Gap Clothing: Unethical Practices And Broken Moral Laws

Gap, the clothing giant founded in 1969 in California, has been criticised for its ethical and sustainability standards. Despite its efforts to rebrand itself as a leader in ethical and socially responsible manufacturing, Gap has been accused of poor labour rights, environmental sustainability, and animal welfare. The company has been criticised for its use of subcontracted labour, which has led to accusations of child labour and sweatshop conditions. In addition, Gap has been criticised for its lack of transparency regarding its supply chain and the factories where its clothes are made, as well as its failure to address concerns related to overproduction and hyperconsumption. While Gap has implemented some positive environmental measures, such as using recycled materials and setting targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, it still has a long way to go to become a truly ethical and sustainable brand.

Child labour

In 2007, Gap admitted that it may have unknowingly used child labour in the production of a line of children's clothing in India. An investigative journalist from the Observer, Dan McDougall, recorded video footage of children aged between 10 and 13, stitching embroidered shirts in a crowded, dimly-lit workroom, with a Gap label on the back of each garment. McDougall reported that the children were working without pay in squalid conditions, and were sleeping on the roof of the building.

Gap Inc. responded by ordering a full investigation and reiterating its policy never to use child labour in the production of its clothes. The president of Gap North America, Martha Hansen, stated that the situation was "completely unacceptable" and that the company did "not ever, ever condone any child labourer making our garments". Hansen also acknowledged the role of subcontractors in the issue, stating that the company farms out huge production orders to subcontractors in the developing world, where child labour is endemic.

In 2010, Gap was again implicated in a child labour scandal, this time along with two other major clothing retailers, Next and Marks & Spencer. An Observer investigation found that staff at their Indian suppliers were working up to 16 hours a day, and being paid as little as 25p an hour. Workers reported that those who refused to work extra hours were threatened and fired, which constitutes forced labour under international law. Gap admitted to wage and overtime violations and ordered its supplier to reduce working hours to within legal limits and refund workers who had been underpaid.

Poor working conditions

Gap Inc. has faced criticism for its poor working conditions, with reports of low wages, child labour, and other labour rights violations. In 2004, Gap launched rigorous social audit systems to weed out child labour in its production processes, but an undercover investigation by The Observer in 2007 found that the system was being abused by subcontractors. The investigation uncovered children as young as 10 working in conditions close to slavery, with some working 16-hour days and facing physical abuse and violence.

In response to the investigation, Gap admitted that children appeared to have been caught up in the production process and vowed to withdraw tens of thousands of items identified. The company also emphasised its commitment to fighting child labour and ensuring safe and fair working conditions for all workers.

In its first social responsibility report, Gap Inc. identified gaps in occupational health and safety and human rights policies at some of the factories it used. As a result, the company stopped doing business with 136 factories due to issues such as child labour, inadequate safety and hygiene measures, insufficient access to drinkable water, and verbal and physical abuse.

Despite these efforts, Gap continues to face criticism for its labour practices. In 2024, reports surfaced of widespread abuse faced by female garment workers in factories in Asia, with allegations of rape, slapping, gendered bullying, and misuse of power to pursue sexual relationships. The reports also highlighted workplace malpractices, including forced overtime and the prevention of bathroom breaks.

In addition to concerns about worker treatment, Gap has also been criticised for its lack of transparency regarding its supply chain and factory locations.

Lack of transparency

Gap Inc. has been criticised for its lack of transparency, particularly in its supply chain. In the 2023 Fashion Transparency Index, Gap received a score of 41-50%. None of its supply chain is certified by labour standards that ensure worker health and safety or other labour rights. There is also no evidence that Gap pays its workers a living wage.

In 2007, an Observer investigation found that Gap clothing was being made by children in sweatshop conditions in New Delhi. In response, Gap said that it required all suppliers and subcontractors to guarantee that they would not use child labour. However, the investigation revealed that the system was being abused by unscrupulous subcontractors.

In a 2022 article, Eco-Stylist gave Gap a transparency rating of 0 out of 14, stating that Gap discloses "basically no information about their textile supply chain and the factories where their clothes are made".

Gap has also been criticised for its lack of transparency regarding its environmental impact. While it has set targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, there is no evidence that it is on track to meet them. It also does not disclose the amount of water it uses for production.

Unethical treatment of animals

Gap Inc. has been criticised for its treatment of animals. The company has been accused of using leather, wool, and exotic animal hair in its products without stating the sources of these materials. This lack of transparency makes it difficult to ensure the welfare of the animals involved in the production process. In response to these concerns, Gap has released a general statement about minimising animal suffering and has publicly prohibited the use of fur, down, angora, or exotic animal skin. However, the company's commitment to animal welfare has been questioned due to its continued use of animal products without providing supply chain information.

The use of leather in the fashion industry has come under scrutiny in recent years, with animal rights organisations such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) campaigning against its use. PETA has exposed the cruel and inhumane treatment of animals in the leather industry, particularly in countries with weaker regulations, such as China, Brazil, and India. Investigations have revealed that cows in India often undergo abuse, including castration, branding with hot irons without painkillers, and being skinned alive. The tanning process used in leather production has also been linked to increased risks of various cancers in workers and surrounding residents due to the use of hazardous chemicals like chromium.

Gap's lack of transparency regarding its animal product sources makes it difficult to ensure that their suppliers are adhering to ethical standards. This is especially concerning given the prevalence of animal abuse and labour rights violations in the leather industry. By not disclosing its sources, Gap contributes to the uncertainty and inconsistency between beliefs and behaviour among consumers who support animal rights.

To improve its ethical standing, Gap should provide detailed information about its supply chain, including the sources of its animal products. By doing so, Gap can ensure that its products are not associated with animal cruelty and labour rights violations. Increased transparency will also enable consumers to make more informed choices, encouraging changes in industrial methods, policies, and regulations within the fashion industry.

Lack of commitment to sustainability

Gap Inc., the company that owns Gap, Old Navy, Banana Republic, and Athleta, has been criticised for its lack of commitment to sustainability. The company has been described as a "fast fashion giant" with almost 4,000 stores worldwide. Despite addressing some sustainability issues and creating an eco-conscious initiative on its website, Gap has been criticised for not having a clear commitment to sustainability.

One of the main criticisms is that Gap does not disclose the amount of water used in its production processes. In addition, the company's hazardous chemical policy does not eliminate all dangerous materials. While Gap claims to use around 50% of responsible materials like organic cotton and recycled materials, it does not disclose its supply chain. The company has also been slow to transition to renewable energy, and its emission rates are still high, with over 5 million metric tons of CO2E emitted.

Gap has also been criticised for its lack of transparency regarding its textile supply chain and the factories where its clothes are made. The company provides little information about how it treats its workers, how much it pays them, or the safety of its facilities. While Gap has set targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, there is no evidence that it is on track to meet these targets.

Overall, Gap's sustainability efforts have been described as insufficient, and the company has been encouraged to do better in the future.

Frequently asked questions