H&M Australia
OVERALL |
|
Owned |
SWE |
Rating |
 |
Apparel
H&M opened their first Australian store in Melbourne on 5 April, 2014, offering mens, womens and kids clothing and homewares.
Company Ownership
| H & M Hennes & Mauritz Pty Ltd | AUS | website | ||||
H & M Hennes & Mauritz AB 
owns 100% of H & M Hennes & Mauritz Pty Ltd |
SWE | website | ||||
Apparel Founded in 1947, they now operate about 3,200 stores in some 54 countries. The firm doesn't own factories but buys its goods from suppliers primarily in Asia and Europe. Controlled by the founding Persson family. | ||||||
Company Assessment
| PRAISE | CRITICISM | INFORMATION | ||
| H & M Hennes & Mauritz Pty Ltd | ||||
| No assessment data currently available for H & M Hennes & Mauritz Pty Ltd | ||||
| H & M Hennes & Mauritz AB | ||||
|
In 2018, 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 A-.
[Source 2018][More on Climate Change]
In 2018 KnowTheChain benchmarked 120 large global companies in the ICT, Food & Beverage, and Apparel & Footwear sectors on their efforts to address forced labour and human trafficking in their supply chains. This company received a score of 65/100.
[Source 2018][More on Workers Rights]
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.
[Source 2018][More on Workers Rights]
This company has either signed PETA's statement of assurance or provided a statement verifying that they do not conduct or commission any animal tests.
[Source 2018][More on Animal Testing]
This company received a score of 76.7/100 in the Newsweek Green Ranking 2017, 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 2017][More on Sustainability Reporting]
The 2019 Fashion Transparency Index looks at how much brands know about their supply chains, what kind of policies they have in place and importantly, how much information they share with the public about their practices and products. Brands owned by this company scored 61%, signifying that it is publishing detailed supplier lists and the vast majority of policies, procedures and future goals. The average score was 21% and the highest score was 64%.
[Source 2019][More on Sustainability Reporting]
This company received a SAM Rank of 97/100 in the Retailing category of the 2018 SAM Corporate Sustainability Assessment. The index is 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.
[Source 2018][More on Sustainability Reporting]
This company received a score of 59/100 (retrieved 14-Feb-2018) in the Corporate Information Transparency Index (CITI), a system for evaluating supply chain practices in China, particularly in regards to environmental management and water pollution. Scores are calculated using government compliance data, online monitoring data, and third-party environmental audits, as well as trends in the environmental performance of factories in the company's supply chains.
[Source 2018][More on Habitats]
This company has signed the 'Accord on Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh', a program endorsed by Bangladeshi and international unions and labor rights organizations. The ground-breaking program includes independent safety inspections with public reports, mandatory factory building renovations, the obligation by brands and retailers to underwrite the cost of repairs, and a vital role for workers and their unions all in a legally-binding, enforceable agreement.
[Source 2019][More on Workers Rights]
B+ grade in the Baptist World Aid Australia's 'Ethical Fashion Report 2019', which grades companies, from A to F, on the strength of their systems to mitigate against the risks of forced labour, child labour and worker exploitation in their supply chains, as well as protect the environment from the harmful impacts of the fashion industry. Assessment criteria fall into five main categories: policies, transparency and traceability, auditing and supplier relationships, worker empowerment and environmental management.
[Source 2019][More on Workers Rights]
Oxfam Australia's Company Tracker compares the big clothing brands on their efforts to pay a living wage to the women working in their factories. This company has released the names and addresses of at least 70% of their supplier factories, and has taken some action towards paying a living wage within a set timeframe in the supply chain.
[Source 2019][More on Workers Rights]
In 2016 Rank a Brand assessed 37 major cotton-using companies on their commitment and performance with regard to sustainable cotton by looking at each company's cotton sourcing policies, use of sustainable cotton, and traceability. This company scored 9/19.5, making it one of the 2nd best performing companies.
[Source 2016][More on Human Rights]
The 2017 Corporate Human Rights Benchmark assessed 98 of the largest publicly traded companies in the world from the Agricultural Products, Apparel and Extractives sectors on 100 human rights indicators. This company's score was in the 40-49 band range. The overall average score was 28.7%.
[Source 2017][More on Human Rights]
This company has signed the 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. The Uzbek government uses local government officials, hospital directors, and school presidents to mobilize workers; and detains and tortures human rights defenders seeking to monitor the harvests. This company has also signed the Turkmenistan Cotton Pledge, where systemic use of forced labour in cotton production also occurs.
