FatFace

Our “Planet” rating evaluates brands based on the environmental policies in their supply chains, from carbon emissions and wastewater to business models and product circularity. Here we rate FatFace “Not Good Enough”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• It uses some lower-impact materials including organic cotton.
• There’s no evidence it’s taking meaningful action to reduce or eliminate hazardous chemicals in manufacturing.
• There’s no evidence it’s taking any action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in its supply chain.
• There’s no evidence it’s taking actions to protect biodiversity in its supply chain.

Workers’ rights are central to our “People” rating, which assess brands’ policies and practices on everything from child labour to living wages and gender equality. Here we rate FatFace “Not Good Enough”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• There’s no evidence it supports diversity and inclusion in its supply chain.
• There’s no evidence it provides financial security to its suppliers, which can result in poor working conditions and wages.
• It audits some of its suppliers.
• There’s no evidence it ensures workers are paid living wages in its supply chain.
• During the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, it disclosed some policies to protect workers in its supply chain from the virus.

Brands’ animal welfare policies and, where applicable, how well they trace their animal-derived products are the focus of our “Animals” rating. Here we rate FatFace “Not Good Enough”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• It has a formal policy aligned with the Five Freedoms of animal welfare but no clear implementation mechanisms in place.
• It appears to use leather, wool, and exotic animal hair.
• It doesn’t appear to use down, fur, angora, or exotic animal skin.
• There’s no evidence it traces any animal-derived materials to the first production stage.

Based on all publicly available information we’ve reviewed, we rate FatFace “Not Good Enough” overall.