Worker exploitation in Bangladesh

War on Want's 2008 report 'Fashion Victims II - How UK clothing retailers are keeping workers in poverty' focuses on garment factories in Bangladesh producing clothes for Primark, Tesco and Asda. The report found that garment workers are still struggling to survive on extremely low pay, suffering poor working conditions, arduous hours and no trade union representation in the factories. [listed under information due to age of report]

Source: War on Want (2008)

Worker exploitation in India

Maid in India', a 2012 report by two Dutch NGOs (SOMO and ICN) revealed how workers in the South Indian garment and textile industry continue to suffer exploitative working conditions while making garments for Western brands. While some recent improvements have been made, thousands of girls work under recruitment and employment schemes that amount to bonded labour. This company was shown to be sourcing from one or more of the four garment manufacturers investigated. While they did respond to a review request, it is unclear whether they are taking sufficient actions to address the problems. [Listed under Information due to age of report]

Source: SOMO (2012)

Workers rights in India

This company sources garments from factories in the Tamil Nadu region of South India. The yarn used in these factories also comes from Tamil Nadu, where large scale forced labour is used in the spinning mills. Workers in these mills are enslaved by employers who withhold their wages or lock them up in company-controlled hostels. They work long hours, face sexual harassment and do not even earn the minimum wage. [Listed under Information due to age of report]

Source: India Committee of the Netherlands (2016)

Detox commitment

Greenpeace launched its "Detox My Fashion" campaign in 2011 to expose the direct links between global clothing brands, their suppliers and toxic water pollution around the world. As a result, many companies, including this one, committed to Greenpeace's Detox Program. The 2016 Detox Catwalk report focused on implementation, assessing the steps taken by fashion brands to fulfil their commitments using three criteria: Detox 2020 plan, PFC elimination and Transparency. This company is "committed to Detox and has made progress implementing its plans, but its actions need to evolve faster to achieve the 2020 Detox goal".

Source: Greenpeace (2016)

Zero discharge of hazardous chemicals

In 2011, a group of major apparel and footwear brands and retailers, including this company, made a shared commitment to help lead the industry towards zero discharge of hazardous chemicals by 2020. It includes specific commitments and timelines to realize this shared goal.

Source: ZDHC (2023)

Climate action commitments

As listed on the We Mean Business website, this company has committed to the following climate action initiatives: adopt a science-based emissions reduction target.

Source: We Mean Business (2021)

Sandblasting

This company has publicly banned sandblasting. Sandblasting is a dangerous and deadly process which involves workers firing sand at jeans under high pressure. It has been known to kill workers within months as the inhalation of large amounts of silica dust generated during sandblasting causes silicosis, a potentially lethal pulmonary disease.

Source: Clean Clothes Campaign (2012)

Uzbek Cotton Pledge signatory

This company signed the Uzbek Cotton Pledge with the Responsible Sourcing Network, signifying a public commitment to not knowingly source Uzbek cotton for the manufacturing of any of their products until the Government of Uzbekistan ends the practice of forced labor in its cotton sector. However the Pledge was lifted in March 2022 after the Uzbek Forum for Human Rights, who monitored the annual cotton harvest since 2010, found no state-imposed forced labor in the 2021 harvest.

Source: Cotton Campaign (2022)

Angora ban

This company has taken angora items off the shelves and promised not to use angora again, following a PETA campaign launched in Dec 2013 which revealed the cruelty inflicted on angora rabbits in Chinese factory farms, where 90% of the world's angora is produced.

Source: PETA (2018)

Better Work Partner

This company is a partner of Better Work, an initiative of the UN's International Labour Organization and the International Finance Corporation which brings diverse groups together - governments, global brands, factory owners, and unions and workers - to improve working conditions in the garment industry and make the sector more competitive.

Source: Better Work (2020)

Sustainable Apparel Coalition member

This company is a member of the Sustainable Apparel Coalition, a multi-stakeholder initiative launched in March 2011 by a group of global apparel and footwear companies and non-profit organizations (representing nearly one third of the global market share for apparel and footwear). The Coalition's goals are to reduce the apparel industry's environmental and social impact, and to develop a universal index to measure environmental and social performance of apparel products.

Source: Sustainable Apparel Coalition (2023)

Leather Working Group member

This company is a member of the Leather Working Group, a multi-stakeholder group who's objective is to develop and maintain a protocol that assesses the compliance and environmental performance of tanners and promotes sustainable and appropriate environmental business practices within the leather industry.

