ETHICS

ETHICS AND RESPONSIBILITY

A system of moral principles: the ethics of a culture.

The rules of conduct recognized in respect to a particular class of human actions or a particular group, culture, etc.

Moral principles, as of an individual:

That branch of philosophy dealing with values relating to human conduct, with respect to the rightness and wrongness of certain actions and to the goodness and badness of the motives and ends of such actions.

The body of moral principles or values governing or distinctive of a particular culture or group: a complex of moral precepts held or rules of conduct followed by an individual.

This past week I wrote to REI board of directors and called Dick’s Sporting Goods (Dicks has a 3^rd party company that you speak with and they in turn pass on the concerned subject to corporate) enquiring about their selling products that are misrepresented by the advertising put forward by the component suppliers to manufacturers or the manufacturers themselves. Thus far I have not received a response from either company which is not to say that I will not...

Who shoulders the responsibility when presenting products falsely advertised and offered to the general public? I say offered because nobody is required to buy the products.

Is it the component manufacturer, is it the manufacture or is it the retailer? In my opinion all three are complicit and are equally responsible. Is it ethically and morally right to present false information about a product that you want to sell? Who is responsible for falsely advertised products entering the market place? The initial responsibility rests squarely on the shoulders of the fabric supplier to begin with. Did the fabric supplier make a garment and field test it for say 12 months so they would have the opportunity to learn if what they have developed performs as they believed it would when first made?

Did the garment manufacturer get samples of the materials and make garments themselves and field test them for 12 months so they too would know if what is being offered to them would perform as the fabric supplier believes it will as part of a finished garment?

I use the time frame of 12 months because that encompasses all seasons.

Now for the retailer; should the retailer accept without some evidence that the garment will perform as being told by the manufacturer. After all the retailer is the last in the line to actually verify what they make available to the general public?

During the past 40 plus years a number of garments have come to the market that in my educated opinion do not perform or function as was originally advertised by the fabric supplier, which has been amplified by the garment maker and of course the retailer in my opinion just didn’t or doesn’t care if the garment does or does not function as told it will.

All of the following materials that in my opinion and I do not believe I am alone in having this opinion are; waterproof breathable, wicking (unless it is cotton, wool, silk or rayon) synthetics do not wick, phase change treated materials, water repellent treated down or down, cooling fabrics or additives on the fabrics that supposedly make them cool and lastly microbial treated fabrics, repellents which are pesticides that represent a danger to all who buy clothing that is impregnated with them.

While writing this paper I came across a company new to me that uses a chemical also from a company new to me that wards off bugs. It is being encapsulated and it is a pesticide. The first company to my knowledge to use it is Nobitech who makes jogging clothing and the product is Skintex made by a chemical company that makes pesticides. Skintex claims that you are protected FROM mosquitoes and other bugs by their chemical so long as you are wearing clothing covering your skin impregnated with their chemical. How about that? They are putting the chemicals in micro balls just like the micro encapsulated paraffin beads that keep one warm. The difference is that these micro encapsulated pesticides shell deteriorates with time and therefore you are subject to absorbing the pesticides which are toxic into your skin as I was able to find on their web site.

All of the companies that are engaged in offering products to the general public that I have written about for years have no regard for their customers. I consider one and all unethical and immoral.

I have still not heard from either REI or Dicks, am I surprised; no. They have no defense for their actions of selling products that are sold to them from companies that put out false information about the various products available in their stores so it is obvious that they too do not care to take responsibility for what they sell.

It is a sad commentary about the general outdoor industry or more specifically the clothing manufacturers that populate the industry.

So when you buy one of the products that uses these bogus materials don’t be surprised to find out you have no recourse when the product fails to perform as advertised; NO COMPANY TAKES RESPONSIBILITY!!!

One more thought to keep in mind "it is always and only about the money", so it really does not matter what they say!!!