Company Profiles

What do the grades mean? A full explanation of the grading system is available here >

	Arcadia Group [2.5 out of 5] Brands: Burton, Dorethy Perkins, Evans, Miss Selfridge, Topman, Topshop, Wallis, BHS Arcadia appears to have done little to build on the work outlined in its previous submissions, although the mapping of homeworkers is now under way. Its work is still largely focused on fact-finding and assessment of supply chains. View Profile >
	Asda George [3 out of 5] Asda’s ‘Lean’ manufacturing programme in Bangladesh is expanding, and can demonstrate some wage improvements. Asda has also made a public commitment to address the price it pays for goods and include a calculated labour cost in this amount. But more work needs to be done to involve unions and empower workers beyond consulting on their opinions. View Profile >
	Aurora Fashions [2.5 out of 5] Brands: Coast, Oasis, Warehouse Aurora is one of the few companies to have set out clear benchmarks to work towards, but its work is largely limited to wage surveys and productivity programmes. There is little evidence of collaborative working, which could assist a smaller brand such as Aurora to punch above its weight. View Profile >
	Burberry [2 out of 5] Burberry has now taken the step of joining the Ethical Trading Initiative, and it is good to see at least one luxury brand engaging with the issues covered by this report. Burberry’s engagement with the living wage is, however, superficial and there appears to be little progress or development in their plans since its last submission in 2009. View Profile >
	Debenhams [1 out of 5] No work to speak of. This company did not respond to our request for information, and has limited information on its website. Debenhams is a member of the ETI and therefore has publicly accepted the need to pay a living wage. There is, however, no evidence of any work towards this goal so it remains a paper commitment. View Profile >
	Fatface [1 out of 5] Fat Face is a relative newcomer to ethical trade, and states this clearly in its submission. As an ETI member it does now have an opportunity to learn from others who have been working on this issue for a while View Profile >
	French Connection [1 out of 5] French Connection has more or less given the same submission as 2009. It shows no inclination or understanding of the need to work towards living wages in its supply chain. View Profile >
	Gap [1 out of 5] Very disappointing. Gap received one of the highest grades in 2009 for its extensive plans to integrate worker and trade union representatives into the process of building a living wage, but this plan has now been discarded and little evidence given of any concrete plans to improve wages in the future. View Profile >
	H&M [1 out of 5] H&M has a clear approach to addressing wages - that sustainable wage improvements should come from an increase in national or industry standards, or should be negotiated between workers and management. We agree in principle but this will take time, and H&M’s projects, which measure success based on minimum wages, do not show evidence of delivering a living wage any time soon. View Profile >
	Hobbs [0 out of 5] This company did not respond to our request for information, and makes no information available on its website. It is therefore safe to assume the worst – that it has no engagement with ethical trading at all. View Profile >
	Inditex [3.5 out of 5] Brands: Zara, Massimo Dutti, Pull & Bear, Bershka Inditex is the only brand to have signed a framework agreement with the international textile union federation. This commits Inditex to work in partnership alongside unions to ensure freedom of association and a living wage is delivered in its supply chain. View Profile >
	Jane Norman [0 out of 5] This company did not respond to our request for information, and makes no information available on its website. It is therefore safe to assume the worst – that it has no engagement with ethical trading at all. View Profile >
	Levi Strauss [1 out of 5] Levi Strauss has now slightly updated its code to acknowledge the right to a living wage, but continues to use minimum wages as its benchmark. It has included in its submission work to support infrastructure that could lead to improved rights to freedom of association, and government lobbying in Bangladesh and Cambodia. The direct work being done with its suppliers, however, remains very limited. View Profile >
	Limited Brands [0 out of 5] Brands:La Senza, Pink, Victoria's Secret This company has a sourcing and labour standards policy which it displays on its website, but it is not developed enough to have considered living wages. View Profile >
	Marks & Spencer [3.5 out of 5] M&S has taken a leadership role on the issue of the living wage by making a commitment to deliver this to workers on a large scale by 2015. It is, however, dragging its heels over publishing figures which give its ‘fair living wage’ promise a concrete benchmark. View Profile >
	Matalan [2 out of 5] Matalan seems to be having success with increasing pay through work study engineering and are citing good intentions around freedom of association programmes. However, its submission shows it has a limited understanding of complex issues and Matalan has a long way to go to convince us that its efforts are genuinely improving wages. View Profile >
	Monsoon Accessorize [3.5 out of 5] As before, a lot of Monsoon’s work is focused on homeworkers. It is also working on concrete programmes to calculate piece rates and is taking some steps to address purchasing practices. Monsoon also seems to be working towards support for worker organising, but falls into the trap of confusing freedom of association and parallel means. View Profile >
	New Look [3 out of 5] Some complex work being carried out on fringe benefits, and worker management dialogue, in collaboration with other retailers, but work on freedom of association, which underpins all sustainable wage improvements, is limited in scope. View Profile >
	Next [3.5 out of 5] Next is working on a project building mature industrial relations in its supply base. We believe this approach is the right one and has the potential to secure long term increases in wages. Unfortunately, Next’s work is limited in other areas: without addressing purchasing practices or setting benchmarks it is unclear the extent to which the work will deliver a living wage to workers in the near future. View Profile >
	Paul Smith [0 out of 5] This company did not respond to our request for information, and makes no information available on its website. It is therefore safe to assume the worst – that it has no engagement with ethical trading at all. View Profile >
	The Peacock Group [1 out of 5] Brands: Peacocks, Bon Marche Peacocks has a code of conduct which it displays on its website, but only commits to pay the legal national or industry minimum wage. View Profile >
	Primark [3 out of 5] Primark's projects have started to incorporate other key aspects apart from productivity. Work on training and capacity building is now a priority, but work falls short on programmes that promote freedom of association. Proposals seem promising and for this reason Primark scraped a grade 3 this year, but to maintain this grade in the future we will need to see more concrete work, especially on pricing. View Profile >
	Reiss [0 out of 5] This company did not respond to our request for information, and makes no information available on its website. It is therefore safe to assume the worst – that it has no engagement with ethical trading at all. View Profile >
	Republic [0 out of 5] This company did not respond to our request for information. It has a code of conduct on its website and this states that it pays the legal minimum wage or a wage that meets local industry standards, whichever is greater. This amount falls far short of the amount needed for a worker to be able to feed, clothe, and shelter herself and her family. View Profile >
	River Island [1 out of 5] As a full member of the ETI River Island should, in principle, accept the right of workers to a living wage, but its submission this year provided no mention of this commitment, or of any work being done to address the issue of wages in its supply chain. View Profile >
	J Sainsbury [2 out of 5] Sainsbury’s has started a wage project in Bangladesh and is working with a group of brands in 110 factories in Bangladesh to improve systems and worker-management dialogue. This is an improvement on last year but it still has a long way to go. View Profile >
	Supergroup [0 out of 5] Brands: Superdry, Cult This company did not respond to our request for information, and makes no information available on its website. We therefore assume that Supergroup has no ethical trading policies. It has, however, recently joined the ETI so we hope to see it adopt a better stance towards wages and rights in the near future and publicly communicate this to consumers. View Profile >
	Tesco [2 out of 5] Tesco continues to focus its efforts on increasing productivity and internal matters such as improving relationships with its suppliers. There is no work mentioned that explicitly aims to increase wages, apart from checking for compliance with the minimum wage in Bangladesh. View Profile >
	White Stuff [0 out of 5] White Stuff has started a basic auditing system, but hasn’t yet made a commitment to work towards paying living wages.. View Profile >