Fast fashion is a term that is well known in today’s vocabulary. The term is often associated with SHEIN or Temu, both of which showcase the definition of the term. Fast fashion means the brand uses synthetic materials, has a constant cycle of new item drops, and price points that mirror unlivable wages for their manufacturer employees.
Though it is important to recognize the most problematic ones, SHEIN is actually the number one fast fashion brand, it is also important to note which brands fall under this category as well. So this article, and ones to come, aims to dive into the lesser known brands that follow the fast fashion and unethical model.
I will be detailing the materials, labour practices, controversies, and revenue of the 2025 season in order to show why these brands fit the criteria. Though, when it does happen, I will also mention the good they are doing as I find that is also important to note. Showing the revenue is to notice how much the company is profiting using the fast fashion business model and how little their workers do actually get paid.
FOREVER 21
Forever 21 had a revenue of 102 million by 2025. However, in Los Angeles factories, workers make anywhere from $4-7 an hour. This is way below the minimum wage in the state of California which is $16.50. Retail workers on the other hand make minimum wage and upwards in the very same state. This proves that Forever 21 can afford to pay their employees a livable wage but refuse to pay the ones making the clothes anymore than they already are. Even more, they filed for bankruptcy in March of 2025 despite their high earnings that same year.
The Department of Labour had found labour malpractice within a four month period in 2016 at a total of 85% of LA factories. This includes, underpay, lost overtime, and working 10 hour days. They issued that Forever 21 is to pay 1.3 million to their employees and as we have noted, they can afford to pay that amount. However, a spokesperson from Ross Dress for Less, an affiliated company of Forever 21, has stated, “We can’t control what third party vendors pay their employees, contractors, and subcontractors.” There is a loophole within a law, that was supposed to shut down sweatshops but has seemingly failed, that lets the company get away without paying a dime. Since Forever 21 is a retail store and not a manufacturer, they are not legally responsible to pay the employees who sew their garments.
In the environmental aspect, Forever 21 really means forever as they use synthetic materials such as polyester, nylon, and acrylic. These materials are impressively hard to break down and often don’t. Plastic is notorious for never breaking down. The process of making said fabrics is also harmful to the environment releasing CO2 emissions when made. The company also has a lack of transparency of their carbon emissions or any plans of lowering their carbon footprint. With weekly, or sometimes daily, releases of new clothes, it’s not any wonder why this company has been considered a fast fashion brand.
In other controversies, the company has not signed the Bangladesh Building and Fire Safety Accord. This accord came around in 2013 after the Rana Plaza building collapsed that killed over 1100 people and injured 2000. The building wasn’t up to code in structural terms and finally buckled under the weight. The terms are to help keep the safety of the factories located in Bangladesh and have been signed by 200 brands. Despite this, Forever 21 still works with factories in Bangladesh. The company has also been sued for copyright infringement multiple times.
NIKE
Nike took in a revenue of 46 billion last year. Which is astounding since they have been under fire since the 1990s for unfair labour practices, underpay being one of them. Even in times of world distress, such as forcing 3300 Thai workers to take unpaid leave during the COVID-19 pandemic. This left many Thai workers with little money to stay afloat while in quarantine. Especially giving that in order to live in Thailand, a person would need to bring in $1000 a month.
These reports don’t stop there. Since 1970, Nike has faced many accusations of using sweatshops, which given their history, I do not doubt for a second they do. Like in 1998, a reporter found evidence of Pakistani children sewing Nike branded soccer balls. Child labour is never okay however the expose did do a number on Nike’s sales that year. There have also been accounts of Nike abandoning manufacturers and factories in countries that work towards better labour laws for their employees. A chilling thought; why would a company leave factories who are trying to better their employees' lives? The answer, money. It always comes back to money. Using child labour and working within countries that have more flexible labour laws allows them, and other brands, to make a higher profit.
Nike products are also made with a blend of polyester and cotton. Polyester is a plastic fiber that is hard to naturally break down and releases carbon emissions when made. They also have not signed the Bangladesh Accord. It is hard to find evidence with what manufacturer they currently work with which leaves Nike able to still be contributing to child labour,abbanoning factores, and other labour malpractice. This all points to an unethical business practice.
Now, in 1998, they did try to open dialogue with college students to see how they could do better with their company and listened to the many complaints about its unethical practices. However, Marc Kasky, a former activist, claimed this was a PR stunt to only show a “good” side of Nike while not actually taking the criticism into account for their business. Kasky sued Nike and the court actually ruled in his favour causing Nike to settle the dispute for 2 million.
They also have a line called Recreation. This line takes old branded Nike clothing donations and reuses them to make new products. How effective this program actually is remains to be seen.
ADIDAS
In 2025, Adidas took in a revenue of 27 billion. An astounding number they were able to reach from low wages and tax avoidance schemes. Taking those into account, it is no wonder how they achieved billionaire status. That and also refusing to pay workers during the 2020 pandemic shutdown. This left many already underpaid employees with little to no money while quarantining.
