<<

The 2019 Ethical Report THE TRUTH BEHIND THE BARCODE THE 2019 ETHICAL FASHION REPORT THE TRUTH BEHIND THE BARCODE

Date: April 2019 Project Leads: Libby Sanders, Jasmin Mawson Lead Researchers: Jessica Tatzenko, Claire Hart, Annie Hollister-Jones Researcher Support: Meredith Ryland, Luke Medic, Emily Taylor

Behind the Barcode is a project of Baptist Aid .

New Zealand headquartered companies researched in with Tearfund .

www.behindthebarcode.org.au

Report : Susanne Geppert

Front cover photo: © Baptist World Aid Australia World © Baptist photo: cover Front Infographics (pp 10–11): Cadence Media 2 CONTENTS

1. Executive Summary...... 4

2. Methodology...... 12

3. Influences...... 17

4. Policies...... 25

5. Traceability and ...... 28

6. Auditing and Supplier Relationships...... 33 Appendices 7. Worker Empowerment...... 37 Statements from non-responsive 90 Letter from auditor 95 8. Environmental ...... 40 Sources 96 9. Index...... 45 About Baptist World Aid Australia 97 10. Survey Data...... 64 Acknowledgements 98

3 Executive Summary

This section outlines the research aim and scope; data collection and findings; 1and overall results of all companies.

4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION

Baptist World Aid is pleased to deliver its sixth Excitingly, in addition to its traditional focus the global fashion industry remains a significant consecutive report on labour rights and labour rights, this year’s research also incorporates employer. It also spurs economic growth, new environmental management metrics in the generates tax revenue, provides valuable skills and environmental management systems in the assessment criteria. In 2019, 75% of companies training, and delivers crucial foreign exchange. fashion industry. The 2019 Ethical Fashion assessed actively engaged in the research process, All of these factors can, and often do, contribute Report grades 130 companies from A+ to F, shedding light on the global fashion industry’s to improving the lives of workers and their based on the strength of their systems to performance in the arenas of labour rights and . environmental management. mitigate against the risks of forced labour, child At the same time, however, the fashion industry For the 43 million workers in the Pacific1 is a source of exploitation for millions. labour, and exploitation in their supply chains. region, and for millions of others across the world,

Overall Grades: A–M * = non-responsive companies

OVERALL GRADE D– A B– C A– C+ A– C B D+ C+ D+ C D B– C+ C– C+ C– C C+ C+ B+ D+ A– A– C– B D– C+ A+ D+ B– D D– B A+ D+ B D– B A– B B+ B+ A C B– C+ D+ A+ A A– B+ C C+ C– B D+ A B+ A– A+ B C– B A+ C+ A– B– B+ C F F F F F F F F F

& Fitch* Abercrombie ALDI Stores Ally Fashion* Anthea Crawford* APG & Co. Group Arcadia Colour AS ASICS ASOS City* Baby Bardot * Barkers Bec and * Ben Sherman Australia & Less Best Betts Group Bloch* Blue Illusion Boardriders Boden Boohoo (Apparel) Collective Brand () Collective Brand Camilla and Marc* NZ Canterbury City Chic Collective Coles* On Group Group Country Cue Jones David Decjuba* Designworks Etiko Ezibuy X Factory Farmers* Brands Future Fast 21* Forever New Forever T– Freeset * Gap Inc. Gazal* Group Pants General Activewear Gorman H&M Holdings Glasson Hallenstein Hot Springs* House of Quirky Huffer Group & Fishing NZ Icebreaker Industrie Jeanswest JETS Group Just K&K Walker* Karen Sylvester* Kate Kathmandu Australia Kowtow L Brands & Co.* Strauss Levi Liminal Apparel Jane Lorna Lowes* Lululemon Athletica Macpac Marks & Max* NZ* Merric Apparel B– A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A A+ A– A+ A– A+ A– A+ A+ A– A+ A– A+ A+ A+ A+ A– A+ A+ A A+ B+ A+ A+ A A+ B A– C A+ A+ A A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A– A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ B– A+ A+ A+ A+ Policies F F F F F F F

Trancparency and D– A+ A– D+ A+ B A+ B A– C– B+ C– C+ D+ B+ C+ C– B+ C– C+ B A– A C+ A+ A D B+ C+ A D+ A– D A– A+ C A B+ A A– A– A– A B– A B+ C A+ A B+ A– C+ C+ C B– C– A+ A A– A+ B+ C– A– A+ B– A B A+ B Traceability F F F F F F F F F F F F

Auditing and D– B+ B– C– A C– A– C B D– D+ C– C D C C+ C C+ C D+ C C A– D A– A C– B C+ A– D C– D C+ A+ D C+ B A C B– B A+ C+ C– C– D A+ A B B+ D+ B– D+ B D– A– B+ A– A B+ D+ B– B+ B– A+ B– C C supplier F F F F F F F F F F F F relationships

Worker B– D– C– B– D– B– D– C– D D– D– D+ D D D+ D– D C– D C+ B B D+ C– D A+ C– C– A+ D– D+ D+ C+ C– C– C+ B+ D– D D A– B+ B+ C D+ D– C– B+ C– B– A– D+ D– A+ C– B– D+ D+ D empowerment F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F

Environmental D A A– B C A– B B C+ C+ C– B+ C– D C D D D+ D B+ B+ B– C– A+ C+ D D B+ A+ D– A– B+ A– B+ A+ B+ A+ D– D+ B C– A+ A+ A+ A C D+ B– D B+ C– B+ A+ A– D+ A+ A+ A– C+ A+ management F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F

5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION

For the majority of workers in the fashion industry, For six years, this research has assessed healthy. Correspondingly, it is the workers in the wages are so low that it leaves them, and their companies across the globe on the strength of fashion that most acutely feel the families, trapped in the cycle of poverty. Beyond their labour rights management systems. In the detrimental effects of poor environmental this, fashion production throughout the Asia 2018 Ethical Fashion Report, we acknowledged management. This is the first year that the Ethical Pacific is marred by the prevalence of and that a “truly ethical” company not only ensures Fashion Report will assess companies on their . In addition, whilst safety standards that its supply chain empowers workers and pays environmental management systems, alongside have improved, fire safety, structural defects within them a living wage, it also understands its impact their labour rights management systems, in factories, and unsafe working conditions remain on the environment and manages its footprint to consideration of their final grade. reasons for continued concern. keep waterways, the earth, and the atmosphere

Overall Grades: M–Z * = non-responsive companies

OVERALL GRADE A+ D B– A– B B– B– A– D B+ C+ A+ D C– A C B C+ B– C– C+ B+ A– A C B C– D+ B C+ B C+ C– B– D– C B+ B C D– B– F F F F F F F F

These 130 companies represent 480 brands. To brand grades, go to the brand index

Mighty Good Group Group Footwear Munro Baby Nature Balance New Next Nike Nobody Noni B Group Nudie Co. Group Oroton Outland Denim Oxford Pagani Patagonia Brands* United Pavement Postie+ Corp.* PVH R.M. Williams * Group Apparel & Gunn Rodd RREPP Apparel Seafolly Seed Heritage Showpo* Group Simon de Winter Group Sussan NZ Swanndri Men Ltd.* 3 Wise * T&T Australia Target Factory* Baby * The Group PAS The Group The Tigerlily* of Life Tree Cooper* Trelise VF Corp. Co.* Distributing Voyager * Wish Group WORLD* Zimmermann on page 45 or online at A+ A– A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A– A+ A+ A+ A A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ C– A B+ A+ A+ A A A Policies F F F F F F F www.behindthebarcode.org.au

Trancparency and A+ D C+ A– A– B+ A– A+ D+ A C+ A+ D B– A+ D– C A– B+ A– B– B A A A+ C B C– D+ B B A– B C A– D C A A– B– C+ Traceability F F F F F F F F

Auditing and B+ D– B A– C+ B– C B+ D B– B A+ D C– A D+ B C B D+ B B B– B+ C– B+ C– D+ B+ D+ B C– C– B– C B+ C+ C+ B supplier F F F F F F F F F F relationships

Worker A+ D+ B– D D– D– B+ B– D+ A+ D– B C– D+ D– D– D– D+ B– B+ D+ D D– C+ D+ C– D– D+ D+ D D+ D C+ empowerment F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F

Environmental A+ D+ A+ B+ B– A+ A B+ A+ D A+ C A B– D D+ D+ B A– A+ C– A D C+ B C– C+ D C– D– D A+ A+ D D+ management F F F F F F F F F F F F F F

6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INDUSTRY PROGRESS

The annual nature of this research enables us to the progress in ethical sourcing, made by the fashion industry. Since last year, improvements have been made across the industry in 79% of the areas assessed. Most noteworthy areas of improvement in 2019 are:

Gender inequality 61% of companies (an increase of 22%) have created policies addressing gender inequality in their supply chain, including the introduction of strategies addressing discrimination faced by women.

Responsible purchasing practices 45% of companies via https://flic.kr/p/Lcxknw © Solidarity Center (an increase of 18%) have introduced policies addressing responsible purchasing practices, with an aim to improve working conditions.

Child and forced labour 35% of companies (an increase of 17%) have robust remediation plans to redress child or forced labour if it is found in their supply chain.

Manufacturing Restrictive Substance List (MRSL) 35% of companies (an increase of 14%) have a comprehensive MRSL that they test against to ensure workers are not exposed to hazardous chemicals with dire environmental impacts.

An important part of the annual reporting process is to give companies the opportunity to report on the improvements they have made, which encourages continual improvement across the industry. Of the companies that were assessed by both the 2018 and 2019 Ethical Fashion Reports, 38% improved their overall grade. The area showing the highest improvement in 2019 is Auditing and Supplier Relationships, followed by Environmental Management (which was assessed in 2018, but not included in the grading until 2019). Workers with Independent Garment Workers Union. 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INDUSTRY CHALLENGES

Despite the significant progress we’ve less visibility, comes greater risk. The prominence most companies seeing value in the process of seen across the industry in the last six of forced and child labour is well documented at being benchmarked and gaining feedback. these earlier stages of production.2 years, serious concerns remain that Several companies with no publicly available information regarding their ethical sourcing need addressing. Transparency practices have chosen not to engage with the Investment in transparency demonstrates a research process, and so receive F grades in the Traceability company’s willingness to be accountable to 2019 Ethical Fashion Report. Without making A company’s investment in traceability and its consumers, civil society, and workers; and makes information known, it becomes impossible for knowledge of suppliers remains a key pillar of it easier for these groups to collaborate to ensure the public to know if these companies are doing a strong labour rights management system. that the rights of workers are upheld. There are anything to combat exploitation in their supply If companies don’t know (or don’t care) who many examples of corporate transparency around chains. A number of companies in this Report were their suppliers are, then there’s virtually no way supply chain practices, but one of the most non-responsive, but still scored reasonable grades, of ensuring that the workers who make their significant examples would be the publication as high as a B, due to the amount of publicly products aren’t being exploited. It is encouraging of a list of suppliers, that includes supplier available information they published. For more then, that this continues to be one of the most business names and addresses. The 2019 Ethical information about the research process and non- significant areas of improvement for the industry Fashion Report has found that 37% of companies responsive companies, refer to the methodology — since Baptist World Aid began this have published a complete list of all final stage (page 12). Non-responsive companies were also research in 2013, there has been a 32% increase in suppliers, increasing to 50% when including given the opportunity to provide a statement companies who are tracing their inputs suppliers companies that have published information about about why they chose not to engage with this and a 31% increase in companies who are tracing at least some suppliers. research. These statements are included on their raw materials supplier. Despite the percentage of companies publishing page 90. Notwithstanding these improvements, traceability full supplier lists having more than doubled since But transparency is no longer an expectation only remains a significant challenge across the industry. we began this research in 2013, transparency driven by consumers, this expectation has also While 69% of companies could demonstrate remains an ongoing challenge in the industry. Low been legislated in a number of countries. The USA, tracing all final stage suppliers, only 18% have transparency is one of the biggest determinants , the UK, and, now, Australia (through the traced all inputs suppliers, and just 8% have traced for the receipt of a low grade, because companies introduction of a Commonwealth Modern Slavery all suppliers. Although the majority of are graded based on a combination of publicly Act) all require companies to publish details of the companies have begun tracing suppliers at these available information and any information they are systems they have in place to ensure that workers deeper stages of their supply chain, it is evident willing to disclose to our researchers. aren’t being enslaved. You can read more about that many still have no knowledge of where their As mentioned previously, 75% of companies chose the introduction of modern slavery legislation in inputs and raw materials are being sourced. With to engage with the research process this year, with Australia on page 18.

8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INDUSTRY CHALLENGES

Living wage Environmental management Of these areas of concern, water use is one of the A living wage is a wage that is sufficient for The environmental impact of the fashion industry most substantial issues. Up to 20,000 litres of workers to be able to afford the basics (food, water, is significant with the apparel industry accounting water is needed to produce 1kg of cotton — with healthcare, clothing, electricity, and education) for 10% of global emissions.4 Up to 20,000 litres it taking up to 2,700 litres of water to produce a for themselves and their dependants. Yet most of water is needed to produce 1 kg of cotton — single cotton T-. We found that just 12% of garment sector workers receive wages well below with it taking up to 2,700 litres to produce the companies were collecting and benchmarking this figure. It comes as no surprise, then, that low cotton needed to make a single T-shirt.5 Globally, water use data from all of their water intensive wages are among the chief concerns for workers.3 humans are consuming 800 billion new pieces of facilities. When it comes to wastewater, again, just 12% of companies are monitoring the wastewater The benefits of a living wage are substantial. In fact, clothing per year, 400% more than we consumed from all wet-processing facilities to ensure it is not payment of a living wage could transform the lives two decades ago. Australia is the second largest environmentally hazardous. of millions by allowing people to lift themselves out consumer of new textiles after the US, averaging 6 of poverty and, at the same time, drive economic 27 kg of new textiles per year. Even more Positively, an increased number of companies growth within communities and nations. However, concerningly, Australians are currently disposing are investing in more sustainable fibres. Just it remains one of the most poorly assessed areas of 6,000 kg of fashion and textile every ten over a third of companies have assessed the 7 of our research. minutes, with the majority of this going to . environmental impact of the fibres they use and It is the poor and vulnerable who feel the impact are investing in more sustainable fibres in their Questions around living wage make up a significant of this environmental damage most acutely, with product design and production as a result. portion of the Worker Empowerment section of the effects of landfill, water and poor this research. Worker Empowerment is 2019 Ethical chemical management impacting on the health More information about the fashion industry’s Fashion Report’s lowest scoring section, with a and wellbeing of workers throughout the apparel environmental impact can be found on page 22. median grade of D. Just 5% of companies could supply chain. demonstrate that they were paying a living wage to all workers at their final stage of production. This year, for the first time, the Ethical Fashion Report assesses the effort of companies to While the industry still has a great deal of mitigate their environmental impact. 11 questions to do to in the area of living wage, small steps are were asked in order to measure a company’s being taken. In 2019, 48% of companies assessed impacts on climate, chemical management reported that they had started to develop a living practices, water usage, use of sustainable fibres, wage methodology and 24% of companies had provision of take-back and repair programs, and, published a commitment to pay a living wage. finally, whether had completed an environmental For more information on the fashion industry’s impact assessment. approach to tackling the continuing issue of living wage, see page 19.

9 2019 at 38% a glance of Companies saw an improvement in their Grade from the 2018 Report

Companies some of the biggest gains 130 assessed Median C+ grade D 22% 17% 15% C C- Worker A+ B Environmental Traceability & Auditing & Empowerment Policies Management Transparency Supplier relationships

more more more Companies Companies companies are ready to are investing are investing 7 17 address and in Responsible in Gender Companies Companies Remediate Purchasing Equality within Child and Practices the supply received A+ received F Forced Labour chain

10 There have been many improvement in 2019, Changes in the such as... industry through 61% the years of Companies are investing in using sustainable fibres ...but despite the progress, 49% 81% significant issues remain: 17% 48%

5% 2013 2019 2013 2019 of Companies can demonstrate paying a living Companies working to Companies working wage to all workers at Final trace where their raw to trace where their Stage facilities materials come from fabrics come from 18% 37% From 2013 to 2019 the percentage of companies publishing full direct supplier lists has increased Methodology

This section outlines the aims and scope of our research, the process of data collection and 2evaluation, and our company grading system.

12 METHODOLOGY

The 2019 Ethical Fashion Report provides a picture of ethical sourcing practices in the Statement on Non-Responsive Companies fashion industry as a resource for consumers, Companies that are non-responsive, along brands are investing sufficiently to mitigate corporations, investors, and policymakers. with those that do not provide any substantive these risks. information, are indicated in the Report Companies may prefer to disclose their supply and Guide with an asterisk (*) next to their This research seeks to empower consumers chain management practices publicly, instead name. These companies are also given the to make more informed and ethical choices in of responding to our survey (e.g. they might opportunity to provide a short statement as purchasing fashion and footwear and provides be surveyed by multiple research projects or to why they chose not to respond, found on insight into supply chain governance for they might prefer a single public disclosure, page 90 of this report. investors. It also aims to assist companies with rather than disclosing through the survey). benchmarking and learnings, as well as identify We acknowledge that many of the non- By assessing non-responsive companies on issues for policymakers to address. By presenting responsive brands may be doing more to publicly available information we can give the performance of companies (relative to one improve their ethical sourcing that we have due to these efforts. In the history of another) in an A+ to F grading system which is been able to assess them on. However, if our research, non-responsive companies updated on an annual basis, individual companies, brands do not disclose, or are unwilling to have received a wide range of grades based and the wider industry, are encouraged to engage disclose, what they are doing to ensure that on their publicly available information. In the in continuous improvement with respect to their workers are not exploited in their supply 2019 Ethical Fashion Report non-responsive ethical sourcing practices. chains, then it becomes almost impossible for companies received grades ranging from a B consumers and the public to know if these to an F. We recognise the fashion industry’s potential for positive impact around the world. The ultimate goal of this project is to work collaboratively alongside companies in the fashion industry research considers five broad themes of social environment. In order to ensure that the research to contribute to ending worker exploitation, responsibility and environmental impact: policies, remains the fashion industry benchmark when alleviating poverty, and environmental traceability and transparency, auditing and it comes to ethical and sustainable sourcing throughout the fashion industry. supplier relationships, worker empowerment, and environmental metrics were developed in 2018. environmental management (outlined on page 15). These metrics were initially weighted at 0%, to Scope of the research This year marks the first year that environmental ensure participating companies had adequate The 2019 Ethical Fashion Report Grading Tool management metrics have been included in the lead time ahead of a new focus area being added classifies the fashion supply chain assessment criteria, expanding this research to the performance assessment process. From into three stages of production: final stage, inputs from its purely labour rights focus. It is widely this report onwards, the environmental metrics stage, and raw materials (outlined on page 15). understood that the fashion industry has a will inform each company’s grade, contributing Across these three stages of production, this considerable, and often negative, impact on the to 10% of the final grade. 13 METHODOLOGY

It is worth emphasising that Baptist World Aid data. Our researchers then send the findings does not conduct site inspections of factories. (marked against the assessment criteria) to the Therefore, company grades are not an assessment company for comment and further input. This of actual conditions in factories and farms, but input is then further reviewed. Baptist World Aid rather an analysis of the strength of a company’s seeks to engage with companies, collect evidence, labour rights and environmental management and understand their processes and systems; systems. This research relies on data that is publicly however, we do not conduct site inspections as available, alongside evidence of systems and part of the grading process. © ILO via https://flic.kr/p/V9uWtJ © ILO practices provided by the companies themselves. Beyond engaging brands, our researchers also work with relevant certifiers to get a better Data collection and evaluation understanding of what systems are covered by As a proxy for the entire fashion supply chain, their certification. Where companies use these the 2019 Ethical Fashion Report assesses a large certifications, information from the certification selection of companies on 44 specific criteria body is considered in the process of the across the five key themes, at three critical stages company’s assessment. Certification bodies that of the supply chain. have been engaged with include Better Cotton The survey and the weightings applied through Initiative, the Global Organic Textile Standard, the Grading Tool has been developed with input Fairtrade and Ethical Clothing Australia. from supply chain specialists, non-government Our researchers actively seek to engage organisations, and company experts (see companies (and pursue contact with non- ‘acknowledgements’ on page 97). The criteria responsive companies) using at least three contained within the Grading Tool draws upon different mediums: phone calls, emails, and international standards, including those articulated letters. All non-responsive companies receive their by the International Labour , the findings twice by post. Letters are also mailed to Sustainable Development Goals, and the United the company’s Board Chair and CEO. This process Nation’s Guiding for Business and seeks to ensure that, in almost every instance Human Rights. The Grading Tool will continue to where a brand has not responded, it is because it evolve over time to incorporate new learnings and has intentionally chosen not to do so. reflect changing industry best practice. In 2019, 75% of brands engaged directly with this In conducting a company evaluation, our research process. researchers assess a company’s own publications, Garment factory in Hung Yên, alongside any relevant independent reports and

14 METHODOLOGY

What the research covers Policies Transparency Auditing and Supplier Worker Environmental The research collects and evaluates data and Traceability Relationships Empowerment Management from fashion companies using the following (and living wage) classification of the supply chain and across the following themes of . Why it matters: Why it matters: Why it matters: Monitoring Why it matters: For a Why it matters: The Policies form the In order to ensure facilities and building labour rights system fashion supply chain standards that that worker rights relationships are critical to to improve working can cause significant RAW MATERIALS brands want their are being upheld, ensuring policies are adhered conditions, workers must environmental production to brands need to to and improvements in be empowered, allowed degradation, which • Cotton (farming) adhere to. They know which facilities working conditions are a voice, and have their affects the wellbeing • , etc (husbandry, are the baseline are responsible for being delivered. While most critical concerns of workers, the shearing etc) by which a brand the production of no monitoring process addressed. It is workers communities they live can measure the their product. is perfect, high quality themselves who have the in, and their natural • Crude Oil for synthetic effectiveness of monitoring helps to provide best visibility of working environment. By What we assess: fibres, plastics, etc its overall efforts a better understanding of conditions. assessing the materials How much of (extraction, refining) to uphold worker the conditions of workers. and facilities they use the supply chain What we assess: rights. A focus on strengthening to make their products, a company has Whether workers are relationships allows trust brands can take What we assess: traced; what it able to unite through building, and increases a informed steps to reduce Provisions to does to monitor democratic trade unions; brand’s capacity to drive their environmental prohibit forced and address whether collective change. impact from the farm to labour and child subcontracting; bargaining agreements the final item of clothing. INPUTS PRODUCTION labour, allow what efforts it is What we assess: What have been established; • Textiles production for freedom of undertaking to percentage of production whether effective What we assess: (ginning, , knitting, association and trace the remainder facilities are audited; grievance mechanisms Whether the company protect worker of its supply whether unannounced and are in place; whether has done its own dying, embroidery) health and safety; chain; a brand’s offsite worker interviews workers are receiving a assessment of the • () whether a brand transparency and anonymous worker living wage so they can environmental impact • Plastic (processing, intends its policies and how willing surveys are used; whether support their families; a throughout its supply moulding) to cover the entire they are to be checks are done on high risk brand’s efforts in moving chain; the percentage production process; held accountable activities like labour brokers towards paying a living of sustainable materials whether the brand through the and recruitment fees; wage. used; if the company has is undertaking information it shares whether the brand is willing collected data on water important measures about it’s supply to be transparent about its use and chemical use in towards improving chain. results and remedial actions; its facilities; monitoring FINAL STAGE PRODUCTION working conditions whether brands are actively systems to improve in facilities. involved in building supplier chemical and water • Cut-Make- (CMT) relationships through management; whether manufacturing (cutting, consolidation, collaboration, take-back and repair , ) supplier training and long programs have been term relationship building. offered to customers.

15 METHODOLOGY

Data verification Grading because it allows the benchmark of an ethically To verify the data provided by companies, The grades awarded in the Report are a measure managed supply change to shift as the industry company responses are reviewed and clarification of the efforts undertaken by each company to standard improves. Using an adjusted bell curve and supporting documentation are sought where mitigate the risks of forced labour, child labour, rather than a fixed standard, means that it is necessary. In some instances, the data worker exploitation, and environmental harm industry practice (and not Baptist World Aid) provided by companies is relied upon to verify throughout their supply chains. Higher grades that sets the standard of ethical supply chain conditions and benefits that workers receive. correspond to companies with labour rights management. Companies are incentivised to Wherever possible, our researchers and company and environmental management systems that, continue improvements in order to align with the representatives work through the survey questions if implemented well, should reduce the risk and progression of the industry. together, allowing both parties to be satisfied that extent of worker exploitation and environmental Some company structures own several brands the data presented is an accurate representation harm in the production of that company’s with differing systems of the company’s policies and processes. products. Low graded companies are those that in place. In these cases, the 2019 Ethical Fashion To ensure consistency in the assessment of are not taking these initiatives, or those choosing Report grades brands separately. Individual brands companies after completing the survey, company not to disclose if they are taking such initiatives. corresponding to a single company are listed, responses are cross-checked by another member It is important to note that a high grade does not alongside their grade, in the Brand Index of this of our research team. mean that a company has a supply chain which Report (see page 45). is free from exploitation or environmental harm. Survey support document Rather, it is an indicator of the efforts the company is undertaking and the strength of its systems to 2018 saw the introduction of the Survey Support Baptist World Aid’s methodology Document (previously referenced as the reduce risk. Furthermore, the 2019 Ethical Fashion Report’s grading methodology is designed and grading process has been audited, “Assessment Support Document”). This document for detail please see page 95 of the was reviewed and updated after the release of to spread companies out along an A+ to F Appendices. the 2018 Ethical Fashion Report. It was once continuum, based on the relative strength of their again provided to companies as part of this year’s efforts and awarding grades on an adjusted bell research process. curve (i.e. the best performers receive A+ grades, the worst receive F grades, with many others in The Survey Support Document acts as a helpful the middle). guide for companies. It includes a rationale for each survey question, and examples of what The adjusted bell curve is a key element to support constitutes a strong labour rights system. The this project’s advocacy purpose. It encourages Survey Support Document also details the companies to continue working on improving validation requirements that need to be adhered their supply chain management, as the bell curve to, in order to demonstrate that a system or policy grades a company comparatively against industry is in place. peers. This is preferable to a fixed standard

16 Industry Influences

This section looks are three areas that are currently having a significant influence on the fashion industry; The Modern 3Slavery Act, Living Wages and Environmental concerns.

