Tudor

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 Tudor “Very Poor”. These are a few issues influencing its score:

• There’s no evidence it uses any lower-impact materials
• There’s no evidence it minimises waste in its supply chain.
• There’s no evidence it’s taking actions to protect biodiversity in its supply chain.
• It uses renewable energy in its direct operations (such as stores or offices) but not 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 Tudor “Not Good Enough”. These are a few issues influencing its score:

• Its final production stage happens in Switzerland, a low risk country for labour abuse.
• There’s no evidence it has a Code of Conduct.
• There’s no evidence it provides financial security to its suppliers, which can result in poor working conditions and wages.
• There’s no evidence it implements practices to support diversity and inclusion in its direct operations or supply chain.
• There’s no evidence it ensures workers are paid living wages in its supply chain.

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 Tudor “It’s a Start”. These are a few issues influencing its score:

• There’s no evidence it has an animal welfare policy.
• It appears to use leather.
• It doesn’t appear to use wool, down, fur, angora, exotic animal skin, or exotic animal hair.
• 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 Tudor “Not Good Enough” overall.