwpgj-DjnDR/

What exactly are you alleging here?  Their own website shows that they manufacture in India, they are not hiding this and even proudly participate in the #WhoMadeMyClothes campaign, and it describes tin detail the ethical standards they require their suppliers to comply with. Or, like some of the commentators in the Instagram discussion you linked to, are you simply assuming that a factory in India must be exploiting its workers?

I don't understand. They've made an Instagram post with the specific purpose of openly acknowledging where their products are made. What "allegation" are they denying?

It seems a bit weird to criticise them for hiding something when the information about what you claim they were hiding came from their own social media post. If they're trying to hide it, they need to rethink their strategy!

I guess the real criticisms are:

• The website not matching up, which strikes me as the website probably just being out of date. They should update it but I don't think it's fair to suggest dishonesty when they're making a specific effort at transparency elsewhere.
• The workers being exploited, which doesn't seem like a settled case. Is it fair to assume that manufacture in that area of the world automatically means exploitation? Perhaps the pay and conditions are awful but I can't see any evidence of that as yet.

I really don't see what issue it is that you are trying to raise here. How is manufacturing clothing somewhere other than Europe unethical? 

I don't see anything especially unethical about maximising shareholder value either - neither of your links nor your original post give any indication that workers are being genuinely exploited.

As you're keen on transparency, why have you chosen to raise this on UKC?

I choose ukc as the main people that this brand is marketed toward are climbers and yogi's.

I don't know for sure that these workers are been exploited but it suggests that labour costs in Bihar are extremely cheaper then countries with in the European union. Exploitation to me is paying someone less than £100 a month. I don't see how I company that tries to be ethical can justify using labour at such low costs, and see that as been fair. I understand a lot of companies use labour from outside Europe but the difference here is 3rd rock states one the core reasons behind starting this company was to combat the negative sides of the fashion industry, and I don't see how they are any different.

I do feel they started the business with a good intentions but it's looking like these beliefs have been put to one side to increase profits. If so then they should change their core values. 

The comment regarding the shareholders funds I guess wasn't clear. There accounts show a increase in stock over that period, the stock doubles at the same time the amount paid to creditor halves. This doesn't suggest the use of cheaper labour but there paying a lot less in 2018 to that in 2017 while getting a lot more for there money. 

I think it's extremely important to update the website, this is the point of sale!  The website is where people go to see what the companies values are, where the clothes are made. Not highlighting the fact the clothes are made outside the European union makes a huge difference into how people might persevere the brand. Knowing something is made in the union gives a lot more certainties that these products adhere to certain regulation. Misleading ads such as stating our clothes our are made in Lithuania, Turkey, Portugal, Israel is more than just unethical its illegal. 

I asked them to change there site so the customers can get a true understanding of the products they are buying, they didn't seem to want to listen to me. That’s why I’m questioning to what extent can companies use marketing to deceive us. 

'Their own website shows that they manufacture in India"

Please show me where it says this, as if so im wrong, but i didn't see that anywhere on there site!

Do you know where your clothes come from? 

Our clothing is made in: Lithuania, Turkey, Portugal and Israel. 

We source most of our fabrics within Europe and print our t-shirts in Wales. 

We only work with factories that follow the Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI) base code. 

there words..

https://www.3rdrockclothing.com/blogs/news/who-made-our-clothes-1

"We'll be sharing with you some of the people who can say #IMadeYourClothes. Read on to find out a little bit more about our supply chain, specifically our factory in India. We also work with factories in Lithuania, Turkey & Portugal and we only work with factories that follow the Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI) base code.

Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI) Base code basics:

1. Employment is freely chosen 
2. Freedom of association (=Unions) 
3. Working conditions are safe and hygienic 
4. Child labour shall not be used 
5. Living wages are paid 
6. Working hours are not excessive 
7. No discrimination is practiced 
8. Regular employment is provided 
9. No harsh or inhumane treatment is allowed"

Their words.  it took me only a couple of minutes of browsing their site to find it, and mine was just a casual look to see what you were complaining about.  You're the one with the apparent grievance, but if you can't be bothered to do the basic research why should you expect them to pay any attention to you?

