“If I cut off your arm, will your husband take you again?” “My husband loves me very much.” So he started cutting. “There was no alternative.”
When Saiful Islam Nasar found a young woman trapped in the rubble of a collapsed building near Bangladesh’s capital, he had to provide first aid despite having no medical training. The girl was dying and the only way to free her was to amputate her arm. In the dim light of a torch, surrounded by unbearable heat and dust, he cut off her arm. The story of Nasar, a volunteer who travelled hundreds of kilometres to help his fellow human beings, could be the plot of a Hollywood love story.
Although love stories imagined by writers or directors usually have happy endings, it is those with unhappy endings that remain most vividly etched in our memory: Romeo and Juliet, Titanic, or The Little Mermaid (in the original version). This story, which began in Bangladesh and resonated around the world, can be added to that list.
A story that defies imagination
The action takes place on several levels—more than 1,100[1]—but we don’t know them all because the authors’ voices have been silenced. However, love and despair remain in the things they left behind: the photos taken at the scene; the clothes covered in dust and blood; and the statements of witnesses. “I looked at who they were in their last moments as they stood together and tried to save each other—to save their beloved lives,” said the photographer whose image moved the whole world.
The photograph of the couple locked in a final embrace is so powerful that it alone can expose the true scale of the tragedy that occurred on 24 April 2013, when an eight-storey building housing several textile factories collapsed in Dhaka, the capital of Bangladesh.
Seeing the photograph makes you realise that each of the more than 1,100 people who lost their lives that day was a protagonist in a love story that we will never know. Their suffering is mourned in anonymity by parents, spouses, sons, and daughters. These people justify the calls from journalists around the world for those responsible to be held accountable, so that such a tragedy never happens again.
Just a numbers game
The real issue behind what the local authorities considered to be an accident that could have happened anywhere in the world is revealed in the words of photographer Taslima Akhter: “I took photos because they [the labourers] work dawn to dusk for very little money and their lives are considered to be so cheap, worth nothing.”
Akhter has brought to light the ugly reality of modern slavery. “Every time I look back to this photo, I feel uncomfortable—it haunts me. They haunt me, as do hundreds of others, they whisper in my ear, ‘We are not numbers, we are not cheap labour.'”
“We are human beings like you. Our life is precious like yours, and our dreams are precious too,” concluded Akhter.
In reality, workers’ lives were indeed cheap for employers, costing only $38 per month. This cheap labour has made Bangladesh the world’s second-largest textile exporter after China, and the textile industry (worth $19 billion per year) is the country’s main source of income. Bangladesh’s textile factories produce what Elizabeth Cline, author of Overdressed, calls “fast fashion”, or the cheapest products sold by big chain stores such as H&M, Zara, Esprit, Lee, Wrangler, Nike, J.C. Penney, and Wal-Mart. These goods are low quality and wear out quickly.
The author of Overdressed: The Shockingly High Cost of Cheap Fashion, travelled to China and Bangladesh to research the textile industries in these countries. She claims that, as labour costs rise in China, companies looking to keep their expenses down are forcing Bangladesh to do what China used to do. However, Bangladesh is unable to cope as it lacks the modern equipment necessary for more complicated clothing designs and has ten times fewer workshops than China. Nevertheless, it is trying to meet the growing demand at the lowest possible prices, with tragic consequences in lives lost.
Just how high is the demand? Around 98% of clothes sold in the US are produced abroad, and 60% of clothes produced in Bangladesh are sold in European stores. A simple mathematical calculation shows how this situation came about. The production cost of a denim jacket in Bangladesh is $3.72 (including materials and labour), whereas in the US it is $13.22. The main difference is labour costs, which are $0.22 in Bangladesh and $7.47 in the US.[2]
The thieves of the 1,100 happy endings
In order to meet demand, local authorities have established a completely unsafe textile industry, in which accidents like this are the rule rather than the exception. The chain of events that led to the tragedy on 24 April 2013 exposes this truth in all its gravity.
Sohel Rana, a local gangster, built the four-storey Rana Plaza building on marshy ground without a permit to do so. He added four more floors in two subsequent stages, again without approval from the authorities. By 23 April 2013, 3,000 people were working in five textile factories, each belonging to a different owner and employed by large foreign companies. On that day, workers noticed cracks in the walls and alerted the authorities. The cracks were so deep that they were even broadcast on television. Rana and the authorities arrived on site and declared that there was no risk and that the factories could remain open. Workers were warned that if they did not come to work the next day, they would be fired. The following day, the building collapsed, trapping the 3,000 people inside. Although nearly 2,000 people were rescued, the rest perished.
