H&M Outed by NYT for Slash & Trash of Unsold Garments (Update: H&M Concedes)

I remember Costco and a few other big box stores getting outed for doing the same thing to seasonal items like garden furniture. Did those practices cease?

 

There's a notable difference between garden furniture, which I'm going to assume won't keep the poor warm during winter (unless burned), and shoes and puffy jackets which certainly can.

 

Absolutely but the point was does outing the company in question lead to a ceasation of the practice. It looks like it just drives it further underground.

 

Forcing large companies to do things like send people to developing countries to check on the conditions requires they meet some of the standards. And if it becomes too expensive to just destroy the goods rather than give them away they will probably do the latter.

It does damage their brand that they don't do the latter already however.

 

Agreed.

It is good that H&M have taken this seriously.

 

Who assumes liability from donated items?

Provided that liability issues are handled properly I have nothing against asking companies to donate items that would otherwise be destroyed. However to demand it without providing liability protection is just asking for it.

My cousins in Ohio run a bakery, they used to provide bread that did not sell that day; certain loaves were allowed more than single day runs; to a local shelter till they got sued. The shelter didn't store the stuff properly and some sticky buns (cinnamon type things) got contaminated and made a few people sick. Well my cousins are the ones whose insurance had to pay up so they stopped giving the stuff away. They sell it to some place that mixes it into animal feed I think

 

Let the poor wear your brand name clothes and watch your brand tank. This is smart business.

 

Not really, because the stuff that doesn't sell is the crap stuff and by the time the poor get this stuff its last seasons anyhow.

 

Or get the brand dragged through the mud in the news over wasting clothes which could be useful.

 

I don't understand how anyone can agree with H&M's practices. Maybe I am confused but it seems silly to toss perfectly useable clothes while people freeze or have nothing more than the clothes on their back.

 

Agreed, this definitely seems wrong to me.

 

Its called managing your brand, it happens all the time, it just sucks when the media latches on to it.

If caddy started giving away surplus cars to homeless people no rich people would want to buy them.

 

There would be no reason for them to implement the practices they are then. If I wanted to sell my clothes for anything more than walmart prices I would not be handing them out to homeless.

 

Caddy is a upper half of the market brand, with a badge on the front. H&M is a middle of the road brand. Managing your brand is more than sticking a nice logo on a product.

Why would you rather not have the free media try and challenge large companies more debatable practises?

 

Why bother when 99% will forget about it tomorrow as opposed to being known as hobo wear forever.

 

Wrong way around, why be remembered forever as tight fisted scrooges. Remembered as hobo wear!? lol, its hardly like the poor homeless are forced to wear H&M uniforms.

Even though I have H&M clothes its not like I would notice someone else as wearing something from the same shop.

In the end destroying the clothes is a waste of resources when there are people who need them.

 

I really don't think there's much liability involved in clothing donated from a store. If you kill yourself with a T shirt, you're either an abject imbecile, or should have had some sort of supervision anyway.

 

Exactly. I'm sure that there is one person out there who would get an item of clothing and be allergic to the fibers or something and then sue H&M.

I'm assuming that H&M is a privately owned company and has every right to do as they see fit with their extra stock. Sure, it's nice to donate it to those who need it, but not required and thus shouldn't be expected.

 

Don't they have the fibres listed on the washing label?