Major fashion retailers are facing mounting scrutiny as data reveals that the real-term price of cotton T-shirts has fallen by roughly 50% since 2001, forcing factories to cut costs through intensified labor demands. A joint report from Public Eye and the Clean Clothes Campaign found that while the nominal price of a T-shirt rose from $2.15 to $2.67 over two decades, inflation-adjusted figures demonstrate a 3.1% annual decline. This downward pricing pressure directly correlates with stagnant wages and increased production quotas in Bangladesh, where 61% of European Union T-shirt imports originate.
Why are garment production costs falling in real terms?
The decline in real-term pricing is not driven by technological breakthroughs or efficiency gains, according to the Public Eye and Clean Clothes Campaign report. Instead, the research suggests that brands exert downward pressure on factory owners through fixed price targets. Interviews with nine pricing specialists and managers in Bangladesh revealed that factories are often forced to accept lower margins to secure contracts. To maintain profitability under these constraints, factory owners have reportedly increased production targets—in some instances from 200 to 250 pieces per hour—without a corresponding rise in worker compensation.
Wages for garment workers in Bangladesh account for only about 12% of the final export price of a cotton T-shirt, according to data cited by the Clean Clothes Campaign.
How do major brands compare on sourcing prices?
Pricing strategies vary significantly among the top six brands importing from Bangladesh, based on 2025 trade data analyzed in the report. Fast Retailing (UNIQLO) reported the highest average pay at $16.95 per kilogram, while LPP paid the lowest at $10.11 per kg. The average import price for cotton T-shirts sourced from Bangladesh stood at $13 per kg, trailing the broader European Union average of $16 per kg. H&M, which the report placed in the middle of the group with an average of $12.82 per kg, contested these findings, stating the figures did not align with their internal systems.
What is the future of fair wage advocacy in fashion?
Advocates are pushing for a structural shift in how brands set procurement prices to better support living wages. The report proposes an interim minimum price target of $18 per kg, with a medium-term goal of $30 per kg. Kalpona Akter, president of the Bangladesh Garment and Industrial Workers Federation, argues that current pricing policies directly contradict the human rights commitments often publicized by major retailers. However, industry insiders remain skeptical; Bangladeshi merchandisers interviewed for the report noted that brands frequently request further price reductions, citing poor sales rather than social responsibility goals.
When researching brand transparency, look for “price per kilogram” rather than “price per unit.” Weight is a more accurate metric for comparing garment costs because it accounts for variations in fabric quality and design complexity.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why does the report use price per kilogram instead of price per T-shirt?
According to the report authors, price per kilogram is a more accurate comparison because T-shirt weights can vary significantly between brands, whereas weight-based pricing provides a standardized metric for manufacturing costs.
How do brands respond to claims of low-price pressure?
Most major brands, including Primark, Inditex, and Bestseller, have stated that report findings fail to account for variables such as product mix, cotton price fluctuations, and operational efficiency improvements.
What is the minimum wage for garment workers in Bangladesh?
The minimum wage is approximately $105 per month, a figure the report notes is roughly one-fourth of the estimated cost of living for a family in Dhaka.
Are you interested in learning more about supply chain transparency and ethical fashion? Subscribe to our newsletter for bi-weekly deep dives into industry reports or leave a comment below with your thoughts on how consumers can influence brand behavior.