Responsibility can be attributed to many parties, including the consumerist society that fuels demand for clothing companies, the fashion industry that changes trends very fast, local barons who want to profit from the hard work of others, and a political system indifferent to social policies. What is certain is that over 1,100 people died because:
- An illegal and unsafe building was allowed to operate.
- Clothing companies agreed to use its factories.
- The owners of the five factories ignored the warnings on 23 April.
- Representatives of the employing companies in Bangladesh also ignored the warnings and did not order work to be suspended.
- Workers were forced to return to work.
- Despite two similar disasters having occurred in the previous five months alone, local authorities said the site was safe.
Had just one of these things not happened, more than 1,100 people could be alive today. Therefore, despite the complexity of the situation, it would have only taken goodwill and common sense to break this vicious cycle at some point.
None of them were willing to take responsibility
Judging by the way those involved in the tragedy reacted, it is clear that it was only the pressure from the international press and the brand-name clothes metaphorically covered in blood that brought the culprits to light.
When the 500th lifeless body was pulled from the rubble, the country’s finance minister declared that the accident was “not really serious”[3] and that it would not affect the country’s textile industry. By the time the death toll reached 900, local authorities had reached an agreement with the United Nations to implement labour market reforms and prevent such tragedies. These measures included recruiting 200 building inspectors over the next six months, reassessing all textile manufacturers, and rebuilding dangerous factories.[4]
Pressure also came from the European Union, which asked Bangladesh to adhere to International Labour Organisation standards after two fires broke out in textile factories, killing 112 workers. Bangladesh currently enjoys duty-free access to European markets for all exports thanks to the Generalised Scheme of Preferences programme, which allows 48 of the world’s poorest countries to export anything except weapons duty-free.
In light of these events, the European Union has considered cutting this preferential access to European textile markets.
However, for the EU to take such a measure against Bangladesh, all member states would have to agree, and it could take more than a year for the measure to be implemented and have an impact on reform in Bangladesh.
Among the measures taken by local authorities are the arrests of the building’s owner, Sohel Rana, who was caught at the border with India, and four of the five factory owners in the building. The fifth owner, Spaniard David Moyer, is still being sought by the police.
As for the clothing companies that worked with those factories, British giant Primark and Canadian company Loblaw have promised to provide compensation to the families of those who died in the accident. Canadian retailers Loblaw, Sears Canada Inc., and Wal-Mart Canada held an emergency meeting to discuss the situation and the possibility of permanently withdrawing from Bangladesh, a move that Walt Disney had already made in March of the same year.
A prime example of how not to react was the response of the Italian fashion giant Benetton, which initially denied any connection with the factory. It was only when photos of clothes bearing the Benetton label appeared in the press that the company’s director declared that “Benetton will make funds available to the [families of the victims] as every member of our industry has a moral obligation to intervene in their support.”[5]
How many personal slaves do you have?
Modern slavery is not something we come into direct contact with. It is a hidden world that we only become aware of when tragedies occur, revealing how many people die because of the terrible conditions in which they are forced to work to produce the goods we enjoy. “What conclusion have we reached?” asked Pope Francis. The conclusion is that we are not aware of human dignity or the dignity of work.[6] And it is true. In our “advanced” century, a person’s life and dignity are worth just a few dollars. Compared to the average price of a slave in 1809, which was $40,000 in today’s currency[7], we can only come to one conclusion: we do not value human dignity.
“How many brothers and sisters in the world are in this situation because of these economic, social and political policies?” asked the Pope. Estimates range from 10 to 30 million. This number varies for several reasons. Firstly, there is no common definition of what “modern slavery” means and entails in all countries. Secondly, it is difficult to count a hidden population that makes great efforts to remain hidden.
According to the American non-profit organisation Slavery Footprint, there are so many slaves that everyone may be indirectly involved in unwittingly supporting slavery. The slaveryfootprint.org website allows you to calculate your “slave labour footprint”, i.e. the approximate number of people who work in inhumane conditions to produce the things you own, including food, houses, cars, electronics, clothes, jewellery, cosmetics, and medicines. After entering details about your properties, age, gender, number of children, diet, etc., the programme displays the number of slaves and their probable location.
How can we reduce our slave labour footprint? Buying the cheapest products is not the answer. Cheap products need to be replaced more quickly, thereby increasing demand. The solution lies in learning how to shop, not where to shop. We must get used to buying out of necessity rather than for pleasure. We should plan our shopping trips and always allocate a fixed budget for certain products, whether they are clothes or cosmetics.
The most important thing is that, regardless of what we buy, or even if we’re just buying for the pleasure of spending money, we should only buy things we really like; things we can form an emotional connection with; things we will use and find it difficult to throw away or replace. As consumers who are not directly involved in this issue, responsible shopping is the least we can do in order to reduce our slave labour footprint, even if only by one person.