Primark
Clothing retailer

Overall

Owned UK
Rating F
About the Ratings

Company Ownership

Primark Stores Ltd
UK
Associated British Foods PLC
owns 100% of Primark Stores Ltd
UK
Food manufacturer
Diversified international food, ingredients and retail group operating in 47 countries. 54.5% owned by Wittington Investments, a company controlled by the founding Weston family.
Wittington Investments Ltd
owns 55% of Associated British Foods PLC
UK
Holding company
Wittington has a spread of investments but its principal asset is its majority holding in Associated British Foods. 79.2% owned by charitable trust, the Garfield Weston Foundation.
Garfield Weston Foundation
owns 79% of Wittington Investments Ltd
UK
Grant-giving charity
Founded 1958. The Weston family controls a string of businesses through this charitable trust, including Associated British Foods, Primark and Fortnum & Mason. Owns nearly 80% of Wittington Investments, its main source of income.

Company Assessment

(Last updated Aug 2024)
Primark Stores Ltd
Praise
Supply chain practices in China
The Green Supply Chain Corporate Information Transparency Index (CITI) evaluates consumer-facing companies that have a sizeable supply chain in China. The evaluation uses government supervision data and public information to assess the environmental management of their supply chains in China. This company received a score of 74.88/100 (retrieved 24 Nov 2023).
Source: IPE (2023)
Ethical Trading Initiative member
The Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI) is an alliance of companies, trade unions and NGOs. They work in partnership to improve the lives of workers across the globe who make or grow consumer goods - everything from tea to T-shirts, from flowers to footballs. This company is a full member.
Turkmen Cotton Pledge signatory
This company has signed the Cotton Pledge with the Responsible Sourcing Network, signifying a public commitment to not knowingly source Turkmen cotton for the manufacturing of any of their products until the Government of Turkmenistan ends the practice of forced labor in its cotton sector. Each cotton season, Turkmen public sector workers are forced by the government to fulfill cotton picking quotas and private businesses are forced to contribute to the efforts financially or with labor. This places a huge burden on the health, education, and general well-being of Turkmen citizens.
46/100 in KnowTheChain Benchmark
In 2023 KnowTheChain benchmarked 65 apparel and footwear companies on their efforts to identify and tackle forced labour risks in their supply chains. This company received a score of 46/100. The average score was 21/100 and the highest score was 63/100.
International Accord signatory
This company is a signatory to the International Accord for Health and Safety in the Textile & Garment Industry. The International Accord was established in 2021 as the successor to the Accord on Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh, which was established in 2013 in the wake of the Rana Plaza building collapse that killed more than 1,000 workers and seriously injured thousands more. Company signatories to the International Accord commit to: Disclosing all factories producing for them in countries with International Accord programs; Ensuring all listed factories participate in the inspection, remediation, and safety training programs; Supporting factories to ensure remediation is financially feasible; Contributing to the operational costs of International Accord programs. This company has also signed the Pakistan Accord.
40/100 in Fashion Transparency Index
The 2023 Fashion Transparency Index reviewed 250 of the world's largest fashion brands and retailers and ranked them according to how much they disclose about their human rights and environmental policies, practices and impacts. Brands owned by this company scored 40%, signifying it is publishing suppliers lists as well as detailed information about their policies, procedures, social and environmental goals, supplier assessment and remediation processes, and is more likely to be addressing issues such as living wages and collective bargaining. The average score was 26% and the highest score was 83%.
Criticism
Efforts to pay a living wage
The Clean Clothes Campaign report, Tailored Wages 2019 analyses responses from 32 top clothing brands about their progress in implementing a living wage for the workers who produce their clothes. This company received the lowest possible grade in the report, meaning they produced no evidence that any worker making their clothes was paid a living wage anywhere in the world.
Workers rights in Myanmar
This company is still sourcing garments from Myanmar, where there has been a significant increase in labour and human rights abuses of garment workers across the country since the military takeover in Feb 2021. Wage theft, inhumane work rates and mandatory overtime, and attacks on freedom of association are the most frequently recorded types of abuse.
Forced labour in China
The Chinese government has facilitated the mass transfer of Uyghur and other ethnic minority citizens from the far west region of Xinjiang to factories across the country. Under conditions that strongly suggest forced labour, Uyghurs are working in factories that are in the supply chains of international brands. The 2021 Laundering Cotton report investigates how forced-labour-produced cotton and cotton-based goods from the Uyghur Region wend their way into international supply chains of well-known international clothing brands, including brands owned by this company.
17.6% in Gender Benchmark
