A few months ago, I discussed here the shift of paradigm in the world of luxury. It is no longer the customer who, through the monetary power alone, decides to acquire a luxury good, it is now the luxury house which decides who is entitled to purchase and in what quantity.
Let us not fool ourselves: the point is not for the luxury houses to preserve its image or reputation by choosing those who correspond to their identity – otherwise, no reality TV starlet would have an Hermès bag, the point is the application of the principle according to which rarity dictates the price of goods. The difficulty of acquisition – first the price and now the rarefied possibility of acquisition – has no other purpose than to create desirability and justify ever more indecent prices correlated with ever decreasing quality.
The latest scandal only confirms that luxury today is a business like any other where market logic has annihilated all logic of craftsmanship and know-how.
The Italian Competition Authority (AGCM) opened an investigation in 2024 into Manufactures Dior SRL – an Italian subsidiary of the Dior group – for alleged exploitation of employees working for four of its Chinese subcontractors.
The subcontractors are now placed under judicial administration by the Italian Justice. The company Manufactures Dior SRL is itself placed under judicial administration for one year for the same reasons, because it could “have made false declarations in matters of ethics and social responsibility, particularly with regard to working conditions and respect for legality among its suppliers.”
One might be surprised that the company Manufactures Dior SRL was placed under judicial administration when the acts were committed within a subcontracting company, but the Italian Justice has the possibility of acting on a company which has possibly profited from illegal commercial behavior undertaken by third parties. The Armani group suffered the same fate and, according to Reuters, a dozen well-known houses are currently the subject of similar investigations.
One might also be surprised by the resurgence of this type of legal proceedings, but Italy currently represents more than 50% of the world production of clothing and luxury items and this type of investigation proves to be more and more common in a market where ethics, sourcing and social responsibility are becoming increasingly crucial for the customer.
The four companies affected by the Dior scandal are Chinese, based in or around Milan and only employ Chinese employees. Some of them are irregular migrants, all of them are underpaid (3 euros per hour), work in safety conditions below the minimum required (the safety devices on the machines have been removed in order to operate them more quickly) and are even forced to sleep at their workplace in unsanitary and illegal dormitories in order to be available 24/7. The electricity bills of these Italian sweatshops which unfortunately bear their name aptly, seem to prove that activity there is continuous, day and night, and without holidays obviously.
It goes without saying that Dior firmly condemns these practices and ensures that it collaborates with the administrator and the Italian authorities.
Really? How did the company Manufactures Dior SRL not question the working conditions of its subcontractors when some of the bags made are charged 53 euros – even though their final selling price is 2,600 euros in Dior stores – fifty times more expensive?
Italian Justice considers that the company Manufactures Dior SRL did not put in place “appropriate measures to verify the actual working conditions or the technical capabilities of the contracting companies” and I suspect hat Dior in the first place had no desire to put in place any measure aimed at social justice or ethics within its production cycle, but rather to preserve its profitability.
One might wonder why Dior did not directly subcontract part of its production in China instead of running such legal risks on the Italian territory. The answer is simple: production – even if it is only a single and tiny stage of production – in Italy allows the famous label “made in Italy” to be affixed on the luxury goods and the same is true in France with the famous “made in France” label.
I hardly know where this leaves the customer who acquires – when allowed to do so – a luxury good at a high price. Buying luxury used to be a guarantee of quality, know-how and craftsmanship. The desirability linked to these qualities has for some time now been replaced by simple brand desirability.
Personally, I buy second-hand for many reasons: I like treasure hunting, I like the idea of durability that vintage or second-hand implies and as the years go by, I prefers to put my money into experiences with my children and not into pure materiality. When I look at a piece that I covet, I try to honestly ask myself whether I would desire as much the piece without the luxury label. If the answer is negative, it is immediately dumped because I then know that my desire is in reality only a desire to acquire social codes – even if in my daily life, I never disclose the brands that I wear – that seems to me to be the height of bad taste (here, it’s different – the brands are mentioned for people who would like the same pieces).
That being said, when I see the construction of the skirt I’m wearing here in the following pictures, I know that I overpaid it even though I bought it on Vestiaire Collective. This is a slip dress and a tulle and veil overskirt. The cut is not even straight – maybe Dior has a problem with tulle because that is also the case on this magnificent dress whose skirt makes big waves at the bottom – and my mother could have made better for around fifty euros. What do you want, paradox is my name.
Beyond my personal case, the lines appear increasingly blurred between fast fashion and luxury – even if desirability and prices are hardly comparable – and I fear that the strong values of quality, sustainability, know-how and craftsmanship have begun to fade because of purely financial logics from which only the customer suffers.
Dior skirt and heels – Monoprix cardigan – Chanel sunglasses – Lanvin purse
September 20, 2024
