This is what I understood back in the '50s. The ads about 'non-shrinking/misshaping were placed by the WGWU, as you can still find their label in older garments. That was their hallmark about buying quality fabric. It seems that when Fashion (the customer/business ordering) took prescidence on the label, that quality began to slip. Not just in the fabric...but when outsourcing to save a union wage buck was becoming the norm...and the result is in one time wearing garments. Kathleen ----- Original Message ----- From: "monica spence" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Historical Costume" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 9:11 AM Subject: RE: [h-cost] abuse of fabrics (aka care and washing)
> > Hi-- > I was a designer / patternmaker and technical designer in the garment > industry for 24 years. Do not blame the manufacturer (the people who > actually sew the garment) for the wording of care labels. Very often the > people who make the garment follow what is demanded by the Customer (the > people who order the garment from the manufacturer: Disney,. Walmart, Sears > etc.) The customer gives the manufacturer a manual that gives phrases and > the care label must be taken from that. The Federal Government also prevents > the manufacturer from doing "preventative care labling": unless you know > that a certain fabric will react by doing something (eg: pouring chlorine > bleach on a swimwear fabric) you cannot say "do not bleach". The problem > with this is that sometimes the customer insists on going the extra step in > stupidity-- over the advice of the manufacturer. I once had an on-going > agrument with Nordstroms about using non-chlorine bleach on a chiild's > swimsuit. I lost. They insisted that the label say "non-chlorine bleach as > needed". The fabric was done no favors with that! > > Don't blame the manufacturer, blame the people who place the order with the > manufacturer. We have our own share of frustrations. (Don't get me started > on off-shore manufacturing...) > > Yours- > Monica Spence > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Behalf Of Lloyd Mitchell > Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 8:33 AM > To: Historical Costume > Subject: Re: [h-cost] abuse of fabrics (aka care and washing) > > > That has certainly been my take on it for years! The so called care label > puts the blame on the owner or outside establishment if the garment fails to > survive the cleaning. > > Besides the "Talon (zipper) ads, remember the Union Label (buy American!) > ads when all the new fibers began to come out in the 1950s? Some of the > American labels such as Jonathan Logan took great pride that you could > depend on their products not to shrink or misshape in the wearing (and > caring) > > Kathleen > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Leah L Watts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 7:10 AM > Subject: Re: [h-cost] abuse of fabrics (aka care and washing) > > > > > One of the things I learned in my studies was that legally, clothing > > > manufacturers have to put a care label on their garments, and they > > > have to > > > test the garment in what ever method they recommend. > > > > Not that all manufacturer's actually _test_ the garments ... I think > > Tommy Hilfiger still holds the record for biggest fine from the FTC for > > inaccurate care labels. There's a fashion boutique that opened recently > > in Omaha that is already notorious among the local dry cleaners; the > > company I work for has told everyone to refuse garments from them because > > they cannot be dry cleaned regardless of the care tag. > > > > >For *most* garments, > > > regardless of fiber content, the easiest and cheapest route is to > > > label the > > > garment "Dry Clean Only". This way they are not responsible for the > > > poor > > > results if the garment is cleaned some other way, and they have to > > > spend > > > very little money researching other cleaning methods. > > > > I've always suspected "Do Not Wash, Do Not Dry Clean, Spot Clean Only" > > was a synonym for "We Couldn't Be Bothered To Test This But Don't Want To > > Be Held Responsible". > > > > Leah > > _______________________________________________ > > h-costume mailing list > > h-costume@mail.indra.com > > http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume > > > > _______________________________________________ > h-costume mailing list > h-costume@mail.indra.com > http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume > > > _______________________________________________ > h-costume mailing list > h-costume@mail.indra.com > http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume > _______________________________________________ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
