City Chic
Lacks transparency. Publishes some details, but doesn't show its workers are paid and treated fairly.
Last researched 2 November 2026 · 7 sources
Australian plus-size women's fashion retailer.
There's no proof City Chic pays more than the legal minimum, which in China is below a living wage.
Know something we've missed? Send evidence. Represent City Chic? Send a right of reply.
Compare City Chic with another brand
Why it's graded Lacks transparency
- Not met: Meets 3 of 6 Good requirements.
- Holds the grade back: It doesn't show that workers are paid a living wage, and isn't certified as working towards one. On Track needs at least one of these.
- It isn't Harm on record, because there's no serious confirmed problem on its record.
- Lacks transparency is still a poor grade: in supply chains like this, workers who can't be seen to be treated fairly are usually underpaid or unprotected.
Good requirements 3 of 6
- Not met: Pays a living wage, or holds a strong fair-pay certificationLiving wage: no evidence
- Not met: Respects worker rightsJudged on where its products are made: worker rights are poorly protected in China.
- Met: Supply chain independently audited or certified, or at least 80% made in countries with strong labour standards
- Met: No child or forced labour findings or links
- Met: Names the factories or farms that make its products, or is fully certified by a scheme that holds and audits that listPublishes its supplier list
- Not met: High-risk raw materials (cotton) traced or certified, or not a major part of its rangeNot traced or certified: cotton
Red flags 1
- Red flag: No evidence it pays a living wage
Stars it would earn as Good
None yet. Stars only show on Good companies. About stars
Where it's made
From City Chic's own disclosure: it publishes its supplier list.
| Country | Worker rights | Legal minimum wage | Forced labour risk |
|---|---|---|---|
| China | No guarantee of rights | Below a living wage | Moderate |
Evidence
What we found
- Publishes supplier list
- Modern slavery statement
- Independent social audits of all its main factories
- Doesn't show where its cotton comes from. Cotton is linked to forced labour in Xinjiang and Turkmenistan, and child labour in several growing regions, so it can't be graded Good until it traces or certifies it.
Research notes City Chic owns no factories and buys from partner factories. Its May 2026 factory list names 37 tier 1 factories, all in China, plus over 200 tier 2-4 suppliers, mostly in China. Tier 1 factories get social audits by Qima based on SA8000; in FY26, 7.3% of audited factories were rated red and 26.8% amber. It bans cotton from Xinjiang, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. It has committed to closing the living wage gap and run wage audits at its top factories, but publishes no figures on how many workers earn a living wage. It scored 36/100 in the 2026 Ethical Fashion Report, above the 31.5 average.
What independent sources say
| Source | Result | Details |
|---|---|---|
| Baptist World Aid Ethical Fashion Report | Listed | Scored 36 out of 100 in the 2026 Ethical Fashion Report (average 31.5), after 40 in 2024. View |
| Australian Modern Slavery Register | Listed | FY25 modern slavery statement reports 39 tier 1 factories with 3,064 workers, mainly in China, with Qima social audits based on SA8000; no modern slavery cases reported. View |
Sources and actions
Sources 7
Show all 7 sources
- City Chic - Good Shopping Guide (ethical.org.au) · search the archive · 2026 Ethical Fashion Report: City Chic scored 36/100 (average 31.5); Oxfam 2024 tracker notes tier 1 supplier disclosure and living wage commitment
- City Chic Collective FY26 Annual Report (ASX) · search the archive · FY26: 3,714 tier 1 workers; factory audit ratings 65.9% green, 26.8% amber, 7.3% red; forced labour policy and tracing kept
- City Chic shakes up sourcing amid heightened risks (Ragtrader) · search the archive · 2023: production concentrated in South China, expanded into Bangladesh, India, Morocco, Vietnam, Cambodia
Published by City Chic or its owner
- CCX Factory List (May 2026) · search the archive · 37 tier 1 factories, all in China; tier 2-4 suppliers mostly in China, a few in Bangladesh, Hong Kong, USA, Cameroon
- City Chic Collective FY25 Modern Slavery Statement · search the archive · 39 tier 1 factories, 3,064 workers; no owned factories; Qima SA8000-based audits; living wage audits at top factories; cotton ban
- City Chic Collective - Corporate Social Responsibility · search the archive · Commits to closing the gap to a living wage using Anker benchmarks; third-party audits; publishes factory list
- CCX Living Wage Statement · search the archive · Suppliers must develop roadmaps to pay a living wage within 5 years; no interim targets published
Company details
- Owned by
- City Chic Collective Limited
- Headquarters
- Australia
- Last researched
- 2 November 2026
- Cite this page
- Labour Lens, "Is City Chic ethical? Labour rating", https://www.labourlens.net/brand/city-chic, last researched 2 November 2026, accessed [date].
- Method
- Researched with AI assistance against published rules. How we check · What Lacks transparency means
Better-graded everyday fashion
None of the everyday fashion brands we know to make shoes is Good yet. These are the strongest so far. The Social Studio, Middlemost and The Social Outfit are Good, but we don't know that they make shoes. Second-hand and refurbished goods create no new factory work, so they're Good by rule and come first.
Something missing or wrong?
Grades are opinions based on the evidence listed here. Send us evidence, or a right of reply if you represent City Chic.