The 2023 Gender Benchmark ranks 112 companies from the apparel and food and agriculture sectors on their efforts to drive gender equality and women's empowerment across their entire value chain. Companies are assessed on governance and strategy, representation, compensation and benefits, health and well-being, violence and harassment, and marketplace and community. This company ranked #75/112, with a total score of 17.6%. The average score was 23% and the highest score was 55%.
Information
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]
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]
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".
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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%.
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.
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.
Associated British Foods PLC
Praise
CDP Climate Change score of B
In 2023, the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) asked companies to provide data about their efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate climate change risk. Responding companies are scored across four key areas: disclosure; awareness; management; and leadership. This company received a CDP Climate Change score of B.
Source: CDP (2023)
Criticism
CDP Forests score of D
In 2023, the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) asked companies to provide data about their efforts towards removing commodity-driven deforestation and forest degradation from its direct operations and supply chains. Responding companies are scored across four key areas: disclosure; awareness; management; and leadership. This company received a CDP Forests score of D.
Source: CDP (2023)
22.5% in Forest 500 Rankings
Forest 500 identifies the 350 companies and 150 financial institutions with the greatest exposure to tropical deforestation risk, and annually assesses them on the strength and implementation of their deforestation and human rights commitments. This company received a score of 22.5%.
Unsustainable palm oil use
This company scores Ethical Consumer's worst rating for their use of palm oil, signifying they are using no or minimal certified palm products, and with no or minimal positive commitments.
Palm oil rating - WAZA
The PalmOil Scan app, produced by the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums (WAZA), rates companies on their commitment to sourcing sustainable palm oil. Companies are scored on their use of certified sustainable palm oil (CSPO), commitment to sourcing CSPO, on-the-ground conservation action, and membership to the RSPO. Companies can earn a rating of Excellent, Good, Poor or No Commitment. This company is rated "Poor" (retrieved 18 Nov 2023).
Source: WAZA (2023)
22/100 in KnowTheChain Benchmark
In 2023 KnowTheChain benchmarked 60 food and beverage companies on their efforts to identify and tackle forced labour risks in their supply chains. This company received a score of 22/100. The average score was a disappointing 16/100 and the highest score was 56/100.
15.4% in Human Rights Benchmark
The 2022 Corporate Human Rights Benchmark assessed 127 companies in the food and agriculture, ICT and automotive manufacturing sectors on their human rights performance. This company received a score of 15.4%. The overall average score was a disappointing 17.3% and the highest score was 50.3%.
5.5/20 in Social Benchmark
The 2024 Social Benchmark assesses the world's 2,000 most influential companies on their responsibility in meeting society's fundamental expectations towards three measurement areas: respecting human rights, providing decent work, and acting ethically. This company was assessed in 2023 and received a score of 5.5/20. The average score was an alarmingly low 4.6/20 and the highest score was 15.5/20.
Tax avoidance
This company scores Ethical Consumer's worst rating for the likely use of tax avoidance strategies, and has at least two high risk subsidiaries in tax havens.
33/100 S&P Global ESG Score
This company received an S&P Global ESG Score of 33/100 in the Food Products category of the S&P Global Corporate Sustainability Assessment, an annual evaluation of companies' sustainability practices (last updated 21 Oct 2022). The rankings are based on an analysis of corporate economic, environmental and social performance, assessing issues such as corporate governance, risk management, environmental reporting, climate strategy, human rights and labour practices.
24.9% in Food and Agriculture Benchmark
The 2023 Food and Agriculture Benchmark assessed 350 keystone companies across the entirety of the food system, from farm to fork. It covers three dimensions where transformation is needed: nutrition, environment and social inclusion. This company ranked #91/350, with a total score of 24.9/100.
Information
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.
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).
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.
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
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.
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%.
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.
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%.
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.
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.
Wittington Investments Ltd
Information
Tax avoidance
UK-based protest group, UK Uncut, targeted Wittington Investments during protests in March 2011 for their tax avoidance policies.
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.
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.
Garfield Weston Foundation
Information
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.
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.
> About the Icons

Company Details

Type:
Wholly-owned subsidiary

Contact Details

Address:
United Kingdom
Website:
www.primark.co.uk

Products / Brands