Do you have evidence, or even anything to suggest, that this factory is not meeting these standards, and that 3rdRock are knowingly using them anyway?  So far as I can see all they are guilty of is that one of their website pages is out of date. 

Labour costs are cheaper in India than in EU countries but so is the cost of living.  You cannot say that a wage below a certain level is "exploitation" unless you also know what that money will buy.

I think you may be misinterpreted unfairly here. I assume English isn't your first language?

"Knowing something is made in the union gives a lot more certainties that these products adhere to certain regulation."

Anything sold within the EU has to comply with EU standards, regardless of where it was made

So far as I can see all they are guilty of is that one of their website pages is out of date. 

out of date! the main page that outlines the companies values. wouldn't you think the values of a company is something that should be kept up to date! i'm sure they didn't move there operation to india last week, and so they have had plenty of time to update this. 

but you are right i didn't check the blog posts, i don't tend to read the blog posts of a company to find out the values they have

Why is paying someone less than £100 per month exploitation?  The focus that has been put on often random figures of pay to denote exploitation/poverty has never made sense to me.  It all depends on the local cost of living.  A quick google on salaries in India shows that £100 per month looks pretty reasonable - it is pretty close to the average.

sorry i shouldn't use random figures, i used this to show how little without underestimating. my research seems to suggest garment worker in india get about  £25 a month. 

This company is marketing them self in a way that suggest they are different to the other clothing companies, there trying to promote good working standards. I question the motives they have to move operations from Europe to India if its not for personal profit.  what about the jobs lost to the european workers who couldn't compete to the cheap labour of India. There is not really a textile industry in the uk any more due to this use of cheap labour. 

i understand living cost are cheaper in india but pay them fairly 

Or perhaps the move to cheaper labour is driven partly by the reluctance of consumers to pay the true value of the goods they buy? I have no data to back this up, just speculation. Private companies will always need to make a profit - else why would they bother to exist?

It's obviously an error on their website, but nothing more sinister than that.  They're not attempting to hide their Indian supply chain, on the contrary they write about it at some length.  I'm more puzzled by their claim that manufacturing in Lithuania, Turkey, Portugal and Israel. is "sourcing locally". By the way, both Turkey and Israel are outside the EU.

If you're going to make serious and potentially libellous claims about a company on a public forum, you'd do well to look into it thoroughly, including a more than cursory glance at their website, and in particular read any blogs which specifically deal with the topic you're complaining about.

The average annual income in India is US$616.  Your recommended figure of £100 a month is equivalent to $1550 per annum.  

maybe an error, but it was also pointed out to them, so could have been corrected. I can't say how long they have been using india. looking at their accounts i would suggest some time during 2017/2018 so plenty of time to up date what i would think is a key piece of information. both for ethics and trading standards. the blog you directed me to was posted 2 days ago.. true outside the eu but in the customs Union agreement.. i believe. 

thank you, your words were taken on board 

Posters on here making unprovoked criticism that verges on libel, invariably are not identifiable by their usernames or profiles.

It's almost as if there may be more to the story than they're letting on.

Can you point me to a company that makes clothes not for personal profit?  I imagine the margins on clothing are pretty tight especially for niche clothing like 3rd rock.  They cannot have huge volumes compared to the big lifestyle climbing brands.  My best guess is that if they did not manufacture in Asia then the clothes would cost way too much and they would disappear pretty quickly.

An interesting link from what is considered one of the most ethical climbing brands is

https://www.patagonia.com/blog/2012/04/patagonia-clothing-made-where-how-wh...

Whilst from 2012 I think this explains how and why they do things really well.  Being ethical is nowhere near as simple as just paying a certain wage.  There are a range of factors.

So what would you prefer - companies that are trying to be as ethical as they can be and therefore helping to make the world a better place or just have companies that don't give a sh$t. I get the impression 3rd rock are doing a good job in a very complex global industry and against some major competition.  Give them credit for what they are doing.

If you want to vent your anger do so against Apple who in my view are the most hypocritical company to exist in terms of claims/perception vs reality when it comes to being ethical (I have an inbuilt hatred for all things Apple).  I assume you are not writing these posts on an Apple device.

My best guess is you have some reason you are not telling us about for your criticism of 3rd rock.