[Source 2019][More on Human Rights]
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 is fully aligned with the Transparency Pledge, thereby committing to regularly publish on its website a list naming all sites that manufacture its products.
[Source 2017][More on Sustainability Reporting]
The Global 100 Most Sustainable Corporations in the World list is an extensive data-driven corporate sustainability assessment. The ranked companies are leaders in the field of a sustainable business approach. The efficiency of a company's energy, water, CO2 and waste management is measured in relation to its total sales volume. The disclosure of that information is a pre-condition for the assessment. This company ranked #20 in the 2016 Global 100.
[Source 2016][More on Sustainability Reporting] |
This 2016 report from the Asia Floor Wage Alliance finds evidence of widespread exploitation in H&M supplier factories in Cambodia and India.
[Source 2016][More on Workers Rights]
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.
[Source 2016][More on Workers Rights]
The average worker in the Bangladeshi garment industry is getting paid only one third of what is considered to be a living wage. Low wages and long working hours have been found to play a key role in parents' decisions to take their children out of school and let them work in various jobs. This company was identified in SOMO's 2017 report 'Branded Childhood' as contributing to this situation.
[Source 2017][More on Workers Rights]
The Clean Clothes Campaign report, Tailored Wages 2019 analyses responses from 20 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.
[Source 2019][More on Workers Rights]
Female migrants employed in garment factories in Bangalore, India are recruited with false promises about wages and benefits, and are subjected to conditions of modern slavery. They work under high-pressure for low wages, and live in hostels with poor living conditions while their freedom of movement is severely restricted. This company was identified in the 2018 report "Labour Without Liberty" as sourcing garments from these factories.
[Source 2018][More on Workers Rights]
This company appeared on Global Exchange's list of "10 Top Corporate Criminals of 2016" for its failure to ensure the safety of workers in Bangladesh.
[Source 2016][More on Workers Rights]
This company is one of the top 5 companies sourcing from Cambodia, where the minimum wage is just 21% of what Asia Floor Wage calculate to be a living wage for the country. Cambodia's garment workers endure excessive overtime, low wages, malnourishment (sometimes leading to mass fainting), violence and intimidation.
[Source 2014][More on Workers Rights]
The Forest 500 identifies, ranks, and tracks the governments, companies and financial institutions worldwide that together could virtually eradicate tropical deforestation. Rankings are based on their public policies and commitments and potential impacts on tropical forests in the context of forest risk commodities (palm oil, soya, beef, leather, timber, and pulp and paper). This company received a score of 2/5.
[Source 2018][More on Forests]
Three years after H&M became the first signatory to the Accord on Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh, almost all of its factories remain behind schedule in carrying out the mandated renovations, with 70% of its strategic suppliers still lacking adequate fire exits.
[Source 2016][More on Workers Rights]
This 2016 investigative report by the India Committee of the Netherlands (ICN) reveals how migrant garment workers in Bangalore, South India endure appalling living conditions, low wages and restricted freedom of movement. This company pledged to take serious action after being named in the report as sourcing from Bangalore.
[Source 2016][More on Workers rights]
This company sources garments from Ethiopia, where workers are paid an average of the equivalent of US$26 per month, the lowest in the world, according to a 2019 report from New York University Stern Center for Business and Human Rights. Based on that amount, "Workers, mostly young women from poor farming families, cannot afford decent housing, food, and transportation."
[Source 2019][More on Workers Rights]
This website by German NGO Earth Link rates companies on their corporate policies against child labour, production monitoring and accusations of child labour. This company received at least one red mark, indicating poor performance in one or more of these areas.
[Source 2013][More on Human Rights] |
According to Greenpeace's 2013 report "Toxic Threads: a story of big brands and water pollution in Indonesia", this company had a business relationship in the recent past with PT Gistex Group, the company responsible for discharging a wide range of hazardous substances directly into the Citarum River in Indonesia.
[Source 2013][More on Habitats]
This company is a member of the CanopyStyle initiative, which came about when research found that millions of trees are used every year to produce dissolving pulp, a key ingredient for fabrics such as rayon/viscose. The campaign seeks to phase out the use of endangered forest fibre in fabric.
[Source 2018][More on Forests]
Following a campaign by the Rainforest Action Network in 2009, this company pledged to take concrete action to clean their supply chains of rainforest paper and sever relationships with companies (like Asia Pulp and Paper) who continue to destroy high conservation and endangered forests in Indonesia and elsewhere.
[Source 2010][More on Forests]
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 "ahead of the curve and on track to meet their commitments".
