Editorial: Online retail has a duty to be human – for their workers and the industry
Old-school retail has been plagued by many criticisms through its long performance on our high streets. It has been far from the patron saint of good behaviour. But if you walked into a store in the early 2000s, you could, fairly or unfairly, get a feel for a company from the staff you bumped into.
The fast fashion stars of the high street have always given off an aura of cheap and dirty clothes from staff who could care less. B&Q, in comparison, has for years been almost entirely staffed by slightly older DIY enthusiasts who popped in for some hanging baskets and had so much fun they just stuck around. Many of them seemed to be called Bernie. Today, even if you aren’t aware of the work they do with charities and ex-offenders, if you pop your head into a Timpson’s, you always leave thinking their heart is broadly in the right place.
But retail has undergone a transformation like few other industries. Selfridges, the stalwart of Oxford Street, is up for auction. Even with bids starting at £4bn, it stretches the limits of imagination to believe the department store will still have seven floors dedicated to retail by the end of the decade. Whether it’s workspace, creative studios or residential – John Lewis’ preferred route – Selfridges as we know it is on its way out.
There is huge potential for the future shape of the highstreet, but it is also fraught with difficulties. With every small shift online we take, every digitally-native brand which pops up on our social media feeds, we become more and more detached from where our clothes are coming from, whether staff are enjoying their jobs, or if they are worked to the bone in factories like those Amazon workers, who are fired by an app rather than by a manager.
Much of this will eventually be automated in some way, but in the meantime, we must be alive to all of the potential stumbling blocks before they happen. This issue came into sharp relief this week, with criticisms of Shein, a Chinese fast-fashion firm which has exploded onto the global retail scene in the past year or so. Advertisements for the brand litter the London underground, and yet it makes the secret services look transparent; getting any information on who works for it, how or where it makes its clothes, is night on impossible.
This newspaper has always been a fierce advocate for the free market. But in order for capitalism to survive and thrive, it must keep an eye on itself. Free markets and free people remain the best route for lifting people out of poverty, allowing people to get on and paying the bills that come with a civilised society.
But there is a serious threat that shadowy online-only brands are escaping culpability for poor working conditions because people never see their staff. It is naive to imagine the checkered history of retail has not been plagued by poor treatment of staff, but having a human face at the counter made people more likely to at least ask the question. When thousands of staff lost their pensions with the collapse of British Home Stores, we might’ve been able to recall a friendly face at the counter and there was huge public pressure to find a resolution. The only person many of us now interact with is our postman.
We need to have a basic requirement for transparency and openness for digitally-native brands. Companies such as Shein will survive the criticisms of opacity, but what of the staff behind the outfit? If it were to fall into administration, would there be an outcry for any lost wages?
As we plot a path along a new high-street, a fresh retail landscape, we need forward-thinking businesses who will lead by example, who will find ways to give customers the Beaming Bernie from B&Q experience, not just for their own ends, but to protect the very concept of business itself.