As London Fashion week wraps up in the UK, Belén Satorre, Associate Director ESG, reflects on why both luxury and fast fashion brands must ensure their garments are produced sustainably and fairly.
Clothing is not just a product of design, but the result of human labour. Fast fashion has been widely scrutinised for its relentless pursuit of low production costs, often achieved by suppressing wages and pushing out garments at minimal prices. This model encourages consumers to view clothing as disposable, driving cycles of overproduction, waste, and often, labour exploitation. Over time, consumers have been conditioned to believe that garments are meant to be cheap and short-lived, replaced as soon as new trends emerge.
Luxury fashion, however, is not immune to these systemic challenges. Despite its focus on craftsmanship and exclusivity, it operates within equally complex global supply chains. Whether in fast fashion or luxury, tracing who made the clothes and under what labour conditions remains a persistent challenge.
While many fashion houses might trace materials back to a specific mill or tannery, mapping the entire chain to its origins remains almost an impossible mission for most. An apparel company might assume it works with 1,000 to 2,000 direct suppliers. In reality, once sub-suppliers are accounted for, the number can range from 20,000 to 50,000. This illustrates how deeply layered and fragmented global supply networks have become, and why full transparency continues to be elusive.
Each purchase, a shirt, pair of jeans, or sneakers, represents a decision that extends far beyond the individual wardrobe. Behind each garment lies a vast network: the design process, the sourcing of raw materials, the manufacturing of textiles and clothing, global distribution, and final sale. These stages often span multiple countries and involve thousands of workers. In truth, sustainably and ethically produced clothing should be the norm. Cutting corners may lower expenses in the short term, but it risks a higher human cost and reputational scandals that can quickly unravel consumer loyalty.
Consumers, however, are not powerless. By asking harder questions Who made my clothes? Under what conditions? And choosing to support brands committed to fair labour and sustainability, they can shift demand away from exploitation and toward accountability. The future of fashion depends on this dual pressure: brands competing not only on style and price but also on values.
The price of neglect: Why human rights due diligence matters
In recent years, it has become clear that many fashion brands lack meaningful oversight of their own supply chains. Too many fashion brands seemingly still have no idea who makes their clothes. Some haven’t visited their factories in more than five years. Others, including big-name labels, haven’t mapped their supply chains beyond the first tier. Add to this widespread outsourcing to third-party factories where working conditions are often unsafe, and the picture is grim.
Why does this happen? Simply put the barrier is often money. Proper due diligence takes resources and time, and many brands don’t want to pay the price. Rigorous auditing, supply chain mapping, and worker engagement require investment, and some brands are unwilling to absorb it. But the consequences of neglect are far greater. In recent years, legislation such as the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and the UK Modern Slavery Act has highlighted the urgent need for brands to embed human rights due diligence (HRDD) into their business practices. But where should fashion companies begin?
- Map the supply chain beyond tier one: Many brands stop at tier-one suppliers, the factories that assemble garments. However, risks often occur deeper in the chain, in cotton fields, spinning mills, dye houses, and informal subcontractors. Mapping supply chains comprehensively provides visibility into where risks are highest.
- Conduct risk assessments: Once mapped, suppliers should be evaluated based on geography, industry practices, and workforce vulnerability by identifying high-risk countries and sectors where forced labour, child labour, or wage exploitation are prevalent and prioritise audits and interventions in the riskiest areas rather than spreading resources too thin.
- Establish policies and codes of conduct: Brands must communicate clear expectations to their suppliers. A Supplier Code of Conduct and a ESG supplier questionnaire should outline and screen for commitments to fair wages, safe working conditions, non-discrimination, and freedom of association. Importantly, these policies should be translated into local languages and integrated into contracts, making them legally binding.
- Engage workers, not just managers: Audits alone are insufficient and often fail to detect abuses. Workers themselves are the most reliable source of information. Therefore, conducting worker surveys and interviews as part of the due diligence is key.
- Collaborate and share responsibility Fashion supply chains are often shared by multiple brands. Collaboration is therefore essential. Joining industry initiatives such as the Fair Wear Foundation or the Ethical Trading Initiative are a good starting resource for joint audits and remediation programmes. As well as starting your own certifications such as ISO 2600, SA800, Fair Trade or the Butterfly Mark. Achieving progress, not perfection is also part of any due diligence process. However, without strong human rights due diligence, the real cost will fall on workers through poverty wages and exploitation.
Fair wages and exploitation
A fair wage (or living wage) refers to compensation sufficient to afford basic needs (housing, food, healthcare, education, etc.), not just the legal minimum or what a given market tolerates and often requires accounting for regional cost of living. Fashion workers in many jurisdictions earn well below living wage thresholds. Wages tend to be a tiny fraction of what consumers pay. Some estimates place labour cost at around 3% of a garment’s price, even in luxury items. This means there’s a lot of markup, but less visibility or accountability about how that markup is distributed down the chain.
According to the 2023 Fashion Transparency Index, only 1% of fashion brands disclose the percentage of workers in their supply chain who are paid a living wage. In several manufacturing nations, including Bangladesh, China, and India, the minimum wage only covers half to a fifth of what a family needs to make ends meet. But the issue of workers not receiving fair wages is not confined to emerging markets. In the UK, over the past five years (2019-20 to 2023-24), 1,268 garment workers in Leicester were found to have been illegally underpaid below the UK National Minimum Wage. The total arrears owed were about £177,678, with penalties of £338,504 imposed on the offending textile companies.
Globally, millions of workers face exploitation to keep prices low and trends fast. There are several reasons brands produce more than they sell: manufacturers insisting on minimum order quantities; an increasingly fast retail cycle fuelled by frequent deliveries of new product etc. The Walk Free Global Slavery Index (2023) reports that 50 million people live in modern slavery, with the fashion industry identified as a high-risk sector.
Fast fashion amplifies these risks. A 2022 investigation revealed that workers in some ultra-fast fashion supply chains were clocking up to 18-hour shifts, earning as little as $0.04 per garment. Even luxury brands are not immune: in 2024, Italian authorities found unauthorised subcontractors producing for high-end labels under exploitative conditions.
Looking forward
Every shirt has a story. Consumers are increasingly demanding that it’s time to ensure it’s not one of exploitation. Studies show that nearly 70% of global consumers are willing to pay more for sustainably produced fashion, and 65% actively check for ethical labels or certifications before purchasing. Labels that reveal garment’s labour conditions are no longer optional, they are becoming the baseline expectation. Enhanced transparency initiatives now push brands to disclose full supply chain details, including sub-tier suppliers.
However, responsibility does not rest solely with brands. Governments must enforce stricter labour laws, ensure compliance, and hold companies accountable. For example, the UK Modern Slavery Act and the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act in the U.S. provide legal frameworks, yet enforcement gaps persist, with numerous brands still implicated in forced labour practices despite formal reporting obligations.
Looking ahead, fashion will compete not only on aesthetics, price, and innovation but increasingly on values and accountability. The brands that embrace this shift demonstrating ethical practices, supply chain traceability, and fair wages will not only meet consumer and regulatory expectations, but also secure a lasting competitive advantage in a market where trust and integrity are becoming the true markers of success.