[Source 2016][More on Habitats]
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 2019][More on Habitats]
This company is a signatory to the New Plastics Economy Global Commitment, whose goal is to eliminate plastic pollution at its source.
[Source 2019][More on Oceans]
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; put a price on carbon; commit to 100% renewable power; responsible corporate engagement in climate policy; report climate change information in mainstream reports as a fiduciary duty; remove commodity-driven deforestation from all supply chains by 2020.
[Source 2017][More on Climate Change]
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 2012][More on Workers Rights]
This company has committed to making products with RWS-certified wool. The Responsible Wool Standard (RWS) is a voluntary global standard which ensures that sheep are treated with respect to their five freedoms and also ensures best practices in the management and protection of the land. However PETA claim the RWS is a kind of greenwash. (http://bit.ly/2oH56o6)
[Source 2018][More on Animal Rights]
This company has announced that they don't sell animal fur or are phasing in a fur-free policy.
[Source 2019][More on Animal Rights]
In 2009 this company announced a permanent policy against selling any exotic skins, including those of snakes, alligators, crocodiles, lizards, ostriches, and other animals.
[Source 2009][More on Animal rights]
This company has committed to making products with RDS-certified down. The Responsible Down Standard (RDS) is an independent, voluntary global standard which ensures that down and feathers come from ducks and geese that have been treated well, with no live plucking or force feeding. However the RDS has been criticised by PETA, who claim live plucking still occurs at RDS farms. (http://bit.ly/2cYTtoJ)
[Source 2019][More on Animal Rights]
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 2018][More on Animal Rights]
This company is a partner of I:Collect (aka I:CO), a global collection network to keep discarded clothing and shoes out of landfills. Customers deposit used textiles into recycling dropoff boxes at this company's stores, and I:CO arranges their environmentally-friendly removal, sorting and reuse.
[Source 2014][More on Governance]
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 2018][More on Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives]
This company is a founding 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 2018][More on Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives]
This company is a member of the Better Cotton Initiative, a voluntary initiative which encourages the adoption of better management practices in cotton cultivation to achieve measurable reductions in key environmental impacts, while improving social and economic benefits for cotton farmers, small and large, worldwide.
[Source 2019][More on Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives]
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 2016][More on Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives]
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 2019][More on Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives]
This company is a global 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 2019][More on Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives]
This company is a core partner of Make Fashion Circular, a multi-stakeholder platform run by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, which drives collaboration between industry leaders and other key stakeholders to create a textiles economy fit for the 21st century. Its ambition is to ensure clothes are made from safe and renewable materials, new business models increase their use, and old clothes are turned into new. This new textiles economy would benefit business, society, and the environment.
[Source 2019][More on Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives]
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 2019][More on Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives]
This company is a member of the Responsible Mica Initiative, a Do-Tank which aims to eradicate child labour and unacceptable working conditions in the Indian mica supply chain by joining forces across industries.
[Source 2017][More on Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives]
In 2018, 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 C.
[Source 2018][More on Forests]
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 2017][More on Human Rights]
In 2018, 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 2018][More on Human Rights]
Responsible Sourcing Network's 2014 report Cotton Sourcing Snapshot: A Survey of Corporate Practices to End Forced Labor includes survey results and ratings of 49 companies reflecting actions they are taking to stop cotton from Uzbekistan picked with forced labor from entering their supply chains. The survey offered a maximum of 100 points across 11 indicators in the categories of Policy, Public Disclosure, Engagement, and Implementation & Auditing. Only five companies scored over 50 points, 19 companies scored under 25 points, and two companies scored zero. This company received a score of 34.5.
[Source 2014][More on Human Rights]
Call to boycott by BDS due to involvement in Israel. [This assessment has not been used in calculation of ratings].
[Source 2010][More on Politics]
Rank a Brand searches the websites of brands for the answers to carefully targeted questions. From this they calculate sustainability scores based on the themes of environment, climate, labor issues, and transparency. Brands owned by this company received a 'C'.
[Source 2018][More on Sustainability Reporting]
This company is listed on the Facing Finance website as a company that manufactures weapons or profits from violations of human rights, pollution, corruption, or international law. Follow link for further details.
[Source 2014] |
||
Company Details
| Company Structure | Wholly-owned subsidiary |
Contact Details
| Address | 4/414 Kent St, Sydney, NSW, 2000, Australia |
| Phone | 02 9277 1000 |
| Freecall | 1800 828 1000 |
| Website | www.hm.com/au/ |