17 INDUSTRY INFLUENCES THE MODERN SLAVERY ACT

For six years now, Baptist World Aid has called or providing false or misleading information. It also Slavery Act, we acknowledge that more work on fashion companies to disclose their efforts instates a state-, independent Anti-Slavery needs to be done to ensure it is as robust as Commissioner — tasked with educating the public possible. We will continue to call for penalties for to address the risk of slavery in their supply on the issues of modern slavery and promoting companies that fail to comply with the reporting chains, reporting on these efforts through the action to end it. requirement, and an Independent Commissioner Ethical Fashion Report. to ensure that the legislation is effectively Commonwealth Modern Slavery Act 3 implemented. Through this research, we have become After years of advocacy from civil society groups, increasingly aware of the critical role that including Baptist World Aid and our Coalition Impact governments have to play in ending child labour partner, STOP THE TRAFFIK, Australia now has There is no doubt that this new legislation will be and exploitation in corporate supply chains. For this a federal Modern Slavery Act. This is a welcome a catalyst for change in the business . reason, we have been resolute in our calls for supply first step in addressing transparency and modern We forward to seeing how the fashion chain regulation in Australia and our organisation slavery in corporate supply chains. industry responds, not only to these new legal has been invited to participate in the various The Modern Slavery Act, which became effective requirements placed upon it, but also to public conversations and inquiries to achieve this end.1 on 1 January 2019, requires entities that are pressure, as consumers are presented with more either based, or operating, in Australia, that have detailed information about how their favourite 2018 saw the introduction of two important pieces brands produce their clothes. of anti-slavery legislation in Australia. an annual consolidated revenue of more than $100 million, to report annually on the risks of We also anticipate that other groups within civil Modern Slavery Act 2 modern slavery in their operations and supply society, like investors and boutique fund managers, chains. This annual report, known as a ‘Modern will now have a more direct avenue to both In June 2018, New South Wales became the first Slavery Statement’, must list the actions a engage with, and measure, a company’s appetite Australian jurisdiction to introduce modern slavery company has taken to assess and address those for corporate social responsibility as it relates legislation. risks, as well as gauge the quality of the company’s to the issue of modern slavery. In turn, we are The NSW Modern Slavery Act requires commercial response. This statement must be approved by the hopeful that this will further drive improvements in entities with an annual turnover of at least $50 company’s Board of Directors, or an equivalent, corporate practice. million, and at least one employee in New South and signed by a Company Director. Once Finally, this legislation adds significant weight to Wales, to annually report on the structure of submitted, this statement will be made publicly the efforts of Baptist World Aid in this space, as their supply chain; key risk areas and mitigation available on a central repository known as the it addresses several areas that we have — and strategies; policies and due diligence processes 4 ‘Modern Slavery Statements Register’ . will continue to — assess companies on. There relating to modern slavery; and training practices It is estimated that these requirements will affect are many brands in the fashion industry that relating to modern slavery. approximately 3,000 businesses.5 have worked collaboratively with Baptist World The NSW Modern Slavery Act also provides for While Baptist World Aid welcomes the Aid to reduce the risk of modern slavery in their penalties of up to $1.1 million for non-compliance introduction of the Commonwealth Modern supply chains. These companies will now be well positioned to report on their achievements to date. 18 INDUSTRY INFLUENCES LIVING WAGES

Low wages and excessive working hours are This results in minimum wages that are far below Not being paid a living wage is one of the most endemic and persistent issues in global supply what would regularly be considered a living wage. significant issues faced by fashion supply chain In Bangladesh for example, living wage estimates workers 4, as the benefits of receiving a living chains, which, all too often, leave full-time are 2.8 times its current minimum wage and, in wage would be nothing short of life-changing. workers, and their families, trapped in a cycle , the current minimum wage is half of the The reality is, the payment of a living wage could of poverty. Baptist World Aid, through this estimated living wage 3. transform the lives of millions by allowing people assessment of companies and their brands, promotes the adoption of a living wage that will meet a workers’ basic needs and allow them to maintain a safe and decent standard of living.

State of the industry Fashion is a lucrative industry. The Australian Fashion Industry alone, was worth close to $23.5 billion in 2018 1. Its value is projected to © World Wide Fund via https://flic.kr/p/81oLDu Wide © World continue growing, with , in particular, expected to grow at 6.2% over the next five years 2.These profits extend beyond Australia, underpinning the of developing countries such as Bangladesh, , and Vietnam, where garments are amongst the largest exports. But in the majority of circumstances, these profits do not reach the workers who make these garments. This is because garment-producing countries, in an effort to retain the investment of foreign companies, frequently set minimum wages too low. Fearing that higher prices, might drive interested companies to competitor countries. Cotton picker in Shayampet,

19 INDUSTRY INFLUENCES LIVING WAGES

to lift themselves — and their families — out of civil society, consumers factory management, and One of the most important first steps a company poverty and, at the same time, drive economic workers. can take when seeking to pay its workers a living growth within communities and nations. There are many initiatives currently working wage, is deciding on a robust methodology to However, the reality of paying living wages is to progress the payment of living wages, two help determine a figure for each region it sources complex and difficult to implement. It is well worth mentioning are the Anker Methodology, In from. 48% of companies assessed by this report recognised that attaining a living wage is not partnership with the Global Living Wage Coalition received credit for taking this step. The majority something that can be achieved by retailers alone. (GLWC), and ACT. cited using the Anker Methodology. It requires a multi- approach, that includes companies and their brands, government, Anker Methodology ACT The Anker Methodology defines a living wage as, ACT (Action, Collaboration, Transformation) is an “Remuneration received for a standard work week agreement between international brands, retailers, by a worker in a particular place sufficient to manufacturers, and trade unions, to address the afford a decent standard of living for the worker issue of living wage in the textile and garment and her or his family. Elements of a decent supply chain. ACT aims to improve wages in standard of living include food, water, housing, the fashion industry by establishing collective education, , , clothing, and bargaining in key garment and textile sourcing other essential needs, including provision for countries, at an industry level, supported by world-

© ILO via https://flic.kr/p/eiJ64a © ILO unexpected events 5.” class manufacturing standards and responsible purchasing practices. Developed by academic researchers and economists Martha and Richard Anker in ACT is a collaboration of global brands and the partnership with GLWC, the methodology has two Industrial Global Union, representing garment, main components 6: textile, and footwear workers from around the globe. Of the 21 brands that are members of ACT, 1. Estimating the cost of a basic decent ten are represented in the 2019 Ethical Fashion for workers and his/her family in a particular Report: geographical location; and • Arcadia • Inditex 2. Determining whether the estimated living wage is being paid to workers. • ASOS •

The Ankers have conducted robust research • Canterbury • Next to develop living wage calculations for a number • • PVH of regions across the Asia Pacific and continue • H&M • Target Garment factory in HCM City, Vietnam. to include more regions in its analysis, annually.

20 INDUSTRY INFLUENCES LIVING WAGES

Members of ACT agree to the following However, when looking at tangible benefits So, whilst the fashion industry’s progress towards principles 7: to workers, only 20% of companies could understanding the importance of a living wage is • A joint approach is needed where all participants demonstrate that they were paying a living wage promising, much more work needs to be done in in global supply chains assume their respective to some portion of their supply chain, with a order to ensure workers receive the living wage responsibilities in achieving freedom of mere 5% of these companies paying a living wage they deserve. association, collective bargaining and living to all workers in their final stage of production. wages. • Agreement on a living wage should be reached through collective bargaining between employers and workers and their representatives, at industry level. • Workers must be free and able to exercise their right to organise and bargain collectively in accordance with ILO Conventions. Collective bargaining is at the heart of ACT’s work. ACT that effective freedom of association will empower workers to negotiate -made solutions which allow both flexibility

and . via https://flic.kr/p/dQCiZw © Asia Development

Corporate response Baptist World Aid has observed an increasing number of companies that are taking meaningful action to work towards paying a living wage to workers in their supply chains. 48% of companies have started to develop a living wage methodology for the regions they source from. 24% of companies have published a level of commitment to pay their workers a living wage, demonstrating their willingness to be held accountable and their recognition of the importance of paying a living wage. Workers in wool manufacturing plant in Bangladesh.

21 INDUSTRY INFLUENCES ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS

Across the last six years, the Ethical Fashion Environmental and social ethics matter The type and severity of impact that an item of Report has assessed the labour rights deeply to consumers too. 86% of the general clothing will have depends significantly on the population think companies should be addressing material that it is made from. Cotton, , management systems of fashion companies social and environmental issues 3. When looking neoprene, and recycled fibres are made and across the globe. In the 2018 Ethical Fashion at Gen Z — the generation that will account processed in very different ways and require Report, we acknowledged that a “truly ethical” for 40% of consumers by 2020 — this statistic different solutions to mitigate their effect on the 4 company not only ensures their supply chain jumps to 94% . The purchasing decisions of environment. The fashion industry is a significant consumers are already guided by their values 5, consumer of fresh water, using approximately empowers workers and pays them a living and this trend only looks set to grow. For the 79 billion cubic metres per year 8. Conversely, wage, it also understands its impact on the fashion industry, increasing consumer concern synthetic fibres made from plastic and chemically environment and manages its footprint to and the continued significant environmental processed plant materials use less water and land impact of production signal a strong impetus to process, however they create other effects, such keep waterways, the earth, and the for change. as a significantly higher greenhouse gas emission atmosphere healthy. Correspondingly, it is the footprint than cotton 9. Companies therefore need workers in the fashion supply chain that most Environmental impact concerns to take tailored approaches to reducing their acutely feel the detrimental effects of poor in the fashion industry impact, however there are some common themes of environmental impact across fashion supply Like many other industries, the fashion industry’s environmental management. chains. Chemical use, water use, and the treatment impact on the environment is diverse. Research of wastewater are vital considerations when has documented direct impact on climate change The significant environmental impact of the managing inputs facilities, such as and through high CO emissions; significant freshwater fashion industry — starting from the raw materials 2 finishing facilities. withdrawal to grow fibres and for the dyeing and stage and continuing across all stages, through finishing process of fabrics; impacted ecosystem The impact of the fashion industry on the to the end-of-life of a garment — has been well quality through a range of forms of pollution; harm environment varies significantly depending on documented. The breadth of environmental issues to human health; and 6. which stage of production is being observed, what that the industry touches on is also wide, from raw material is used, and where the production is It is important to note that most of the carbon emissions to water consumption, and taking place. In order to capture this complexity 1 environmental impact caused by the fashion waste concerns . Across time, the rapid growth and advocate for better practice in environmental industry occurs within its supply chains, most of production and consumption in the fashion management, we asked fashion companies to notably at the raw materials and input stages 7. industry has seen the environmental impact of address aspects of environmental management 2 Therefore, companies which have put significant the industry grow . The depth, breadth, and rapid which were at the intersection of the impact and effort into tracing facilities deep in their supply scaling-up of the fashion industry’s environmental the fashion industry’s ability to act. impact, highlights that there is a need to chain are at an advantage to understand and understand and address the issue. improve environmental management practices.

22 INDUSTRY INFLUENCES ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS

Benchmarking environmental “What percentage of the company’s final product Companies can (and should) also actively seek to management in the fashion industry is made from sustainable fibres?” use fibres that are available from more sustainable These are the metrics used to assess companies, We recognise that fibres have different impacts sources, including those cultivated from less including the questions asked and a rationale depending on their type, source, and how they are water-intensive or chemical-intensive raw materials as to the significance of each question. Of the processed. Our first question regarding materials and recycled fibres. 44 questions asked overall in our Grading seeks to grow understanding of the three Tool, 11 were dedicated to environmental fibres used by volume in a company’s supply Emissions management, contributing to 10% of a company’s chain, then encourage implementation of that This year, we also asked, “Has the company overall grade. understanding into the product design stage. publicly announced a net-zero carbon emissions Environmental impact can thereby be prevented, reduction target by 2050 for its supply chain? Or Governance rather than treated after-the-fact. The percentage is it lobbying for this target in the countries that it This year we asked, “Has the company undertaken of companies that have assessed the impact of is operating in?” an assessment of its environmental impact and their top three fibres and used these assessments Carbon emissions are a consequence of all stages risks throughout its supply chain?” to inform changes in their design and production of the supply chain. The Agreement is a increased by 7% in 2019. A clear starting point in managing the risks of worldwide framework to address greenhouse harmful environmental impact within the fashion industry, is for companies to understand the risks at play in their own supply chain. Company decision-makers will be best situated to develop a strategic approach to managing environmental matters, when they are aware of the current environmental impact of their company and the possible environmental risks throughout its supply chain. © ILO via https://flic.kr/p/BUtnpt © ILO

Materials We asked companies two questions related to the materials used in their supply chain. These were: “Has the company assessed the environmental impact of its top three fibres and materials used in its apparel products and implemented learnings from this assessment into product design and production?” and; Better Work Factory in Vietnam. 23 INDUSTRY INFLUENCES ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS

gases emissions, including carbon emissions. including testing, were being used to ensure that “For what percentage of wet-processing facilities The net-zero carbon emissions reduction target final products complied with the RSL. has the company collected wastewater quality aligns with the Paris Agreement. We believe that data?” and; Secondly, and deeper into the supply chain, a company commitment to this target does two manufacturing restricted substance list (MRSL) “Of these, do all have wastewater improvement things: firstly, it indicates to governments that defines banned and restricted hazardous strategies?” the private sector endorses and seeks to align its substances to prevent their use and discharge into practices with the Paris Agreement; and secondly, Wet-processing facilities include those that the environment during manufacturing. Again, it it sets a target for companies to bring their supply undertake viscose-manufacturing, , was important for us to see that quality assurance chain energy usage into line with. To acknowledge dyeing, printing, and finishing processes. These systems were in place, such as monitoring of that companies may be taking a range of differed facilities are more likely to have effluent that is chemical management systems and water quality. actions to this end, we noted in our assessment environmentally hazardous, if not treated prior to Since our preliminary analysis of companies in that companies may alternatively, or additionally, release into the environment. 2018, we have seen a 14% increase in companies engage on this issue with the government in the checking compliance with their MRSL. Wastewater management can be achieved countries where they operate through various through wastewater treatment systems, inputs forms of lobbying. There has been a 10% increase Water use management, wastewater quality testing, this year in the number of companies receiving full standards development and implementation, and a This year we asked, “For what percentage of water credit through publicly committing to a target or combination of the above. lobbying governments. intensive facilities has the company collected and benchmarked water use data?” and; The number of companies using wastewater improvement strategies has grown this year. For “Has the company used the above data to Chemical use companies which are collecting wastewater quality implement a water use plan?” Regarding chemical use, we asked two key data on their facilities, only 15% do not have questions of companies this year. These were: Garment production is water-intensive. Our first improvement strategies implemented in any facility. “Does the company have a restricted substances question aims to increase company understanding list against which it tests compliance?” and; of actual and ideal water usage in water-intensive Material/product waste facilities throughout their supply chain, while the “Does the company have a manufacturing The 2018 assessment also recognises that following question aims to encourage companies restricted substances list against which it tests textile waste is a major and growing problem. to implement these learnings. compliance?” We therefore asked a final question to this end, namely, “Does the company make available to Firstly, a restricted substance list (RSL) defines the Wastewater customers a take-back and/or repair program?”. permitted levels of chemical content and chemical Similar to the above questions, we also sought Take-back programs have the potential to lead exposure for final products being produced by to explore wastewater management through the to textile into new textiles, insulation, a company. It was important for us to see that following questions: not only was this RSL being communicated to and other products. Repair programs allow for suppliers, but that quality assurance systems, longevity of garment use.

24 Policies

This section evaluates the policies that fashion companies have in place to address the risk of worker exploitation in supplier and subcontracted factories. Most companies have now adopted policies which set the minimum working conditions they expect of their suppliers and factories. Policies are the first step 4 to creating a robust supply chain management system.

25 POLICIES INDUSTRY OVERVIEW

Does the company have a code Does the code apply to multiple Does the code prohibit the use of Does the company have a policy that addresses the ILO Four levels of the supply chain, including regular and excessive overtime? addressing gender inequality in the Fundamental Principles and the raw materials level? (Partial = supply chain, including a strategy Rights at Work? applies to inputs production) to address discrimination faced by women in the apparel industry?

YES 87% YES 33% YES 69% YES 32%

A includes the By stating that their code applies to Regular and excessive overtime is Women represent about 80% of basic worker rights which supplier multiple levels of their supply chain, a significant and ongoing issue for global garment workers. Despite factories are expected to observe. companies are accepting that their worker welfare in the global fashion this, gender-based discrimination in At a minimum, a good code of sphere of responsibility is not limited industry. Long hours reduce worker recruitment, and sexual harassment, conduct will include the ILO’s Four to their final stage manufacturers. safety, as most workplace accidents are widespread in the workplace. Of Fundamental Principles and Rights The deeper, more removed levels of happen when workers are tired. Long note, is that all countries in the Asia- at Work. This prohibits child labour; the supply chain are at greatest risk hours also place undue stress on a Pacific record a gender pay gap. It is forced labour; discrimination; of worker exploitation, which makes large number of workers. Excessive therefore important that companies and guarantees worker rights to efforts to ensure that these suppliers overtime is often driven by low and proactively implement policies freedom of association and collective operate in line with Code standards insufficient wages and pressure from and clear strategies to address the bargaining. critical. managers to extend working hours vulnerability and discrimination faced Among the companies assessed, 33% of companies reported or meet deadlines. The majority of by female workers in their supply 87% have Codes of Conduct applying their Code of Conduct companies assessed have codes that chain. that include at least these basic to multiple levels of their supply include standards addressing limits We found that roughly a third of principles. chain, including to the level of raw on overtime. companies surveyed do have such material production, while a further systems in place. While a healthy 43% reported making efforts to start, this is an area that requires insist standards within their Code further industry attention. of Conduct are adhered to as far as their fabric production suppliers.

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 26 POLICIES BEST PRACTICE HIGHLIGHTS

AS Colour – Purchasing Practises as raising awareness with its retail team, who are the training on nutrition — an area impacting AS Colour is committed to ensuring ethical increasingly being approached by customers who workers beyond the factory with their eating purchasing practises. Through regular factory visits are interested in AS Colour’s ethical stance and decisions impacting on the health of their families. and engaging in open dialogue with its suppliers, organic products. One supplier reported that the worker knowledge on health issues had increased and that they’d also AS Colour hopes to encourage more discussions “Whilst many supplier challenges at times seem experienced a decrease in worker turnover. about supplier challenges as well as its own. daunting (or outside the scope of influence) for In line with industry-wide experience, the a relatively small business such as ours, the fact plans to take the learnings from overriding feedback to come out of this open remains that their problems ultimately impact on this project to further develop and inform their dialogue has been that the fast fashion buying our workers and our production. For these reasons, strategy on women’s empowerment and gender cycle remains the biggest challenge. This is one we have believed it important to invest the in their supply chain. At the time of writing this reason that AS Colour chooses to operate outside time to ensure we are aware of the bigger picture, report, a final impact assessment of the program of this sphere, developing its buying calendar to evolve our business and purchasing practises to was underway. in collaboration with suppliers, so as to ensure offer support and solutions where we can, and, as enough buffer time and stock to accommodate a responsible industry practitioner, work to build the setbacks which can occur in complex and our influence.” people intensive supply chains. Additionally, AS AS Colour Colour continues to invest its time and resource in understanding actual production lead-times. New Balance – Gender Strategy Adherence to these processes is governed by the Across the world, women comprise the majority founder of AS Colour, who, having established of the footwear and garment manufacturing these principles himself, continues to have a workforce. In an effort to improve health, literacy, hands on approach signing off any new suppliers, and healthcare access for women factory overseeing order placement and timelines, and workers in Vietnam, New Balance has partnered promoting a of continuous improvement with one of its key suppliers, Business for Social from both within the company’s operation as well Responsibility, to implement their HERHealth as from its suppliers. program. Finally, this year, AS Colour has invested in joining Through HERHealth, 2,000 women workers Amfori (a business association which promotes received training and participated in peer open and sustainable trade). It has also employed education programs on nutrition, reproductive an ethical sourcing specialist, whose dual role is health, pre and post-natal care, and early detection to work with the AS Colour buying team, as well of cancer. Participants reported enjoying

27 Transparency and Traceability

This section measures the degree to which a company has traced its suppliers at three key stages of production: final stage, inputs and raw materials. It also looks at how transparent the company 5is with respect to the location and nature of its suppliers.

28 TRANSPARENCY AND TRACEABILITY INDUSTRY OVERVIEW

Are broad auditing results shared publicly? Has the company traced 100% of all of its Is there a public list of supplier facilities facilities for the following stages of production (including names and addresses)? (partial = some traced)?

FINAL RAW FINAL RAW FINAL RAW INPUTS INPUTS INPUTS STAGE MATERIALS STAGE MATERIALS STAGE MATERIALS YES 8% YES 18% YES 15% YES 29% YES 1% YES 70% YES 8% YES 37% YES 5%

While most companies trace and audit their Tracing the location of suppliers is an important Publishing supplier lists is a way that companies suppliers to ensure that basic working conditions way in which a company can begin to take can demonstrate to workers, consumers, and the are adhered to, it takes a particularly mature responsibility for working conditions in its supply public, that they are committed to being held approach to transparency and social responsibility chain. It’s almost impossible for companies to know accountable to the workers in their supply chain. to admit that suppliers do not always meet that suppliers are adhering to Code standards if Transparency deepens the credibility of claims standards set for them. Consequently, only 29% of they do not know who their suppliers are. companies make about their supply chain systems companies shared data about their broad auditing 70% of companies have traced all of their final and engenders trust. Of the companies assessed, results with the general public. We believe that stage facilities, but the level of traceability tapers 37% (up from 16% in 2013) published a full list admissions of noncompliance do not represent for the more removed parts of the supply chain, of their final stage suppliers along with factory failures in social compliance; but rather, an particularly inputs and raw materials suppliers. It addresses. A further 15% received partial credit for important step towards greater transparency and is in the parts of the supply chain, such as these, disclosing a portion of their supplier list. that will drive improved working which sit outside of the purview of companies, conditions. It is the companies that are unable to that the risk of worker exploitation is both higher identify or admit to concerns in their supply chain and least likely to be remedied. that are most hampered from improving.

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 29 TRANSPARENCY AND TRACEABILITY INDUSTRY OVERVIEW

Does the company ensure that there is either no subcontracting or that all subcontracted production adheres to code standards at the final stage of production?

FINAL RAW INPUTS STAGE MATERIALS YES 27% YES 63% YES 26%

Does the company ensure that there is either no subcontracting or that all subcontracted production adheres to code standards at the final stage of production? It is common for direct suppliers to subcontract orders out to other facilities. Where these subcontractors are unauthorised or unmonitored, the possibility that workers will be exploited increases substantially. This remains one of the greatest areas of risk in the global fashion industry supply chain. In acknowledgement of this, 63% of companies assessed have taken some steps at the final production stage, to ensure that either, there is no subcontracting, or that all subcontracted production adheres to the standards laid out in their Code of Conduct.

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 30 TRANSPARENCY AND TRACEABILITY BEST PRACTICE HIGHLIGHTS

Patagonia – Down Sourcing While cotton is one of the most used fibres in garment production, there are a number of other raw materials that companies need to be tracing in order to ensure they are upholding ethical standards from raw material fibre to factory. Down has become a prominently used material, particularly in the outdoor apparel sector. There Patagonia by © Image provided are many challenges in ensuring ethically sourced down. Patagonia have been pioneers in the tracing of down products used in their garments. Starting in 2007, when an environmental impact assessment of its raw materials identified the inhumane treatment of birds throughout the global poultry industry. Birds in the down supply chain can be forced fed (for foie gras), live plucked, and variously mistreated throughout their lives — up to, and including, processing at the slaughterhouse. Patagonia believes it is not acceptable for animals to suffer in the name of performance, luxury, or fashion, which led them to help develop “Down is a by-product of the , the Traceable Down Standard, as well as the and the down we buy comes exclusively from certified down which is used in our clothing. Responsible Wool Standard (RWS), alongside slaughterhouses. After it is collected from geese then continue to our centre, where the other likeminded brands, animal welfare NGOs, that have been killed for their meat, we follow it down garments arrive, are checked in, and stored and certification bodies. through washing, sorting, and processing facilities and packaged to send out to our customers, Patagonia became the first brand certified to to ensure proper traceability and segregation from following the Traceable Down Standard brand these two animal welfare standards, which seek to untraceable down. We continue our audits all the requirements. It’s a lot of work. But this is how we set the highest bar for animal welfare within the way to the garment factory, where we make sure help ensure the birds whose down we use in our fiber supply chain. our certified traceable down is stored separately products have been treated humanely.” from that of other brands, so we can ensure it is Patagonia

31 TRANSPARENCY AND TRACEABILITY BEST PRACTICE HIGHLIGHTS

Outland Denim – Transparency efforts collaborate on solutions that will change the way we explain the value Outland Denim places on Transparency is an essential part of Outland garments are manufactured in the fashion industry. transparency, and we invite the supplier to set the Denim’s brand identity on a moral, customer, “Culture, location and values are factors that bar high with us. We believe transparency is crucial and industry level. Its foundations are built on a contribute to the type of response we receive from to produce genuinely ethical fashion, so we seek to desire to eradicate human trafficking by offering suppliers on the topic of transparency. It can be a align with suppliers that hold these same values — opportunity to those in vulnerable communities, new, daunting concept to some suppliers when we desiring to transform the industry from the inside in the form of training, stable employment, living out.” ask to put information about their company online. Leisl Lancaster, Social and Environmental wage, and education. To encourage their support in our endeavours, Impact Manager, Outland Denim Transparency ensures that the practises of Outland Denim are continuously, internally scrutinised and held to the highest standard. It ensures that its ethos of #ZeroExploitation remains a constant, and that the success of Outland Denim and its staff does not come at the detriment of other people or the planet. For customers of Outland Denim, transparency provides a connection to the maker that isn’t Baker. © Outland Denim/Sophie traditionally visible (much less, felt) in fashion. An increase in education surrounding the lifestyle and working conditions of garment workers has made consumers cautious of brands. Until it goes without saying that a garment was manufactured with respect to the maker and the environment, transparency is key in building this trust with customers who want to purchase from brands that not only their style but their values, too. Finally, at an industry level, transparency is a way for Outland Denim to demonstrate the effectiveness and power of its business to other businesses who are on the journey to a more responsible supply chain or social model. It gives Outland Denim an avenue to Outland Denim seamstresses.

32 Auditing and Supplier Relationships

This section focusses on how a company manages its relationship with suppliers to ensure working conditions meet the standards set out in its policies. It evaluates audit processes, as well as training and other industry collaboration efforts that continue to support factories to 6better understand and provide decent working conditions.

33 AUDITING AND SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIPS INDUSTRY OVERVIEW

What percentage of facilities are audited over a What percentage of companies audit all of their Are corrective action plans pertaining to wages 2-year period by trained social auditors (internal final stage facilites with unannounced audits, and/or overtime resolved within 12 months? and/or third party)? anonymous worker surveys or off-site worker interviews per year?

FINAL RAW FINAL RAW FINAL RAW INPUTS INPUTS INPUTS STAGE MATERIALS STAGE MATERIALS STAGE MATERIALS YES 17% YES 6% YES 3% YES 57% YES 2% YES 11% YES 0% YES 6% YES 0%

Once a company has traced the location of Unannounced audits gain a more accurate picture Corrective action plans () are the main suppliers, audits are a useful tool to better of everyday operations in factories because factory tool used for driving compliance against audit understand the working conditions in their managers, and others in positions of influence, standards. Too often however, CAPs are raised facilities, and to identify instances of worker have less warning time to abuses. Workers are on the same series of issues, in repeated audits. exploitation. There is great diversity in the quality also more likely to feel freer to express concerns Full and timely resolution of these CAPs remains of audits and their capacity to effectively capture about their workplace when they are interviewed elusive, particularly for issues pertaining to wages a true representation of working conditions. offsite, and away from factory management, or and overtime. Brands can opt for third party or internal audits, surveyed anonymously. These three measures The findings of this report confirm this practice, and many use a combination of the two. Neither significantly affect the quality of audits conducted. with only 6% of companies able to demonstrate is necessarily better or worse than the other. Only 11% of companies reported auditing all of their that when CAPs are raised regarding wage and Audits work best at improving working conditions cut-make-trim facilities with either unannounced overtime issues in their final stage facilities, they when coupled with effective corrective action visits, offsite worker interviews, are resolved within 12 months. plans, strong supplier relationships, training or anonymous worker surveys each year. programs on worker rights, and, perhaps most importantly, instruments to hear worker voice, like union engagement and effective grievance mechanisms. While it is good to see that over half of the companies surveyed know all of their final stage producers, only 2% know all of their raw material suppliers.