Source: Leather Working Group (2022)

ACT participant

This company is a participant in the Action, Collaboration, Transformation (ACT) initiative, an initiative between international brands and retailers, manufacturers, and trade unions to address the issue of living wages in the textile and garment supply chain.

Source: IndustriALL (2021)

Transparency Pledge

The Apparel and Footwear Supply Chain Transparency Pledge (Transparency Pledge) helps demonstrate apparel and footwear companies' commitment towards greater transparency in their manufacturing supply chain. Transparency of a company's manufacturing supply chain better enables a company to collaborate with civil society in identifying, assessing, and avoiding actual or potential adverse human rights impacts. This is a critical step that strengthens a company's human rights due diligence. This company has published some supplier factory information, but falls short of the Pledge standard.

Source: Transparency Pledge (2019)

Textile Exchange member

This company is a member of the Textile Exchange, a global non-profit that works closely with its members to drive textile industry transformation in preferred fibres, integrity and standards and responsible supply networks. They identify and share best practices regarding farming, materials, processing, traceability and product end-of-life in order to reduce the textile industry's impact on the world's water, soil and air, and the human population.

Source: Textile Exchange (2019)

Fashion Charter signatory

This company is a signatory to the Fashion Industry Charter for Climate Action, a United Nations initiative which contains the vision to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050.

Source: UNFCCC (2023)

Ellen MacArthur Foundation partner

This company is a partner of the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, whose stated mission is to accelerate the transition to a circular economy. The Ellen MacArthur Foundation works with business, government and academia to build a framework for an economy that is restorative and regenerative by design.

Source: Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2023)

23/100 in What Fuels Fashion?

What Fuels Fashion? is a single-issue, special edition of the Fashion Transparency Index. The 2024 report ranked 250 of the world's largest fashion brands and retailers according to their level of disclosure on climate and energy-related data in their own operations and supply chains. Brands owned by this company scored 23%. The average score was 18% and the highest score was 75%.

Source: Fashion Revolution (2024)

Modern Slavery statement

California, the UK and Australia have all enacted legislation requiring companies operating within their borders to disclose their efforts to eradicate modern slavery from their operations and supply chains. Follow the link to see this company's disclosure statement.

Source: company website (2018)

BHRRC company profile

Business & Human Rights Resource Centre digital platform presents news and allegations relating to the human rights impact of over 20,000 companies. Their enhanced Company Dashboards also include financial information, key data points based on corporate policies, and scores from prominent civil society benchmarks. Follow the link and use the search function to view this company's dashboard.

Source: BHRRC (2022)

Criticisms for Primark subsidiary

Primark is an Irish clothing retailer operating 271 stores throughout western Europe, and a subsidiary of Associated British Foods. Primark has been criticised for worker exploitation.

Source: Shop Ethical online profile (2014)

Workers rights in India

A 2015 investigation by the BBC has found workers on Indian tea plantations who pick tea for this company are paid less than £2 per day and live in inhuman conditions. Living and working conditions are so bad, and wages so low, that tea workers and their families are left malnourished and vulnerable to fatal illnesses. There was also a disregard for health and safety, with workers spraying chemicals without protection, and on some estates, child labour being used.

Source: BBC (2015)

Tax avoidance in Zambia

In Feb 2013 ActionAid (UK) released a report revealing that this company is dodging its tax bill in Zambia, one of the world's poorest countries. ActionAid claims ABF has avoided an estimated US$27 million in taxes in Zambia since 2007, where the company operates a sugar company. ABF denies the allegations (http://bit.ly/1j7m8l6).

Source: ActionAid (2013)

34.2% in Newsweek Green Rankings 2016

This company received a score of 34.2/100 in the Newsweek Green Rankings 2016, which ranks the world's largest publicly traded companies on eight indicators covering energy, greenhouse gases, water, waste, fines and penalties, linking executive pay to sustainability targets, board-level committee oversight of environmental issues and third-party audits. Ranking methodology by Corporate Knights and HIP Investor.

Source: Newsweek (2016)

Sustainability claims

This company has a number of sustainability claims on its website in the areas of renewable energy, worker safety, packaging reductions and ethical business practices

Source: company website (2014)

Palm oil scorecard - WWF

The 2024 WWF Palm Oil Buyers Scorecard evaluates the progress and performance of 285 major retailers and manufacturer companies, focusing on actions companies have taken to ensure their own palm oil supply chain is sustainable and free of deforestation, natural ecosystem conversion, and human rights abuse. This company is rated 'middle of the pack' with a score of 11.36 out of a possible total of 24.