I'm off to order some 3rd rock trousers that I have been meaning to do for a while.

nice article, thank you for that. 'we have made the choice to do better and not accept the status quo"

I really don't mean any harm to 3rd rock, for me they made good clothes, i liked there designs over most of the climbing brands out there. When i first saw these images i was disappointed to realise they moved some off their operation to india. To me they were a local company, close to my home, then i looked further into their values it stated european sourced fabrics etc.  I felt disheartened in them, in some way i felt that they had sold out, even more so there values don't accept that they use india.(i accept its states india briefly in a blog post) I asked them to update there site, their values and they didn't. If they believe in transparency then say clearly under 'where our clothes are made' that your factory is in india. 

I appreciate greatly jessica went to the factories. 

personal profit again might have been the wrong term. to me it seems they moved to india to increase profits, and that is what im questioning. what motive did they have to move there?  sure companies need to make money, and if there making money to pay their employees fairly i understand that. but when you move operations to these places known for cheap labour i feel greed comes into play. you're using that labour because it is cheap.

i hope im wrong and i hope they are looking after all there employees. Maybe they see that this labour is cheap and they are doing there best to help those people live a fulfilled life. i loved the article about patagonia and how they are going that extra mile so to speak. would be great to see a company like 3rd rock doing something similar. 

i really have no other agenda. it's true i hate most companies, i hate the system most people are stuck in.  When i see a company i like go down the road all the other did, i feel sad. thanks for your message and to you.  i can see maybe i could have gone down a different route with my issues with 3rd rock. 

Enough said really. 

At risk of stating the obvious, any manufacturer of any product under any economic system has to make a profit. Profit is simply the surplus left after the costs of making and distributing the product are deducted from the price you can sell it for.  If you can't make a surplus you can't sustain any business for very long.  So of course manufacturers need to cut costs, and one way is to move the process to somewhere labour is cheap. "Cheap" means relative to here - paying workers less than the equivalent would be paid in the UK is not exploitation if they are being paid a wage which is fair in their local economy.

There may be other ethical reasons as well.  Trade with a poor country is the best way of raising its living standards. If western companies like this one were not buying this factory's products, who would they then be selling to? Would local customers be able to pay a price for its products which enables the factory to pay its workers a fair wage?  Without western companies like this one insisting their suppliers comply with a range of ethical standards, and paying a price which allows the supplier to achieve this, do you think the workers would still be treated fairly? Or would they end up like those in the Rana Plaza Factory collapse that resulted in the loss of 1138 lives of garment factory workers in 2013, referenced in their blog?

It's a complicated world.  

Thanks for your reply. 

Ethics is always very complicated and rarely clear cut.  I have taught on ethics in an engineering context for a few years using case studies.  It is interesting to see the debates from the students that result from these case studies.  Even in case studies that on the face of it most people would think there is only one correct outcome it is normally quite easy to frame arguments on both sides.

An interesting smaller company in the UK to read about is Finisterre.  They are primarily a surfing company but actually make great outdoor clothes in general.  Interestingly they have never really pushed the general outdoor market like hill walking/climbing/mountaineering.

https://finisterre.com/pages/sustainability

They have factories in Asia as well.  They are also a B Corp certified company

https://finisterre.com/blogs/features/b-corp

https://bcorporation.net/

Worth reading about.

I don't think you understand just how few options exist for people in places like India, and much of the world beyond India.  $1 a day, a poverty wage, is better than many people can hope for.  $2-3 a day gives opportunity beyond many people's wildest dreams.  If you want to pay £5-£10 a day you are already distorting the local market in dramatic fashion. 

It goes beyond salaries too.  Besides simply not being paid salaries at all, for many the terms & conditions of employment are nothing like what we would recognise in the West.  There simply are no standards or requirements of bosses.  The opportunity to supply a European company, and having just a fraction of their standards imposed on the local manufacturer, can be a massive step up in working conditions.

how do you expect a country like india to ever get out of this situation there in? the west has been domintaite over the east for a very long time, and if we keep meeting the minimum standards of pay they will never rise up.  How can it be that the west continues are allowed to grow at the hands of the cheap labour from the east. 