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 34 AUDITING AND SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIPS INDUSTRY OVERVIEW

Does the company invest in training buyers Does the company actively improve leverage Does that company have a preferred supplier and suppliers/factory managers, in order to and relationships with suppliers, through supplier program by which suppliers are incentivised by increase awareness of human rights and health consolidation and/or industry collaboration? strong labour rights records? and safety risks?

FINAL RAW FINAL RAW FINAL RAW INPUTS INPUTS INPUTS STAGE MATERIALS STAGE MATERIALS STAGE MATERIALS YES 24% YES 29% YES 20% YES 48% YES 8% YES 45% YES 25% YES 38% YES 25%

Education and awareness are essential for bringing For brands to drive changes in working conditions Preferred supplier programs reward suppliers change to the industry. Buyers, suppliers and in factories, it is critical that they build leverage with additional orders, and longer relationships factory managers each play key roles in the supply and deepen supplier relationships. Relationships for performing against key performance criteria, chain and have the opportunity to both identify build trust and provide a secure environment for including social criteria. These programs represent risks in supply chains and set terms to prevent companies and suppliers to invest in improving an effective tool for companies to drive ongoing them. Companies that provide human rights and working conditions. Increasing leverage by labour rights improvements amongst its suppliers risk training to their buyers, suppliers and factory consolidating a company’s supplier base, or by and to identify and strategically invest in those managers increase their awareness of these issues, collaborating with others in the industry, improves suppliers that are most able to uphold worker and their ability to prevent and address them the capacity for a company to advance positive rights. where they may exist. change in the facilities it sources from. In contrast, It is also a positive tool for suppliers, as it rewards We are pleased to see 48% of surveyed companies pursuing short term contracts based only on price their efforts to invest in workers, creating greater invested in this training, with a further 25% gaining and product specifications can incentivise poor stability for them, and better conditions for their partial credit for some form of similar training working conditions. 45% of companies are fully workers. program. invested in improving leverage and relationship with suppliers. We’re pleased to see that 38% of surveyed companies had a preferred supplier program that offered incentive to suppliers to have a strong labour rights record.

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 35 AUDITING AND SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIPS BEST PRACTICE HIGHLIGHTS

KOOKAI – Supplier Relationships for employees, and food or meals at subsidized important work, as well as facilitate its handover KOOKAÏ is a family owned women’s fashion label. prices. to the Government of Bangladesh Remediation The Australian and New Zealand retail boutiques Its factory was awarded the Employer of and Coordination Cell. Its primary objective is to and online stores offer styles which are designed Choice Award at the Women in Business Awards ensure that workplace safety remains a priority in-house at its studio. in 2018. for Bangladeshi factory workers. Dissatisfied by the working conditions of some of Without effective collaboration between all the factories it had visited internationally, KOOKAÏ Bangladesh Accord – Industry Collaboration signatories, it would not have been possible decided to open its own manufacturing facilities. Following the Rana Plaza building collapse in April to achieve this level of impact. The ongoing 13 years ago, a factory was established in Fiji 2013, a number of clothing companies, unions, and leadership of brands in this process is crucial (being the homeland of one of the founders). This affiliates began their work towards a safer ready- to ensuring that factories remain in a position gave KOOKAÏ visibility over its supply chain and made garment industry by signing the five-year, to deliver worker rights and safety. enabled the founders of the business to contribute legally-binding Accord on Fire and Building Safety Signatories to The Accord in the 2019 Ethical to the education, training, and employment of in Bangladesh (The Accord). Fashion Report: Fijian people. In the five years following its implementation, Three years ago, KOOKAÏ opened another factory significant improvements were made in the • Adidas • Hugo Boss in . KOOKAÏ now employs almost 1,000 areas of fire and building safety, with over 85% • Aldi • Inditex Fijian residents and 600 Sri Lankan residents. of identified hazards being resolved as part of Owning and operating its own factories, where The Accord’s remediation process. Furthermore, • APG & Co • Kmart Australia the vast majority of its Australian and New workplace programs to educate and empower • • Marks & Spencer Zealand garments are made, allows KOOKAÏ to Bangladeshi factory workers, such as a complaints • Big W • Next ensure production is carried out in an ethical and mechanism, have also been implemented as part sustainable way. KOOKAÏ has full transparency of of The Accord. This impacts on large numbers • Cotton On Group • Puma of Bangladeshi factory workers, with more than the working environment of those who produce its • Desigworks • PVH Corp garments, with regular visits and communication two million people, in over 1,600 factories, being • Forever New • Sussan Group between Melbourne and the factories. covered by The Accord. • Fruit of the Loom • ’ KOOKAÏ is committed to the prosperity and Last year, the process of handing over wellbeing of its employees and offers its factory responsibility for The Accord’s continued • H&M • UNIQLO employees a range of benefits. These include implementation, to a national regulatory body, ongoing training and mentoring programs, began. As such, the 2018 Transition Accord education on social issues, free health checks, a was put into effect on 1 June 2018. Signed by full-time counsellor on site available to employees, global unions and over 200 companies, the a safe workplace with security on site, transport 2018 Transition Accord serves to continue this

36 Worker Empowerment

This section focuses on how workers are empowered to make their collective voice heard in the supply chain through trade unions, 7collective bargaining agreements, and grievance mechanisms.

37 WORKER EMPOWERMENT INDUSTRY OVERVIEW

Are democratically elected unions in at least 50% Does the company have a functioning Does the company have any systems or policies of final stage facilities? (partial = some) grievance mechanism which workers can access in place to rehabilitate child or forced labourers anonymously and in their native language? if discovered?

FINAL FINAL FINAL RAW INPUTS STAGE STAGE STAGE MATERIALS YES 25% YES 20% YES 33% YES 35% YES 5%

Freedom of association and the right to collective Grievance mechanisms enable workers to voice Documented cases of child and forced labour have bargaining are together one of the ILO’s Four concerns about violations to their rights and safety been associated with every stage of the global Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work. and to remedy them within the factory. Many fashion industry supply chain. It is important that Effective recognition of these rights empowers companies rightly ask factories to establish internal brands have a remediation plan in place so that workers to negotiate decent working conditions grievance mechanisms for workers to resolve they are in a good position to respond to the risk and fairer wages. Disappointingly, too few facilities complaints directly with their employers. of these worst forms of abuse occurring in their in the apparel industry actually have an effective, It is important that workers are additionally supply chain. If child labour is found, companies democratically elected trade union. This is a provided with an avenue to express their concerns should, ideally, be prepared to find a way to practical limit on the expression of the right to to a third party, particularly since the factory may remove them from the situation, provide for the join or not join a worker representative body. be responsible for the abuse and may have already child’s education, and replace the lost income Just 1 in 5 companies could demonstrate the refused to rectify it. An alternative avenue for to the family. If forced labour is found, brands presence of trade unions and/or collective raising grievances is also necessary because audits should facilitate the individual’s reintegration into bargaining agreements in the majority of final only capture a snapshot of what is occurring in the labour market and transition to decent work stage facilites. This still stands in sharp contrast factories. Of the companies assessed, 71% reported with compensation for any unpaid wages. Of the to the 87% of companies whose policies uphold providing workers in a portion of their supply companies assessed, 35% reported having systems the right to freedom of association and collective chain with access to some form of grievance or policies in place to rehabilitate child or forced bargaining. It appears that while auditors routinely mechanism. labourers if they were discovered in their final ask workers if they feel they are free to express stage facilities, with a further 28% reporting some this right, companies are less robust in checking less formal commitments to action in this area. for the presence of avenues for workers to do so in practice.

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 38 WORKER EMPOWERMENT BEST PRACTICE HIGHLIGHTS

Kathmandu – Grievance Mechanism their views in real-time. As part of every full audit, to empower workers to negotiate tailor-made Previously, Kathmandu’s grievance mechanism Kathmandu now includes an anonymous worker solutions. which allow both flexibility and security. relied on its factory workers ­— the majority of survey, which can be completed after hours on their “It’s a groundbreaking collaboration and the only whom do not understand English or use email — own mobile phones, through the Laborlink portal. way forward to create lasting systematic change.” to contact the company using an email address, This provides the company with clearer visibility of H&M which was written in English. worker well-being throughout its supply chain. Similarly, the only time workers were interviewed “Both of these tools have led to an increase in “Inditex became a founding member of ACT about grievances was during an audit when they communication from workers and the discovery of because we have always believed that we were taken aside to speak privately with the several grievances. In one example, we were alerted must work collaboratively to bring sustainable auditor, but this often occurred in full view of their to the fact that one supplier was subcontracting improvements to working conditions and living management. Unsurprisingly, Kathmandu received the production of our apparel to an unauthorised wages in the garment supply chain.” zero contact to its grievance email address factory. This information helped us to align five Inditex and workers rarely communicated they were other global brands using the same supplier and, “We’re always looking to better understand the unhappy, unsafe, or concerned about their working together, we had much greater influence. By reasons behind poor labour practices and to conditions when interviewed. cooperating, we were able to facilitate immediate ultimately create long-term improvements in action and transparency on behalf of the supplier. Kathmandu has since recognised that workers workers’ lives. That’s why we partner with a range This ultimately led to an investment in the needed to be able to communicate with them in of expert organisations, industry groups, and other management systems, an improvement in working their own language and by means which were brands on projects, like ACT, that are designed to conditions, and a change in understanding and more accessible. The majority of Kathmandu’s help us do just that.” attitude that was in keeping with our own values workers are based in and use social media ASOS and best practice.” platform — WeChat — to share their experiences, Kathmandu make purchases, and communicate with others. “As a proud member of ACT, the Cotton On Group So, Kathmandu cleverly added a WeChat QR code is committed to working collaboratively with fellow ACT – Living Wage Initiative to every Code of Conduct posted in every facility signatories towards the establishment of industry making its product. This simple solution means that ACT (Action, Collaboration, Transformation) is an wide collective bargaining to create positive workers can now use their mobile phones to scan a agreement between international brands, retailers, change to the way wages and working conditions code and communicate directly and confidentially manufacturers, and trade unions, to address the are set. This will directly support the Group’s own with the company in their own language, using a issue of living wage in the textile and garment journey toward paying wages.” tool they are familiar with. supply chain. Cotton On Group Furthermore, in collaboration with its social auditing By establishing collective bargaining, at industry Of the 21 brands that are members of ACT, nine partner, ELEVATE, Kathmandu also began using level, in key sourcing countries, supported are represented in the 2019 Ethical Fashion Report. Laborlink, a mobile platform that establishes a two- by world-class manufacturing standards and See a full list of ACT members featured in this way communication channel for workers to share responsible purchasing practices, ACT aims report on page 20.

39 Environmental Management

This section assesses a company’s environmental management system, focusing on how well the company understands the impact supply chain practices have on the environment and how they manage 8its footprint to keep waterways, the earth, and the atmosphere healthy.

40 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT INDUSTRY OVERVIEW

Has the Company undertaken an assessment of Is 100% of the Companies final product made Has the company collected and benchmarked it’s environmental impacts and risks throughout from sustainable fibres? (partial = some) water use data for all water intensive facilities? the supply chain?

FINAL FINAL YES 38% STAGE STAGE YES 5% YES 12%

A clear starting point in managing the risks We recognise that fibres have different impacts Wet-processing facilities include those that of harmful environmental impacts of a supply depending on their type, source and how they are undertake viscose-manufacturing, weaving, chain is for companies to understand the risks processed. Our first question regarding materials dyeing, printing and finishing processes. These at play in their own supply chain. Company seeks to grow understanding of the top 3 fibres facilities are more likely to have effluent that is decision-makers will be best situated to develop used by volume in a company’s supply chain, environmentally hazardous if not treated prior a strategic approach to managing environmental and then encourage implementation of that to release into the environment. matters when they understand their company’s understanding into the product design stage. Wastewater management can be achieved environmental impacts and risks throughout the Environmental impacts can thereby be prevented, through wastewater treatment systems, inputs supply chain. rather than treated after-the-fact management, wastewater quality testing, The percentage of companies that have assessed standards development and implementation, the impact of their top 3 fibres and used these and a combination of the above. assessments to inform changes in their design and The number of companies using wastewater production increased by 7% in 2019. improvement strategies has grown this year. Companies can and should also actively For companies which are collecting wastewater seek to use the fibres that are available from quality data on their facilities, only 15% have no more sustainable sources than those that are improvement strategies implemented in any conventionally sourced, including fibres cultivated facility — a decrease of 5% from 2018. from less water- or chemical-intensive raw materials and recycled fibres.

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 41 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT INDUSTRY OVERVIEW

Does the brand make available to customers a take-back and/ or repair program?

FINAL STAGE YES 27%

We also recognised in our assessment this year that textile waste is a major and growing problem. We therefore asked a final question in our assessment to this end; namely, “Does the company make available to customers a take-back and/or repair program?”. Take back programs have the potential to lead to into new textiles, insulation and other products. Repair programs allow for longevity of garment use. 27% of companies had developed a take-back or repair program, with a further 11% taking steps to develop such programs.

42 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT BEST PRACTICE HIGHLIGHTS

Gorman – Sustainable fibres While benchmarking water use is already a “It’s our responsibility to care for this world. We Gorman’s use of sustainable fibres came about as process in place for the majority of Jeanswest aspire to leave it a better place than when we a result of its research on the impact of cotton on suppliers, the company’s biggest challenge will arrived. Our social responsibility lives within our the environment. In response to its findings, the be to ensure continuous improvement in this people. It’s our social responsibility to all — we company made a conscious decision to introduce area. This will necessitate working closely with its have each other’s back — from retail staff through organic cotton to lessen the environmental and factory partners in the years ahead. to the talented makers that craft all aspects of our down products, both near and far. At Huffer, social impact of their cotton range. This happened “We’re prepared for this to be a lengthy process, we take this seriously so commit to the highest of in 2008, when awareness about the environmental working closely with our suppliers. Water is one of manufacturing standards offering, down garments impact of cotton was not as widespread as the most valuable resources we have on this planet we know customers will not only love, but also it is today. and, as an industry, we need to look at how to best have the confidence to wear knowing they have Initially, Gorman received a lot of positive attention reduce our impact. been made in accordance with the internationally about its organic range, but discovered that Since implementing this strategy, we have recognised Responsible Down Standard.” converting this consumer interest into action was benchmarks and a starting point to work from. Huffer. a much slower process. More than a decade later, Which, in itself, is a success.” Gorman reports that the wider community is more Jeanswest educated about environmental risks than it used to HanesBrands – Energy management be. Today, there is a growing market of conscious and environmental stewardship Huffer – Take-back program consumers who are looking for more sustainable In 2007, HanesBrands launched a comprehensive Huffer collect and distribute pre-owned down or options. energy management policy lead by the company’s puffer to those who need them. Down and Gorman also seeks to use other environmentally CEO. The aim of the policy was to advance two Puffer Jackets can be donated at any Huffer store, sustainable fabrics in its range, which, in 2017/2018, key goals: in exchange for a $50 voucher towards a new included recycled wool and recycled PET. Huffer Down . All collected jackets are then 1) formalising the company’s commitment to donated to local charites. mitigating its environmental footprint, and Jeanswest – Managing water 2) generating cost savings through energy use in the supply chain This initiative was conceived by a Huffer team member who wanted to encourage a more efficiency. Tracking and improving water use in the ethical alternative for people who were buying Because HanesBrands believes that environmental supply chain has been an increasing priority for Huffer Jackets when they already owned one. stewardship is good business. Jeanswest in recent years. This is because the The initiative aims to collect jackets that might Since its launch, employee adoption has seen it company recognises that it’s crucial to have initial otherwise lie around at home, or end up in landfill, flourish — reducing greenhouse gas emissions by benchmarks in place, to be able to assess risk and donate them to charities who will then 28 percent, water use by 30 percent, and saving and make progress going forward. distribute them to those in need. more than $10 million annually through enhanced

43 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT BEST PRACTICE HIGHLIGHTS

energy efficiency. The company reinforces the and received medical and surgery support as part earned an A– rating and scored in the top value of environmental stewardship by using some of HanesBrands’ Green for Good program. 6 percent of nearly 7,000 companies that of these cost savings to fund community The company has 2020 goals to reduce carbon participated in the Carbon Disclosure Project improvement projects, undertaken by employee emissions by 40 percent, reduce water use by (CDP) 2018 Climate Change Report. volunteers. Employees have refurbished schools 50 percent, achieve zero landfill, and source clean Good environmental stewardship will remain a key and , created after-school programs, energy for 40 percent of its worldwide needs. In focus for HanesBrands going forward. conducted tree plantings and beach clean-ups, recognition of its achievements, Hanesbrands initiated community water and energy projects, © ILO via https://flic.kr/p/eiJ64a © ILO

Garment factory in HCM City, Vietnam.

44 Brand Index

This section lists grades for the 480 brands associated with the 130 companies assessed in this report. While some companies assessed are a single-brand company, 9others hold multiple brands.

45 BRAND INDEX GRADES BY COMPANY A–B * = non-responsive companies

Parent Company Brand Grade Parent Company Brand Grade Parent Company Brand Grade

Abercrombie & Fitch* Abercrombie & Fitch* D– Arcadia Group C+ Ben Sherman Australia Ben Sherman D+

Abercrombie & Fitch* Hollister Co.* D– Arcadia Group C+ Best & Less Edited C

Abercrombie & Fitch* * D– Arcadia Group C+ Best & Less Best & Less C

Abercrombie & Fitch* Abercrombie Kids* D– Arcadia Group Outfit C+ Best & Less Edited Plus C

adidas adidas A Arcadia Group Outfit Kids C+ Best & Less Mango C

adidas A AS COLOUR AS Colour A– Best & Less Tilt C

ALDI Stores Aldi B– ASICS ASICS C Best & Less Mantaray C

ALDI Stores Barely Basics B– ASICS Ontisuka Tiger C Best & Less Breakers C

ALDI Stores Barely Essentials B– ASICS ASICS Tiger C Best & Less Bad Boy C

ALDI Stores Crane Performance B– ASICS HAGLOFS C Best & Less Baby Baby C

ALDI Stores Crane Snow Extreme B– ASOS ASOS DESIGN B Best & Less Baby C

ALDI Stores Crane B– ASOS ASOS EDITION B Betts Group Betts D

ALDI Stores INOC B– ASOS ASOS WHITE B Betts Group Airflex D

ALDI Stores Serra B– ASOS ASOS MADE IN KENYA B Betts Group Zu D

ALDI Stores Lily and Dan B– ASOS ASOS 4505 B Big W Big W B–

ALDI Stores Torque B– ASOS ASOS collabs B Big W Denim1964 B–

ALDI Stores Workzone B– ASOS Supply B Big W B–Collection B–

ALDI Stores West Bay B– ASOS Made In. B Big W Wave Zone B–

ALDI Stores Higgledee Baby B– ASOS Venture Brands B Big W Joe & Co. B–

ALDI Stores Higgledee B– ASOS Reclaimed Vintage B Big W Brilliant Basic B–

Ally Fashion* Ally Fashion* F ASOS Crooked Tongues B Big W B Athletic B–

Anthea Crawford* Anthea Crawford* C ASOS Noak B Big W Black Smith B–

APG & CO SABA A– ASOS Heart and Dagger B Big W Circuit B–

APG & CO Sportscraft A– ASOS Collusion B Big W Circuit Curve B–

APG & CO Jag A– Baby City* Baby City* F Big W Dymples B–

Arcadia Group Menswear C+ Bardot Pty Ltd Bardot D+ Big W Layla & Co B–

Arcadia Group C+ Bardot Pty Ltd Bardot Junior D+ Big W Avella B–

Arcadia Group C+ Barkers Clothing* Barkers* C+ Big W Emerson B–

Arcadia Group C+ Bec and Bridge* Bec and Bridge* F Big W MB by Michelle B–

46 BRAND INDEX GRADES BY COMPANY B–F * = non-responsive companies

Parent Company Brand Grade Parent Company Brand Grade Parent Company Brand Grade

Bloch* Bloch* F Cotton On Group Cotton On A– Ezibuy Ezibuy D+

Blue Illusion Blue Illusion C+ Cotton On Group Cotton On Kids A– Ezibuy Capture D+

Boardriders Quicksilver C– Cotton On Group Body A– Ezibuy Emerge D+

Boardriders C– Cotton On Group Rubi A– Ezibuy Gracehill D+

Boardriders Roxy C– Cotton On Group Factorie A– Ezibuy Capture European D+

Boardriders DC C– Cotton On Group Typo A– Ezibuy Heine D+

Boardriders RVCA C– Cotton On Group Supre A– Ezibuy Sara D+

Boardriders Element C– Country Road Group Country Road A– Ezibuy Euro Edit D+

Boardriders Von Zipper C– Country Road Group MIMCO A– Ezibuy Together D+

Boardriders Xcel C– Country Road Group Trenery A– Ezibuy Mia Lucce D+

Boden Boden C+ Country Road Group Witchery A– Ezibuy South D+

Boohoo Boohoo C– Country Road Group Politix A– Ezibuy Urban D+

Boohoo boohooMAN C– Cue Clothing Co* Cue* C– Factory X Fashion B–

Boohoo PrettyLittleThing C– Cue Clothing Co* Dion Lee* C– Factory X Autonomy B–

Boohoo Nasty Gal C– David Jones Milana B Factory X Alannah Hill B–

Brand Collective (Apparel) Elka Collective C David Jones Alta Linea B Factory X Dangerfield B–

Brand Collective (Apparel) Elwood C David Jones Agenda B Factory X Jack B–

Brand Collective (Apparel) Mossimo C David Jones David Jones B Factory X Claude Maus B–

Brand Collective (Footwear) C+ David Jones David Jones Classic Collection B Factory X L’URV B–

Brand Collective (Footwear) Julius Marlow C+ David Jones Organic Baby by David Jones B Factory X Princess Highway B–

Brand Collective (Footwear) Grosby C+ David Jones David Jones Junior B Factory X Revival B–

Brand Collective (Footwear) Clarks C+ Decjuba* Decjuba* D– Farmers* Farmers* F

Brand Collective (Footwear) C+ Designworks Republic C+ Fast Future Brands Valleygirl D

Camilla and Marc* Camilla and Marc* F Designworks Suburban C+ Fast Future Brands TEMPT D

Camilla and Marc* C&M* F Designworks Review Kids C+ Fast Future Brands Mirrou D

Canterbury of NZ Canterbury of NZ C+ Designworks Mooks C+ * Forever 21* D–

City Chic Collective City Chic B+ Designworks Sista C+ Forever New Forever New B

Coles* Mix* D+ Designworks B.O.D. C+ Freeset T-Shirts Freeset T-Shirts A+

Coles* Coles* D+ Etiko Etiko A+ Fruit of the Loom* Vanity Fair* D+

47 BRAND INDEX GRADES BY COMPANY F–H * = non-responsive companies

Parent Company Brand Grade Parent Company Brand Grade Parent Company Brand Grade

Fruit of the Loom* Fruit of the Loom* D+ Gildan Activewear A– Hanesbrands Razza Matazz A

Fruit of the Loom* * D+ Gildan Activewear Therapy Plus A– Hanesbrands Red Robin A

Fruit of the Loom* Russel Athletic* D+ Gildan Activewear Kushyfoot A– Hanesbrands Rio A

Gap Inc. GAP B Gildan Activewear Peds A– Hanesbrands Sheridan A

Gap Inc. Banana Republic B Gorman Gorman B Hanesbrands Sheer Relief A

Gap Inc. Old Navy B H&M H&M B+ Hanesbrands Voodoo A

Gap Inc. Athleta B H&M Monki B+ Hanesbrands A

Gap Inc. Intermix B H&M COS B+ Hanesbrands Barely There A

Gazal* Gazal* D– H&M Weekday B+ Hanesbrands A

General Pants Group General Pants Group B H&M Cheap Monday B+ Hanesbrands C9 by A

General Pants Group Arvust B H&M Other Stories B+ Hanesbrands A

General Pants Group Alice in the B H&M Arket B+ Hanesbrands Gear for Sports A

General Pants Group B Hallenstein Glasson Holdings Hallenstein Brothers B+ Hanesbrands DIM A

General Pants Group Insight B Hallenstein Glasson Holdings Glassons B+ Hanesbrands Knights Apparel A

General Pants Group Subtitled B Hanesbrands JMS A Hanesbrands GTM A

General Pants Group Don’t Ask Amanda B Hanesbrands Alternative Apparel A Hanesbrands Leggs A

General Pants Group Neon Hart B Hanesbrands A Hot Springs* P.E. Nation* F

General Pants Group BNWR B Hanesbrands A Hot Springs* Lover* F

General Pants Group Standard B Hanesbrands N Things A Hot Springs* Cooper St* F

General Pants Group GP Tees B Hanesbrands Champion A Hot Springs* Rebecca Vallance* F

General Pants Group Candidate B Hanesbrands Dunlopillo A Hot Springs* Jasmine & Will* F

General Pants Group GP Co Basics B Hanesbrands Fairydown A House of Quirky MinkPink C

Gildan Activewear Gildan A– Hanesbrands A House of Quirky Staple C

Gildan Activewear A– Hanesbrands Hestia A House of Quirky Twiin C

Gildan Activewear Anvil A– Hanesbrands Explorer A Huffer Huffer B–

Gildan Activewear Comfort Colors A– Hanesbrands Jockey (AU and NZ) A Hugo Boss Group Boss C+

Gildan Activewear Alstyle A– Hanesbrands Kayser A Hugo Boss Group Hugo C+

Gildan Activewear Toe A– Hanesbrands A Hugo Boss Group Boss Orange C+

Gildan Activewear Secret A– Hanesbrands A Hugo Boss Group Boss Green C+

48 BRAND INDEX GRADES BY COMPANY H–N * = non-responsive companies

Parent Company Brand Grade Parent Company Brand Grade Parent Company Brand Grade

Hunting & Fishing NZ Hunting & Fishing NZ D+ Lorna Jane Lorna Jane C+ Myer Vue B–

Icebreaker Icebreaker A+ Lowes* Lowes* F Myer Heritage B–

Inditex A Lowes* Beare & Ley* F Myer Regatta B–

Inditex A lululemon athletica Lululemon Athletica A– Myer Tokito B–

Industrie Industrie A– Macpac Macpac B– Myer Miss Shop B–

Industrie Indie kids A– Marks & Spencer Marks & Spencer B+ Myer Sprout B–

Industrie Roler A– Max* Max* C Myer Milkshake B–

Jeanswest Jeanswest B+ Merric Apparel NZ* Merric* F Myer Soho B–

JETS JETS Swimwear C Mighty Good Group Mighty Good Undies A+ Myer Chloe & Lola B–

Just Group Just Jeans C+ Munro Footwear Group I love Billy D Myer Trent Nathan B–

Just Group Jay Jays C+ Munro Footwear Group Silent D by Django & Juliette D Nature Baby Nature Baby A–

Just Group Jacqui E C+ Munro Footwear Group Django & Juliette D New Balance New Balance B

Just Group Portmans C+ Munro Footwear Group Top End D Next Next B–

Just Group Dotti C+ Munro Footwear Group Mollini D Next Lipsy B–

Just Group Peter Alexander C+ Munro Footwear Group Gamins D Next Label/Mix B–

K&K K&K C– Munro Footwear Group Colorado D Nike Nike B–

Karen Walker* Karen Walker* B Munro Footwear Group Cinori D Nike B–

Kate Sylvester* Kate Sylvester* D+ Munro Footwear Group Diana Ferrari D Nike Hurley B–

Kathmandu Kathmandu A Munro Footwear Group Supersoft by Diana Ferrari D Nike Brand B–

