H&M is having a bit of a PR problem right now. It was discovered that the clothing corporation that sells trendy clothes for dirt cheap prices destroys excess clothing that is thrown away to make room for more inventory.
People are pissed. Lots of folks short on cash could use a new long-sleeved tee or hooded coat in these winter months, so why destroy clothing that is just being trashed? It could be put to good use, many Americans are arguing.
My initial thought when hearing about the slashing practices: Well, of course they do.
Now, H&M isn't going to be confused with Chanel any time soon, but Chanel does the very same thing to their clothes. Why? Because the value of what has already been bought and is currently being worn goes down dramatically when suddenly anyone lucky enough to stumble on a piece of discarded clothing gets to wear it. It doesn't make sense for the clothier.
I admit, a $20 dress doesn't have much value to begin with, but H&M's niche is turnover. They sell cheaply-constructed, but super trendy clothes. They don't need to last, because next season they will be sorely out of style. They have to change out their offerings regularly to make room for more trends, and if those trends were being worn for free, by those who find or are given the clothing, those paying for them would be much less inclined to do so.
Basically, by giving away clothing that is going into the trash, H&M would be hurting their bottom line on future sales.
My initial thought was that the outrage should lie in the too-large bulk purchases of inventory. Because,
of course that was made possible by child labor or sweat shop conditions. But in researching H&M's track record on sweat shop usage, I learned the company is socially responsible in this arena. Much more so than other clothing companies. In fact, I couldn't find any substantiated evidence that H&M uses child labor or sweat shops, despite not owning any factories themselves. Impressive.
The way that H&M keeps their prices for customers so low is buy buying more than they need. Bulk purchases of items allow them to get them for a much lower price.
Considering H&Ms social responsibility in regards to sweat shops and child labor, I am having a hard time getting my $1.99 knickers in a wad about the clothes slashing. Giving away or throwing away perfectly good clothes would be suicide for their organization. Or maybe, just maybe, by giving clothes away to the less fortunate would create positive PR buzz for the company, and they'd have a windfall of profits like never before. But, I kinda doubt it.
What do you think about H&M's slashing of clothing? Let me hear from you below.
UPDATE, 2:08 p.m.: H&M has released a statement saying it will no longer slash clothing, and that it's policy in place is to donate said items.
H&M said they are unsure why clothing was being slashed:
“It will not happen again,” said Nicole Christie, a spokeswoman for
H & M in New York. “We are committed 100 percent to make sure this
practice is not happening anywhere else, as it is not our standard
practice.”
Ms. Christie said it was H & M’s policy to donate
unworn clothing to charitable groups. She said that she did not know
why the store on 34th Street was slashing the clothes, and that the
company was checking to make sure that none of its other stores were
doing so.
Call me a little suspicious that clothing was being destroyed by rogue employees, not because they weren't instructed to do so, but hooray for clothing donations to charity. We can all agree that is a good thing.
[Photo by reiner.kraft]
