‘We would slash the fabric’: Fashion’s harmful habit of destroying unsold clothes

One woman’s recent discovery of garbage bags full of unused children’s clothes outside a Toronto mall is highlighting a serious problem in the fashion industry.

On Wednesday, Natasha McKenna said she was disappointed to find purposely damaged clothes, toys, shoes and other items outside a local Carter’s OshKosh.

READ MORE: From Beyonce to Lady Gaga, the biggest fashion moments of the decade

“They weren’t just thrown out, they were destroyed so they couldn’t be used by anyone,” McKenna wrote on a now-viral Facebook post.

McKenna saw everything from cut-up children’s gloves to shoes with cut-out triangles at the ankle and toys that had several pieces missing.


A pair of gloves cut up. Photo by Natasha McKenna

In a statement to Global News, a spokesperson for Carter’s said their policy “is to dispose of damaged or unusable product to prevent any potential harm to our customers.”

Story continues below advertisement

“We contacted our store in Canada and determined the items in question were damaged or unusable and disposed of properly for safety reasons,” the spokesperson said.










Why climate change in the Arctic affects us all


Why climate change in the Arctic affects us all

The company added that in the last five years, it has donated products to children’s organizations in the U.S. in Canada.

The practice of destroying clothes

Unfortunately, the practice of destroying or disposing of clothes is not unique to one retailer. In fact, experts say it’s a practice that happens across the world.

Global News reached out to several retailers for their policy on discarding and donating unsold items. Many of the responses have been similar.

Kristina Lovesey, 28, worked at an Ottawa-based Winners in 2008. She remembers being instructed to destroy “damaged” goods.

READ MORE: Climate change driving up risk of wildfires in Canada: fire experts

“We would slash the fabric or remove branding so that the item was either unusable or undesirable, shoes would lose the tongue or have the insoles cut up and bags we would cut straps off,” she said.

Other times she was asked to break patio dishes.

Story continues below advertisement

“If there were recalls or the item was damaged to the point of it being a safety issue, those products would go straight into the garbage,” Lovesey said.

“But that wasn’t always the case.”

A spokesperson for Winners and Marshalls Canada told Global News “there is little undamaged merchandise that goes unsold and we typically donate that merchandise to charitable organizations.”

When asked if they ever destroy unsold items, the company declined to answer.










Greta Thunberg denounces world leaders’ ‘creative PR’ in climate flight at UN summit


Greta Thunberg denounces world leaders’ ‘creative PR’ in climate flight at UN summit

Lovesey never got a clear explanation as to why employees would destroy unsold items. She heard everything from thrift shops and charities not accepting brand name clothing to policies around not allowing people to take items from dumpsters. Lovesey says the store would qualify this as “theft.”

“Even as high school kids working part time, I think we were all aware of how wasteful these practices were.”



Tweet This

Warren Mabee, an environmental expert and professor in the Department of Geography and Planning at Queen’s University, says the issue is widespread.

“With planned obsolescence, [clothes] essentially wear out faster, so consumers are constantly motivated to buy new and keep up with the latest fashion,” he said.

This puts pressure on retailers to constantly clear the shelves to make room for the next thing, Mabee explained. What gets tossed away could be perfect quality, but it simply isn’t selling fast enough.

Story continues below advertisement

This is, in part, due to the shift from “producing clothes that were durable and long-lasting to clothes that are extremely fragile,” he said.

The carbon footprint of fashion

There aren’t robust statistics available on how much is being disposed of in this way, said Mabee, which makes it difficult to develop a “total footprint” caused by this practice.

However, the carbon footprint caused by clothing and the fashion industry more broadly is well-documented.

Fast-fashion giants like H&M, Zara and Nike have faced criticism for their environmentally harmful practices.

A 2017 New York Times article found that a local Nike store was slashing up unsold sneakers and garments so they would be unwearable. In 2017, H&M was accused of burning 12 tonnes of unsold but usable clothes since 2013 by Danish journalists who produced a documentary on the Swedish retailer.

READ MORE: Environmental impacts of ‘fast fashion’ and what you can do as a consumer

In a statement to Global News, H&M Canada said “only when test results show that certain products do not fulfill our safety regulations” they are taken off shelves and not recycled.

Story continues below advertisement

In these cases, “they will therefore be sent to destruction in accordance with our global safety routines, and this is extremely rare,” the spokesperson said.










Upcycling helps divert clothing waste from landfills


Upcycling helps divert clothing waste from landfills

Even more exclusive brands destroy clothes.

Luxury brand Burberry burned unsold clothes, accessories and perfume worth nearly $49 million in 2017 to prevent them from being cheaply sold or stolen, the BBC reported.

When clothing ends up in landfills

When clothing is burned, it produces greenhouse gas emissions. When it’s simply thrown away, it often ends up in landfills.

According to nonprofit Remake, 80 per cent of discarded textiles end up in landfills or are burned across the globe. Only 20 per cent are reused or recycled.

But even when clothes aren’t discarded, there’s an environmental impact on production.

“Even clothes made of natural fibres have a steep carbon footprint because often cotton or other materials are grown in one place … shipped to another country for processing, and then shipped back for final sale,” Mabee said.

READ MORE: Canadians want more action on climate change, but are worried about ‘economic hardship’

“There’s a fairly hefty carbon footprint associated with that travel.”

Story continues below advertisement

The situation is made worse when the fibres are grown using pesticides, herbicides and artificial irrigation, which is increasingly common.

“To add to this, many clothing items incorporate dyes or chemical additives that can cause environmental problems, or synthetic fibres like polyester that don’t decompose in landfills and which are sourced from petroleum sources,” said Mabee.










The rise of modest fashion, explained


The rise of modest fashion, explained

“Polyester and other plastics can also break down in the wash, leading to micro-plastic losses which can pass through water filtration plants, back into lakes, rivers and oceans.”

Even though clothing resellers like Value Village are increasing in popularity, Mabee is worried about textile waste, which continues to be a massive problem for the environment.

“As much as 80 per cent of textiles will end up in landfill,” he said. “It can take up to 200 years for [natural fibres] to break down, while synthetic fibre doesn’t decompose at all.”

What can consumers do?

The best thing a consumer can do is to try and buy items “that last” rather than the latest fashion, Mabee said. This may mean investing in locally made brands or companies that have greener manufacturing practices.

He also encourages shopping at clothing resale stores.

READ MORE: Aging population, climate change biggest challenges for Canada’s economy in 2020s: RBC

“One potentially beneficial trend happening now is the shift towards ‘uniform’ dress styles, where you pick a look and then replicate it on an ongoing basis — like Obama and his dark suits and red ties,” he said.

Story continues below advertisement

Mabee also says companies need to make longer-lasting products.

“At the very least, I think companies should be willing to recycle or donate things they cannot sell — rather than disposing of them.”

Meghan.Collie@globalnews.ca
Laura.Hensley@globalnews.ca
Arti.Patel@globalnews.ca

© 2020 Global News, a division of Corus Entertainment Inc.

Lifestyle

Products You May Like

Articles You May Like

Two Weeks After the COVID 19 Lockdown – The Positives and Opportunities.
Stressed and Anxious? Here’s How to Stay Emotionally Healthy
Prince Harry, Meghan Markle don’t need U.S. to foot security cost: spokesperson
Hang In There (We Are All In This Together) Motivational Speech
The Second Wind Is Coming (NEVER GIVE UP speech)
i4cp Survey: 71% Say Trump’s Push to Return People to Work is “Reckless” (i4cp login required)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *