Not too long ago, I was chatting with a co-worker about the poor service she鈥檇 received while shopping. Knowing the store in question to be a big-box outfit and not exactly famous for treating its employees well, I suggested that perhaps she shouldn鈥檛 have been surprised.
After all, I reasoned, if they鈥檙e not investing in their employees 鈥� if they don鈥檛 think their staff are worth more than minimum wage 鈥� then it鈥檚 not hard to understand why they wouldn鈥檛 put much effort into training them.
(This was spoken, of course, with the bitter bite of an ex-customer-service sourpuss.)
Shop somewhere else, I suggested, where they treat employees better.
She balked. 鈥淚 just can鈥檛 afford it.鈥�
The conversation ended there, because I鈥檓 not the arbiter of what another person can or can鈥檛 afford, but it reaffirmed to me that our buying habits represent not what we can or can鈥檛 do, but what we鈥檝e chosen to do, perhaps without even thinking.
After the clothing-factory collapse at the Rana Plaza in Dhaka, Bangladesh, that killed more than 1,000 people, our attention has been drawn yet again to the ways in which our lifestyles 鈥� the ease, convenience and relative affordability of which we hold as normal 鈥� are directly linked to the conditions of other people鈥檚 lives. Factories in poor areas of other countries often place workers in conditions that we would consider unacceptable for ourselves.
This isn鈥檛 news for us; it鈥檚 the status quo. Only last November, a fire in another Dhaka factory killed at least 117 people, due to inadequate safety precautions. On May 8, seven people were killed in a similar factory fire, again in Dhaka.
You have to fight your way past the sensationalism of headlines such as 鈥淚s there blood on your shirt?鈥� but once you do, it鈥檚 impossible to deny that as consumers, we are culpable. Our privileged position in the make-ship-sell-buy relationship means that we鈥檙e responsible for what we choose to do with our money.
Many people are arguing that the kind of structural change needed in the industry is the responsibility of the brands, not the consumers. I understand this logic, but I disagree with the 鈥淲ell, it鈥檚 not my problem鈥� fatalism that underlies it. An individual decision to avoid certain retailers might seem like a drop in the bucket, but that doesn鈥檛 mean it doesn鈥檛 matter, and it certainly doesn鈥檛 mean that this isn鈥檛 our problem.
In 2011, at a major clothing-retailer summit in Dhaka, a proposal to bolster safety standards in the industry was rejected by the brands in attendance as being too costly. It seems as though companies don鈥檛 care until their sales take a hit. As consumers, therefore, we are crucial.
Some people have taken the tragedy in Bangladesh to mean that we should only buy Canadian. Rashed Chowdhury, a former colleague of mine, was quoted in the Globe and Mail immediately after the disaster for his nuanced perspective: 鈥淢y father is Bangladeshi, and I lived there for about 10 years: I know what a tremendous benefit the garments industry has been 鈥� The last thing I鈥檇 want people in the West to do following this tragedy is to stop buying Bangladeshi clothes. The effects of such an action would fall disproportionately on the workers 鈥� who already have the lowest minimum wage in the world.鈥�
Like all serious decisions, our way forward requires not a knee-jerk reaction, but a commitment to making ethical choices in all aspects of our lives 鈥� and that鈥檚 not hard to do. We need to take a look at our own decisions.
Some of us don鈥檛 have the luxury of choosing between cheap and ethical, but many of us do, and it has never been easier to research the stores you choose to shop at. The BBC has compiled a list of manufacturers and brands that were represented in the Rana Plaza collapse. Networks like the Clean Clothes Campaign and Labour Behind the Label provide resources for people curious about shopping more ethically.
And please, please, please pay attention to how they treat their employees. If a company chooses to pay its workers minimum wage (which in Victoria is roughly nine dollars an hour less than a living wage), chances are it鈥檚 not too interested in its contractors鈥� employees in Bangladesh.
