When I went into Uniqlo yesterday they had some press stud closure Down jackets for sale in their Emporium store for $39.90. (I've attached the link for the vest as they don't have the jacket shown on their site. It is basically the same but with sleeves.) The sizes are mainly small, or large. The colours were mainly khaki, with a few blacks, blues and greys. I bought one of these and they are warm and incredibly light.
I really like this jacket, but I am female. Honestly, I don't think you will be beating the women off with a stick if you are a bloke.
The model on the website appears to be male…
It is a men's jacket; just saying it is fairly metrosexual for a male jacket.
@try2bhelpful:
Those buttons made it look like Mao Zedong's vest.
Would get weird looks if I wear this vest to the office.
AU$39.90 is the price
fixed, but man are you tight.
I tried to be helpful.
lol
…
Any one know how much this would cost in Japan? I am heading there in winter and will need one of these but thought it might be cheaper to get at a Uniqlo in Japan.
You could try to see if you can find a Uniqlo store online for Japan. Just be aware they are going into winter, not coming out of it, so they may not have specials on the jackets.
From what I saw their normal prices were comparative to the sale prices over here.
I think it's generally cheaper over there
yea… but by then the AUD may drop even lower. it's certainly trending that way.
Geese / duck would be painfully live plucked
Uniqlo have publicly denied they use live plucking.
Thanks, link please. They would put it on the label or their website no doubt
@try2bhelpful: glad I asked. That first link is most helpful and makes clear why they don't make the claim. They make suppliers assure them they don't live pluck and don't say how often they audit suppliers. There would be down in those clothes that was painfully live plucked. I imagine most of it is.
@grasstown: The final link is a flat denial that the jackets come from live plucked birds. I would be very interested if you went directly to Uniqlo and told them your suspicions the reply they would give you.
@try2bhelpful: I'm pretty sure the first link qualifies the flat denial in the last link.
"Thank you for your message. In response to your query, none of the down for our products is plucked from live animals. If you'd like to read more on UNIQLOs stance on corporate social responsibility, please visit:"
The flat denial is relying on the assurance made by their suppliers. But it's a lame denial as the first link qualifies
@grasstown: I can find no site that indicates uniqlo is using live plucking; only sites where they deny it. If you have any please give me the link. If you can prove this assertion I will join you on the picket line.
@try2bhelpful: I'm just pointing out that the denial is qualified. It relies on the agreement uniqlo has with its suppliers, it's trust of suppliers, and it's non independent audit of suppliers undertaken at unspecified intervals. Please see your own link http://qz.com/296435/a-shoppers-guide-to-buying-ethically-so… also, they do not assert it on their labeling or website.
@grasstown: You have still not answered my question, do you have any evidence they do use "live plucking"; if you do I am personally happy to go to Uniqlo with it and take them to task. You have made this statement "There would be down in those clothes that was painfully live plucked. I imagine most of it is." Can you please back this up.
@grasstown: Sorry, but I am giving up on this conversation; you may be very confident, but you have made bald statements with no concrete information to back them up. I do not need links to "lying supplier stories" as you have no proof Uniqlo are actually lying and I already know that some suppliers lie.
I have found nothing online that indicates that Uniqlo is actually using "live plucking". May I suggest you write to Uniqlo directly voicing your issues and getting more information from them and indicate you are going to make a fuss if they don't give you answers. As indicated before if you can get me any proof I will be more than happy to go to the barricades with you including, very loudly, taking my jackets back for a full refund.
@try2bhelpful: if you want an unqualified denial buy Patagonia. Their suppliers are independently audited, every stage of the animals life
@grasstown:
This is a response I got from Uniqlo when I sent a query email.
"Thank you for getting in touch with us at UNIQLO.
With regards to your enquiry, none of our down products is plucked from live animals. It is taken from ducks after they are slaughtered for meat production. We will continue to ensure that the down for our products is sourced in a manner that does not cause any pain to the animals.
