Der Preis der Blue-Jeans

Overview

The documentary investigates the global “jeans hunger” for very cheap, mass-produced denim. It traces how low retail prices—especially in Germany—are enabled by offshore supply chains, weak labor protections, and high environmental costs, largely in China.

1) Cheap jeans for consumers depend on price pressure from retailers

• German textile shops source most jeans from China (about 600 million pairs per year globally).
• Jeans are no longer treated as durable goods: fast-changing fashion and aggressive discounting drive demand for ever-lower prices.
• Major brands and importers often refuse to name suppliers or provide little transparency, even when contacted by the researchers.

2) Retail discount pricing translates into extremely low payments to factories

• A German jeans discounter (Kick) sells pairs at around €9.99 and attributes the low price structure to high production volumes and lower wage costs in China/Asia.
• The documentary follows jeans said to be produced for Kick from the Guangzhou area to a factory (Shin Tai Garmin Factory).
• Factory owner Jonathan Lee says he receives roughly €3.10 per pair from Kick—leaving little for fabric, laundry/finishing, and machine maintenance.
• He argues wage increases are hard to achieve when unit pricing for Western orders remains extremely low.

3) Documented labor conditions: long hours, low pay, and exhausting systems

• Workers in the jeans production chain commonly work long shifts (up to 15–16 hours described in sewing), including extended days and Saturday work.
• Earnings are reported as barely at minimum wage levels—overtime may occur, but overall income remains low.
• The film also depicts crowded dormitories with minimal privacy, plus reports of health issues linked to chemical exposure and workplace hazards.

4) “Used look” and finishing processes intensify chemical and health risks

• The documentary highlights the controversial “used look” (faded, sanded, bleach-treated denim) driven by consumer demand for new jeans to appear old.
• In laundry/finishing steps, workers perform intense manual and chemical processes to create distressing effects—even for major brands such as H&M.
• Reported environmental and occupational concerns include:
  • spraying chemicals without adequate protections,
  • lack of meaningful wastewater treatment,
  • toxic residues and chemical runoff,
  • high dust exposure and risks such as respiratory disease.

5) Environmental damage: chemical-intensive production and polluted waterways

• The documentary shows dyeing and finishing stages using substances associated with health and environmental harm (including mention of phenols, solvents, and caustic/acid dye processes).
• It also depicts sandblasting and bleach/chemical treatments that contribute to dangerous dust and chemical exposure.
• It cites incidents of high-contamination shipments being intercepted by German customs (e.g., a May 2011 shipment for Kick).
• Environmental campaigner Greenpeace’s Manfred Santen argues textile production is highly chemical-intensive and can release toxic substances (e.g., chromium/heavy metals) into waterways.
• A Chinese farming family near factory areas describes long-term harm to land and water, alleging that compensation promised for land taken for industrial expansion often does not reach residents, with corruption suspected.

6) Limited accountability: “supplier blame” and retailer/manufacturer denials

The documentary contrasts on-the-ground conditions with public-facing positions from retailers/brands:

• H&M does not provide an on-camera interview but issues a written statement about sustainable production goals.
• Kik acknowledges problems as “often the rule,” but emphasizes responsibility on the Chinese side and claims Western companies lack real alternatives because factories are “fully booked.” It also argues that production shifts to different low-cost countries.

The film frames this as an industry pattern of hide-and-seek: when standards are not met, blame is redirected toward local suppliers or governments, while core pricing pressure remains.

7) Potential shift of denim production to even lower-cost regions

• Producer comments suggest future production could move again (e.g., toward Africa) if China becomes too expensive—continuing the cycle of labor and environmental harm if consumers keep demanding low prices.

---

Presenters / Contributors

• Giang (cameraman)
• Karl Borg Schulze (sustainability consulting; also appears associated with H&M discussions)
• Jonathan Lee (jeans factory owner in Guangdong)
• Michael Ahritz (manager at Kick, discussing sourcing and pricing structure)
• Michael Aretz (board member at Kik, responding to documentary footage)
• Heiner Sefanig / Heiner Seeig (jeans producer commentary)
• Manfred Santen (Greenpeace employee/campaigner on textile chemicals)
• Jonathan Lee’s workers/informants (including workers and an unnamed Chinese informant who helps enable restricted filming)
• Hushin Lay (bleaching/chemical-exposure worker interview)
• Schülfeng (worker referenced in the bleaching process)
• Hong Fay (farmer near contaminated areas)
• Tien (Hong Fay’s son)
• Chenling (piecework worker in a sewing room)
• Mai (Chenling’s wife, also sewing)
• Eddie Knapp (jeans/fashion business figure mentioned as working with scarcity/seasonal contracts)
• Mr. Tang / Mr. Tank (factory/middleman context in orders and distressing/bleaching)
• Wong Juen (middleman/agent delivering design drafts)
• Greenpeace / textile informant(s) (unnamed; used to access factories where journalists are unwelcome)
• Ertan / Jenlin / Mr. Tann / others (factory workers or individuals interviewed or referenced in labor-life segments)