National Clothesline

Last November, we featured an editorial on a J.C. Penney Stafford Washable Suit that hit the consumer market. For $200, businessmen could purchase formal attire that could be cleaned in a household washing machine. With technological components infused into the interior, it was considered a garment of the future. Of course, the suit still required old-fashioned care. Even J.C. Penney recommended it be touched up with an iron — an odd feature for clothing that is marketed as a time-saving convenience. Not helping matters any, Consumer Reports later completed testing on the suits and confirmed that they indeed became wrinkled following cleaning at home. The consumer watchdog group overall gave favorable marks, noting that the suit retained a sharp crease and smooth fabric. Though not considered a “top-of-the-line tailored suit,” they believed the attire was acceptable for the workplace. However, Consumer Reports also recommended to have the clothing professionally pressed periodically to keep it looking “sharp and crisp.”

The good news for drycleaners is that the suits never really appeared capable of taking away much business. After all, consumers won’t really be saving themselves any time washing and ironing the Staffords. For many, they will be more trouble than their worth. The bad news for drycleaners is that J.C. Penney continues to test new products that could eventually harbor a more harmful impact. Most recently, the company announced the arrival of the Stafford Super Shirt, which incorporates Scotchgard(TM) brand technology from 3M in order to repel stains and wrinkles. Naturally, the shirt is being marketed as an accessory for the Stafford Washable Suit. The kicker (according to a J.C. Penney press release) is this: the shirt’s “technology helps to preserve the fabric, eliminating the need to iron or commercially launder and reducing the frequency of washing”. The company also promises that if home care instructions are properly followed, the shirt will avoid shrinkage or discoloration, too. Currently, it is available in over 500 J.C. Penney stores, and it will hit another 200 by the middle of August.

How much of the new product is hype? How much of an impact can it really make on cleaners? It’s too early to say for sure, but the future does not appear to be getting any easier for the industry, which must, as a whole, continue to improve in order to keep a big step ahead of the home cleaning alternatives. It’s impossible to know what lies ahead, but you can be certain more products will come. Regardless of when those garments of the future arrive, you can be sure of another thing, as well: drycleaners must be capable of servicing those items better than anyone else.

Ten years after the first state clean-up funds were established, almost 3,300 drycleaners in 12 states are covered by dedicated drycleaner remediation programs, according to the State Coalition for the Remediation of Drycleaners (SCRD).

In those states, SCRD says, environmental assessment has begun at more than over 900 sites, remediation activities are underway at about 250 sites and remediation has been completed at 66 sites. Another 153 drycleaner sites have been “closed” under state programs. Those sites were closed after assessment work only; were closed after monitoring only; or were closed after remediation was performed. How you interpret these statistics depends on whether you are a “glass is half empty” person or a “glass is half full” person.

The “half empty” interpretation says that the 3,300 cleaners covered by state remediation programs represent only a small percentage of drycleaning sites in the country; the number of sites being worked on is an even smaller percentage. This comes at a cost of thousands of dollars and countless hours of time invested by cleaners and trade associations to get their state programs approved and keep them running.

The “half-full” interpretation says that no one expected a problem that took years to develop would be fixed overnight and, given more time, these programs will do a lot of good for many cleaners. It also points encouragingly to the number of sites “closed” after assessment or monitoring work only, which suggests that many other sites may not need extensive and expensive remediation. More important for the “half-full” argument is the knowledge and information about site clean-ups compiled by SCRD, which could lead to faster, better and cheaper site clean-ups in the future.