Kmart Australia Kmart B+ Munro Footwear Group Isabella Rossi D Nobody Denim Nobody Denim A–

Kookai Kookai A– Munro Footwear Group Lynx D Noni B Group Rockmans D

Kowtow Kowtow A+ Munro Footwear Group Wanted D Noni B Group Beme D

L Brands B Munro Footwear Group Midas D Noni B Group W.Lane D

L Brands ’s Secret B Myer Myer B– Noni B Group Table Eight D

Lacoste Lacoste C– Myer B– Noni B Group Rose D

Levi Strauss & Co* Levi’s Signature* B Myer Piper B– Noni B Group Noni B D

Levi Strauss & Co* Dockers* B Myer Blaq B– Noni B Group Liz Jordan D

Levi Strauss & Co* Denizen* B Myer Reserve B– Noni B Group Millers D

Liminal Apparel Liminal Apparel A+ Myer AHG B– Noni B Group Katies D

49 BRAND INDEX GRADES BY COMPANY N–T * = non-responsive companies

Parent Company Brand Grade Parent Company Brand Grade Parent Company Brand Grade

Noni B Group Autograph D PVH Corp* Olga by Warners* C+ Target Australia Target B

Noni B Group Maggie T D PVH Corp* * C+ The Baby Factory* The Baby Factory* F

Noni B Group Rivers D PVH Corp* True & Co.* C+ The Iconic* Atmos&Here * C+

Noni B Group Crossroads D R.M. Williams R.M. Williams B– The Iconic* The Iconic* C+

Nudie Jeans Co. Nudie Jeans Co.. B+ Ralph Lauren* Ralph Lauren* C– The Iconic* Spurr* C+

Oroton Group Oroton C+ Ralph Lauren* RLX* C– The Iconic* Staple Superior* C+

Outland Denim Outland Denim A+ Ralph Lauren* American Living* C– The Iconic* Double Oak Mills* C+

Oxford Oxford D Ralph Lauren* * C– The Iconic* H-Wood* C+

Pagani Pagani C– Ralph Lauren* Club Monaco* C– The Iconic* Dazie* C+

Patagonia Patagonia A Retail Apparel Group Tarocash C+ The PAS Group Limited Yarra Trail C–

Pavement United Brands* Pavement* F Retail Apparel Group yd. C+ The PAS Group Limited Review C–

Pavement United Brands* Lemonade* F Retail Apparel Group Connor C+ The PAS Group Limited Marco Polo C–

Pavement United Brands* Non Sense* F Retail Apparel Group Johnny Bigg C+ The PAS Group Limited Black Pepper C–

Pavement United Brands* Petals* F Retail Apparel Group Rockwear C+ The PAS Group Limited Extra Pepper C–

Pavement United Brands* Pom Pom* F Rip Curl Rip Curl B+ The PAS Group Limited Breakaway C–

Pavement United Brands* Co Co Beach* F Rodd & Gunn Rodd & Gunn A– The PAS Group Limited Equus C–

Pavement United Brands* Zom–B* F RREPP Rrepp A Active Intent B–

Pavement United Brands* Scram* F RUBY Apparel Ruby C The Warehouse Group Amco B–

Pavement United Brands* Wax* F Seafolly Seafolly B The Warehouse Group An’D B–

Postie+ Postie C Seed Heritage Seed Heritage C– The Warehouse Group Back Country B–

Puma Puma B Showpo* Showpo* F The Warehouse Group Basics Brand B–

Puma Cobra B Simon de Winter Group Simon de Winter D+ The Warehouse Group Basics Maternity B–

PVH Corp* * C+ Simon de Winter Group Darn Tough D+ The Warehouse Group Beach Works B–

PVH Corp* * C+ Sussan Group Sussan B The Warehouse Group Blue Denim Co B–

PVH Corp* Van Heusen* C+ Sussan Group Suzanne Grae B The Warehouse Group Debut B–

PVH Corp* * C+ Sussan Group Sportsgirl B The Warehouse Group Garage B–

PVH Corp* ARROW* C+ Swanndri NZ Swanndri C+ The Warehouse Group H&H B–

PVH Corp* * C+ 3 Wise Men Limited* 3 Wise Men* F The Warehouse Group Intrepid B–

PVH Corp* Warner’s* C+ T&T Fashions* T&T* F The Warehouse Group Kate Madison B–

50 BRAND INDEX GRADES BY COMPANY T–Z * = non-responsive companies

Parent Company Brand Grade Parent Company Brand Grade

The Warehouse Group Match B– VF Corp Napapiriji B

The Warehouse Group Maya B– VF Corp B

The Warehouse Group Navigator South B– VF Corp B

The Warehouse Group Pickaberry B– VF Corp Timberland B

The Warehouse Group Rivet B– VF Corp Rock & Republic B

The Warehouse Group Schooltex B– VF Corp Williamson Dickie B

The Warehouse Group Urban Equip B– VF Corp Smartwool B

The Warehouse Group The Warehouse B– VF Corp VF Outlet B

Tigerlily* Tigerlily* D– Voyager Distributing Co* Jump* F

Tree of Life Tree of Life C Voyager Distributing Co* Kachel* F

Tree of Life Peace Angel C Voyager Distributing Co* Pong* F

Trelise Cooper* Cooper by Trelise* F Wish Designs Pty Ltd* Wish* F

Trelise Cooper* little trelise* F Workwear Group King Gee C

Trelise Cooper* Trelise Cooper* F Workwear Group C

UNIQLO UNIQLO B+ WORLD* WORLD* D–

VF Corp Jansport B Zimmermann Zimmermann B–

VF Corp Bulwark B

VF Corp Lee B

VF Corp Rustler B

VF Corp Majestic B

VF Corp Nautica B

VF Corp Wrangler B

VF Corp Eagle Creek B

VF Corp B

VF Corp RIDERS by LEE B

VF Corp Reef B

VF Corp Kipling B

VF Corp Red Kap B

VF Corp Horace Small B

51 BRAND INDEX GRADES BY BRAND A–B * = non-responsive companies

Brand Parent Company Grade Brand Parent Company Grade Brand Parent Company Grade

Abercrombie & Fitch* Abercrombie & Fitch* D– ASOS DESIGN ASOS B Beare & Ley* Lowes* F

Abercrombie Kids* Abercrombie & Fitch* D– ASOS EDITION ASOS B Bec and Bridge* Bec and Bridge* F

Active Intent The Warehouse Group B– ASOS MADE IN KENYA ASOS B Beme Noni B Group D

adidas adidas A ASOS WHITE ASOS B Ben Sherman Ben Sherman Australia D+

Agenda David Jones B Athleta Gap Inc. B Berlei Hanesbrands A

AHG Myer B– Atmos&Here * The Iconic* C+ Best & Less Best & Less C

Airflex Betts Group D Autograph Noni B Group D Betts Betts Group D

Alannah Hill Factory X B– Autonomy Factory X B– Big W Big W B–

Aldi ALDI Stores B– Avella Big W B– Billabong Boardriders C–

Alice in the Eve General Pants Group B B Athletic Big W B– Black Pepper The PAS Group Limited C–

Ally Fashion* Ally Fashion* F B.O.D. Designworks C+ Black Smith Big W B–

Alstyle Gildan Activewear A– Baby Baby Best & Less C Blaq Myer B–

Alta Linea David Jones B Baby Berry Best & Less C Bloch* Bloch* F

Alternative Apparel Hanesbrands A Baby City* Baby City* F Blue Denim Co The Warehouse Group B–

Amber Rose Noni B Group D Back Country The Warehouse Group B– Blue Illusion Blue Illusion C+

Amco The Warehouse Group B– Bad Boy Best & Less C BNWR General Pants Group B

American Apparel Gildan Activewear A– Bali Hanesbrands A Boden Boden C+

American Living* Ralph Lauren* C– Banana Republic Gap Inc. B Body Cotton On Group A–

An’D The Warehouse Group B– Bardot Bardot Pty Ltd D+ Bonds Hanesbrands A

Anthea Crawford* Anthea Crawford* C Bardot Junior Bardot Pty Ltd D+ Boohoo Boohoo C–

Anvil Gildan Activewear A– Barely Basics ALDI Stores B– boohooMAN Boohoo C–

Arket H&M B+ Barely Essentials ALDI Stores B– Boss Hugo Boss Group C+

ARROW* PVH Corp* C+ Barely There Hanesbrands A Boss Green Hugo Boss Group C+

Arvust General Pants Group B Barkers* Barkers Clothing* C+ Boss Orange Hugo Boss Group C+

AS Colour AS COLOUR A– Basics Brand The Warehouse Group B– Bras N Things Hanesbrands A

ASICS ASICS C Basics Maternity The Warehouse Group B– Breakaway The PAS Group Limited C–

ASICS Tiger ASICS C Basque Myer B– Breakers Best & Less C

ASOS 4505 ASOS B B-Collection Big W B– Brilliant Basic Big W B–

ASOS collabs ASOS B Beach Works The Warehouse Group B– Bulwark VF Corp B

52 BRAND INDEX GRADES BY BRAND B–G * = non-responsive companies

Brand Parent Company Grade Brand Parent Company Grade Brand Parent Company Grade

Burton Menswear Arcadia Group C+ Cooper St* Hot Springs* F Dotti Just Group C+

C&M* Camilla and Marc* F COS H&M B+ Double Oak Mills* The Iconic* C+

C9 by Champion Hanesbrands A Cotton On Cotton On Group A– Dunlopillo Hanesbrands A

Calvin Klein* PVH Corp* C+ Cotton On Kids Cotton On Group A– Dymples Big W B–

Candidate General Pants Group B Country Road Country Road Group A– Eagle Creek VF Corp B

Canterbury of NZ Canterbury of NZ C+ Crane ALDI Stores B– Eastpak VF Corp B

Capture Ezibuy D+ Crane Performance ALDI Stores B– Edited Best & Less C

Capture European Ezibuy D+ Crane Snow Extreme ALDI Stores B– Edited Plus Best & Less C

Camilla and Marc* Camilla and Marc* F Crooked Tongues ASOS B Element Boardriders C–

Champion Hanesbrands A Crossroads Noni B Group D Elka Collective Brand Collective (Apparel) C

Chaps* Ralph Lauren* C– Cue* Cue Clothing Co* C– Elwood Brand Collective (Apparel) C

Cheap Monday H&M B+ Dangerfield Factory X B– Emerge Ezibuy D+

Chloe & Lola Myer B– Darn Tough Simon de Winter Group D+ Emerson Big W B–

Cinori Munro Footwear Group D David Jones David Jones B Equus The PAS Group Limited C–

Circuit Big W B– David Jones Classic Collection David Jones B Etiko Etiko A+

Circuit Curve Big W B– David Jones Junior David Jones B Euro Edit Ezibuy D+

City Chic City Chic Collective B+ Dazie* The Iconic* C+ Evans Arcadia Group C+

Clarks Brand Collective (Footwear) C+ DC Shoes Boardriders C– Explorer Hanesbrands A

Claude Maus Factory X B– Debut The Warehouse Group B– Extra Pepper The PAS Group Limited C–

Club Monaco* Ralph Lauren* C– Decjuba* Decjuba* D– Ezibuy Ezibuy D+

Co Co Beach* Pavement United Brands* F Denim1964 Big W B– Factorie Cotton On Group A–

Cobra Golf Puma B Denizen* Levi Strauss & Co* B Fairydown Hanesbrands A

Coles* Coles* D+ Diana Ferrari Munro Footwear Group D Farmers* Farmers* F

Collusion ASOS B DIM Hanesbrands A Forever 21* Forever 21* D–

Colorado Munro Footwear Group D Dion Lee* Cue Clothing Co* C– Forever New Forever New B

Comfort Colors Gildan Activewear A– Django & Juliette Munro Footwear Group D Freeset T-Shirts Freeset T-Shirts A+

Connor Retail Apparel Group C+ Dockers* Levi Strauss & Co* B Fruit of the Loom* Fruit of the Loom* D+

Converse Nike B– Don’t Ask Amanda General Pants Group B Gamins Munro Footwear Group D

Cooper by Trelise* Trelise Cooper* F Dorothy Perkins Arcadia Group C+ GAP Gap Inc. B

53 BRAND INDEX GRADES BY BRAND G–L * = non-responsive companies

Brand Parent Company Grade Brand Parent Company Grade Brand Parent Company Grade

Garage The Warehouse Group B– Huffer Huffer B– Julius Marlow Brand Collective (Footwear) C+

Gazal* Gazal* D– Hugo Hugo Boss Group C+ Jump* Voyager Distributing Co* F

Gear for Sports Hanesbrands A Hunting & Fishing NZ Hunting & Fishing NZ D+ Just Jeans Just Group C+

General Pants Group General Pants Group B Hurley Nike B– K&K K&K C–

Geoffrey Beene* PVH Corp* C+ Hush Puppies Brand Collective (Footwear) C+ Kachel* Voyager Distributing Co* F

Gildan Gildan Activewear A– H-Wood* The Iconic* C+ Karen Walker* Karen Walker* B

Gilly Hicks* Abercrombie & Fitch* D– I love Billy Munro Footwear Group D Kate Madison The Warehouse Group B–

Glassons Hallenstein Glasson Holdings B+ Icebreaker Icebreaker A+ Kate Sylvester* Kate Sylvester* D+

Gold Toe Gildan Activewear A– Indie kids Industrie A– Kathmandu Kathmandu A

Gorman Gorman B Industrie Industrie A– Katies Noni B Group D

GP Co Basics General Pants Group B INOC ALDI Stores B– Kayser Hanesbrands A

GP Tees General Pants Group B Insight General Pants Group B King Gee Workwear Group C

Gracehill Ezibuy D+ Intermix Gap Inc. B Kipling VF Corp B

Grosby Brand Collective (Footwear) C+ Intrepid The Warehouse Group B– Kmart Kmart Australia B+

GTM Hanesbrands A Isabella Rossi Munro Footwear Group D Knights Apparel Hanesbrands A

H&H The Warehouse Group B– IZOD* PVH Corp* C+ Kookai Kookai A–

H&M H&M B+ Jack London Factory X B– Kowtow Kowtow A+

HAGLOFS ASICS C Jacqui E Just Group C+ Ksubi General Pants Group B

Hallenstein Brothers Hallenstein Glasson Holdings B+ Jag APG & CO A– Kushyfoot Gildan Activewear A–

Hanes Hanesbrands A Jansport VF Corp B Label/Mix Next B–

Hard Yakka Workwear Group C Jasmine & Will* Hot Springs* F Lacoste Lacoste C–

Heart and Dagger ASOS B Jay Jays Just Group C+ Layla & Co Big W B–

Heine Ezibuy D+ Jeanswest Jeanswest B+ Lee VF Corp B

Heritage Myer B– JETS Swimwear JETS C Leggs Hanesbrands A

Hestia Hanesbrands A JMS Hanesbrands A Lemonade* Pavement United Brands* F

Higgledee ALDI Stores B– Jockey (AU and NZ) Hanesbrands A Levi’s Signature* Levi Strauss & Co* B

Higgledee Baby ALDI Stores B– Joe & Co. Big W B– Lily and Dan ALDI Stores B–

Hollister Co.* Abercrombie & Fitch* D– Johnny Bigg Retail Apparel Group C+ Liminal Apparel Liminal Apparel A+

Horace Small VF Corp B Jordan Brand Nike B– Lipsy Next B–

54 BRAND INDEX GRADES BY BRAND L–R * = non-responsive companies

Brand Parent Company Grade Brand Parent Company Grade Brand Parent Company Grade

little trelise* Trelise Cooper* F MinkPink House of Quirky C Other Stories H&M B+

Liz Jordan Noni B Group D Mirrou Fast Future Brands D Outfit Arcadia Group C+

Lorna Jane Lorna Jane C+ Miss Selfridge Arcadia Group C+ Outfit Kids Arcadia Group C+

Lover* Hot Springs* F Miss Shop Myer B– Outland Denim Outland Denim A+

Lowes* Lowes* F Mix* Coles* D+ Oxford Oxford D

Lululemon Athletica lululemon athletica A– Mollini Munro Footwear Group D P.E. Nation* Hot Springs* F

L’URV Factory X B– Monki H&M B+ Pagani Pagani C–

Lynx Munro Footwear Group D Mooks Designworks C+ Patagonia Patagonia A

Macpac Macpac B– Mossimo Brand Collective (Apparel) C Pavement* Pavement United Brands* F

Made In. ASOS B Myer Myer B– Peace Angel Tree of Life C

Maggie T Noni B Group D Napapiriji VF Corp B Peds Gildan Activewear A–

Maidenform Hanesbrands A Nasty Gal Boohoo C– Petals* Pavement United Brands* F

Majestic VF Corp B Nature Baby Nature Baby A– Peter Alexander Just Group C+

Mango Best & Less C Nautica VF Corp B Pickaberry The Warehouse Group B–

Mantaray Best & Less C Navigator South The Warehouse Group B– Ping Pong* Voyager Distributing Co* F

Marco Polo The PAS Group Limited C– Neon Hart General Pants Group B PINK L Brands B

Marks & Spencer Marks & Spencer B+ New Balance New Balance B Piper Myer B–

Match The Warehouse Group B– Next Next B– Platinum Hanesbrands A

Max* Max* C Nike Nike B– Playtex Hanesbrands A

Maya The Warehouse Group B– Noak ASOS B Politix Country Road Group A–

MB by Michelle Bridges Big W B– Nobody Denim Nobody Denim A– Pom Pom* Pavement United Brands* F

Merric* Merric Apparel NZ* F Non Sense* Pavement United Brands* F Portmans Just Group C+

Mia Lucce Ezibuy D+ Noni B Noni B Group D Postie Postie+ C

Midas Munro Footwear Group D Nudie Jeans Co. Nudie Jeans co B+ PrettyLittleThing Boohoo C–

Mighty Good Undies Mighty Good Group A+ Old Navy Gap Inc. B Princess Highway Factory X B–

Milana David Jones B Olga by Warners* PVH Corp* C+ Pulp Fashion Factory X B–

Milkshake Myer B– Ontisuka Tiger ASICS C Puma Puma B

Millers Noni B Group D Organic Baby by David Jones David Jones B Quicksilver Boardriders C–

MIMCO Country Road Group A– Oroton Oroton Group C+ R.M. Williams R.M. Williams B–

55 BRAND INDEX GRADES BY BRAND R–T * = non-responsive companies

Brand Parent Company Grade Brand Parent Company Grade Brand Parent Company Grade

Ralph Lauren* Ralph Lauren* C– Russel Athletic* Fruit of the Loom* D+ Staple Superior* The Iconic* C+

Razza Matazz Hanesbrands A Rustler VF Corp B Subtitled General Pants Group B

Rebecca Vallance* Hot Springs* F RVCA Boardriders C– Suburban Designworks C+

Reclaimed Vintage ASOS B SABA APG & CO A– Supersoft by Diana Ferrari Munro Footwear Group D

Red Kap VF Corp B Sara Ezibuy D+ Supply ASOS B

Red Robin Hanesbrands A Schooltex The Warehouse Group B– Supre Cotton On Group A–

Reebok adidas A Scram* Pavement United Brands* F Sussan Sussan Group B

Reef VF Corp B Seafolly Seafolly B Suzanne Grae Sussan Group B

Regatta Myer B– Secret Gildan Activewear A– Swanndri Swanndri NZ C+

Republic Designworks C+ Seed Heritage Seed Heritage C– 3 Wise Men* 3 Wise Men Limited* F

Reserve Myer B– Serra ALDI Stores B– T&T* T&T Fashions* F

Review The PAS Group Limited C– Sheer Relief Hanesbrands A Table Eight Noni B Group D

Review Kids Designworks C+ Sheridan Hanesbrands A Target Target Australia B

Revival Factory X B– Showpo* Showpo* F Tarocash Retail Apparel Group C+

RIDERS by LEE VF Corp B Silent D by Django & Juliette Munro Footwear Group D TEMPT Fast Future Brands D

Rio Hanesbrands A Silks Gildan Activewear A– The Baby Factory* The Baby Factory* F

Rip Curl Rip Curl B+ Simon de Winter Simon de Winter Group D+ The Iconic* The Iconic* C+

Rivers Noni B Group D Sista Designworks C+ The North Face VF Corp B

Rivet The Warehouse Group B– Smartwool VF Corp B The Warehouse The Warehouse Group B–

RLX* Ralph Lauren* C– Soho Myer B– Therapy Plus Gildan Activewear A–

Rock & Republic VF Corp B South Cape Ezibuy D+ Tigerlily* Tigerlily* D–

Rockmans Noni B Group D Spalding* Fruit of the Loom* D+ Tilt Best & Less C

Rockwear Retail Apparel Group C+ Speedo* PVH Corp* C+ Timberland VF Corp B

Rodd & Gunn Rodd & Gunn A– Sportscraft APG & CO A– Together Ezibuy D+

Roler Industrie A– Sportsgirl Sussan Group B Tokito Myer B–

Roxy Boardriders C– Sprout Myer B– Tommy Hilfiger* PVH Corp* C+

Rrepp RREPP A Spurr* The Iconic* C+ Top End Munro Footwear Group D

Rubi Cotton On Group A– Pants Group B Topman Arcadia Group C+

Ruby RUBY Apparel C Staple House of Quirky C Topshop Arcadia Group C+

56 BRAND INDEX GRADES BY BRAND T–Z * = non-responsive companies

Brand Parent Company Grade Brand Parent Company Grade

Torque ALDI Stores B– Wax* Pavement United Brands* F

Tree of Life Tree of Life C Weekday H&M B+

Trelise Cooper* Trelise Cooper* F West Bay ALDI Stores B–

Trenery Country Road Group A– Williamson Dickie VF Corp B

Trent Nathan Myer B– Wish* Wish Designs Pty Ltd* F

True & Co.* PVH Corp* C+ Witchery Country Road Group A–

Twiin House of Quirky C Wonderbra Hanesbrands A

Typo Cotton On Group A– Workzone ALDI Stores B–

UNIQLO UNIQLO B+ WORLD* WORLD* D–

Urban Ezibuy D+ Wrangler VF Corp B

Urban Equip The Warehouse Group B– Xcel Boardriders C–

Valleygirl Fast Future Brands D Yarra Trail The PAS Group Limited C–

Van Heusen* PVH Corp* C+ yd. Retail Apparel Group C+

Vanity Fair* Fruit of the Loom* D+ Zara Inditex A

VANS VF Corp B Zara Home Inditex A

Venture Brands ASOS B Zimmermann Zimmermann B–

VF Outlet VF Corp B Zom-B* Pavement United Brands* F

Victoria’s Secret L Brands B Zu Betts Group D

Volley Brand Collective (Footwear) C+

Von Zipper Boardriders C–

Voodoo Hanesbrands A

Vue Myer B–

W.Lane Noni B Group D

Wallis Arcadia Group C+

Wanted Munro Footwear Group D

Warner’s* PVH Corp* C+

Wave Zone Big W B–

57 BRAND INDEX BRANDS RANKED HIGHEST TO LOWEST

* = non-responsive companies

Parent Company Brand Grade Parent Company Brand Grade Parent Company Brand Grade

Etiko Etiko A+ Hanesbrands Voodoo A Country Road Group Trenery A–

Freeset T-Shirts Freeset T-Shirts A+ Hanesbrands Bali A Country Road Group Witchery A–

Icebreaker Icebreaker A+ Hanesbrands Barely There A Country Road Group Politix A–

Kowtow Kowtow A+ Hanesbrands Wonderbra A Gildan Activewear Gildan A–

Liminal Apparel Liminal Apparel A+ Hanesbrands C9 by Champion A Gildan Activewear American Apparel A–

Mighty Good Group Mighty Good Undies A+ Hanesbrands Maidenform A Gildan Activewear Anvil A–

Outland Denim Outland Denim A+ Hanesbrands Gear for Sports A Gildan Activewear Comfort Colors A–

adidas adidas A Hanesbrands DIM A Gildan Activewear Alstyle A–

adidas Reebok A Hanesbrands Knights Apparel A Gildan Activewear Gold Toe A–

Hanesbrands JMS A Hanesbrands GTM A Gildan Activewear Secret A–

Hanesbrands Alternative Apparel A Hanesbrands Leggs A Gildan Activewear Silks A–

Hanesbrands Berlei A Inditex Zara A Gildan Activewear Therapy Plus A–

Hanesbrands Bonds A Inditex Zara Home A Gildan Activewear Kushyfoot A–

Hanesbrands Bras N Things A Kathmandu Kathmandu A Gildan Activewear Peds A–

Hanesbrands Champion A Patagonia Patagonia A Industrie Industrie A–

Hanesbrands Dunlopillo A RREPP Rrepp A Industrie Indie kids A–

Hanesbrands Fairydown A APG & CO SABA A– Industrie Roler A–

Hanesbrands Hanes A APG & CO Sportscraft A– Kookai Kookai A–

Hanesbrands Hestia A APG & CO Jag A– lululemon athletica Lululemon Athletica A–

Hanesbrands Explorer A AS COLOUR AS Colour A– Nature Baby Nature Baby A–

Hanesbrands Jockey (AU and NZ) A Cotton On Group Cotton On A– Nobody Denim Nobody Denim A–

Hanesbrands Kayser A Cotton On Group Cotton On Kids A– Rodd & Gunn Rodd & Gunn A–

Hanesbrands Playtex A Cotton On Group Body A– City Chic Collective City Chic B+

Hanesbrands Platinum A Cotton On Group Rubi A– H&M H&M B+

Hanesbrands Razza Matazz A Cotton On Group Factorie A– H&M Monki B+

Hanesbrands Red Robin A Cotton On Group Typo A– H&M COS B+

Hanesbrands Rio A Cotton On Group Supre A– H&M Weekday B+

Hanesbrands Sheridan A Country Road Group Country Road A– H&M Cheap Monday B+

Hanesbrands Sheer Relief A Country Road Group MIMCO A– H&M Other Stories B+

58 BRAND INDEX BRANDS RANKED HIGHEST TO LOWEST

* = non-responsive companies

Parent Company Brand Grade Parent Company Brand Grade Parent Company Brand Grade

H&M Arket B+ David Jones David Jones Junior B Puma B

Hallenstein Glasson Holdings Hallenstein Brothers B+ Forever New Forever New B Seafolly Seafolly B

Hallenstein Glasson Holdings Glassons B+ Gap Inc. GAP B Sussan Group Sussan B

Jeanswest Jeanswest B+ Gap Inc. Banana Republic B Sussan Group Suzanne Grae B

Kmart Australia Kmart B+ Gap Inc. Old Navy B Sussan Group Sportsgirl B

Marks & Spencer Marks & Spencer B+ Gap Inc. Athleta B Target Australia Target B

Nudie Jeans Co. Nudie Jeans Co.. B+ Gap Inc. Intermix B VF Corp Jansport B

Rip Curl Rip Curl B+ General Pants Group General Pants Group B VF Corp Bulwark B

UNIQLO UNIQLO B+ General Pants Group Arvust B VF Corp Lee B

ASOS ASOS DESIGN B General Pants Group Alice in the Eve B VF Corp Rustler B

ASOS ASOS EDITION B General Pants Group Ksubi B VF Corp Majestic B

ASOS ASOS WHITE B General Pants Group Insight B VF Corp Nautica B

ASOS ASOS MADE IN KENYA B General Pants Group Subtitled B VF Corp Wrangler B

ASOS ASOS 4505 B General Pants Group Don’t Ask Amanda B VF Corp Eagle Creek B

ASOS ASOS collabs B General Pants Group Neon Hart B VF Corp The North Face B

ASOS Supply B General Pants Group BNWR B VF Corp RIDERS by LEE B

ASOS Made In. B General Pants Group Standard B VF Corp Reef B

ASOS Venture Brands B General Pants Group GP Tees B VF Corp Kipling B

ASOS Reclaimed Vintage B General Pants Group Candidate B VF Corp Red Kap B

ASOS Crooked Tongues B General Pants Group GP Co Basics B VF Corp Horace Small B

ASOS Noak B Gorman Gorman B VF Corp Napapiriji B

ASOS Heart and Dagger B Karen Walker* Karen Walker* B VF Corp Eastpak B

ASOS Collusion B L Brands PINK B VF Corp VANS B

David Jones Milana B L Brands Victoria’s Secret B VF Corp Timberland B

David Jones Alta Linea B Levi Strauss & Co* Levi’s Signature* B VF Corp Rock & Republic B

