Welcome! We regret to inform you that the Injury Board National News Desk has been discontinued. Feel free to browse around and enjoy our previously published articles, or visit The Injury Blog Network for the latest in personal injury news.

Mom-Based Garment Industry May Be Hardest Hit By New Safety Regs

Posted by Jane Akre
Monday, January 19, 2009 11:12 PM EST
Category: Protecting Your Family, In The Workplace
Tags: Small Business, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Lead, Children's Toys

Author Kathleen Fasanella talks about the hit to the small garmet industry if CPSC regs are allowed to go into place next month.

Kathleen Fasanella

LEARN MORE

NATIONAL VOICES

 

IMAGE SOURCE:  Kathleen Fasanella, Fashion Incubator,Courtesty:  K. Fasanella

 

 

Beginning in February 2009, new federal requirements take effect to make products for children safer and free from lead.

The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) was mandated by Congress last August following the findings of unacceptably high levels of lead in imports primarily from China – toys, jewelry, and clothing.

The new rules apply to manufacturers, importers, and retailers.  Children’s products made on or after February 10, cannot be sold if they contain more than 600 parts per million (ppm) of total lead. The total lead drops to 300 ppm on August 14, 2009.

For phthalates – an industrial “plasticizer” that is used to make vinyl flexible and is found in nail polish to shower curtains - if a product contains more than 0.1 percent of certain specific phthalates, or fails to meet the mandatory standards for toys, they too cannot be sold.  A loophole exists for used items sold in thrift or consignment stores. Those sellers are not required to certify that those products meet the new lead or phthalates limits.

While they sound good on the surface, not everyone supports the new rules. 

Kathleen Fasanella of Las Cruces, New Mexico, admits to causing an online ruckus over the CPSIA. 

Involved in the garment industry for 30 years, Fasanella helps entrepreneurs launch clothing lines. In her book, “Entrepreneur’s Guide To Sewn Product Manufacturing” she guarantees to, "get you off to a solid start or your money back,” promoted on her Fashion Incubator Web site.

But lately the conversation has moved from couture and contracts to what CPSIA will mean to the thousands of apparel startups – the bulk of which are small businesses of fewer than 20 employees, or are run by stay-at-home moms.  And for the vast majority, it means closing their doors.

Fasanella tells IB News, “I get 3,000 children’s wear designers visiting the site everyday and all but three say they are going out of business.”

The reason is the regulations.  “Sewn products” for children, such as clothing, books, stuffed animals, bedding, pajamas, shoes, slippers or diapers, without component testing at the supplier level will do nothing to make products safer, says Fasanella.

Whether grommets, buttons, sequins or fabric, they should all be tested before the item is produced, not after.

“Traditionally you test your components. The new law requires we do unit testing with is an amalgamation of everything. Typically a designer will use the same fabric in a variety of styles, some with buttons, for example.  The way the law reads, they have to test ten different styles, not just the components. There is nothing in the manufacturing that is going to introduce lead,” she says.

Testing ten different styles in three different colors by a third party verifier, could easily result in a $30,000 price tag, far too much for the small mom-and-pop or mom enterprise.

In her letter to Nancy Nord of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) which oversees the regulations, “Today I received a price estimate from a work at home mom who makes hair bows that exceeded $125,000.00. That’s right, one hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars. In light of that, your repeated assertions that lead testing amounts to a minuscule $25 is offensive. Tell me, which lab is this? I can send them a lot of customers.”

An exception to component testing might be in flammable fabrics. Producing pajamas already requires a manufacturer to buy certified flame resistant fabric. That requirement remains unchanged.  

Fasanella says the feds didn’t consult with independent manufacturers before crafting the Act and many of the rules and regulations already exist on the books, but are not enforced.

Least to suffer under the new rules ironically might be Wal-Mart, which led the drive to low cost overseas labor. The big box retailler won't suffer because it has the clout to order China to produce to its specifications, and the ability to test to make sure they are in compliance.

With help from the internet, many independent entrepreneurs today market their wares to the public directly through eBay or Etsy.com, a place to buy and sell all things handmade.  Many sellers on Twitter say Etsy.com will never be the same and Esty has set up its own protest page to CPSIA.

On Friday, several members of Congress expressed concern for the small business community and suggest that products in which lead has never been a problem might be exempted from third party testing, such as a children’s book or undyed fabric.

Fasanella tells her online community that most of the problems with dangerous products on the market come from the tiniest companies so, “an exemption would actually increase the proportion of dangerous products on the market.” That’s why, she suggests, it won’t pass and is more like a bone being thrown to placate the negative feedback.

As the last minute wrangling continues, it’s the small business community that will be hardest hit by the new regulations.  Wal-Mart, Burlington Coat Factory and Macys are all requiring certification for recent products shipped or they are sent back. 

The end result may be some safer products from big box producers, but fewer independents able to stay in business and ultimately fewer products on store shelves for consumers to choose from.  #


3 Comments

Anonymous User
Posted by Ann
Thursday, January 22, 2009 5:07 PM EST

"Least to suffer under the new rules ironically might be Wal-Mart, which led the drive to low cost overseas labor. The big box retailler won't suffer because it has the clout to order China to produce to its specifications, and the ability to test to make sure they are in compliance."

Interesting. I am pretty sure I recall reading on the Fashion Incubator (a post by Kathleen) that big businesses will be hit hard also. Now she's saying they won't be affected as much.

Posted by Xmas
Monday, January 26, 2009 1:51 PM EST

Ann,

Wal-Mart can send items back to manufacturers and demand they test them. Mom-and-pop stores don't have the clout to demand that.

Big Chinese manufacturers that produce toys in batches of 10,000 can spread the cost of testing across all the toys in the batch. The stay-at-home mom that makes three dress from one bolt of cloth cannot.

It's an economics of scale issue. Large companies selling large numbers of things have more opportunity to spread the costs. If the costs are very large (time-wise or money-wise), small manufacturers are effectively locked out of the market.

Anonymous User
Posted by Malissa
Tuesday, February 03, 2009 1:29 PM EST

In a time with the Economy is hurting so badly the larger scope outways the few incendents. Middle and lower income families depend on these second hand stores to cloth their children. They have to strech the dollar as far as it can go. But the only way the big stores like walmart are going to be able to absorb the cost of testing is to pass it on to the consumer. So these family's who are forced to pay full price retail are going to get very little for a very high price. This hurts the children of America, who will be forced to dress in rags or nothing. Children who did not fill liked they lived in poverty are now going to. It seems to me that this is only going to benifit the big retailers. So many laws are passed to help line big company's pockets more. Like the law to taxing, every cow you have to help the envirment. That is only lining someones pocket and putting the small ranchers out of business.

Comments for this article are closed.

About the National News Desk

Our mission is to seek the complete truth and provide a full and fair account of the events and issues that surround personal safety, accident prevention, and injury recovery.  We are committed to serving the public with honesty and integrity in these efforts.

Hurt in an accident? Contact an Injury Board member

Subscribe to Blog Updates

Enter your email address if you would like to receive email notifications when comments are made on this post.

Email address

Subscribe

RSS Feed

Add the National News Desk to your favorite RSS reader

Add to Google Reader Add to myYahoo Add to myMSN Add to Bloglines Add to Newsgator Add to Netvibes Add to Pageflakes