Fashion subcontracting: new measures to combat labour exploitation in Italy
The government’s paradoxical solution: a magic trick that makes accountability disappear down the supply chain
Fashion subcontracting is a hot-button issue, posing significant reputational risks for luxury brands. In response to recent sweatshop scandals, Minister for Made in Italy, Urso, has proposed a controversial solution: exempting client companies from responsibility.
This approach was crystallised in an amendment—nicknamed the “Save Tod’s” clause—following a request for special administration of the Tod’s Group by the Milan prosecutor’s office. Approved last Tuesday as part of the annual law for SMEs, the amendment allows fashion companies to obtain a “supply chain legality” certification. In practice, it absolves top brands from accountability for labour conditions at the bottom of their supply chain.
The legislation, recently approved by the Senate Industry Committee, states that fashion groups are not liable if they had pre-existing “organisational models” designed to prevent crimes, overseen by an internal body with autonomous control powers. The consequence is clear: major fashion houses could soon be completely relieved of responsibility for exploitation within their own production networks.
Confindustria Moda & reputational advantage
Confindustria Moda, which helped draft the legislation, defends the measure: “The enormous pressure on brands creates sector-wide difficulties,” they state. “While it’s right that each leader organises work correctly, we can’t ask for more. Ongoing investigations send the wrong message to workers.”
For fashion brands under recent scrutiny, this voluntary supply chain certification offers a clear exit strategy. Companies can choose to undergo external audits with their suppliers. Once an implementing decree defines the parameters, compliant brands can display a “certified supply chain” mark.
This provides a reputational advantage and, crucially, legal protection. If a certified supplier is later found to have irregularities, the lead company would be shielded from judicial administration.
Fashion subcontracting — critical voices: “A shield for exploiters”
The government’s move has drawn sharp criticism from unions and opposition parties, who accuse it of effectively legalising labour exploitation.
Alessandro Genovesi of the CGIL union called the amendment “a very serious precedent.” He stated, “Faced with judicial allegations of criminal exploitation, the government is erasing the crime. From a tax shield for evaders, we have moved to a criminal shield for those who exploit.”
The CGIL, excluded from government talks with industry representatives, is demanding stricter measures, including verification of worker-to-production ratios, application of collective labour agreements, and limits on subcontracting.
Echoing this outrage, Democratic Party Labour Representative Maria Cecilia Guerra denounced the policy as “a coup that weakens the fight against labour exploitation.” She explained the practical effect: “A company can sell €500 shoes from a contractor paying workers €2.50 an hour, yet face no audit. The client’s responsibility is swept away by a certificate.” She and colleague Arturo Scotto condemned it as “a step backwards by a right-wing party with no interest in protecting job quality or ethical businesses.”
Final thoughts
In conclusion, we must ask: who seeks subcontracting to get the lowest possible production prices? And in that pursuit, what do luxury company owners expect? Can the cheapest labour cost ever correspond to the highest labour standards?
Fashion subcontracting and sweatshop conditions are a critical yet systemic issue. The fundamental paradox of the government’s new measures is that they legalise the very conditions that lead to labour exploitation. The complex subcontracting chains, driven by the luxury sector’s pursuit of the lowest costs, are now being fortified with a legal shield. The proposed “solution” does not raise labour standards, verify fair wages, or limit outsourcing. Instead, it offers brands a path to waive liability, ensuring that the highest standards of luxury can continue to rest on the lowest standards for workers’ rights.
Italy is not solving the crisis; it is guaranteeing impunity for the powerful at the expense of the vulnerable.
In short, the Italian government is offering a false solution. Protection for brands—not for people.
Fashion subcontracting: new measures to combat labour exploitation in Italy Read More »