They were sued in 2021 for their line titled: “Sam Smith forever. 100% Iconic, 50% Recycled.” The lawsuit claimed the advertisement was false given that the 50% recycled tag line was misleading. This made consumers think the shoe line was made from 50% recycled material, which, after more digging, was found to be a lie. It was all another case of classic greenwashing. Greenwashing means a misleading or deceptive marketing tactic to make their company and product seem more eco-friendly than it actually is. We saw another example of what it could look like with the KaskyvNike lawsuit.
On their Fashion Transparency Index report, they scored 51-60%. The Fashion Transparency Index aims to push brands to be more honest and true with their ethical and environmental practices.A low score of 50% or under shows a lack of transparency. An overall good score would have to be 50% or higher. For reference, Gucci averagely scores 80%. Adidas low score is barely a passing grade, leaving the question to what is it they aren't showing us?
UNIQLO
Uniqlo took in a revenue of 229 billion Yen last year. That is 1.5 billion in USD. An astounding number for a company that has only been around in international locations since 2005. Part of the success comes from the Westerns obsession with asian products and style, a topic for another day. However, that seemingly isn’t the only reason the company is already valued at over a billion.
The company started in 1984 in Hiroshima, Japan, but has since gained worldwide popularity. Though, even in their earlier days controversy struck them. The biggest case being forced labour with minorities in China. Specifically, the Uyghur people, an Islamic faith based community. The Uyghur people claimed that Uniqlo’s company took part in the aggressive behaviors to form servitude, human trafficking, and genocide. All claims have been backed by multiple sources. The Uyghur people already face discrimination on a daily basis in their hometowns all for being a different faith than the rest of China.
On the more sustainable side of Uniqlo, well, they aren’t perfect in that regard either. The company releases 1000s of new stock weekly and their items use a blend of polyester and other plastic fabrics to make them. They also scored a low score, 41-50%, on their Fashion Transparency Index report. However, they do have a repair and reuse program which allows donations from their brand. As well, they are part of the Better Cotton Initiative. This initiative sees to use better cotton growing practices and usage by training farmers to use more sustainable agriculture methods and partnering these farmers with companies like Uniqlo.
FASHION NOVA
2025 revenue for Fashion Nova was estimated to be about 1 billion. Though, owning 3.8 million in back pay to their employees is probably included in that number. The manufacturers that work with Fashion Nova have harsh demands of their employees. Still, Fashion Nova doesn’t work “directly” to any of the 1000 manufacturers that make their clothing, so it is hard to pin any unfair treatment on the Fashion Nova brand itself. Yet, I’d argue, if there is proof of your clothing being made at one of the horrible working conditions business, you’re just as responsible for seemingly turning a blind eye. Especially, when none of your suppliers meet any of the labour standards.
Fashion Nova releases new items, estimated 600-900, weekly which is a classic for fast fashion brands. They also claim to be able to create clothes from concept to selling within 24hours or less. That is a very quick turn around. For reference, if I were to sew a new shirt from a pattern, it would take me roughly a week. Starting from a concept idea to finishing a product in a day seems absurd unless you’re working around the clock. In the production of Fashion Nova’s clothes, they use a mix of plastic materials such as polyester, nylon, and elastane and there is no evidence their more sustainable materials, cotton and linen, are ethically sourced. There is also no evidence of how much they contribute to CO2 emissions or what they plan to do to lower their carbon/environmental footprint. This is all evident when you reflect that Fashion Nova recently scored a 0-10% on their Fashion Transparency Index report.
A big controversy that I didn’t even know about until researching this topic is apparently one of their wool coats contains materials that are linked to cancer if exposed to the human skin. This coat contains cadmium, lead, and Di(2-ethylhexyl), phthalate. All of these can cause cancer especially if exposed to the reproduction area. Despite still being listed as “coming soon” on their website as of writing this article, the state of California issued a warning to buyers about this product.
~
This is only the beginning of my list. I have many more brands to cover as fast fashion companies. The list is long and extensive and some might even be your favourite. Even if they are, they should be held to a higher standard. The Earth and its population deserve better. Please subscribe to my Substack for a monthly article about fast fashion brands or weekly articles about environmental impacts.
For their papers and research into fast fashion brands. I’d also like to thank you for taking the time to read this article. If you’d like to learn even more, please give these sources a read, you won’t be disappointed. Please share this with a friend to spread information on how companies are making our planet even more sick.
Trying to regain childhood memories to deal with your trauma and better you mental health is interesting. Like you think its core memories, like your seventh birthday, but its more like randomly remembering another seven year old called your colouring ugly 🫠
vaporwave
origamiaround
pixelskylines
tangentwithtanner
prguitarman
