Global retail giant H&M has come under fire H&M for the origin of its own, which is mainly used for products such as puffer jackets and outerwear. PETA submitted a shareholder resolution to the H&M group, calling on the board to produce a report on the slaughter methods used to source down for the company.
The call for transparency comes as PETA Asia recently led an investigation that found a down supplier in Vietnam was not complying with international animal welfare regulations. PETA uncovered cruelty and suffering inflicted on ducks during plucking at the factory. The factory was previously a supplier to H&M.
As an animal rights organization, PETA is focused on ending the suffering and exploitation of animals. We applaud companies like H&M, which are taking important steps to completely eliminate the use of animals, one of the most important things they can do to that end.
Ethically Sourced Down
While H&M outlines its animal welfare policy on its website, stating that no animals should be harmed in the production of its products, there is little transparency regarding origins, processes, and sourcing. H&M says it has already banned angora wool and fur, in addition to implementing stricter protocols for sourcing cashmere.
PETA calls the Textile Exchange's Responsible Down Standard (RDS) ineffective because H&M has begun removing the RDS label from its online offerings. PETA claims that H&M does not provide information about the farms and slaughterhouses that supply its products.
According to PETA, H&M claims that animals should not be tortured for their garments. Therefore, H&M should heed PETA's call to scrutinize its supply chain to ensure just that. Every down item represents the pain and suffering of terrified birds and misleading labels and lip service only serve to exonerate companies and deceive gullible customers
Brands use Responsible Down Standard certification to allow consumers to know that their down and feathers come from animals that have not been exposed to unnecessary harm. They hope the standard can be used to reward and influence the down and feather industry to incentivize practices that respect the humane treatment of ducks and geese.
Is Vegan Fashion Always the Most Sustainable Option?
Vegan doesn't always necessarily mean sustainable or ethical which is a shame, as I believe veganism goes beyond using or not using leather in certain products. We have seen in previous posts how brands and influencers are using the term veganism as a marketing tool to mislead the consumer.
Brands like H&M have been accused of destroying new and unsold clothing since 2013 because there is constant pressure to bring new merchandise to market. Has H&M started to reduce the number of collections it releases weekly? As far as we know, they haven't and it's not even on the table.
Is H&M going to stop using animal-derived materials (such as leather, down, wool, or silk) from now on? It’s a fact that factory farming has a huge impact on the planet and leather shares responsibility for all the environmental destruction caused by the meat industry, as well as the pollution caused by the toxins used in tanning. But how sustainable is a vegan collection from a fast fashion brand that uses virgin plastic to justify that these garments are animal and environmentally friendly?
The H&M x PETA 2021 collection used phrases like "vegan" and "plant-based" as synonyms for "eco-friendly" and "ethical," and this is far from the truth. Some vegan skins are made from plant-based materials, while others are created from artificial products. But can a brand be sustainable by using virgin plastics?