David Jones Agenda B Levi Strauss & Co* Dockers* B VF Corp Williamson Dickie B

David Jones David Jones B Levi Strauss & Co* Denizen* B VF Corp Smartwool B

David Jones David Jones Classic Collection B New Balance New Balance B VF Corp VF Outlet B

David Jones Organic Baby by David Jones B Puma Puma B ALDI Stores Aldi B–

59 BRAND INDEX BRANDS RANKED HIGHEST TO LOWEST

* = non-responsive companies

Parent Company Brand Grade Parent Company Brand Grade Parent Company Brand Grade

ALDI Stores Barely Basics B– Factory X Autonomy B– Nike Nike B–

ALDI Stores Barely Essentials B– Factory X Alannah Hill B– Nike Converse B–

ALDI Stores Crane Performance B– Factory X Dangerfield B– Nike Hurley B–

ALDI Stores Crane Snow Extreme B– Factory X Jack London B– Nike Jordan Brand B–

ALDI Stores Crane B– Factory X Claude Maus B– R.M. Williams R.M. Williams B–

ALDI Stores INOC B– Factory X L’URV B– The Warehouse Group Active Intent B–

ALDI Stores Serra B– Factory X Princess Highway B– The Warehouse Group Amco B–

ALDI Stores Lily and Dan B– Factory X Revival B– The Warehouse Group An’D B–

ALDI Stores Torque B– Huffer Huffer B– The Warehouse Group Back Country B–

ALDI Stores Workzone B– Macpac Macpac B– The Warehouse Group Basics Brand B–

ALDI Stores West Bay B– Myer Myer B– The Warehouse Group Basics Maternity B–

ALDI Stores Higgledee Baby B– Myer Basque B– The Warehouse Group Beach Works B–

ALDI Stores Higgledee B– Myer Piper B– The Warehouse Group Blue Denim Co B–

Big W Big W B– Myer Blaq B– The Warehouse Group Debut B–

Big W Denim1964 B– Myer Reserve B– The Warehouse Group Garage B–

Big W B-Collection B– Myer AHG B– The Warehouse Group H&H B–

Big W Wave Zone B– Myer Vue B– The Warehouse Group Intrepid B–

Big W Joe & Co. B– Myer Heritage B– The Warehouse Group Kate Madison B–

Big W Brilliant Basic B– Myer Regatta B– The Warehouse Group Match B–

Big W B Athletic B– Myer Tokito B– The Warehouse Group Maya B–

Big W Black Smith B– Myer Miss Shop B– The Warehouse Group Navigator South B–

Big W Circuit B– Myer Sprout B– The Warehouse Group Pickaberry B–

Big W Circuit Curve B– Myer Milkshake B– The Warehouse Group Rivet B–

Big W Dymples B– Myer Soho B– The Warehouse Group Schooltex B–

Big W Layla & Co B– Myer Chloe & Lola B– The Warehouse Group Urban Equip B–

Big W Avella B– Myer Trent Nathan B– The Warehouse Group The Warehouse B–

Big W Emerson B– Next Next B– Zimmermann Zimmermann B–

Big W MB by Michelle Bridges B– Next Lipsy B– Arcadia Group Burton Menswear C+

Factory X Pulp Fashion B– Next Label/Mix B– Arcadia Group Dorothy Perkins C+

60 BRAND INDEX BRANDS RANKED HIGHEST TO LOWEST

* = non-responsive companies

Parent Company Brand Grade Parent Company Brand Grade Parent Company Brand Grade

Arcadia Group Evans C+ Just Group Portmans C+ ASICS ASICS C

Arcadia Group Miss Selfridge C+ Just Group Dotti C+ ASICS Ontisuka Tiger C

Arcadia Group Topshop C+ Just Group Peter Alexander C+ ASICS ASICS Tiger C

Arcadia Group Topman C+ Lorna Jane Lorna Jane C+ ASICS HAGLOFS C

Arcadia Group Wallis C+ Oroton Group Oroton C+ Best & Less Edited C

Arcadia Group Outfit C+ PVH Corp* Calvin Klein* C+ Best & Less Best & Less C

Arcadia Group Outfit Kids C+ PVH Corp* Tommy Hilfiger* C+ Best & Less Edited Plus C

Barkers Clothing* Barkers* C+ PVH Corp* Van Heusen* C+ Best & Less Mango C

Blue Illusion Blue Illusion C+ PVH Corp* IZOD* C+ Best & Less Tilt C

Boden Boden C+ PVH Corp* ARROW* C+ Best & Less Mantaray C

Brand Collective (Footwear) Hush Puppies C+ PVH Corp* Speedo* C+ Best & Less Breakers C

Brand Collective (Footwear) Julius Marlow C+ PVH Corp* Warner’s* C+ Best & Less Bad Boy C

Brand Collective (Footwear) Grosby C+ PVH Corp* Olga by Warners* C+ Best & Less Baby Baby C

Brand Collective (Footwear) Clarks C+ PVH Corp* Geoffrey Beene* C+ Best & Less Baby Berry C

Brand Collective (Footwear) Volley C+ PVH Corp* True & Co.* C+ Brand Collective (Apparel) Elka Collective C

Canterbury of NZ Canterbury of NZ C+ Retail Apparel Group Tarocash C+ Brand Collective (Apparel) Elwood C

Designworks Republic C+ Retail Apparel Group yd. C+ Brand Collective (Apparel) Mossimo C

Designworks Suburban C+ Retail Apparel Group Connor C+ House of Quirky MinkPink C

Designworks Review Kids C+ Retail Apparel Group Johnny Bigg C+ House of Quirky Staple C

Designworks Mooks C+ Retail Apparel Group Rockwear C+ House of Quirky Twiin C

Designworks Sista C+ Swanndri NZ Swanndri C+ JETS JETS Swimwear C

Designworks B.O.D. C+ The Iconic* Atmos&Here * C+ Max* Max* C

Hugo Boss Group Boss C+ The Iconic* The Iconic* C+ Postie+ Postie C

Hugo Boss Group Hugo C+ The Iconic* Spurr* C+ RUBY Apparel Ruby C

Hugo Boss Group Boss Orange C+ The Iconic* Staple Superior* C+ Tree of Life Tree of Life C

Hugo Boss Group Boss Green C+ The Iconic* Double Oak Mills* C+ Tree of Life Peace Angel C

Just Group Just Jeans C+ The Iconic* H-Wood* C+ Workwear Group King Gee C

Just Group Jay Jays C+ The Iconic* Dazie* C+ Workwear Group Hard Yakka C

Just Group Jacqui E C+ Anthea Crawford* Anthea Crawford* C Boardriders Quicksilver C–

61 BRAND INDEX BRANDS RANKED HIGHEST TO LOWEST

* = non-responsive companies

Parent Company Brand Grade Parent Company Brand Grade Parent Company Brand Grade

Boardriders Billabong C– Bardot Pty Ltd Bardot D+ Fast Future Brands TEMPT D

Boardriders Roxy C– Bardot Pty Ltd Bardot Junior D+ Fast Future Brands Mirrou D

Boardriders DC Shoes C– Ben Sherman Australia Ben Sherman D+ Munro Footwear Group I love Billy D

Boardriders RVCA C– Coles* Mix* D+ Munro Footwear Group Silent D by Django & Juliette D

Boardriders Element C– Coles* Coles* D+ Munro Footwear Group Django & Juliette D

Boardriders Von Zipper C– Ezibuy Ezibuy D+ Munro Footwear Group Top End D

Boardriders Xcel C– Ezibuy Capture D+ Munro Footwear Group Mollini D

Boohoo Boohoo C– Ezibuy Emerge D+ Munro Footwear Group Gamins D

Boohoo boohooMAN C– Ezibuy Gracehill D+ Munro Footwear Group Colorado D

Boohoo PrettyLittleThing C– Ezibuy Capture European D+ Munro Footwear Group Cinori D

Boohoo Nasty Gal C– Ezibuy Heine D+ Munro Footwear Group Diana Ferrari D

Cue Clothing Co* Cue* C– Ezibuy Sara D+ Munro Footwear Group Supersoft by Diana Ferrari D

Cue Clothing Co* Dion Lee* C– Ezibuy Euro Edit D+ Munro Footwear Group Isabella Rossi D

K&K K&K C– Ezibuy Together D+ Munro Footwear Group Lynx D

Lacoste Lacoste C– Ezibuy Mia Lucce D+ Munro Footwear Group Wanted D

Pagani Pagani C– Ezibuy South Cape D+ Munro Footwear Group Midas D

Ralph Lauren* Ralph Lauren* C– Ezibuy Urban D+ Noni B Group Rockmans D

Ralph Lauren* RLX* C– Fruit of the Loom* Vanity Fair* D+ Noni B Group Beme D

Ralph Lauren* American Living* C– Fruit of the Loom* Fruit of the Loom* D+ Noni B Group W.Lane D

Ralph Lauren* Chaps* C– Fruit of the Loom* Spalding* D+ Noni B Group Table Eight D

Ralph Lauren* Club Monaco* C– Fruit of the Loom* Russel Athletic* D+ Noni B Group Amber Rose D

Seed Heritage Seed Heritage C– Hunting & Fishing NZ Hunting & Fishing NZ D+ Noni B Group Noni B D

The PAS Group Limited Yarra Trail C– Kate Sylvester* Kate Sylvester* D+ Noni B Group Liz Jordan D

The PAS Group Limited Review C– Simon de Winter Group Simon de Winter D+ Noni B Group Millers D

The PAS Group Limited Marco Polo C– Simon de Winter Group Darn Tough D+ Noni B Group Katies D

The PAS Group Limited Black Pepper C– Betts Group Betts D Noni B Group Autograph D

The PAS Group Limited Extra Pepper C– Betts Group Airflex D Noni B Group Maggie T D

The PAS Group Limited Breakaway C– Betts Group Zu D Noni B Group Rivers D

The PAS Group Limited Equus C– Fast Future Brands Valleygirl D

62 BRAND INDEX BRANDS RANKED HIGHEST TO LOWEST

* = non-responsive companies

Parent Company Brand Grade Parent Company Brand Grade

Noni B Group Crossroads D Pavement United Brands* Petals* F

Oxford Oxford D Pavement United Brands* Pom Pom* F

Abercrombie & Fitch* Abercrombie & Fitch* D– Pavement United Brands* Co Co Beach* F

Abercrombie & Fitch* Hollister Co.* D– Pavement United Brands* Zom-B* F

Abercrombie & Fitch* Gilly Hicks* D– Pavement United Brands* Scram* F

Abercrombie & Fitch* Abercrombie Kids* D– Pavement United Brands* Wax* F

Decjuba* Decjuba* D– Showpo* Showpo* F

Forever 21* Forever 21* D– 3 Wise Men Limited* 3 Wise Men* F

Gazal* Gazal* D– T&T Fashions* T&T* F

Tigerlily* Tigerlily* D– The Baby Factory* The Baby Factory* F

WORLD* WORLD* D– Trelise Cooper* Cooper by Trelise* F

Ally Fashion* Ally Fashion* F Trelise Cooper* little trelise* F

Baby City* Baby City* F Trelise Cooper* Trelise Cooper* F

Bec and Bridge* Bec and Bridge* F Voyager Distributing Co* Jump* F

Bloch* Bloch* F Voyager Distributing Co* Kachel* F

Camilla and Marc* Camilla and Marc* F Voyager Distributing Co* Ping Pong* F

Camilla and Marc* C&M* F Wish Designs Pty Ltd* Wish* F

Farmers* Farmers* F

Hot Springs* P.E. Nation* F

Hot Springs* Lover* F

Hot Springs* Cooper St* F

Hot Springs* Rebecca Vallance* F

Hot Springs* Jasmine & Will* F

Lowes* Lowes* F

Lowes* Beare & Ley* F

Merric Apparel NZ* Merric* F

Pavement United Brands* Pavement* F

Pavement United Brands* Lemonade* F

Pavement United Brands* Non Sense* F

63 Survey Data

This section provides a breakdown of the data behind each grade for the 130 companies assessed in the Report. The data is presented in a section-by-section 10and question-by-question breakdown.

64 SURVEY DATA POLICIES A–K

OVERALL GRADE D- A B- C A- C+ A- C B D+ C+ D+ C D B- C+ C- C+ C- C C+ C+ B+ D+ A- A- C- B D- C+ A+ D+ B- D D- B A+ D+ B D- B A- B B+ B+ A C B- C+ D+ A+ A A- B+ C C+ C- B D+ A B+ A- A+ F F F F F F F Abercrombie & Fitch* Abercrombie adidas ALDI Stores Ally Fashion* Anthea Crawford* APG & Co. Group Arcadia Colour AS ASICS ASOS City* Baby Bardot Clothing* Barkers Bec and Bridge* Ben Sherman Australia & Less Best Betts Group Big W Bloch* Blue Illusion Boardriders Boden Boohoo (Apparel) Collective Brand (Footwear) Collective Brand Camilla and Marc* NZ Canterbury City Chic Collective Coles* On Group Cotton Group Road Country Cue Jones David Decjuba* Designworks Etiko Ezibuy X Factory Farmers* Brands Future Fast 21* Forever New Forever T-Shirts Freeset Fruit of the Loom* Gap Inc. Gazal* Group Pants General Gildan Activewear Gorman H&M Holdings Glasson Hallenstein Hanesbrands Hot Springs* House of Quirky Huffer Group Hugo Boss Hunting & Fishing NZ Icebreaker Inditex Industrie Jeanswest JETS Group Just K&K Walker* Karen Sylvester* Kate Kathmandu Kmart Australia Kookai Kowtow

POLICIES GRADE B- A+ A+ F A+ A+ A+ A+ A A+ F A- A+ F A- A+ A- A+ F A+ A- A+ A- A+ A+ F A+ A+ A- A+ A+ A A+ B+ A+ A+ A A+ B A- C A+ A+ A A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ F A+ A+ A+ A- A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+

CODE OF CONDUCT Q1 Does the brand have a Code of Conduct for suppliers that covers the ILO Four Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work? Q2 Does the code prohibit the use of regular and excessive overtime? Q3 Are suppliers required to ensure freedom of movement for employees and their right to enter and leave employment willingly and voluntarily? E.g. suppliers are prohibited from withholding employee identity documents, including passports. Q4 Does the code include provisions to protect worker health and safety? Q5 Does the code apply to multiple levels of the supply chain including the raw materials level? Q6 Is the code included in supplier contracts? POLICIES Q1 Does the brand have a policy addressing gender inequality in the supply chain, including a strategy to address discrimination faced by women in the apparel industry? Q2 Does the brand have a policy on responsible purchasing practices in relation to supplier engagement that aims to improve working conditions?

Key: YES PARTIAL NO * = non-responsive companies 65 SURVEY DATA POLICIES L–Z

OVERALL GRADE B C- B A+ C+ A- B- B+ C A+ D B- A- B B- B- A- D B+ C+ A+ D C- A C B C+ B- C- C+ B+ A- A C B C- D+ B C+ B C+ C- B- D- C B+ B C D- B- F F F F F F F F F F L Brands Lacoste & Co.* Strauss Levi Liminal Apparel Jane Lorna Lowes* Lululemon Athletica Macpac Marks & Spencer Max* NZ* Merric Apparel Mighty Good Group Group Footwear Munro Myer Baby Nature Balance New Next Nike Nobody Denim Noni B Group Nudie Jeans Co. Group Oroton Outland Denim Oxford Pagani Patagonia Brands* United Pavement Postie+ Puma Corp.* PVH R.M. Williams Ralph Lauren* Group Apparel Retail Rip Curl & Gunn Rodd RREPP Apparel Ruby Seafolly Seed Heritage Showpo* Group Simon de Winter Group Sussan NZ Swanndri Men Ltd.* 3 Wise Fashions* T&T Australia Target Factory* Baby The Iconic* The Group PAS The Group Warehouse The Tigerlily* of Life Tree Cooper* Trelise UNIQLO VF Corp. Co.* Distributing Voyager Designs* Wish Group Workwear WORLD* Zimmermann

POLICIES GRADE A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ B- A+ A+ A+ A+ F A+ A- A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A- A+ A+ A+ A A+ A+ F A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ A+ F A A+ A+ F F A+ F A+ A+ A+ C- A B+ A+ A+ F F A A A

CODE OF CONDUCT Q1 Does the brand have a Code of Conduct for suppliers that covers the ILO Four Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work? Q2 Does the code prohibit the use of regular and excessive overtime? Q3 Are suppliers required to ensure freedom of movement for employees and their right to enter and leave employment willingly and voluntarily? E.g. suppliers are prohibited from withholding employee identity documents, including passports. Q4 Does the code include provisions to protect worker health and safety? Q5 Does the code apply to multiple levels of the supply chain including the raw materials level? Q6 Is the code included in supplier contracts? POLICIES Q1 Does the brand have a policy addressing gender inequality in the supply chain, including a strategy to address discrimination faced by women in the apparel industry? Q2 Does the brand have a policy on responsible purchasing practices in relation to supplier engagement that aims to improve working conditions?

Key: YES PARTIAL NO * = non-responsive companies 66 SURVEY DATA TRACEABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY FINAL STAGE PRODUCTION A–K

OVERALL GRADE D– A B– C A– C+ A– C B D+ C+ D+ C D B– C+ C– C+ C– C C+ C+ B+ D+ A– A– C– B D– C+ A+ D+ B– D D– B A+ D+ B D– B A– B B+ B+ A C B– C+ D+ A+ A A– B+ C C+ C– B D+ A B+ A– A+ F F F F F F F

FINAL STAGE PRODUCTION Abercrombie & Fitch* Abercrombie adidas ALDI Stores Ally Fashion* Anthea Crawford* APG & Co. Group Arcadia Colour AS ASICS ASOS City* Baby Bardot Clothing* Barkers Bec and Bridge* Ben Sherman Australia & Less Best Betts Group Big W Bloch* Blue Illusion Boardriders Boden Boohoo (Apparel) Collective Brand (Footwear) Collective Brand Camilla and Marc* of NZ Canterbury City Chic Collective Coles* On Group Cotton Group Road Country Cue Jones David Decjuba* Designworks Etiko Ezibuy X Factory Farmers* Brands Future Fast 21* Forever New Forever T–Shirts Freeset Fruit of the Loom* Gap Inc. Gazal* Group Pants General Gildan Activewear Gorman H&M Holdings Glasson Hallenstein Hanesbrands Hot Springs* House of Quirky Huffer Group Hugo Boss Hunting & Fishing NZ Icebreaker Inditex Industrie Jeanswest JETS Group Just K&K Walker* Karen Sylvester* Kate Kathmandu Kmart Australia Kookai Kowtow

TRACEABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY GRADE D– A+ A– F D+ A+ B A+ B A– F C– B+ F C– C+ D+ B+ F C+ C– B+ C– C+ B F A– A C+ A+ A D B+ F C+ A D+ A– F D F A– A+ C A F B+ A A– A– A– A F B– A B+ C A+ A B+ A– C+ C+ C B– C– A+ A A– A+

TRACEABILITY Q1 Approximately what percentage of factories has the brand traced? 1–25% 100% 100% 0% 76–99% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 0% 100% 100% 0% 100% 100% 76–99% 100% 0% 100% 100% 100% 76–99% 100% 100% 0% 100% 100% 76–99% 100% 100% 51–75% 100% 1–25% 100% 100% 51–75% 100% 1–25% 51–75% 1–25% 100% 100% 100% 100% 1–25% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 1–25% 100% 100% 76–99% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 76–99% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Q2 If not fully traced, is brand involved in a tracing project to locate unknown suppliers? Q3 Does the brand ensure that there is either no subcontracting or that all subcontracted production adheres to code standards? Q4 Does the brand track suppliers’ use of temporary or contract workers? Q5 Has the brand conducted a labour rights risk assessment of its supply chain to improve its labour rights management system? TRANSPARENCY Q1 Is there a public list of supplier factories?

Q2 Does the public list contain detailed indicators about each factory? Q3 Are broad monitoring results shared publicly

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 100% 76–99% 51–75% 26–50% 1–25% 0% N/A * = non-responsive companies 67 SURVEY DATA TRACEABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY FINAL STAGE PRODUCTION L–Z

OVERALL GRADE B C– B A+ C+ A– B– B+ C A+ D B– A– B B– B– A– D B+ C+ A+ D C– A C B C+ B– C– C+ B+ A– A C B C– D+ B C+ B C+ C– B– D– C B+ B C D– B– F F F F F F F F F F

FINAL STAGE PRODUCTION L Brands Lacoste & Co.* Strauss Levi Liminal Apparel Jane Lorna Lowes* Lululemon Athletica Macpac Marks & Spencer Max* NZ* Merric Apparel Mighty Good Group Group Footwear Munro Myer Baby Nature Balance New Next Nike Nobody Denim Noni B Group Nudie Jeans Co. Group Oroton Outland Denim Oxford Pagani Patagonia Brands* United Pavement Postie+ Puma Corp.* PVH R.M. Williams Ralph Lauren* Group Apparel Retail Rip Curl & Gunn Rodd RREPP Apparel Ruby Seafolly Seed Heritage Showpo* Group Simon de Winter Group Sussan NZ Swanndri Men Ltd.* 3 Wise Fashions* T&T Australia Target Factory* Baby The Iconic* The Group PAS The Group Warehouse The Tigerlily* of Life Tree Cooper* Trelise UNIQLO VF Corp. Co* Distributing Voyager Designs* Wish Group Workwear WORLD* Zimmermann

TRACEABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY GRADE B+ C– A– A+ B– F A B A+ B F A+ D C+ A– A– B+ A– A+ D+ A C+ A+ D B– A+ D– C A– B+ A– B– B A A A+ C B C– F D+ B B F F A– F B C A– D C F A A– F F B– F C+

TRACEABILITY Q1 Approximately what percentage of factories has the brand traced? 100% 51–75% 100% 100% 100% 1–25% 100% 100% 100% 76–99% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 76–99% 100% 100% 51–75% 100% 100% 100% 1–25% 100% 100% 51–75% 100% 100% 100% 100% 76–99% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 0% 100% 100% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100% 76–99% 76–99% 100% 0% 100% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 100% Q2 If not fully traced, is brand involved in a tracing project to locate unknown suppliers? Q3 Does the brand ensure that there is either no subcontracting or that all subcontracted production adheres to code standards? Q4 Does the brand track suppliers’ use of temporary or contract workers? Q5 Has the brand conducted a labour rights risk assessment of its supply chain to improve its labour rights management system? TRANSPARENCY Q1 Is there a public list of supplier factories?

Q2 Does the public list contain detailed indicators about each factory? Q3 Are broad monitoring results shared publicly

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 100% 76–99% 51–75% 26–50% 1–25% 0% N/A * = non-responsive companies 68 SURVEY DATA TRACEABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY INPUTS PRODUCTION A–K

OVERALL GRADE D– A B– C A– C+ A– C B D+ C+ D+ C D B– C+ C– C+ C– C C+ C+ B+ D+ A– A– C– B D– C+ A+ D+ B– D D– B A+ D+ B D– B A– B B+ B+ A C B– C+ D+ A+ A A– B+ C C+ C– B D+ A B+ A– A+ F F F F F F F

INPUTS PRODUCTION Abercrombie & Fitch* Abercrombie adidas ALDI Stores Ally Fashion* Anthea Crawford* APG & Co. Group Arcadia Colour AS ASICS ASOS City* Baby Bardot Clothing* Barkers Bec and Bridge* Ben Sherman Australia & Less Best Betts Group Big W Bloch* Blue Illusion Boardriders Boden Boohoo (Apparel) Collective Brand (Footwear) Collective Brand Camilla and Marc* of NZ Canterbury City Chic Collective Coles* On Group Cotton Group Road Country Cue Jones David Decjuba* Designworks Etiko Ezibuy X Factory Farmers* Brands Future Fast 21* Forever New Forever T–Shirts Freeset Fruit of the Loom* Gap Inc. Gazal* Group Pants General Gildan Activewear Gorman H&M Holdings Glasson Hallenstein Hanesbrands Hot Springs* House of Quirky Huffer Group Hugo Boss Hunting & Fishing NZ Icebreaker Inditex Industrie Jeanswest JETS Group Just K&K Walker* Karen Sylvester* Kate Kathmandu Kmart Australia Kookai Kowtow

TRACEABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY GRADE D– A+ A– F D+ A+ B A+ B A– F C– B+ F C– C+ D+ B+ F C+ C– B+ C– C+ B F A– A C+ A+ A D B+ F C+ A D+ A– F D F A– A+ C A F B+ A A– A– A– A F B– A B+ C A+ A B+ A– C+ C+ C B– C– A+ A A– A+

TRACEABILITY Q1 Approximately what percentage of factories has the brand traced? 1–25% 76–99% 76–99% 0% 0% 76–99% 1–25% 100% 1–25% 26–50% 0% 51–75% 51–75% 0% 1–25% 26–50% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 26–50% 26–50% 51–75% 1–25% 0% 26–50% 0% 100% 76–99% 0% 51–75% 100% 1–25% 51–75% 1–25% 26–50% 100% 1–25% 26–50% 0% 1–25% 0% 76–99% 100% 1–25% 76–99% 0% 76–99% 76–99% 26–50% 51–75% 51–75% 76–99% 0% 26–50% 76–99% 1–25% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 26–50% 76–99% 26–50% 76–99% 1–25% 76–99% 26–50% 100% 100% Q2 If not fully traced, is brand involved in a tracing project to locate unknown suppliers? Q5 Does the brand ensure that there is either no subcontracting or that all subcontracted production adheres to code standards? Q4 Does the brand track suppliers’ use of temporary or contract workers? Q5 Has the brand conducted a labour rights risk assessment of its supply chain to improve its labour rights management system? TRANSPARENCY Q1 Is there a public list of supplier factories?

