Pan tu nie stał

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 Pan tu nie stał “Not Good Enough”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• There’s no evidence it uses any lower-impact materials.
• It manufactures its products closer to home to reduce the climate impact of long-distance shipping.
• There’s no evidence it’s taking meaningful action to reduce or eliminate hazardous chemicals in manufacturing.
• There’s no evidence it’s taking meaningful action to reduce water use.

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 Pan tu nie stał “Good”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• Its final production stage happens in Poland, a medium risk country for labour abuse.
• There’s no evidence it has a Code of Conduct.
• It partly traces its supply chain including the final and some of the second production stages.
• There’s no evidence it ensures workers are paid living wages in its supply chain.
• The brand claims to audit some of its supply chain but doesn’t specify what percentage.

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 Pan tu nie stał “Good”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• It appears to use wool.
• It doesn’t appear to use leather, down, fur, angora, exotic animal skin, or exotic animal hair.

Based on all publicly available information we’ve reviewed, we rate Pan tu nie stał “It’s a Start” overall.