Source: WWF Palm Oil Scorecard (2024)

CDP Water Security score of C

In 2023, the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) asked companies to provide data about their efforts to manage and govern freshwater resources. Responding companies are scored on six key metrics: transparency; governance & strategy; measuring & monitoring; risk assessment; targets & goals; and value chain engagement. This company received a CDP Water Security score of C.

Source: CDP (2023)

21.4% in Human Rights Benchmark

The 2023 Corporate Human Rights Benchmark assessed 55 companies in the apparel sector on their human rights performance. This company received a score of 21.4%. The overall average score was a disappointing 18.2% and the highest score was 53.4%.

Source: World Benchmarking Alliance (2023)

Modern Slavery statement

California, the UK and Australia have all enacted legislation requiring companies operating within their borders to disclose their efforts to eradicate modern slavery from their operations and supply chains. Follow the link to see this company's disclosure statement.

Source: company website (2018)

16.8% in Sustainable Cotton Ranking

The 2020 Sustainable Cotton Ranking, published by WWF, Solidaridad and the Pesticide Action Network UK analysed the 77 largest cotton users among international apparel brands and retailers, reviewing their policies, actual uptake of more sustainable cotton and transparency in their supply chains. According to the report, this company is "starting the journey" with a score of 16.8%. The average score was 18.2% and the highest score was 79.2%.

Source: Sustainable Cotton Ranking (2020)

Tier 4 in farm animal welfare rankings

The 2021 Business Benchmark on Farm Animal Welfare (BBFAW) report ranks global food companies on how they are managing and reporting their farm animal welfare policies and practices. This company appeared in tier 4, "Making progress on implementation", with tier 1 being the best, and tier 6 the worst.

Source: BBFAW (2021)

Investment in nanotechnology

Friends of the Earth's 2014 report "Tiny Ingredients, Big Risks" names this company as one of over 200 transnational food companies engaged in nanotechnology research and development, and on their way to commercializing products. New studies are adding to a growing body of scientific evidence indicating nanomaterials may be toxic to humans and the environment.

Source: FOE (2014)

21.5% in Nature Benchmark

The Nature Benchmark ranks 816 companies across 20 industries on their efforts to protect our environment and its biodiversity. Companies were assessed in three phases between 2022 and 2024 using three measurement areas: governance and strategy; social inclusion and community impact; and ecosystems and biodiversity. This company was assessed in 2023 and is ranked #221/816, with a total score of 21.5/100.

Source: World Benchmarking Alliance (2023)

Tax avoidance

UK-based protest group, UK Uncut, targeted Wittington Investments during protests in March 2011 for their tax avoidance policies.

Source: UK Uncut (2011)

Modern Slavery statement

California, the UK and Australia have all enacted legislation requiring companies operating within their borders to disclose their efforts to eradicate modern slavery from their operations and supply chains. Follow the link to see this company's disclosure statement.

Source: company website (2023)

Foie gras sales

In 2021 Wittington Investments subsidiary Fortnum & Mason announced it will stop selling foie gras after a 10 year long campaign by PETA. Foie gras is made of the liver of a duck or goose that has been force fed grain through a tube for the last 12-18 days of its life under factory farm conditions. More than a dozen countries have prohibited foie gras production due to animal welfare concerns.

Source: PETA (2021)

BOTTOM Rating in Good Shopping Guide

Brands in 'bread' category received BOTTOM Rating; with a score of 46 out of a possible score of 100 in the Ethical Company Organisation's 'Good Shopping Guide' (UK), which evaluates brands with regard to their environmental, animal welfare and human rights records.

Source: Ethical Company Organisation (UK) (2023)

Governance

In 2010, the UK Charity Commission found that some of the family members who run the Garfield Weston Foundation allowed an investment company it controlled (Wittington Investments) to make illegal political donations between 1993 and 2007. The Charity Commission also found that the charity's nine trustees breached their duties in January 2006 by voting for a resolution allowing Wittington to make donations without giving proper consideration.

Source: news article (2010)

Charitable giving

The Garfield Weston Foundation gives grants to UK registered charities, with the exception of animal welfare charities. Organisations with an 'exempt' or 'excepted' status such as churches, hospitals, educational establishments and housing corporations may also apply for grants.

Source: company website (2012)