Q2 Does the public list contain detailed indicators about each factory? Q3 Are broad monitoring results shared publicly

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 100% 76–99% 51–75% 26–50% 1–25% 0% N/A * = non-responsive companies 69 SURVEY DATA TRACEABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY INPUTS PRODUCTION L–Z

OVERALL GRADE B C– B A+ C+ A– B– B+ C A+ D B– A– B B– B– A– D B+ C+ A+ D C– A C B C+ B– C– C+ B+ A– A C B C– D+ B C+ B C+ C– B– D– C B+ B C D– B– F F F F F F F F F F

INPUTS PRODUCTION L Brands Lacoste & Co.* Strauss Levi Liminal Apparel Jane Lorna Lowes* Lululemon Athletica Macpac Marks & Spencer Max* NZ* Merric Apparel Mighty Good Group Group Footwear Munro Myer Baby Nature Balance New Next Nike Nobody Denim Noni B Group Nudie Jeans Co. Group Oroton Outland Denim Oxford Pagani Patagonia Brands* United Pavement Postie+ Puma Corp.* PVH R.M. Williams Ralph Lauren* Group Apparel Retail Rip Curl & Gunn Rodd RREPP Apparel Ruby Seafolly Seed Heritage Showpo* Group Simon de Winter Group Sussan NZ Swanndri Men Ltd.* 3 Wise Fashions* T&T Australia Target Factory* Baby The Iconic* The Group PAS The Group Warehouse The Tigerlily* of Life Tree Cooper* Trelise UNIQLO VF Corp. Co.* Distributing Voyager Designs* Wish Group Workwear WORLD* Zimmermann

TRACEABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY GRADE B+ C– A– A+ B– F A B A+ B F A+ D C+ A– A– B+ A– A+ D+ A C+ A+ D B– A+ D– C A– B+ A– B– B A A A+ C B C– F D+ B B F F A– F B C A– D C F A A– F F B– F C+

TRACEABILITY Q1 Approximately what percentage of factories has the brand traced? 76–99% 1–25% 76–99% 100% 1–25% 0% 100% 76–99% 100% 1–25% 0% 76–99% 0% 1–25% 100% 100% 51–75% 1–25% 100% 1–25% 76–99% 76–99% 100% 1–25% 1–25% 76–99% 0% 26–50% 26–50% 1–25% 100% 76–99% 100% 76–99% 76–99% 100% 51–75% 76–99% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 76–99% 100% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 26–50% 51–75% 26–50% 76–99% 0% 76–99% 76–99% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 76–99% Q2 If not fully traced, is brand involved in a tracing project to locate unknown suppliers? Q5 Does the brand ensure that there is either no subcontracting or that all subcontracted production adheres to code standards? Q4 Does the brand track suppliers’ use of temporary or contract workers? Q5 Has the brand conducted a labour rights risk assessment of its supply chain to improve its labour rights management system? TRANSPARENCY Q1 Is there a public list of supplier factories?

Q2 Does the public list contain detailed indicators about each factory? Q3 Are broad monitoring results shared publicly

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 100% 76–99% 51–75% 26–50% 1–25% 0% N/A * = non-responsive companies 70 SURVEY DATA TRACEABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY RAW MATERIALS PRODUCTION A–K

OVERALL GRADE D– A B– C A– C+ A– C B D+ C+ D+ C D B– C+ C– C+ C– C C+ C+ B+ D+ A– A– C– B D– C+ A+ D+ B– D D– B A+ D+ B D– B A– B B+ B+ A C B– C+ D+ A+ A A– B+ C C+ C– B D+ A B+ A– A+ F F F F F F F

RAW MATERIALS PRODUCTION Abercrombie & Fitch* Abercrombie adidas ALDI Stores Ally Fashion* Anthea Crawford* APG & Co. Group Arcadia Colour AS ASICS ASOS City* Baby Bardot Clothing* Barkers Bec and Bridge* Ben Sherman Australia & Less Best Betts Group Big W Bloch* Blue Illusion Boardriders Boden Boohoo (Apparel) Collective Brand (Footwear) Collective Brand Camilla and Marc* of NZ Canterbury City Chic Collective Coles* On Group Cotton Group Road Country Cue Jones David Decjuba* Designworks Etiko Ezibuy X Factory Farmers* Brands Future Fast 21* Forever New Forever T–Shirts Freeset Fruit of the Loom* Gap Inc. Gazal* Group Pants General Gildan Activewear Gorman H&M Holdings Glasson Hallenstein Hanesbrands Hot Springs* House of Quirky Huffer Group Hugo Boss Hunting & Fishing NZ Icebreaker Inditex Industrie Jeanswest JETS Group Just K&K Walker* Karen Sylvester* Kate Kathmandu Kmart Australia Kookai Kowtow

TRACEABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY GRADE D– A+ A– F D+ A+ B A+ B A– F C– B+ F C– C+ D+ B+ F C+ C– B+ C– C+ B F A– A C+ A+ A D B+ F C+ A D+ A– F D F A– A+ C A F B+ A A– A– A– A F B– A B+ C A+ A B+ A– C+ C+ C B– C– A+ A A– A+

TRACEABILITY Q1 Approximately what percentage of factories has the brand traced? 0% 76–99% 100% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 51–75% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 51–75% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 26–50% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 100% 1–25% 76–99% 76–99% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 51–75% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 51–75% 76–99% 26–50% 100% Q2 If not fully traced, is brand involved in a tracing project to locate unknown suppliers? Q3 Does the brand ensure that there is either no subcontracting or that all subcontracted production adheres to code standards? Q4 Does the brand track suppliers’ use of temporary or contract workers? Q5 Has the brand conducted a labour rights risk assessment of its supply chain to improve its labour rights management system? TRANSPARENCY Q1 Is there a public list of supplier factories?

Q2 Does the public list contain detailed indicators about each factory? Q3 Are broad monitoring results shared publicly

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 100% 76–99% 51–75% 26–50% 1–25% 0% N/A * = non-responsive companies 71 SURVEY DATA TRACEABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY RAW MATERIALS PRODUCTION L–Z

OVERALL GRADE B C– B A+ C+ A– B– B+ C A+ D B– A– B B– B– A– D B+ C+ A+ D C– A C B C+ B– C– C+ B+ A– A C B C– D+ B C+ B C+ C– B– D– C B+ B C D– B– F F F F F F F F F F

RAW MATERIALS PRODUCTION L Brands Lacoste & Co.* Strauss Levi Liminal Apparel Jane Lorna Lowes* Lululemon Athletica Macpac Marks & Spencer Max* NZ* Merric Apparel Mighty Good Group Group Footwear Munro Myer Baby Nature Balance New Next Nike Nobody Denim Noni B Group Nudie Jeans Co. Group Oroton Outland Denim Oxford Pagani Patagonia Brands* United Pavement Postie+ Puma Corp.* PVH R.M. Williams Ralph Lauren* Group Apparel Retail Rip Curl & Gunn Rodd RREPP Apparel Ruby Seafolly Seed Heritage Showpo* Group Simon de Winter Group Sussan NZ Swanndri Men Ltd.* 3 Wise Fashions* T&T Australia Target Factory* Baby The Iconic* The Group PAS The Group Warehouse The Tigerlily* of Life Tree Cooper* Trelise UNIQLO VF Corp. Co* Distributing Voyager Designs* Wish Group Workwear WORLD* Zimmermann

TRACEABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY GRADE B+ C– A– A+ B– F A B A+ B F A+ D C+ A– A– B+ A– A+ D+ A C+ A+ D B– A+ D– C A– B+ A– B– B A A A+ C B C– F D+ B B F F A– F B C A– D C F A A– F F B– F C+

TRACEABILITY Q1 Approximately what percentage of factories has the brand traced? 0% 0% 1–25% 100% 0% 0% 1–25% 100% 26–50% 0% 0% 100% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 100% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 26–50% 100% 1–25% 51–75% 0% 0% 0% 0% 76–99% 0% 0% 51–75% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% Q2 If not fully traced, is brand involved in a tracing project to locate unknown suppliers? Q3 Does the brand ensure that there is either no subcontracting or that all subcontracted production adheres to code standards? Q4 Does the brand track suppliers’ use of temporary or contract workers? Q5 Has the brand conducted a labour rights risk assessment of its supply chain to improve its labour rights management system? TRANSPARENCY Q1 Is there a public list of supplier factories?

Q2 Does the public list contain detailed indicators about each factory? Q3 Are broad monitoring results shared publicly

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 100% 76–99% 51–75% 26–50% 1–25% 0% N/A * = non-responsive companies 72 SURVEY DATA AUDITING AND SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIPS FINAL STAGE PRODUCTION A–K

OVERALL GRADE D– A B– C A– C+ A– C B D+ C+ D+ C D B– C+ C– C+ C– C C+ C+ B+ D+ A– A– C– B D– C+ A+ D+ B– D D– B A+ D+ B D– B A– B B+ B+ A C B– C+ D+ A+ A A– B+ C C+ C– B D+ A B+ F F F F F F F

FINAL STAGE PRODUCTION Abercrombie & Fitch* Abercrombie adidas ALDI Stores Ally Fashion* Anthea Crawford* APG & Co. Group Arcadia Colour AS ASICS ASOS City* Baby Bardot Clothing* Barkers Bec and Bridge* Ben Sherman Australia & Less Best Betts Group Big W Bloch* Blue Illusion Boardriders Boden Boohoo (Apparel) Collective Brand (Footwear) Collective Brand Camilla and Marc* of NZ Canterbury City Chic Collective Coles* On Group Cotton Group Road Country Cue Jones David Decjuba* Designworks Etiko Ezibuy X Factory Farmers* Brands Future Fast 21* Forever New Forever T–Shirts Freeset Fruit of the Loom* Gap Inc. Gazal* Group Pants General Gildan Activewear Gorman H&M Holdings Glasson Hallenstein Hanesbrands Hot Springs* House of Quirky Huffer Group Hugo Boss Hunting & Fishing NZ Icebreaker Inditex Industrie Jeanswest JETS Group Just K&K Walker* Karen Sylvester* Kate Kathmandu Kmart Australia

AUDITING AND SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIPS GRADE D– B+ B– F C– A C– A– C B F D– D+ F C– C D C F C+ C C+ C D+ C F C A– D A– A C– B F C+ A– D C– F D F C+ A+ D C+ F B A C B– B A+ F C+ C– C– D A+ A B B+ D+ B– D+ B D– A– B+

AUDITING Q1 What percentage of facilities are audited over a 2-year period by trained social auditors (internal and/or third party)? 51–75% 51–75% 100% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 0% 51–75% 100% 0% 100% 100% 76–99% 100% 0% 100% 100% 100% 76–99% 76–99% 76–99% 0% 51–75% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 0% 100% 100% 76–99% 51–75% 0% 26–50% 1–25% 100% 100% 76–99% 100% 0% 100% 100% 51–75% 100% 100% 100% 1–25% 76–99% 51–75% 76–99% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 76–99% 51–75% 100% 26–50% 100% 100% What percentage of facilities are internally audited by staff with social audit training? 0% 26–50% 26–50% 0% 0% 51–75% 1–25% 0% 26–50% 76–99% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 76–99% 1–25% 51–75% 1–25% 76–99% 0% 0% 0% 0% 76–99% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 100% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 26–50% 1–25% 76–99% 0% 0% 51–75% 0% 0% 100% 26–50% 100% 1–25% 76–99% 0% 26–50% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 51–75% 0% 1–25% 0% What percentage of facilities are audited by third party auditors that specialise in labour standards? 51–75% 1–25% 100% 0% 100% 26–50% 100% 100% 51–75% 1–25% 0% 51–75% 100% 0% 100% 100% 76–99% 100% 0% 100% 76–99% 100% 26–50% 51–75% 51–75% 0% 100% 100% 100% 1–25% 100% 100% 100% 0% 100% 100% 76–99% 26–50% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 100% 76–99% 26–50% 0% 100% 1–25% 26–50% 1–25% 100% 100% 1–25% 51–75% 51–75% 26–50% 0% 100% 51–75% 100% 76–99% 100% 76–99% 51–75% 100% 26–50% 100% 100% Q2 What percentage of facilities are audited with unannounced audits, anonymous worker surveys or off-site worker interviews per year? 0% 26–50% 1–25% 0% 100% 76–99% 1–25% 100% 0% 76–99% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 51–75% 0% 26–50% 0% 26–50% 76–99% 0% 100% 1–25% 100% 1–25% 0% 51–75% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 51–75% 1–25% 1–25% 100% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 100% 1–25% 0% 0% 100% 0% 76–99% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 100% 0% 1–25% 100% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 26–50% 1–25% Q3 Are suppliers monitored for their use of labour brokers and recruitment fees? Q4 What percentage of corrective action plans pertaining to wages and/or overtime are resolved within 12 months? 0% 0% 0% 0% 76–99% 26–50% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 76–99% 0% 51–75% 51–75% 100% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 26–50% 76–99% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 51–75% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 76–99% SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIPS Q1 Does the brand invest in training buyers and suppliers/factory managers, in order to increase awareness of human rights and health and safety risks? Q2 Does the company actively improve leverage and relationships with suppliers, through supplier consolidation and industry collaboration? Q3 Does that company have a preferred supplier program by which suppliers are incentivised by strong labour rights records? Q4 For companies more than 10 years old: What proportion of suppliers has the company sourced from for at least 5 years? 0% 76–99% 51–75% 0% 0% 76–99% 26–50% 76–99% 51–75% 51–75% 0% 51–75% 51–75% 0% 76–99% 76–99% 26–50% 1–25% 0% 76–99% 51–75% 26–50% 26–50% 26–50% 26–50% 0% 51–75% 76–99% 0% 26–50% 76–99% 51–75% 51–75% 0% 51–75% 100% 51–75% 51–75% 0% 26–50% 0% 26–50% 100% 0% 0% 0% 76–99% 51–75% 51–75% 26–50% 51–75% 51–75% 0% 51–75% 51–75% 26–50% 76–99% 51–75% 51–75% 51–75% 76–99% 0% 26–50% 76–99% 76–99% 1–25% 76–99% 26–50%

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 100% 76–99% 51–75% 26–50% 1–25% 0% N/A * = non-responsive companies 73 SURVEY DATA AUDITING AND SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIPS FINAL STAGE PRODUCTION K–Z

OVERALL GRADE A– A+ B C– B C+ A+ A– B– B+ C A+ D B– A– B B– B– A– D B+ C+ A+ D C– A C B C+ B– C– C+ B+ A– A C B C– D+ B C+ B C+ C– B– D– C B+ B C D– B– F F F F F F F F F F

FINAL STAGE PRODUCTION Kookai Kowtow L Brands Lacoste & Co.* Strauss Levi Jane Lorna Liminal Apparel Lowes* Lululemon Athletica Macpac Marks & Spencer Max* NZ* Merric Apparel Mighty Good Group Group Footwear Munro Myer Baby Nature Balance New Next Nike Nobody Denim Noni B Group Nudie Jeans Co. Group Oroton Outland Denim Oxford Pagani Patagonia Brands* United Pavement Postie+ Puma Corp.* PVH R.M. Williams Ralph Lauren* Group Apparel Retail Rip Curl & Gunn Rodd RREPP Apparel Ruby Seafolly Seed Heritage Showpo* Group Simon de Winter Group Sussan NZ Swanndri Men Ltd* 3 Wise Fashions* T&T Australia Target Factory* Baby The Iconic* The Group PAS The Group Warehouse The Tigerlily* of Life Tree Cooper* Trelise UNIQLO VF Corp. Co.* Distributing Voyager Designs* Wish Group Workwear WORLD* Zimmermann

AUDITING AND SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIPS GRADE A– A B+ D+ B– B– B+ F A+ B– C C F B+ D– B A– C+ B– C B+ D B– B A+ D C– A F D+ B C B D+ B B B– B+ C– B+ C– F D+ B+ D+ F F B F C– C– B– F C F B+ C+ F F C+ F B

AUDITING Q1 What percentage of facilities are audited over a 2-year period by trained social auditors (internal and/or third party)? 100% 76–99% 100% 76–99% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 76–99% 100% 100% 0% 100% 26–50% 100% 100% 76–99% 76–99% 100% 100% 76–99% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 0% 100% 100% 76–99% 100% 76–99% 100% 76–99% 100% 100% 26–50% 100% 51–75% 0% 100% 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100% 76–99% 1–25% 76–99% 0% 100% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 100% What percentage of facilities are internally audited by staff with social audit training? 0% 0% 100% 0% 26–50% 0% 100% 0% 76–99% 26–50% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 51–75% 76–99% 26–50% 0% 0% 0% 76–99% 100% 51–75% 0% 76–99% 0% 0% 26–50% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 51–75% 0% 0% 0% 100% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 100% 26–50% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 100% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% What percentage of facilities are audited by third party auditors that specialise in labour standards? 100% 76–99% 26–50% 76–99% 26–50% 100% 100% 100% 1–25% 100% 100% 100% 0% 100% 26–50% 100% 100% 1–25% 1–25% 26–50% 100% 76–99% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 1–25% 0% 100% 26–50% 1–25% 100% 100% 100% 76–99% 100% 100% 26–50% 100% 51–75% 0% 100% 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 100% 51–75% 100% 1–25% 76–99% 0% 76–99% 1–25% 0% 0% 76–99% 0% 100% Q2 What percentage of facilities are audited with unannounced audits, anonymous worker surveys or off-site worker interviews per year? 1–25% 1–25% 26–50% 0% 1–25% 100% 100% 0% 1–25% 76–99% 1–25% 100% 0% 1–25% 0% 26–50% 26–50% 1–25% 76–99% 1–25% 51–75% 0% 76–99% 76–99% 100% 51–75% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 51–75% 51–75% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 100% 0% 0% 0% 51–75% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 26–50% 0% 1–25% 0% 76–99% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 76–99% Q3 Are suppliers monitored for their use of labour brokers and recruitment fees? Q4 What percentage of corrective action plans pertaining to wages and/or overtime are resolved within 12 months? 100% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 76–99% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 100% 26–50% 0% 76–99% 0% 0% 51–75% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 76–99% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIPS Q1 Does the brand invest in training buyers and suppliers/factory managers, in order to increase awareness of human rights and health and safety risks? Q2 Does the company actively improve leverage and relationships with suppliers, through supplier consolidation and industry collaboration? Q3 Does that company have a preferred supplier program by which suppliers are incentivised by strong labour rights records? Q4 For companies more than 10 years old: What proportion of suppliers has the company sourced from for at least 5 years? 76–99% 51–75% 76–99% 1–25% 0% 100% N/A 0% 76–99% 51–75% 1–25% 51–75% 0% N/A 51–75% 51–75% 26–50% 26–50% 51–75% 0% 100% 51–75% 26–50% 100% N/A 1–25% 100% 76–99% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 26–50% 0% 76–99% 76–99% 100% N/A 76–99% 76–99% 51–75% 0% 100% 76–99% 76–99% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 100% 76–99% 26–50% 1–25% 76–99% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 76–99% 0% 76–99%

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 100% 76–99% 51–75% 26–50% 1–25% 0% N/A * = non-responsive companies 74 SURVEY DATA AUDITING AND SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIPS INPUTS PRODUCTION A–K

OVERALL GRADE D– A B– C A– C+ A– C B D+ C+ D+ C D B– C+ C– C+ C– C C+ C+ B+ D+ A– A– C– B D– C+ A+ D+ B– D D– B A+ D+ B D– B A– B B+ B+ A C B– C+ D+ A+ A A– B+ C C+ C– B D+ A B+ F F F F F F F

INPUTS PRODUCTION Abercrombie & Fitch* Abercrombie adidas ALDI Stores Ally Fashion* Anthea Crawford* APG & Co. Group Arcadia Colour AS ASICS ASOS City* Baby Bardot Clothing* Barkers Bec and Bridge* Ben Sherman Australia & Less Best Betts Group Big W Bloch* Blue Illusion Boardriders Boden Boohoo (Apparel) Collective Brand (Footwear) Collective Brand Camilla and Marc* of NZ Canterbury City Chic Collective Coles* On Group Cotton Group Road Country Cue Jones David Decjuba* Designworks Etiko Ezibuy X Factory Farmers* Brands Future Fast 21* Forever New Forever T–Shirts Freeset Fruit of the Loom* Gap Inc. Gazal* Group Pants General Gildan Activewear Gorman H&M Holdings Glasson Hallenstein Hanesbrands Hot Springs* House of Quirky Huffer Group Hugo Boss Hunting & Fishing NZ Icebreaker Inditex Industrie Jeanswest JETS Group Just K&K Walker* Karen Sylvester* Kate Kathmandu Kmart Australia

AUDITING AND SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIPS GRADE D– B+ B– F C– A C– A– C B F D– D+ F C– C D C F C+ C C+ C D+ C F C A– D A– A C– B F C+ A– D C– F D F C+ A+ D C+ F B A C B– B A+ F C+ C– C– D A+ A B B+ D+ B– D+ B D– A– B+

AUDITING Q1 What percentage of facilities are audited over a 2-year period by trained social auditors (internal and/or third party)? 1–25% 26–50% 1–25% 0% 0% 51–75% 0% 51–75% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 51–75% 0% 0% 26–50% 1–25% 100% 0% 26–50% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 51–75% 0% 100% 51–75% 0% 26–50% 0% 1–25% 100% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 26–50% 0% 26–50% 100% 76–99% 0% 0% 26–50% 100% 100% 100% 51–75% 51–75% 0% 76–99% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 100% 100% 1–25% 26–50% 26–50% 26–50% 1–25% 100% 0% 51–75% 100% What percentage of facilities are internally audited by staff with social audit training? 0% 26–50% 1–25% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 100% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 76–99% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100% 100% 1–25% 76–99% 0% 26–50% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% What percentage of facilities are audited by third party auditors that specialise in labour standards? 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 51–75% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 51–75% 0% 0% 51–75% 1–25% 100% 0% 26–50% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 51–75% 0% 1–25% 51–75% 0% 26–50% 0% 1–25% 100% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 100% 76–99% 0% 0% 26–50% 1–25% 100% 0% 51–75% 100% 0% 51–75% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 100% 51–75% 1–25% 1–25% 26–50% 26–50% 1–25% 100% 0% 51–75% 100% Q2 What percentage of facilities are audited with unannounced audits, anonymous worker surveys or off-site worker interviews per year? 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 51–75% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 51–75% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 1–25% 0% 0% 100% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% Q3 Are suppliers monitored for their use of labour brokers and recruitment fees? Q4 What percentage of corrective action plans pertaining to wages and/or overtime are resolved within 12 months? 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 76–99% 0% 51–75% 51–75% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 76–99% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 76–99% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 76–99% SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIPS Q1 Does the brand invest in training buyers and suppliers/factory managers, in order to increase awareness of human rights and health and safety risks? Q2 Does the company actively improve leverage and relationships with suppliers, through supplier consolidation and industry collaboration? Q3 Does that company have a preferred supplier program by which suppliers are incentivised by strong labour rights records? Q4 For companies more than 10 years old: What proportion of suppliers has the company sourced from for at least 5 years? 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 0% 51–75% 0% 76–99% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 76–99% 0% 0% 0% 51–75% 1–25% 1–25% 26–50% 0% 0% 0% 0% 76–99% 0% 26–50% 76–99% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 100% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 51–75% 100% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 51–75% 51–75% 0% 51–75% 51–75% 1–25% 76–99% 51–75% 51–75% 51–75% 1–25% 0% 0% 100% 1–25% 0% 51–75% 26–50%

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 100% 76–99% 51–75% 26–50% 1–25% 0% N/A * = non-responsive companies 75 SURVEY DATA AUDITING AND SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIPS INPUTS PRODUCTION K–Z

OVERALL GRADE A– A+ B C– B A+ C+ A– B– B+ C A+ D B– A– B B– B– A– D B+ C+ A+ D C– A C B C+ B– C– C+ B+ A– A C B C– D+ B C+ B C+ C– B– D– C B+ B C D– B– F F F F F F F F F F

INPUTS PRODUCTION Kookai Kowtow L Brands Lacoste & Co.* Strauss Levi Liminal Apparel Jane Lorna Lowes* Lululemon Athletica Macpac Marks & Spencer Max* NZ* Merric Apparel Mighty Good Group Group Footwear Munro Myer Baby Nature Balance New Next Nike Nobody Denim Noni B Group Nudie Jeans Co. Group Oroton Outland Denim Oxford Pagani Patagonia Brands* United Pavement Postie+ Puma Corp.* PVH R.M. Williams Ralph Lauren* Group Apparel Retail Rip Curl & Gunn Rodd RREPP Apparel Ruby Seafolly Seed Heritage Showpo* Group Simon de Winter Group Sussan NZ Swanndri Men Ltd.* 3 Wise Fashions* T&T Australia Target Factory* Baby The Iconic* The Group PAS The Group Warehouse The Tigerlily* of Life Tree Cooper* Trelise UNIQLO VF Corp. Co.* Distributing Voyager Designs* Wish Group Workwear WORLD* Zimmermann

AUDITING AND SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIPS GRADE A– A B+ D+ B– B+ B– F A+ B– C C F B+ D– B A– C+ B– C B+ D B– B A+ D C– A F D+ B C B D+ B B B– B+ C– B+ C– F D+ B+ D+ F F B F C– C– B– F C F B+ C+ F F C+ F B

AUDITING Q1 What percentage of facilities are audited over a 2-year period by trained social auditors (internal and/or third party)? 1–25% 76–99% 1–25% 76–99% 100% 100% 0% 0% 100% 76–99% 1–25% 0% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 100% 1–25% 26–50% 0% 100% 76–99% 0% 51–75% 0% 1–25% 76–99% 1–25% 100% 0% 76–99% 26–50% 26–50% 100% 0% 76–99% 1–25% 0% 0% 51–75% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 26–50% 0% 76–99% 26–50% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 51–75% What percentage of facilities are internally audited by staff with social audit training? 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 26–50% 100% 0% 0% 76–99% 26–50% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 76–99% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 51–75% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 0% 76–99% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 100% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% What percentage of facilities are audited by third party auditors that specialise in labour standards? 100% 76–99% 1–25% 76–99% 26–50% 100% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 100% 1–25% 26–50% 0% 100% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 100% 0% 100% 26–50% 26–50% 100% 0% 76–99% 1–25% 0% 0% 51–75% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 26–50% 0% 76–99% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 51–75% Q2 What percentage of facilities are audited with unannounced audits, anonymous worker surveys or off-site worker interviews per year? 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 100% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 100% 51–75% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Q3 Are suppliers monitored for their use of labour brokers and recruitment fees? Q4 What percentage of corrective action plans pertaining to wages and/or overtime are resolved within 12 months? 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 51–75% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 76–99% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIPS Q1 Does the brand invest in training buyers and suppliers/factory managers, in order to increase awareness of human rights and health and safety risks? Q2 Does the company actively improve leverage and relationships with suppliers, through supplier consolidation and industry collaboration? Q3 Does that company have a preferred supplier program by which suppliers are incentivised by strong labour rights records? Q4 For companies more than 10 years old: What proportion of suppliers has the company sourced from for at least 5 years? 76–99% 26–50% 51–75% 1–25% 0% N/A 26–50% 0% 76–99% 76–99% 0% 0% 0% N/A 0% 1–25% 26–50% 0% 26–50% 0% 51–75% 1–25% 26–50% 76–99% NA 0% 1–25% 76–99% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 26–50% 0% 51–75% 51–75% 100% N/A 26–50% 51–75% 51–75% 0% 100% 76–99% 100% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 100% 0% 26–50% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 51–75% 0% 76–99%

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 100% 76–99% 51–75% 26–50% 1–25% 0% N/A * = non-responsive companies 76 SURVEY DATA AUDITING AND SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIPS RAW MATERIALS PRODUCTION A–K

OVERALL GRADE D– A B– C A– C+ A– C B D+ C+ D+ C D B– C+ C– C+ C– C C+ C+ B+ D+ A– A– C– B D– C+ A+ D+ B– D D– B A+ D+ B D– B A– B B+ B+ A C B– C+ D+ A+ A A– B+ C C+ C– B D+ A B+ F F F F F F F

