Deadly denim

The Killer Jeans Campaign, launched in November 2010, called on major brands and retailers to stop sandblasting, a method of giving jeans a worn-out look. The process can seriously damage workers’ health if performed without suitable protective equipment. Over 40 major brands and retailers have issued a ban on sandblasting but, as Dominique Muller explains, garment workers are still being asked to risk their lives for fashion.

***

Silicosis, a fatal lung disease, caused by the inhalation of crystalline silica, is one of the oldest known occupational diseases; it was first observed among stone workers by the Romans. It is usually associated with quarry workers, stone masons and workers in the gem and mining industries. Silicosis is an incurable and irreversible lung disease and extremely high exposures – such as in the unventilated jeans sandblasting process – can result in acute silicosis within weeks of exposure. Workers die because they cannot breathe properly any more. In 2004 and 2005, doctors in Turkey started noticing a series of silicosis cases among young garment workers. This was unusual because silicosis was – until then – seen as an older person’s disease, linked to years of exposure to silica from stone working or coal mining. The unexpected occurrence of a string of cases of acute silicosis in workers in their twenties started to form a deadly pattern, and the medical profession began to publicize the epidemic.

Worker without proper face protection at a denim sandblasting plant outside of Dhaka, Bangladesh, March 27th 2010. Photo: Allison Joyce 2010

Fast forward to 2012 and over 1,800 cases of garment workers with silicosis have been registered in Turkey. Fifty-four people are officially known to have died as a result of sandblasting jeans in Turkey – mainly young men, many from the same family, and usually migrant workers coming from Georgia and Azerbaijan who had been employed without contracts, pensions or papers. Many more workers have not been traced, despite the extensive efforts of a group of former workers and supporters, the Turkish Solidarity Committee of Sandblasting Labourers, which succeeded in getting the Turkish government to ban sandblasting in the garment industry in 2009.

Why jeans?
In the mid-1980s, manufacturers began to use techniques to ‘distress’ the denim in order to make it look worn. By the 1990s, worn-look jeans had become popular throughout the Western world, ushering in the widespread adoption of sandblasting. As the name implies, sand is blasted under high pressure creating an abrasive process to clean, smooth or alter surfaces. Traditionally it has been used in construction and metal-working.

Sandblasting is used to create worn patches on the legs, back and knees of denim jeans. In some cases, machines are used, but in many countries it is done manually by workers using hoses filled with sand to blast away at jeans creating a massively dusty environment. Often workers are not given any form of protection, and many simply wind cloths around their face to protect themselves from the sand. One workplace in Bangladesh has been described as like a desert during a sandstorm. It is estimated that almost half of the 200 million pairs of jeans exported from Bangladesh each year are sandblasted.

Sandblasting without any concern for the health risks is a very inexpensive process. Silica sand is cheap, and manual sandblasting only requires simple techniques. Denim jeans with a worn-out or vintage look can be sold at a much higher retail price – up to three times more – than ordinary jeans.

Silica exposure, and, in particular, sandblasting, has long been known to cause silicosis. The use of crystalline silica was banned for most blasting in the UK as far back as 1950 and in other European Union countries in 1966. In 1974, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health in the United States recommended that the use of silica sand as an abrasive blasting material be prohibited and that less hazardous materials be substituted. Only substances containing less than 1% silica (in Europe) or 0.5% in the USA can be used. The sand used to sandblast in Turkey usually comes from local beaches and contains up to 80% silica. In Bangladesh, the local sand comes from nearby rivers. In some instances, less silica-heavy sand imported from China is used but generally local sand is preferred because it is cheaper.

Despite knowing the dangers, jeans manufacturers continued to use sandblasting as a normal process to make fashionable lived-in looking jeans. Indeed, when the government of Turkey banned the use of sandblasting in the production of denim, companies simply moved production elsewhere – for example, a significant rise was observed in North Africa as Turkish manufacturers moved there. In Asia too, production increased after 2009.

Clean clothes campaigning
The Clean Clothes Campaign (CCC) launched a major campaign in late 2010 and, within months, around 40 big name jean producers had publicly signed up to a ban. Some brands were very quick to stop the process once the dangers were clearly shown. Levi Strauss and Co., for example, were among the first, and has (according to company information) verified, through on-site inspection, that none of its authorized suppliers continue to use sandblasting at sites where their garments are produced. Levi’s also requires its suppliers to remove all abrasives and sandblasting equipment from these sites. In addition, Levi’s also publicly disclose their official supplier list. Gucci also responded by taking steps to work with local trade union representatives and non-governmental organizations to end the process.

