UNITE! Tag in Made in USA suits

[kabert]

Another post reminded me of this pet-peeve of mine.... I have to say, whenever I see the UNITE. label inside a jacket, the value of the suit/blazer somehow drops in value and quality in my mind. Somehow, I just can't get out of my head the vision of ham-handed, industrial, assembly-line workers, rather than quality-conscious tailors of fine clothing. I'm sure there are lots of nice people who are members of the local garment-workers union, but the "in your face" nature of the UNITE. label reminds me of way-past-its-time socialist revolutionary propoganda, or something.

Not all US suits have them -- HF does I think (along with an ocean of other crappily-made suits), but Oxxford certainly doesn't. Perhaps Oxxford isn't unionized.

 

[novalis]

Hmm, I think someone mentioned that Martin Greenfield suits have this label as well and he and his suits seem to have a good reputation.

At least I certainly hope so since I have a jacket on order from Greenfield.

 

[johnnynorman3]

There is nothing wrong with the Unite tag. If anything, the presence of a union indicates to me that wages are high enough to attract top talent. Certainly Oxxford's workers are unionized.

 

[imageWIS]

There is nothing wrong with the Unite tag. If anything, the presence of a union indicates to me that wages are high enough to attract top talent. Certainly Oxxford's workers are unionized.

Theorizing that Oxxford's workers are top talent, and unions guarantee top wages, therefore Oxxford's workers must be unionized is speculative conjecture that really has no basis in the real world.

Proletariats typically unionize because as a collective whole they have disputes with management and have a better bargaining chip as a whole than as individuals. I do not know if Oxxford's workers are unionized, if they are not it is possible that Oxxford has been able to negotiate with them regarding their concerns and thus they have had no reason to unionize.

As well, unions do not necessarily equate with higher wages or better talent; rather that workers have simply chosen to negotiate for certain communal rights as a group rather then individually.

Jon.

 

[johnnynorman3]

My "theory" is based on the fact that most skilled garment workers in this country are unionized -- is this not correct? If it is correct, I'm simply guessing based on odds that they are unionized.

 

[LA Guy]

This is a dumb f**kin' argument guys.  Some of the better U.S.A. maded suits, Southwick, for example, are union made, some others are not.  Who cares?

 

[imageWIS]

This is a dumb f**kin' argument guys. Some of the better U.S.A. maded suits, Southwick, for example, are union made, some others are not. Who cares?

Ah, but my point is regarding the rationalization of union-made clothing, not as to the actual quality itself. Obviously, you don't care.

Jon.

 

[imageWIS]

My "theory" is based on the fact that most skilled garment workers in this country are unionized -- is this not correct? If it is correct, I'm simply guessing based on odds that they are unionized.

I can comprehend that, but without having the correct information, it is all mere speculation. Best to search google for the answer than to speculate.

Jon.

 

[Mark Seitelman]

I would be very surprised if Oxxford were a non-union shop considering that it is an old shop dating from the 1920's in an old, union town, Chicago.

Greenfield's worker's are unionized.

I believe that Savile Row's workers are either unionized or are virtually unionized.

I do not know if non-union workers are better than unionized ones. It is naive to think that a tailor sewing in a factory is a great artiste. Tailors and other workers in garment factories are WORKERS. They aren't owners. They don't reap the rewards of owing the factory.

Workers need protections. Remember the Triangle Shirt Waist Fire? In the beginning of the 1900's when all clothing was made on our shores our garment workers had a rough time. Many of us are the grandchildren of these immigrants who turned-out the clothing of the nation.

Non-union clothing has flooded the USA because the clothes are cheaply made in China and other wonderful places. These workers are getting about a buck a day. If you were a business owner wouldn't you rather pay a buck a day for a laborer than $100 a day? Of course, this doesn't help our workers and only serves to lift-up the third-world.

In comparison, unionized, American workers have the opportunity to climb the ladder. They can have a comfortable life and a future for their children.

My guess is that many of the members of this forum who wax rhapsodic about bespoke tailoring are the sons of union workers. They would not be debating the merits of Neopolitan and London tailoring if it weren't the back-breaking sacrifices of their fathers and grandfathers.

 

[johnnynorman3]

I doubt Oxxford puts out an inferior suit to most "artistes" that go out on their own.

I would bet that only a handful of sole proprietorship tailors in the world can produce a suit that equals the construction of Oxxford. The biggest difference, it seems, is that you can get true bespoke more readily from a tailor such as Carvatto, etc.

 

[Mark Seitelman]

I agree with Mr. Johnnynorman3. Oxxford puts out a heck of a product on an assembly-line basis. I have found the product equal and in some ways better than my Savile Row stuff.

I heard that some Anderson & Sheppherd people inspected the Oxxford product at the factory and found that the product equalled the Anderson suit from the quality of the workmanship. I heard that they were very impressed.

If you were to walk into a clothing factory, as I have done, you would find a nation of immigrants, a little U.N. All that these workers bring to our shores are their sewing skills and dreams. I firmly believe that the unions have helped the immigrants' lot in our garment factories.

 

[kabert]

I should add... as a lawyer with many clients that are regularly fighting what seem to be slimy unions, I have a bit of an anti-union bias.

Normally, it's not the worker that's the problem, but the union leaders.

 

[johnw86]

I should add... Â as a lawyer with many clients that are regularly fighting what seem to be slimy unions, I have a bit of an anti-union bias.

Yeah, but in all honesty, I bet you'd admit some of your clients fit into that category, too.

 

[Ed13]

Unions are a business just like the companies their members work for. They are there to make money and if they couldn't, they would not exist.

A strong union can keep workers employed that should be fired. Promotions are often given on time served rather than merit. These are not always the best way to ensure a good product at a competitive price.

 

[dah328]

In comparison, unionized, American workers have the opportunity to climb the ladder.  They can have a comfortable life and a future for their children.

My guess is that many of the members of this forum who wax rhapsodic about bespoke tailoring are the sons of union workers.  They would not be debating the merits of Neopolitan and London tailoring if it weren't the back-breaking sacrifices of their fathers and grandfathers.

On pain of turning this into a thread about economics, I would point out that although my fathers and grandfathers (or more accurately, grandfathers and great-grandfathers) made back-breaking sacrifices through farming with livestock as their only source of automation, that's no justification for the American consumer to subsidize their opportunity to "climb the ladder."

dan