With the economy as it is, spending money wisely is more important than ever. Gift giving is a wonderful thing - and should continue to be - but we need to be conscious of how we spend our dollars. Before you break open the piggy bank, ask yourself the following: Will this gift truly be appreciated? Is there a way that I can spend less AND give more at the same time? I believe that you can with TOMS Shoes...
This Holiday Season, TOMS launched an audacious campaign to sell and give 30,000 pairs of shoes in 30 days! We kicked off this campaign by making a short one-minute video describing our goal (www.TOMSshoes.com). In the past 10 days, over 25,000 people have seen this video and more than 9000 shoes have been sold and will soon be given. This is AMAZING... but we still need YOUR help. We only have 20 days left to reach our goal!
Together, we can make a difference... one pair of shoes at a time!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lucy-bernholz/good-gifting---philanthro_b_146114.html
During the Pa. Democratic primary, Stephen Colbert highlighted DonorsChose, and supporters of Hillary & Barack contributed over $100,000 to needy schools in the state.
www.DonorsChose.org
Australia hasn't suffered as badly as America but things are getting tighter. Groceries cost more and rents are rising. I think we will go into a mild recession but the gov't is working on stimulating the economy and the reserve bank has lowered lending rates again by a full 1%. We are still the lucky country but if commodities fall any further we may not be feeling quite so lucky.
http://www.girleffect.org/#/splash/
The Girl Effect ad was done by Wieden and Kennedy in Portland while the Tom's shoe ad was done by another smaller company in California. I know its hard to be original these days but at least try especially when its for a good cause.
www.charityusa.com/
www.madebysurvivors.com/
While I am happy to see an effort to defeat the environmental disease podoconiosis (by providing shoes to those at risk), I am discouraged that Tom's uses textile factories in China and Argentina, and is moving factories to Brazil and Ethiopia, without any adequate labor oversight. (See FAQ at Tom's Shoes.)
Toms Shoes is not availing itself of the mechanisms in place to evaluate and monitor these factories. The WRC (Worker's Rights Consortium) is an agreement signed by thousands of companies and universities to monitor factory conditions.
Tom's Shoes says only that they engage in their own monitoring, but research has shown this to be an ineffective means of curtailing sweatshop abuses. Self-inspection is not generally effective, because of issues of time, distance, cost and even cultural factors. Tom's would be more convincingly labor-friendly (without child labor, with adequate pay and fabric fiber ventilation) if they joined the WRC.
I do not want to fight one environmental disease (podoconiosis) by creating another (lung fiber disease), which often results from working with fabrics in unsafe factory conditions.
With all we know about the lack of access to Chinese factories and the environmental and health attitude of Chinese law and labor (melamine, lead, toxins and poisons), it is not acceptable to take Tom's word on "self-inspections".
Tom's: Please adopt a factory inspection policy that is in place, that is helping, and that will ultimately be cheaper for you than doing their own inspections.
We pride ourselves in being very transparent about our manufacturing standards and processes, so please feel free to come straight to us with any other questions. Again, we appreciate your concern.
sean@tomsshoes.com
310.566.3170
However, I do not believe that you address the issues, nor do I believe you have re-stated my point(s) accurately. Neither is my response "mis-informed" as you claim. It is quite informed.
Your own inspection, which you assert, is not enough. When do you inspect? How often? Announced or unannounced? At the beginning of a contract only?
You further say "out shoes are not manufactured with unsafe fibers" and, frighteningly, you imply that workers ONLY wear masks when working with "glue". The point: All airborne fibers are dangerous. Just like asbestos fibers. The fibers, such as those used to make Hanes T-shirts in the Domincan Republic, are deadly in the air and lungs. Without masks at all times in fabric facilities, workers are in danger.
Also, your FAQ does NOT mention any "ITS", like you imply. It says only what you have said: That you do some inspections and that "third parties" do some. Not good enough, Sean. Not by a long shot.
Tom's Shoes may be trying to capitalize on a "giving" message, but what they are giving labor is very little, compared to the $60 price tag for most of these shoes. Labor needs the WRC to do spot, random and unannounced inspections, to follow-up on disputes and to investigate worker complaints.
Tom's is not doing a good enough job to justify the claims it makes, here and on its web site.
This style of shoe is an ancient Chinese shoe style. When I was a student in Danmark, I discovered these shoes were worn by many young Danes. I bought my first pair of this style there, in Danmark.
They are simple, comfortable and long-lasting shoes. (The Danish/Chinese version have 'rope bottoms', made from a high-durability hemp-like fiber.) I remember the label inside my first pair said "Fermstillet i Kina" (Made in China).
Tom's shoes are quite attractive, I think (especially the plain styles, for my taste) and I see no reason why they should be for "only the tasteless rich".
What I do wish, however, is that Tom's Shoes would make the move to having these Chinese and Argentinian factories inspected by an official, non-profit, world-wide inspection program, which they could easily do by joining the WRC (Worker's Rights Consortium).
Until then, I can not buy the shoes in good conscience, no matter my view of their aesthetics.