RAW MATERIALS PRODUCTION Abercrombie & Fitch* Abercrombie adidas ALDI Stores Ally Fashion* Anthea Crawford* APG & Co. Group Arcadia Colour AS ASICS ASOS City* Baby Bardot Clothing* Barkers Bec and Bridge* Ben Sherman Australia & Less Best Betts Group Big W Bloch* Blue Illusion Boardriders Boden Boohoo (Apparel) Collective Brand (Footwear) Collective Brand Camilla and Marc* of NZ Canterbury City Chic Collective Coles* On Group Cotton Group Road Country Cue Jones David Decjuba* Designworks Etiko Ezibuy X Factory Farmers* Brands Future Fast 21* Forever New Forever T–Shirts Freeset Fruit of the Loom* Gap Inc. Gazal* Group Pants General Gildan Activewear Gorman H&M Holdings Glasson Hallenstein Hanesbrands Hot Springs* House of Quirky Huffer Group Hugo Boss Hunting & Fishing NZ Icebreaker Inditex Industrie Jeanswest JETS Group Just K&K Walker* Karen Sylvester* Kate Kathmandu Kmart Australia

AUDITING AND SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIPS GRADE D– B+ B– F C– A C– A– C B F D– D+ F C– C D C F C+ C C+ C D+ C F C A– D A– A C– B F C+ A– D C– F D F C+ A+ D C+ F B A C B– B A+ F C+ C– C– D A+ A B B+ D+ B– D+ B D– A– B+

AUDITING Q1 What percentage of facilities are audited over a 2-year period by trained social auditors (internal and/or third party)? 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 26–50% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 26–50% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 100% 1–25% 0% 51–75% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% What percentage of facilities are internally audited by staff with social audit training? 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% What percentage of facilities are audited by third party auditors that specialise in labour standards? 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 26–50% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 26–50% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 100% 1–25% 0% 51–75% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% Q2 What percentage of facilities are audited with unannounced audits, anonymous worker surveys or off-site worker interviews per year? 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 26–50% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% Q3 Are suppliers monitored for their use of labour brokers and recruitment fees? Q4 What percentage of corrective action plans pertaining to wages and/or overtime are resolved within 12 months? 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 51–75% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIPS Q1 Does the brand invest in training buyers and suppliers/factory managers, in order to increase awareness of human rights and health and safety risks? Q2 Does the company actively improve leverage and relationships with suppliers, through supplier consolidation and industry collaboration? Q3 Does that company have a preferred supplier program by which suppliers are incentivised by strong labour rights records? Q4 For companies more than 10 years old: What proportion of suppliers has the company sourced from for at least 5 years? 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 26–50% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 76–99% 76–99% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0%

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 100% 76–99% 51–75% 26–50% 1–25% 0% N/A * = non-responsive companies 77 SURVEY DATA AUDITING AND SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIPS RAW MATERIALS PRODUCTION K–Z

OVERALL GRADE A– A+ B C– B A+ C+ A– B– B+ C A+ D B– A– B B– B– A– D B+ C+ A+ D C– A C B C+ B– C– C+ B+ A– A C B C– D+ B C+ B C+ C– B– D– C B+ B C D– B– F F F F F F F F F F

RAW MATERIALS PRODUCTION Kookai Kowtow L Brands Lacoste & Co.* Strauss Levi Liminal Apparel Jane Lorna Lowes* Lululemon Athletica Macpac Marks & Spencer Max* NZ* Merric Apparel Mighty Good Group Group Footwear Munro Myer Baby Nature Balance New Next Nike Nobody Denim Noni B Group Nudie Jeans Co. Group Oroton Outland Denim Oxford Pagani Patagonia Brands* United Pavement Postie+ Puma Corp.* PVH R.M. Williams Ralph Lauren* Group Apparel Retail Rip Curl & Gunn Rodd RREPP Apparel Ruby Seafolly Seed Heritage Showpo* Group Simon de Winter Group Sussan NZ Swanndri Men Ltd.* 3 Wise Fashions* T&T Australia Target Factory* Baby The Iconic* The Group PAS The Group Warehouse The Tigerlily* of Life Tree Cooper* Trelise UNIQLO VF Corp. Co.* Distributing Voyager Designs* Wish Group Workwear WORLD* Zimmermann

AUDITING AND SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIPS GRADE A– A B+ D+ B– B+ B– F A+ B– C C F B+ D– B A– C+ B– C B+ D B– B A+ D C– A F D+ B C B D+ B B B– B+ C– B+ C– F D+ B+ D+ F F B F C– C– B– F C F B+ C+ F F C+ F B

AUDITING Q1 What percentage of facilities are audited over a 2-year period by trained social auditors (internal and/or third party)? 0% 100% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 51–75% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 76–99% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% What percentage of facilities are internally audited by staff with social audit training? 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 51–75% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% What percentage of facilities are audited by third party auditors that specialise in labour standards? 0% 100% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 51–75% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 76–99% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Q2 What percentage of facilities are audited with unannounced audits, anonymous worker surveys or off-site worker interviews per year? 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Q3 Are suppliers monitored for their use of labour brokers and recruitment fees? Q4 What percentage of corrective action plans pertaining to wages and/or overtime are resolved within 12 months? 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIPS Q1 Does the brand invest in training buyers and suppliers/factory managers, in order to increase awareness of human rights and health and safety risks? Q2 Does the company actively improve leverage and relationships with suppliers, through supplier consolidation and industry collaboration? Q3 Does that company have a preferred supplier program by which suppliers are incentivised by strong labour rights records? Q4 For companies more than 10 years old: What proportion of suppliers has the company sourced from for at least 5 years? 26–50% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% N/A 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% N/A 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 76–99% N/A 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% N/A 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 100% 76–99% 51–75% 26–50% 1–25% 0% N/A * = non-responsive companies 78 SURVEY DATA WORKER EMPOWERMENT FINAL STAGE PRODUCTION A–K

OVERALL GRADE D– A B– C A– C+ A– C B D+ C+ D+ C D B– C+ C– C+ C– C C+ C+ B+ D+ A– A– C– B D– C+ A+ D+ B– D D– B A+ D+ B D– B A– B B+ B+ A C B– C+ D+ A+ A A– B+ C C+ C– B D+ A B+ A– A+ F F F F F F F

FINAL STAGE PRODUCTION Abercrombie & Fitch* Abercrombie adidas ALDI Stores Ally Fashion* Anthea Crawford* APG & Co. Group Arcadia Colour AS ASICS ASOS City* Baby Bardot Clothing* Barkers Bec and Bridge* Ben Sherman Australia & Less Best Betts Group Big W Bloch* Blue Illusion Boardriders Boden Boohoo (Apparel) Collective Brand (Footwear) Collective Brand Camilla and Marc* of NZ Canterbury City Chic Collective Coles* On Group Cotton Group Road Country Cue Jones David Decjuba* Designworks Etiko Ezibuy X Factory Farmers* Brands Future Fast 21* Forever New Forever T–Shirts Freeset Fruit of the Loom* Gap Inc. Gazal* Group Pants General Gildan Activewear Gorman H&M Holdings Glasson Hallenstein Hanesbrands Hot Springs* House of Quirky Huffer Group Hugo Boss Hunting & Fishing NZ Icebreaker Inditex Industrie Jeanswest JETS Group Just K&K Walker* Karen Sylvester* Kate Kathmandu Kmart Australia Kookai Kowtow

WORKER EMPOWERMENT GRADE F B– D– F C– B– D– B– D– C– F F D F D– D– F D+ F D D D+ D– D C– F D C+ F B B D+ C– F D A+ F C– F F F C– A+ D– D+ F D+ C+ C– C– C+ B+ F D– D D F A– B+ B+ C F D+ D– C– F B+ C– B– A–

WAGES Q1 Has the company developed a living wage methodology and calculated a living wage for each region that it operates in? Q2 Has the brand published a commitment to pay living wages, which is timebound and measurable, including a methodology or benchmark? Q3 What percentage of facilities have projects to improve wages? 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 100% 1–25% 1–25% 51–75% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 26–50% 26–50% 0% 1–25% 26–50% 100% 1–25% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 1–25% 51–75% 0% 0% 0% 0% 26–50% 1–25% 76–99% 0% 0% 51–75% 1–25% 0% 0% 76–99% 0% 51–75% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 76–99% 26–50% 1–25% 100% Q4 What percentage of facilities pay a living wage? 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 1–25% 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 51–75% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 26–50% 51–75% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 26–50% WORKER VOICE Q1 What percentage of facilities are known to have independent democratically elected trade unions and/or collective bargaining

agreements? 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 100% 76–99% 1–25% 26–50% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 76–99% 100% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 100% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 100% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 26–50% 1–25% 1–25% 51–75% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 26–50% 0% 76–99% 1–25% 76–99% 26–50% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 76–99% 1–25% 51–75% 76–99% Q2 Are all workers trained on their rights regarding freedom of association? Q3 Does the company have a functioning grievance mechanism which workers can access annonymously and in their native language? Q4 Are workers trained on their rights and entitlements, including how to use grievance mechanisms? CHILD & FORCED LABOR REMEDIATION PLAN Q1 Where child labour and/or forced labour is found to exist, does the company consult with credible civil society organisations in developing a plan for redress?

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 100% 76–99% 51–75% 26–50% 1–25% 0% * = non-responsive companies 79 SURVEY DATA WORKER EMPOWERMENT FINAL STAGE PRODUCTION L–Z

OVERALL GRADE B C– B A+ C+ A– B– B+ C A+ D B– A– B B– B– A– D B+ C+ A+ D C– A C B C+ B– C– C+ B+ A– A C B C– D+ B C+ B C+ C– B– D– C B+ B C D– B– F F F F F F F F F F

FINAL STAGE PRODUCTION L Brands Lacoste & Co.* Strauss Levi Liminal Apparel Jane Lorna Lowes* Lululemon Athletica Macpac Marks & Spencer Max* NZ* Merric Apparel Mighty Good Group Group Footwear Munro Myer Baby Nature Balance New Next Nike Nobody Denim Noni B Group Nudie Jeans Co. Group Oroton Outland Denim Oxford Pagani Patagonia Brands* United Pavement Postie+ Puma Corp.* PVH R.M. Williams Ralph Lauren* Group Apparel Retail Rip Curl & Gunn Rodd RREPP Apparel Ruby Seafolly Seed Heritage Showpo* Group Simon de Winter Group Sussan NZ Swanndri Men Ltd.* 3 Wise Fashions* T&T Australia Target Factory* Baby The Iconic* The Group PAS The Group Warehouse The Tigerlily* of Life Tree Cooper* Trelise UNIQLO VF Corp. Co.* Distributing Voyager Designs* Wish Group Workwear WORLD* Zimmermann

WORKER EMPOWERMENT GRADE D+ F D– A+ C– F B– D+ D+ D F A+ F D+ B– D D– D– B+ F B– D+ A+ F D– B F C– D+ D– D– F D– D+ B– B+ D+ D D– F F C+ D+ F F C– F D– F D+ F D+ F D D+ F F D F C+

WAGES Q1 Has the company developed a living wage methodology and calculated a living wage for each region that it operates in? Q2 Has the brand published a commitment to pay living wages, which is timebound and measurable, including a methodology or benchmark? Q3 What percentage of facilities have projects to improve wages? 1–25% 0% 0% 100% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 51–75% 0% 1–25% 26–50% 100% 0% 0% 51–75% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% Q4 What percentage of facilities pay a living wage? 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 51–75% 0% 1–25% 0% 100% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 1–25% WORKER VOICE Q1 What percentage of facilities are known to have independent democratically elected trade unions and/or collective bargaining

agreements? 0% 0% 0% 100% 100% 0% 51–75% 76–99% 1–25% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 76–99% 1–25% 0% 0% 51–75% 0% 100% 100% 100% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 51–75% 1–25% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 0% 51–75% 0% 26–50% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 76–99% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 76–99% Q2 Are all workers trained on their rights regarding freedom of association? Q3 Does the company have a functioning grievance mechanism which workers can access annonymously and in their native language? Q4 Are workers trained on their rights and entitlements, including how to use grievance mechanisms? CHILD & FORCED LABOR REMEDIATION PLAN Q1 Where child labour and/or forced labour is found to exist, does the company consult with credible civil society organisations in developing a plan for redress?

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 100% 76–99% 51–75% 26–50% 1–25% 0% * = non-responsive companies 80 SURVEY DATA WORKER EMPOWERMENT INPUTS PRODUCTION A–K

OVERALL GRADE D– A B– C A– C+ A– C B D+ C+ D+ C D B– C+ C– C+ C– C C+ C+ B+ D+ A– A– C– B D– C+ A+ D+ B– D D– B A+ D+ B D– B A– B B+ B+ A C B– C+ D+ A+ A A– B+ C C+ C– B D+ A B+ A– A+ F F F F F F F

INPUTS PRODUCTION Abercrombie & Fitch* Abercrombie adidas ALDI Stores Ally Fashion* Anthea Crawford* APG & Co. Group Arcadia Colour AS ASICS ASOS City* Baby Bardot Clothing* Barkers Bec and Bridge* Ben Sherman Australia & Less Best Betts Group Big W Bloch* Blue Illusion Boardriders Boden Boohoo (Apparel) Collective Brand (Footwear) Collective Brand Camilla and Marc* of NZ Canterbury City Chic Collective Coles* On Group Cotton Group Road Country Cue Jones David Decjuba* Designworks Etiko Ezibuy X Factory Farmers* Brands Future Fast 21* Forever New Forever T–Shirts Freeset Fruit of the Loom* Gap Inc. Gazal* Group Pants General Gildan Activewear Gorman H&M Holdings Glasson Hallenstein Hanesbrands Hot Springs* House of Quirky Huffer Group Hugo Boss Hunting & Fishing NZ Icebreaker Inditex Industrie Jeanswest JETS Group Just K&K Walker* Karen Sylvester* Kate Kathmandu Kmart Australia Kookai Kowtow

WORKER EMPOWERMENT GRADE F B– D– F C– B– D– B– D– C– F F D F D– D– F D+ F D D D+ D– D C– F D C+ F B B D+ C– F D A+ F C– F F F C– A+ D– D+ F D+ C+ C– C– C+ B+ F D– D D F A– B+ B+ C F D+ D– C– F B+ C– B– A–

WAGES Q1 Has the company developed a living wage methodology and calculated a living wage for each region that it operates in? Q2 Has the brand published a commitment to pay living wages, which is timebound and measurable, including a methodology or benchmark? Q3 What percentage of facilities have projects to improve wages? 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 51–75% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 76–99% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 76–99% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 76–99% Q4 What percentage of facilities pay a living wage? 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 51–75% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 26–50% WORKER VOICE Q1 What percentage of facilities are known to have independent democratically elected trade unions? 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 26–50% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 76–99% 1–25% 51–75% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 76–99% Q2 Are all workers trained on their rights regarding freedom of association? Q3 Does the company have a functioning grievance mechanism which workers can access annonymously and in their native language? Q4 Are workers trained on their rights and entitlements, including how to use grievance mechanisms? CHILD & FORCED LABOR REMEDIATION PLAN

Q1 Where child labour and/or forced labour is found to exist, does the company consult with credible civil society organisations in developing a plan for redress?

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 100% 76–99% 51–75% 26–50% 1–25% 0% * = non-responsive companies 81 SURVEY DATA WORKER EMPOWERMENT INPUTS PRODUCTION L–Z

OVERALL GRADE B C– B C+ A+ A– B– B+ C A+ D B– A– B B– B– A– D B+ C+ A+ D C– A C B C+ B– C– C+ B+ A– A C B C– D+ B C+ B C+ C– B– D– C B+ B C D– B– F F F F F F F F F F

INPUTS PRODUCTION L Brands Lacoste & Co.* Strauss Levi Jane Lorna Liminal Apparel Lowes* Lululemon Athletica Macpac Marks & Spencer Max* NZ* Merric Apparel Mighty Good Group Group Footwear Munro Myer Baby Nature Balance New Next Nike Nobody Denim Noni B Group Nudie Jeans Co. Group Oroton Outland Denim Oxford Pagani Patagonia Brands* United Pavement Postie+ Puma Corp.* PVH R.M. Williams Ralph Lauren* Group Apparel Retail Rip Curl & Gunn Rodd RREPP Apparel Ruby Seafolly Seed Heritage Showpo* Group Simon de Winter Group Sussan NZ Swanndri Men Ltd.* 3 Wise Fashions* T&T Australia Target Factory* Baby The Iconic* The Group PAS The Group Warehouse The Tigerlily* of Life Tree Cooper* Trelise UNIQLO VF Corp. Co.* Distributing Voyager Designs* Wish Group Workwear WORLD* Zimmermann

WORKER EMPOWERMENT GRADE D+ F D– C– A+ F B– D+ D+ D F A+ F D+ B– D D– D– B+ F B– D+ A+ F D– B F C– D+ D– D– F D– D+ B– B+ D+ D D– F F C+ D+ F F C– F D– F D+ F D+ F D D+ F F D F C+

WAGES Q1 Has the company developed a living wage methodology and calculated a living wage for each region that it operates in? Q2 Has the brand published a commitment to pay living wages, which is timebound and measurable, including a methodology or benchmark? Q3 What percentage of facilities have projects to improve wages? 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 100% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Q4 What percentage of facilities pay a living wage? 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 100% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% WORKER VOICE Q1 What percentage of facilities are known to have independent democratically elected trade unions? 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 51–75% 0% 100% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 51–75% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 51–75% Q2 Are all workers trained on their rights regarding freedom of association? Q3 Does the company have a functioning grievance mechanism which workers can access annonymously and in their native language? Q4 Are workers trained on their rights and entitlements, including how to use grievance mechanisms? CHILD & FORCED LABOR REMEDIATION PLAN

Q1 Where child labour and/or forced labour is found to exist, does the company consult with credible civil society organisations in developing a plan for redress?

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 100% 76–99% 51–75% 26–50% 1–25% 0% * = non-responsive companies 82 SURVEY DATA WORKER EMPOWERMENT RAW MATERIALS PRODUCTION A–K

OVERALL GRADE D– A B– C A– C+ A– C B D+ C+ D+ C D B– C+ C– C+ C– C C+ C+ B+ D+ A– A– C– B D– C+ A+ D+ B– D D– B A+ D+ B D– B A– B B+ B+ A C B– C+ D+ A+ A A– B+ C C+ C– B D+ A B+ A– A+ F F F F F F F

RAW MATERIALS PRODUCTION Abercrombie & Fitch* Abercrombie adidas ALDI Stores Ally Fashion* Anthea Crawford* APG & Co. Group Arcadia Colour AS ASICS ASOS City* Baby Bardot Clothing* Barkers Bec and Bridge* Ben Sherman Australia & Less Best Betts Group Big W Bloch* Blue Illusion Boardriders Boden Boohoo (Apparel) Collective Brand (Footwear) Collective Brand Camilla and Marc* of NZ Canterbury City Chic Collective Coles* On Group Cotton Group Road Country Cue Jones David Decjuba* Designworks Etiko Ezibuy X Factory Farmers* Brands Future Fast 21* Forever New Forever T–Shirts Freeset Fruit of the Loom* Gap Inc. Gazal* Group Pants General Gildan Activewear Gorman H&M Holdings Glasson Hallenstein Hanesbrands Hot Springs* House of Quirky Huffer Group Hugo Boss Hunting & Fishing NZ Icebreaker Inditex Industrie Jeanswest JETS Group Just K&K Walker* Karen Sylvester* Kate Kathmandu Kmart Australia Kookai Kowtow

WORKER EMPOWERMENT GRADE F B– D– F C– B– D– B– D– C– F F D F D– D– F D+ F D D D+ D– D C– F D C+ F B B D+ C– F D A+ F C– F F F C– A+ D– D+ F D+ C+ C– C– C+ B+ F D– D D F A– B+ B+ C F D+ D– C– F B+ C– B– A–

WAGES Q1 Has the company developed a living wage methodology and calculated a living wage for each region that it operates in? Q2 Has the brand published a commitment to pay living wages, which is timebound and measurable, including a methodology or benchmark? Q3 What percentage of facilities have projects to improve wages? 0% 100% 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100% 0% 100% Q4 What percentage of facilities pay a living wage? 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% WORKER VOICE Q1 What percentage of facilities are known to have independent democratically elected trade unions? 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 0 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 100% Q2 Are all workers trained on their rights regarding freedom of association? Q3 Does the company have a functioning grievance mechanism which workers can access annonymously and in their native language? Q4 Are workers trained on their rights and entitlements, including how to use grievance mechanisms? CHILD & FORCED LABOR REMEDIATION PLAN

Q1 Where child labour and/or forced labour is found to exist, does the company consult with credible civil society organisations in developing a plan for redress?

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 100% 76–99% 51–75% 26–50% 1–25% 0% * = non-responsive companies 83 SURVEY DATA WORKER EMPOWERMENT RAW MATERIALS PRODUCTION L–Z

OVERALL GRADE B C– B A+ C+ A– B– B+ C A+ D B– A– B B– B– A– D B+ C+ A+ D C– A C B C+ B– C– C+ B+ A– A C B C– D+ B C+ B C+ C– B– D– C B+ B C D– B– F F F F F F F F F F

RAW MATERIALS PRODUCTION L Brands Lacoste & Co.* Strauss Levi Liminal Apparel Jane Lorna Lowes* Lululemon Athletica Macpac Marks & Spencer Max* NZ* Merric Apparel Mighty Good Group Group Footwear Munro Myer Baby Nature Balance New Next Nike Nobody Denim Noni B Group Nudie Jeans Co. Group Oroton Outland Denim Oxford Pagani Patagonia Brands* United Pavement Postie+ Puma Corp.* PVH R.M. Williams Ralph Lauren* Group Apparel Retail Rip Curl & Gunn Rodd RREPP Apparel Ruby Seafolly Seed Heritage Showpo* Group Simon de Winter Group Sussan NZ Swanndri Men Ltd.* 3 Wise Fashions* T&T Australia Target Factory* Baby The Iconic* The Group PAS The Group Warehouse The Tigerlily* of Life Tree Cooper* Trelise UNIQLO VF Corp. Co.* Distributing Voyager Designs* Wish Group Workwear WORLD* Zimmermann

WORKER EMPOWERMENT GRADE D+ F D– A+ C– F B– D+ D+ D F A+ F D+ B– D D– D– B+ F B– D+ A+ F D– B F C– D+ D– D– F D– D+ B– B+ D+ D D– F F C+ D+ F F C– F D– F D+ F D+ F D D+ F F D F C+

WAGES Q1 Has the company developed a living wage methodology and calculated a living wage for each region that it operates in? Q2 Has the brand published a commitment to pay living wages, which is timebound and measurable, including a methodology or benchmark? Q3 What percentage of facilities have projects to improve wages? 0% 0% 100% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 76–99% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Q4 What percentage of facilities pay a living wage? 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% WORKER VOICE Q1 What percentage of facilities are known to have independent democratically elected trade unions? 0% 0% 1–25% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Q2 Are all workers trained on their rights regarding freedom of association? Q3 Does the company have a functioning grievance mechanism which workers can access annonymously and in their native language? Q4 Are workers trained on their rights and entitlements, including how to use grievance mechanisms? CHILD & FORCED LABOR REMEDIATION PLAN

Q1 Where child labour and/or forced labour is found to exist, does the company consult with credible civil society organisations in developing a plan for redress?

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 100% 76–99% 51–75% 26–50% 1–25% 0% * = non-responsive companies 84 SURVEY DATA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT GOVERNANCE, MATERIALS, EMISSIONS, CHEMICAL USE A–K

OVERALL GRADE D– A B– C A– C+ A– C B D+ C+ D+ C D B– C+ C– C+ C– C C+ C+ B+ D+ A– A– C– B D– C+ A+ D+ B– D D– B A+ D+ B D– B A– B B+ B+ A C B– C+ D+ A+ A A– B+ C C+ C– B D+ A B+ A– A+ F F F F F F F Abercrombie & Fitch* Abercrombie adidas ALDI Stores Ally Fashion* Anthea Crawford* APG & Co Group Arcadia Colour AS ASICS ASOS City* Baby Bardot Clothing* Barkers Bec and Bridge* Ben Sherman Australia & Less Best Betts Group Big W Bloch* Blue Illusion Boardriders Boden Boohoo (Apparel) Collective Brand (Footwear) Collective Brand Camilla and Marc* of NZ Canterbury City Chic Collective Coles* On Group Cotton Group Road Country Cue Jones David Decjuba* Designworks Etiko Ezibuy X Factory Farmers* Brands Future Fast 21* Forever New Forever T–Shirts Freeset Fruit of the Loom* Gap Inc. Gazal* Group Pants General Gildan Activewear Gorman H&M Holdings Glasson Hallenstein Hanesbrands Hot Springs* House of Quirky Huffer Group Hugo Boss Hunting & Fishing NZ Icebreaker Inditex Industrie Jeanswest JETS Group Just K&K Walker* Karen Sylvester* Kate Kathmandu Kmart Australia Kookai Kowtow

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT GRADE D A A– F F B C A– B B F F C+ F F C+ F C– F B+ C– D C D D F D+ D F B+ B+ F B– F C– A+ F C+ F D D B+ A+ D– A– F B+ A– B+ A+ B+ A+ F D– D+ B C– A+ A+ A+ A C D+ F B– D B+ C– B+ A+

GOVERNANCE Q1 Has the brand undertaken an assessment of its environmental impacts and risks throughout its supply chain? MATERIALS Q1 Has the brand assessed the environmental impact of its top 3 fibres and materials used in its apparel products and implemented learnings from assessment into product design and production? Q2 What percentage of the brand’s final product is made from sustainable fibres? 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 51–75% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 100% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 100% 0% 26–50% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 26–50% 26–50% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 76–99% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 51–75% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 26–50% 1–25% 1–25% 100% EMISSIONS Q1 Has the brand announced net-zero carbon emissions reduction target by 2050 for its supply chain, or is it lobbying for this target in the countries that it is operating in? CHEMICAL USE Q1 Does the brand have a restricted substances list against which it tests compliance? Q2 Does the brand have a manufacturing restricted substances list against which it tests compliance?

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 100% 76–99% 51–75% 26–50% 1–25% 0% * = non-responsive companies 85 SURVEY DATA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT GOVERNANCE, MATERIALS, EMISSIONS, CHEMICAL USE L–Z

OVERALL GRADE B C– B A+ C+ A– B– B+ C A+ D B– A– B B– B– A– D B+ C+ A+ D C– A C B C+ B– C– C+ B+ A– A C B C– D+ B C+ B C+ C– B– D– C B+ B C D– B– F F F F F F F F F F L Brands Lacoste & Co* Strauss Levi Liminal Apparel Jane Lorna Lowes* Lululemon Athletica Macpac Marks & Spencer Max* NZ* Merric Apparel Mighty Good Group Group Footwear Munro Myer Baby Nature Balance New Next Nike Nobody Denim Noni B Group Nudie Jeans co Group Oroton Outland Denim Oxford Pagani Patagonia Brands* United Pavement Postie+ Puma Corp* PVH R.M. Williams Ralph Lauren* Group Apparel Retail Rip Curl & Gunn Rodd RREPP Apparel Ruby Seafolly Seed Heritage Showpo* Group Simon de Winter Group Sussan NZ Swanndri Men Ltd* 3 Wise Fashions* T&T Australia Target Factory* Baby The Iconic* The Group PAS The Group Warehouse The Tigerlily* of Life Tree Cooper* Trelise UNIQLO VF Corp Co* Distributing Voyager Designs* Wish Group Workwear WORLD* Zimmermann

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT GRADE A– D+ A+ A+ F F A– C+ A+ F F A+ F D+ A+ B+ B– A+ A F B+ F A+ D F A+ F C A B– D D+ D+ B A– A+ C– A D F F C+ B F F C– F C+ D C– D– D F A+ A+ F F D F D+

GOVERNANCE Q1 Has the brand undertaken an assessment of its environmental impacts and risks throughout its supply chain? MATERIALS Q1 Has the brand assessed the environmental impact of its top 3 fibres and materials used in its apparel products and implemented learnings from assessment into product design and production? Q2 What percentage of the brand’s final product is made from sustainable fibres? 0% 0% 1–25% 100% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 26–50% 0% 0% 100% 1–25% 0% 76–99% 1–25% 1–25% 51–75% 1–25% 0% 76–99% 0% 100% 26–50% 0% 51–75% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 26–50% 26–50% 100% 1–25% 26–50% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 26–50% 51–75% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 26–50% 1–25% 0% 26–50% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% EMISSIONS Q1 Has the brand announced net-zero carbon emissions reduction target by 2050 for its supply chain, or is it lobbying for this target in the countries that it is operating in? CHEMICAL USE Q1 Does the brand have a restricted substances list against which it tests compliance? Q2 Does the brand have a manufacturing restricted substances list against which it tests compliance?