For inquiries and any other concerns please do not hesitate to email us at [email protected] or call us at 1800-UNIQLO (864756). We would like to thank you for choosing UNIQLO.
We look forward to you shopping with us again soon. Have a great day!
Sincerely,
Noreen
UNIQLO AUSTRALIA CUSTOMER CENTER
www.uniqlo.com/au/
Toll free : 1800-UNIQLO (864756)
Monday - Friday 9:00am - 6:00pm AEST
Saturday, Sunday & Public Holidays : CLOSED"
They are flatly denying your assertion.
I suggest if you don't believe them you use the contact information provided here to hunt them down and expose them. More than happy for you to raise the issue of auditing with them and see if you can get more specific information.
"Patagonia’s more rigorous checking process came about after the company realized suppliers were providing ducks to force-feeding facilities for foie gras production, in violation of their agreement to treat the birds humanely." Suppliers lie and violate agreements
shouldn't you be questioning how they can make that claim, given they don't independantly audit. Shouldn't you ask how often they audit. It's based on trust with supplier who have a "strong incentive to adhere to our requirements", Also, maybe you should seek ask them if their suppliers were providing ducks to force-feeding facilities for foie gras production.
As noted in your link:
Uniqlo tells Quartz via email that its suppliers are required to sign an agreement to not use down from live-plucked, force-fed birds and the company’s corporate social responsibility (pdf) sourcing team visits suppliers to make sure they follow the agreement.
This is a few steps short of an independently audited system, like Patagonia’s and the North Face’s. And indeed, Patagonia’s more rigorous checking process came about after the company realized suppliers were providing ducks to force-feeding facilities for foie gras production, in violation of their agreement to treat the birds humanely.
But Ai Kanda, a spokeswoman at Fast Retailing says Uniqlo has reason to trust its suppliers. “We maintain a relatively small number of manufacturing partner relationships, which means the volumes for those we have can be quite large, and they have a strong incentive to adhere to our requirements,” she tells Quartz in the email.
In simple terms, Uniqlo’s business is too valuable for its suppliers to betray their trust by cutting corners—we hope.
@grasstown: on second thoughts, you should just ask them if the quoted info is correct, and if so be satisfied that they tried to fool you though their flat denial. That their flat denial was not all it seemed, but rather wishful self serving carefully vague bull
@grasstown: I have already sent them an email and got a reply. I have given you the contact details, if you don't believe them why aren't you going back to them and asking them these questions? If you have an issue then you chase it up with them. Are you too frightened to make your accusations directly to Uniqlo because you think you will be done for Libel if you use your real name; which is what I did when I sent them the request for information.
@try2bhelpful: wtf? im ok, you are calling their denial a flat denial. I am calling it a qualified denial. you are choosing to ignore the extra info they gave. they only provided the qualification when they were asked to explain. otherwise, they only provide the denial. they only qualify it when they are probed. I am content. I am not going to ask them to reconfirm what they have already confirmed. you are choosing to accept the vague true statement in preference of the more detailed true statement.
@grasstown: and you are refusing to chase down the people you are saying are lying and are torturing animals. If you really think this is what they are doing then go after Uniqlo, or go to PETA and expose them. Don't come here and make assertions without backing them up. I can't believe you said what you said and then say you are content; if that is what I truly believed I would be far from content with the status quo.
@try2bhelpful: I am content. I make informed purchases. My assertions are backed up. You are blissfully avoiding. I have spelt it out so many times above. Suppliers lie and violate agreements. Uniqlo make the statement on trust of suppliers. Is that clear enough for you.
@grasstown: You are content to allow Uniqlo to continue to torture animals and do nothing about it. It is not enough to not purchase the products whilst many other people do, you have to do something to actively bring their crimes out into the open and make them change their ways. I think you might be the one that is blissfully ignoring the issue. I get it, I just don't think you do. Also as you do not see fit to highlight your issues with Uniqlo directly I have sent them a follow up email detailing your issues.
Can OzBargain Studs wear it too ?