Textile Labelling Revision should take a holistic view – the adoption of new textile fibre generic names should be more straightforward

Textile and clothing companies often sell products in multiple markets, which makes complying to current non-harmonized rules burdensome. We need rules on what is mandatory and what is not for the whole EU and harmonized ways to label textile products. This would benefit both consumers and companies.

TEXTILE LABELLING REGULATION NEEDS A REVISION 

Fibre composition is very important information to consumers. It helps to make better and more informed choices based on the material composition. We support the EU Commission’s intention to revise the Textile Labelling regulation 1007/2011, which is in need for bringing up to date. 

• To speed up green transition, the adoption of new textile fibre generic names should be more straightforward. Currently, the process takes years to complete and is not transparent. This is especially the case for man-made cellulosic fibre.
• The presence of recycled fibre should be included in the labelling rules and the ways of marking standardized.
• Feather and down should be included in the same regulation. Currently what is required does not work and companies haven’t adopted the wording “contains non-textile parts of animal origin”.
• The rules for adding additional information to fibre composition are not clear to economic operators. This option is needed, but it should be more explicit what is allowed and what is not. This information often refers to the fibre origin, manufacturing method, certificates, recycled content. 

Lastly, there is a great need for a guiding document for the Textile Labelling regulation 1007/2011. It is unfortunate that the document which was prepared a few years ago wasn’t published after all. 

SMALLER AND MORE DURABLE PHYSICAL LABELS  

Both consumers and companies are in need for longer lasting, smaller labels, which consumers will not cut off the product. And yes, a physical label is still needed in the future. But it could be a lot smaller if we moved part of the information to a digital form, such as the DPP. Minimum information on the physical label could be fibre composition and care instructions. This would support circular economy objectives.

Labels should have also minimum durability requirements so that they would have the same lifetime as the product. Currently physical labels are of poor quality, uncomfortable to consumers, and many even unreadable. Also, if there is too much information on the label, consumers are very likely to cut it off, which means loss of all information. 

LANGUAGE REQUIREMENTS SHOULD ME MODERATED 

Companies are struggling to add all required languages to physical labels, and this leads to frustratingly long labels. The language requirements should be moderated in textile labelling. 

One solution could be, for example, fibre composition written only in English in the physical label and care instructions using ISO 3758 symbols. All other languages could be in a digital form. 

MADE IN -MARKING AND SIZE SHOULD BE MANDATORY AND SIZE SYSTEMS HARMONIZED IN THE EU 

The origin of textile product and made in -marking has been a hot topic for many years. Finnish Textile & Fashion sees that made in -marking could be mandatory in EU. Most companies already add it voluntarily, as this is something the consumers expects from them. That being said, origin rules are maybe not so fitting for textile products, as the value chains are diverse. 

Size markings should also be mandatory for all apparel. During the revision, it could also be considered whether the size systems could be harmonized in EU. 

CARE INSTRUCTIONS SHOULD BE HARMONIZED IN THE EU 

Currently different EU countries have different rules, and in many, it is not even mandatory to include care instructions in a textile product. This would be and easy fix. We already have a standardized way of marking wash and care instructions for textile products, using ISO 3756 symbols. We should take a full advantage of this standard and require all member countries to use these symbols for care instructions. 

Finland has also been using a national standard for verbal care instructions and translations into several languages. This has been a very useful document if a company has chosen to use verbal care instructions instead of symbols. And in many times, additional verbal instructions are needed. EN standard would solve this problem. 

All in all, it is a very easy step to harmonize care labelling for textiles for the whole EU using standardized symbols added with standardized verbal instruction when necessary.