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 100% 76–99% 51–75% 26–50% 1–25% 0% * = non-responsive companies 86 SURVEY DATA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT WATER USE, WASTE WATER, MATERIAL/PRODUCT WASTE A–K

OVERALL GRADE D– A B– C A– C+ A– C B D+ C+ D+ C D B– C+ C– C+ C– C C+ C+ B+ D+ A– A– C– B D– C+ A+ D+ B– D D– B A+ D+ B D– B A– B B+ B+ A C B– C+ D+ A+ A A– B+ C C+ C– B D+ A B+ A– A+ F F F F F F F Abercrombie & Fitch* Abercrombie adidas ALDI Stores Ally Fashion* Anthea Crawford* APG & Co Group Arcadia Colour AS ASICS ASOS City* Baby Bardot Clothing* Barkers Bec and Bridge* Ben Sherman Australia & Less Best Betts Group Big W Bloch* Blue Illusion Boardriders Boden Boohoo (Apparel) Collective Brand (Footwear) Collective Brand Camilla and Marc* of NZ Canterbury City Chic Collective Coles* On Group Cotton Group Road Country Cue Jones David Decjuba* Designworks Etiko Ezibuy X Factory Farmers* Brands Future Fast 21* Forever New Forever T–Shirts Freeset Fruit of the Loom* Gap Inc. Gazal* Group Pants General Gildan Activewear Gorman H&M Holdings Glasson Hallenstein Hanesbrands Hot Springs* House of Quirky Huffer Group Hugo Boss Hunting & Fishing NZ Icebreaker Inditex Industrie Jeanswest JETS Group Just K&K Walker* Karen Sylvester* Kate Kathmandu Kmart Australia Kookai Kowtow

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT GRADE D A A– F F B C A– B B F F C+ F F C+ F C– F B+ C– D C D D F D+ D F B+ B+ F B– F C– A+ F C+ F D D B+ A+ D– A– F B+ A– B+ A+ B+ A+ F D– D+ B C– A+ A+ A+ A C D+ F B– D B+ C– B+ A+

WATER USE Q1 For what percentage of water intensive facilities has the brand collected and benchmarked water use data? 1–25% 1–25% 76–99% 0% 0% 26–50% 1–25% 51–75% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 51–75% 0% 0% 26–50% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 100% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 100% 1–25% 26–50% 0% 1–25% 51–75% 26–50% 100% 1–25% 100% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 76–99% 100% 100% 100% 51–75% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 100% Q2 Has the brand used the above data to implement a water use plan? WASTE WATER Q1 For what percentage of wet-processing facilities has the brand collected wastewater quality data? 1–25% 76–99% 76–99% 0% 0% 26–50% 0% 51–75% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 26–50% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 100% 0% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 100% 0% 26–50% 0% 1–25% 51–75% 26–50% 100% 1–25% 100% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 100% 51–75% 100% 51–75% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 1–25% 100% Q2 Of these, do all have wastewater improvement strategies? MATERIAL/PRODUCT WASTE Q1 Does the brand make available to customers a take-back and/or repair program?

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 100% 76–99% 51–75% 26–50% 1–25% 0% * = non-responsive companies 87 SURVEY DATA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT WATER USE, WASTE WATER, MATERIAL/PRODUCT WASTE L–Z

OVERALL GRADE B C– B A+ C+ A– B– B+ C A+ D B– A– B B– B– A– D B+ C+ A+ D C– A C B C+ B– C– C+ B+ A– A C B C– D+ B C+ B C+ C– B– D– C B+ B C D– B– F F F F F F F F F F L Brands Lacoste & Co* Strauss Levi Liminal Apparel Jane Lorna Lowes* Lululemon Athletica Macpac Marks & Spencer Max* NZ* Merric Apparel Mighty Good Group Group Footwear Munro Myer Baby Nature Balance New Next Nike Nobody Denim Noni B Group Nudie Jeans co Group Oroton Outland Denim Oxford Pagani Patagonia Brands* United Pavement Postie+ Puma Corp* PVH R.M. Williams Ralph Lauren* Group Apparel Retail Rip Curl & Gunn Rodd RREPP Apparel Ruby Seafolly Seed Heritage Showpo* Group Simon de Winter Group Sussan NZ Swanndri Men Ltd* 3 Wise Fashions* T&T Australia Target Factory* Baby The Iconic* The Group PAS The Group Warehouse The Tigerlily* of Life Tree Cooper* Trelise UNIQLO VF Corp Co* Distributing Voyager Designs* Wish Group Workwear WORLD* Zimmermann

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT GRADE A– D+ A+ A+ F F A– C+ A+ F F A+ F D+ A+ B+ B– A+ A F B+ F A+ D F A+ F C A B– D D+ D+ B A– A+ C– A D F F C+ B F F C– F C+ D C– D– D F A+ A+ F F D F D+

WATER USE Q1 For what percentage of water intensive facilities has the brand collected and benchmarked water use data? 100% 1–25% 1–25% 100% 0% 0% 51–75% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 26–50% 1–25% 26–50% 26–50% 0% 1–25% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 26–50% 76–99% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 100% 0% 51–75% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 0% 76–99% 76–99% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Q2 Has the brand used the above data to implement a water use plan? WASTE WATER Q1 For what percentage of wet-processing facilities has the brand collected wastewater quality data? 26–50% 1–25% 76–99% 100% 0% 0% 76–99% 1–25% 100% 1–25% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 26–50% 0% 26–50% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 26–50% 51–75% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 100% 0% 51–75% 1–25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1–25% 1–25% 1–25% 0% 76–99% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Q2 Of these, do all have wastewater improvement strategies? MATERIAL/PRODUCT WASTE Q1 Does the brand make available to customers a take-back and/or repair program?

Key: YES PARTIAL NO 100% 76–99% 51–75% 26–50% 1–25% 0% * = non-responsive companies 88 Appendices

89 STATEMENTS FROM NON-RESPONSIVE COMPANIES

Of the 130 company surveys covered in our 2019 report, 34 companies chose not to engage with our research and they have been listed as “non- responsive”. Each non-responsive company was offered the chance to include a short statement in The Report, regarding its decision not to participate in this research. The following eight companies provided statements:

Karen Walker that our colleagues in the fashion industry can see fashion industry. Whilst this survey is a framework We commend Baptist World Aid Australia/ our actions and commitments also. We’re always for responsible practice, we feel it has limitations for Tearfund New Zealand for their advocacy and happy to answer any further questions directly via: small, boutique fashion businesses. After discussion we’re grateful for the insights we’ve gained from https://www.karenwalker.com/socialresponsibility. with Tearfund about our unique local industry, we participating in previous surveys. decided that instead of participating in the survey WORLD this year, we will instead put our resources into two The survey is suited to mass market brands and special projects for 2019. The first is co-founding manufacturers, not to boutique brands like ours WORLD has chosen not to partake in the Tearfund questionnaire. Whilst WORLD appreciates what Mindful Fashion New Zealand, a New Zealand with less than a handful of manufacturing partners fashion industry collective that is committed and production runs of around 50 units per style. Tearfund is endeavouring to achieve, we do not believe at this time, that the Tearfund Survey is to supporting the future of our local garment We’re very happy with where we’re at in terms of applicable to, or understanding of New Zealand industry and create benchmarks for ethical clothing our manufacturing and sourcing. We’re confident garment production. WORLD will continue to production in New Zealand. Secondly, we have in our plan going forward; continuing to make champion New Zealand manufacturing and help publicly released our first annual Progress Report measurable in-the-field improvements and sharing maintain a local industry that is receding at an which identifies where Kate Sylvester is focussing this information directly with our community. alarming rate, whilst applying our community’s their sustainability resources, measures and shares By not participating in the survey, we’re given high ethical and moral standards. our sustainability goals and results, and talks a grade by Tearfund solely based on what transparently with our customers. Find out more about our initiatives at katesylvester.com information was available online at the time of Kate Sylvester grading. The grade does not reflect our ethical Kate Sylvester believes the true value of clothing is Max standards and social responsibility systems. in its design, how it was made and how long it will It merely reflects Tearfund’s evaluation of last and we take a considered and kind approach Max continues to be committed to an ethical and information online. The information we’ve shared to everything we do. At Kate Sylvester we are sustainable sourcing . We have on our is very extensive and it’s important deeply committed to social and environmental taken the decision not to participate in the Ethical to us that our community’s able to read about the responsibility and commend Tearfund and Baptist Fashion Survey but to instead focus on initiatives many ways in which we action our core beliefs and World Aid on what is a valuable report for the that make real change to our sourcing model and 90 STATEMENTS FROM NON-RESPONSIVE COMPANIES

sustainable business practises. We have made of Organic, Recycled and Responsibly sourced The Iconic significant progress in the past year in our ethical products which we are very proud of. However our THE ICONIC is deeply committed to social and production practises and have collaborated goals and aspirations are high and we still have environmental responsibility. While we recognise with the Tearfund team to demonstrate the a lot of work ahead of us to get to our goals of there is still much work to do, we have invested progress we have made and to identify new areas Carbon Neutral and 100% responsibly sourced. heavily over the past year to proactively work of opportunity. We are transparent about our In January this year we launched a full with our supply chain to ensure decent working sourcing practises and publish these in detail on Transparency website under the banner “Made for conditions are a reality for the more than 10,000 our website: Maxshop.com. life” which goes deep into our ethos, strategies, people involved in manufacturing our own-brand In addition we are delighted to announce that Max policies, and goals for our supply chain. We products. has achieved CEMARS certification for measuring also publicly released our very first annual The report by Baptist World Aid has played an our carbon emissions and has developed a carbon Transparency report in March which goes into important role in enabling customers to learn more management plan and a pathway to take the further detail about our Environmental and Ethical about the brands they purchase, while prompting business carbon neutral. We are also proud of Responsibility journey and sets us a benchmark change in our industry. However, we believe the work we have done recently to remove over to measure ourselves against to ensure we reducing the complexities involved in supply chain 900,000 plastic bags per year from our business continually improve and make progress toward our management into a single score is potentially operations. Operating an ethical and sustainable goals, which we will share publicly each year. misleading. We also feel the significant time and business has become part of the Max strategic Whilst we didn’t participate directly in the survey resources required to respond to the Baptist World plan, with progress reported to our Board, and we due to these reasons, we fully support the Aid questionnaire is better spent on our continued are committed to this being a significant part of principles and work of the Ethical Fashion Report, work with our supply chain. our business operations into the future. and have collaborated closely with the Tear Fund Therefore, rather than participate in a private team sharing with them our developments and evaluation process, we have opted for Baptist Barkers taking on board feedback to further improve what World Aid to assess THE ICONIC’s social and In the past 12 months Barkers has undertaken a we are doing in this space. environmental responsibility journey through the huge focus to strategically reposition the brand publicly available information detailed on our to become a responsible business with a core The Baby Factory website. While this reduced opportunity to clarify focus on environmental, ethical and transparent “Because we are such a small company operating perceived actions during assessment, we believe sourcing. Due to our small team and limited in predominantly one small market (NZ), and our our customers and stakeholders have the right to resources, this year we decided not to participate clothing volumes are small, we only use overseas receive the same information as Baptist World Aid, in the Ethical Fashion Survey but instead chose and local agents to source our clothing, which and we urge them to make their own assessment to put our energies and focus into making some comes predominantly from China . Manufacturers about our performance. real change in the development and sourcing of do not wish to deal with is directly because of the our product, and the transparency of our supply Publicly available information is the greatest small MOQ’s we use. We are therefore unable to form of transparency and accountability, and chain — including a substantial increase in the use obtain the information you have requested.”

91 STATEMENTS FROM NON-RESPONSIVE COMPANIES

we hope to set a new standard amongst our suppliers to honor our commitment to worker industry peers to follow over time. We will safety. In addition, we support the major initiative Baptist World Aid Australia is grateful for the continue to regularly update information about our supporting Bangladesh Worker Safety: The Accord time that companies have taken to provide sustainability and ethical sourcing journey on our on Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh. these statements and welcomes their input. It website, and we welcome any reader, customer Beyond these efforts, Fruit of the Loom is a remains open to working with all companies or member of the general public to contact our signatory to the Apparel & Footwear Industry assessed by The Report, to better understand team for any questions or feedback. https://www. Commitment to Responsible Recruitment to join the systems they have in place to ensure theiconic.com.au/sustainability-ethical-sourcing/. the industry to address potential forced labor workers are not being exploited. risks with regards to migrant workers, and we Fruit of the Loom are committed to be in full alignment with the Baptist World Aid Australia appreciates At Fruit of the Loom we are committed to Transparency Pledge with respect to our Supply that companies of all sizes have engaged, conducting business in accordance with the Chain. with most the process of being highest standards of and respect benchmarked and gaining feedback helpful. Additional information on our CSR program for human rights and the environment. We Strong systems, matched by full, open, and can be found by visiting our Corporate Social operate in accordance with these standards as set honest disclosures by companies (preferably Responsibility website at http://www.fotlinc.com. forth in our Code of Conduct in all facilities that public) continue to be the best way for supply our products. We take pride in creating consumers to evaluate that companies are Bec and Bridge an environment of continuous improvement taking the appropriate measures to address where both employees and the business can be Formalising and publishing ethical and sustainable exploitation in their supply chain. successful, balancing the needs of the business practices in Bec and Bridge is our top priority with our impact on the environment, the people for 2019. Whilst we have always operated with involved in our supply chain, and the communities this ethos, we understand the need to validate our suppliers. We are extremely proud of the fact in which we operate. and publish our systems. We are currently part way through formalising this process, working that we have been able to sustain our Australian We choose suppliers that share our commitment with David Nesbitt (Ethical Sourcing Agency) as made identity. Continuing to develop our ethical and work with us to achieve a sustainable supply our Ethical and Sustainability consultant to build and sustainability practices will allow us to fully chain by adhering to our Code of Conduct, our framework, policies and procedures. This participate in the survey in future years in a which is monitored through regular assessments process is no small undertaking and as a small meaningful way. Bec and Bridge appreciates conducted by third party firms. business we need to invest time and money to the work Baptist World Aid Australia do in Fruit of the Loom also takes the matter of worker ensure it is done correctly. We maintain local, researching and reporting on Corporate and Social safety as a critically important aspect of our CSR Australian manufacturing and strive to ensure a Responsibility systems and we look forward to program. Accordingly, we have adopted a “Factory safe, supportive and fair working environment being part of the survey in the near future. Safety Policy” to clarify our expectations of all for all of our employees, and the employees of

92 STATEMENTS FROM NON-RESPONSIVE COMPANIES

CAMILLA AND MARC We are confident that the standards in our Code Whilst we are pleased with the progress we’ve CAMILLA AND MARC value the intent of the of Conduct are being met and will continue to made to growing our ethical footprint in the past Baptist World Aid Survey in their work to research communicate with our manufacturers and raw 12 months we understand also that there is no and inform consumers on Corporate and Social material supply partners to ensure to the best of quick fix. To truly set the tone for sustainable Responsibility (CSR) systems. These efforts our ability that proper standards of conduct are change we are continuing to develop initiatives are commendable and CAMILLA AND MARC maintained. through our entire business — ethical standards strongly maintain that consumers have the right and sustainability is something that we live and to be aware and assured of the ethical standards Decjuba breathe. Over the last 12 months we have taken surrounding clothing manufacture domestically Ethical Sourcing and Sustainability is a some solid steps : launching our first eco-friendly and abroad. fundamental part of the DECJUBA DNA and a fashion item with a puffer jacket made from driving force in our current and future journey. recycled materials, introduced biodegradable We have chosen not to be involved in the survey packaging for all garments delivered, begun the as we believe the nature and format of the Having a positive impact on our planet is important to us and this mandate guides our move to bio-degradable satchels for online orders, questioning does not provide a comprehensive and ensured our leather specialists source leather picture of CAMILLA AND MARC’s CSR practices decisions along each step of our supply chain. The DECJUBA Code of Conduct sets out our non- as a bi-product of the and sign to and the information as such, can be misleading. that agreement in our code of conduct. Tanneries We encourage our customers to be informed negotiable principles around banned practices and materials including Uzbekistan cotton, mohair must also supply documentation outlining the and we welcome any community questions or steps in which the are sourced and highlight concerns that may arise around such matters. and cashmere along with our non-negotiable mandate around animal cruelty and environmental that this is carried out in a humane manner. CAMILLA AND MARC, as a matter of practice sustainability. It also outlines our zero tolerance to While we see a definite need for transparency and monitor closely all aspects of our supply chain modern slavery and gender discrimination. reports like the Baptist World Aid Ethical Fashion and we have a zero tolerance for unfair and Report and appreciate their drive to achieve better unsafe working conditions. We have a strong We are very passionate about driving and embedding our Code of Conduct with all of our ethical standards for manufacturing and sourcing relationship with our manufacturers that is built on we chose not to participate in the report this year. a mutual appreciation and of ethical suppliers. It’s a continuous journey that includes thorough routine audits; a detailed supplier We were given a D in the Baptist World Aid Ethical production, upheld by accountability, constant Fashion Report not because of poor practices, but communication and transparency. CAMILLA AND onboarding process; regular factory visits from DECJUBA leadership team with a focus on long- because of this choice. We believe in the strength MARC also ensure there is a growing focus on of our Code of Conduct and our core values sustainability. term, sustainable ; and training for both our suppliers and the DECJUBA team on of Honesty, Bravery, Integrity, and ethical supply chain and sustainable practices, Optimism to mandate our ethical and sustainable including acceptable working conditions and living practices and have openly committed to driving wages. positive and sustainable change through our business model.

93 STATEMENTS FROM NON-RESPONSIVE COMPANIES

The more people who care about the ethical As is a food and grocery responsibility of the fashion industry the better. For retailer rather than an apparel business, we have transparency, the details of our code and practices not participated in the 2019 Fashion Report can be found on our website. www.decjuba.com. survey, as the report does not accurately represent au/pages/our-vision. the breadth and depth of our ethical sourcing program. Additionally, the changes in assessment Coles parameters from one year to the next, fails to Coles is a food and grocery retailer which engages capture the progress we have made in partnership with more than 750 Coles Own Brand, fresh with our suppliers, including supporting the produce and meat suppliers, who operate over development of Australia’s first industry-led labour 2,200 sites located in more than 40 countries, with hire certification, StaffSure. more than 1,720 of these sites located in Australia. We welcome the opportunity to engage with We take very seriously the need to safeguard Baptist World Aid on wider ethical human rights through ethical business practices issues beyond apparel, specifically in grocery and within these supply chains. Coles was the first agricultural supply chains. major Australian supermarket to adopt the Supplier Ethical Data Exchange (Sedex), a global ethical supply chain management platform, in 2016. Currently, 97 per cent of all suppliers are registered on Sedex and monitored under our ethical sourcing program, which includes a comprehensive risk assessment, independent audit, non-conformance close-out, worker voice hotline and worker remediation requirements.

94

Grant Thornton Australia Gabriel Lacoba Limited Director of Community Engagement Level 17 Baptist World Aid Australia 383 Kent Street Locked Bag 2200 NSW 2000 North Ryde BC NSW 1670 T +61 2 8297 2400

29 March 2019

Dear Gabriel,

ATTESTATION LETTER – Independent Review of Baptist World Aid Australia’s End-to-End Process and Methodology for the 2019 Ethical Fashion Report

Background

Grant Thornton Australia Limited (“Grant Thornton”) was engaged to undertake an independent review of the Advocacy Tools and End-to-End Processes for the Ethical Fashion Report (EFR) published by Baptist World Aid Australia (“BWAA”) as part of BWAA’s Behind the Barcode project.

Our Objective and Approach The overall objective of the independent review was to assess the end-to-end methodology from both a design and operating effectiveness viewpoint for developing the EFR. An overview of Grant Thornton’s 2-phase approach is outlined as follows:

LETTER FROM AUDITOR Design assessment  Discussed with relevant stakeholders and reviewed relevant documentation (e.g. Survey Support Document) to obtain understanding and assess the end-to-end processes and controls as part of the methodology for developing the EFR;  Performed walkthrough of the advocacy tools and assessed the adequacy and effectiveness of controls in the tools and processes; and  Mapped out and evaluated the overall processes and controls in place, both from a robustness as well as from an efficiency standpoint.

Operational Validation A sample of 15 companies (or “brands”) of the 130 brands from the 2019 EFR were selected in February 2019 following finalisation of grades to determine the reliability and validity of the assessment results. Testing included:

 Confirming methodologies (as confirmed in Design Assessment phase) have been followed; and  Reconciling assessment outcomes to the grading tools to ensuring results are correctly reflected within the report.

Grant Thornton Australia Conclusion Gabriel Lacoba Limited Director of Community Engagement Level 17 We are pleased to state that the overall methodology is considered robust, primarily driven by the use of Baptist World Aid Australia 383 Kent Street standard Research and Project Management tools (i.e. Survey, Grading and Master Data templates and Locked Bag 2200 Sydney NSW 2000 North Ryde BC NSW 1670 T +61 2 8297 2400 ABN-41 127 556 389 ACN-127 556 389

Grant Thornton Australia Ltd ABN 41 127 556 389 ACN 127 556 389 ‘Grant Thornton’ refers to the brand under which the Grant www.grantthornton.com.au Thornton member firms provide assurance, tax and advisory services to their clients and/or refers to one or more member firms, as the context requires. Grant Thornton Australia Limited is a member firm of Grant Thornton International Ltd (GTIL). GTIL and the member firms are not a worldwide partnership. GTIL and each member firm is a separate legal entity. Services are delivered by the 29 March 2019 member firms. GTIL does not provide services to clients. GTIL and its member firms are not agents of, and do not obligate one another and are not liable for one another’s acts or omissions. In the Australian context only, the use of the term ‘Grant Thornton’ may refer to Grant Thornton Australia Limited ABN 41 127 556 389 and its Australian subsidiaries and related entities. Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation. Dear Gabriel,

ATTESTATION LETTER – Independent Review of Baptist World Aid Australia’s End-to-End Process and Methodology for the 2019 Ethical Fashion Report

Background

Grant Thornton Australia Limited (“Grant Thornton”) was engaged to undertake an independent review of the Advocacy Tools and End-to-End Processes for the Ethical Fashion Report (EFR) published by Baptist World Aid Australia (“BWAA”) as part of BWAA’s Behind the Barcode project.

Our Objective and Approach The overall objective of the independent review was to assess the end-to-end methodology from both a design and operating effectiveness viewpoint for developing the EFR. An overview of Grant Thornton’s 2-phase approach is outlined as follows:

Design assessment  Discussed with relevant stakeholders and reviewed relevant documentation (e.g. Survey Support Document) to obtain understanding and assess the end-to-end processes and controls as part of the methodology for developing the EFR;  Performed walkthrough of the advocacy tools and assessed the adequacy and effectiveness of controls in the tools and processes; and  Mapped out and evaluated the overall processes and controls in place, both from a robustness as well as from an efficiency standpoint.

Operational Validation A sample of 15 companies (or “brands”) of the 130 brands from the 2019 EFR were selected in February 2019 following finalisation of grades to determine the reliability and validity of the assessment results. Testing included: 95  Confirming methodologies (as confirmed in Design Assessment phase) have been followed; and  Reconciling assessment outcomes to the grading tools to ensuring results are correctly reflected within the report.

Conclusion We are pleased to state that the overall methodology is considered robust, primarily driven by the use of standard Research and Project Management tools (i.e. Survey, Grading and Master Data templates and

ABN-41 127 556 389 ACN-127 556 389

Grant Thornton Australia Ltd ABN 41 127 556 389 ACN 127 556 389 ‘Grant Thornton’ refers to the brand under which the Grant www.grantthornton.com.au Thornton member firms provide assurance, tax and advisory services to their clients and/or refers to one or more member firms, as the context requires. Grant Thornton Australia Limited is a member firm of Grant Thornton International Ltd (GTIL). GTIL and the member firms are not a worldwide partnership. GTIL and each member firm is a separate legal entity. Services are delivered by the member firms. GTIL does not provide services to clients. GTIL and its member firms are not agents of, and do not obligate one another and are not liable for one another’s acts or omissions. In the Australian context only, the use of the term ‘Grant Thornton’ may refer to Grant Thornton Australia Limited ABN 41 127 556 389 and its Australian subsidiaries and related entities. Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation.

SOURCES

Executive Summary 2 NSW Legislation, Modern Slavery Act 2018 No 30, New South Environmental Concerns Wales Government [website], January 2019, , accessed March 2019. Recent employment and wage trends, ILO [website], Oct 2017, and Footwear Industries Study, Quantis, 2018. , accessed March 153, Australian Government [website], January 2019, , accessed March 2019. 3 2017 Cone Gen Z CSR study: How to Speak Z, Cone 2 Department of Labour, List of Produced by 4 Ibid. Communications [website], 2017, , accessed February 2019. September 2018

96 ABOUT BAPTIST WORLD AID AUSTRALIA

Baptist World Aid Australia is an international Established in 1959, Baptist World Aid Australia aid and development organisation, with a works with local partners in 25 countries in the Pacific, , , vision to see a world where poverty has ended, and Africa. Its activities cover four key areas: where all people enjoy the fullness of life • Community Development projects build lasting God intends. solutions to poverty for entire communities; • Its Child Sponsorship program assists children In order to achieve this vision, Baptist World Aid to break down the barriers of poverty — for Australia works through two equally important themselves and their whole community; partnerships: • Its work in disaster saves lives before, during and • It partners with like-minded agencies overseas to after a disaster strikes; and empower communities to lift themselves out of poverty, challenge injustice and build resilience; • Baptist World Aid Australia stands with the and oppressed and marginalised, advocating for a more just world. • It partners with Christians and churches in Australia, particularly those from the Baptist Baptist World Aid Australia has been campaigning movement, in generous giving, ethical various industries to end worker exploitation for consumption, courageous advocacy and faithful over nine years, beginning its research into the prayer in order to achieve for people living fashion and electronics industries in 2010. This in poverty. report is the sixth of its kind.

97 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We are grateful to every representative, from each Our thanks also go to Better Cotton Initiative, of the companies that engaged with our research Ethical Clothing Australia, Global Organic Textile this year. Thank you for the time and extraordinary Standard and Fairtrade Australia and New Zealand, effort which went into collating and sharing data for helping us to better understand your systems. with us. Thank you to our church partners who have Thanks to those consultants who supported the financially supported the work of our Behind the development of our preliminary environmental Barcode project, enabling us to grow the breadth metrics — Alice Cope (UN Global Compact), Dawn of our research — Erina Community Baptist McGregor (China Water Risk), Matthew Luxon Church, Northside Baptist Church, and Seaforth (Envision), Måns Sweeney (Ausbil), Lisa Heinze, Baptist Church. Yun Zheng (Elevate), Rick Lambell (Kmart) Todd Copeland (Patagonia) and Felicity Muller and Brooke Summers (Cotton Australia).

98