Other brands made less extensive promises, instead stating that they would be phasing out sandblasting from their production. Still others stated they had never used the process and that never would, without providing any more details. Out of all the brands targeted in the initial campaign phase, only one – Dolce and Gabbana – refused to discuss the issue or provide any details whatsoever.

However, none of the brands agreed to take responsibility for the comprehensive screening of workers for silicosis and ensuring that any affected have proper medical treatment and access to adequate medical facilities. Companies must take responsibility for these workers – if they are tempted to leave responsibility for their workers’ health to others further down the supply chain, this could provide local suppliers with the opportunity to cover up potential or real cases of silicosis when they arise. This is especially true in countries such as Bangladesh where the doctor on site is paid for by the factory and may be the only medical professional available to the workers.

Reality on the ground
Despite the bans imposed by many companies, recent research undertaken by CCC partners in Bangladesh showed a very different reality. In interviews with workers from
nine factories, nearly half of them identified the labels of brands shown to them as being manufactured and sandblasted in the factories in which they worked. These brands included many which claim to have banned sandblasting. There was some evidence that buyer bans have had an impact on the use of sandblasting in Bangladesh. For example, several known sandblasting units have now closed down. However, in general, the impact of bans appears to have been patchy, poorly monitored and widely circumvented, at least in the majority of factories the CCC investigated. For example, shockingly, the CCC found that regardless of whether a brand has ‘banned’ sandblasting or not, manual sandblasting still takes place, often at night to avoid detection by auditors or others. In addition, smaller workshops, producing for the local market, continue to use manual sandblasting extensively.

Activists in Belgium stage an awareness-raising demonstration designed to bring home to consumers the realities of sandblasted jeans production. Photo: Clean Clothes Campaign.

Health and safety
The CCC’s recent investigation also uncovered a pressing need to increase awareness of the health risks of sandblasting among workers. Research shows that although some workers are aware of the potential dangers of sandblasting, they are prepared to work for the higher wages offered. It was also discovered that the medical diagnosis and treatment available to workers is woefully inadequate, and that awareness of the link between garment sandblasting and silicosis among medical practitioners is almost non-existent. Given that the latency period of silicosis can be up to ten years, the CCC is calling for urgent action to prevent a potential epidemic among young workers.

In late March, the CCC held an experts meeting in Geneva to discuss the continued use of sandblasting in denim production and the need to develop proper models of compensation workers affected or potentially affected by silicosis. During the meeting, workers and medical professionals from Bangladesh, China and Turkey related their experiences. The similarities were startling – young workers falling ill after several months at work; workers paid higher wages, effectively because factory owners knew their working lives would be much shorter; and workers forced to work up to 12 hour shifts in incredibly dusty environments with little or no protection from the sand. Once sick, the workers all faced problems in getting a proper diagnosis – partly because they lacked proper work contracts and therefore could not prove a work relationship with the factory, making it possible for a factory to deny the workers had ever worked there and were suffering from an “occupational” ailment. In turn, this means that workers are often denied social security and pension rights. Doctors told the meeting that colleagues often failed to diagnose silicosis because this was not a disease they expected to see in a healthy young garment worker – instead they diagnosed tuberculosis or a general lung problem.

A dangerous occupation
In 1995, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) launched an International Programme on Global Elimination of Silicosis but, so far, it does not include action on silicosis in the garment industry. The CCC wants to ensure that silicosis in the garment industry is included in the Programme’s sphere of work, and that garment industry is defined as a dangerous occupation under ILO/WHO rules. This will help raise awareness of the possibility of garment workers suffering from silicosis and help support the CCC’s calls for a ban. A core part of the Killer Jeans Campaign is a call for the European Union to ban the importation of sandblasted jeans from countries which have not implemented a national ban.

The CCC is concerned that the failure of brands to change their designs, and/or to increase production time to allow suppliers to shift to more labour-intensive and slower finishing techniques, is not helping bring an end to the practice – sometimes clandestine and sometimes overt – of sandblasting. In order to really make a difference, companies must adapt what they order from factories. They need to help end the demand for jeans that need to be sandblasted in order to look ‘cool’. In 2007, the average import price per pair of jeans imported to the European Union from Bangladesh was only €3.89. Given the end price of a pair of jeans and given that human life is priceless, it is time big brands made some serious production changes.

● Dominique Muller is coordinator of the Killer Jeans Campaign at the International Secretariat of the Clean Clothes Campaign, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

- The Clean Clothes Campaign launched the Killer Jeans Campaign in November 2010, calling on major brands and retailers to ban the use of sandblasting, support workers to get diagnosis and treatment for illnesses resulting from their employment and provide compensation for those affected. See here for more information and the latest campaign news.