The idea to me that saying £1 is great for them is unfair and its our dominance over them that doesn't allow them to fight back. This is not a modern issue, and i would say it dates back 100s of years. if we keep supporting the companies that use this cheap labour then nothing will ever change.

https://bcorporation.net/ 2 someone pointed me out to this corporation, and i think everyone should be aware of it, and support the companies that are trying to do well. 

I don't usually post in threads involving political/financial/social issues but i would stop now if I were you. You're not making a very good account of yourself, your arguements are poorly researched and driven by a lack of common sense.

The problem is that you have to change countries gradually.  If you suddenly started paying people way over the usual local rates of pay then as Pan Ron says you distort the local market which has massive implications.  At it's crudest, the outcome is likely to be massive inflation that has all the associated economic problems.  You will end up widening the poverty gap between those on the higher wages and those not and probably end up making things even worse than they were before.

Whilst the imbalance between rich and poorer countries is not ideal you cannot just bring poorer countries up to the standards of rich ones overnight.  It takes time for economic change to happen in a sustainable way.  This might seem unfair in the short term but will lead to a more balanced state of affairs in the long term.

However, I do think it is a good idea that western companies put some pressure re working, health and safety standards etc  Again it is about gradual improvement.  You cannot change things overnight.  It is all about sustainable evolution.

So can we get one thing straight - I may be making a wild leap of faith here, but judging by writing styles, I'd say you are climbersclimb from the thread you've linked to. In which case you seem to have an axe to grind. It seems very odd to me that you are making the statements that you've made - on their feed they have videos of the factory, of Rebecca talking to workers, and other workers from the same factory. So they have made the mistake of not listing all the places they manufacture. There is no law against that, infact they are substantially more open than other manufacturers by even telling you this information. Personally I'd say you are jumping to conclusions based on very little - your assessment of their accounts and what they are doing to achieve their profits is basically just made up.

Is it ideal that companies continue to manufacture mainly in third world countries at a fraction of the cost it would cost here? Well you could see it as part of the solution - things cannot change overnight. Using companies which provide better conditions is a start and will in the long term provide the change you desire. Only using EU based companies would still require using low wages, in an area where living costs are much higher so you could easily argue that those workers are going to get a worse deal as their residual income after bills etc will be a lower percentage of their income, despite being paid more. Plus those people would have to find alternative employment, maybe somewhere which is less likely to provide a beneficial situation for them. In addition to achieve your result it would require ALL companies working in the same way, and increasing pay across the board, otherwise consumers will just buy from cheaper sources rather than from 3rd Rock, who would quickly go bust and cease to do the work the do. 

How do you expect a country like India to develop if western companies don't trade with it? Apart from the purely commercial aspect, how long do you think it would take for them to improve all-round standards for their workers without pressure from ethical western companies? That includes paying a fair wage, but but paying excessive wages simply because they seem low by western standards is actually damaging.  

And judging from their website, 3rd Rock is one of them.  You have failed to produce any evidence, or even credible allegations, that their dealings with their Indian suppliers are anything other than what they say they are.  What this seems to boil down to is your own naive assumption that using an Indian supplier must mean they are exploiting the workers, when the reality appears to be that 3rd Rock is requiring the factory not only to pay them a fair wage but also offer them other rights and benefits (which many workers in India don't enjoy). If you can show this is not the case, then let's see the evidence.

Hello there, Jess here from 3RD ROCK. I have now had a chance to update our website page with all the up to date information. Please follow the link here: https://www.3rdrockclothing.com/pages/traceability-whomademyclothes.

A 'lack of response' to your comments was merely due to a family holiday, a weekend, and a very small team. I hope you now feel fully informed.

I must say a huge thank you to all the people who backed us up with positive comments on this thread. Thank you for believing in us!  Jess.x

Some very high quality and well thought out responses on this thread.  

I have nothing to add, but a burning question from the photo linked from the OP.

What on Earth is the nature of the 5-pin socket in the middle of the strip of wall mounted switched sockets?  

Looks the same as the one that's two to the right. I assume, just different size plugs.

No apology yet for your smear campaign?

Maybe you are not really concerned about ethics but work for a rival company?

Or maybe you are on holiday and have not read the response from Jess yet...

Possibly, a socket that supports both BS-1363 and BS-546 type plugs!