Dangerfield
Lacks transparency. Publishes some details, but doesn't show its workers are paid and treated fairly.
Last researched 2 November 2026 · 5 sources
Melbourne label selling retro-inspired men's and women's clothing.
Dangerfield's supply chain was linked to forced labour in 2019, which it has only partly acted on.
Know something we've missed? Send evidence. Represent Dangerfield? Send a right of reply.
Compare Dangerfield with another brand
Why it's graded Lacks transparency
- Not met: Meets 2 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: the most serious problem on its record (forced labour link, last recorded in 2019) was a link through a supplier, which the company has only partly acted on.
- 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 2 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, Bangladesh and Vietnam.
- Met: Supply chain independently audited or certified, or at least 80% made in countries with strong labour standards
- Not 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 2
- Red flag: No evidence it pays a living wage
- Red flag: Forced, slave or child labour found in or linked to its supply chain
Stars it would earn as Good
None yet. Stars only show on Good companies. About stars
Where it's made
From Factory X Pty's supplier list, which covers Dangerfield and its sister brands. Dangerfield publishes no breakdown of its own, so these are group-wide shares. The rest is shown as where clothes and shoes are usually made.
| Country | Share | Worker rights | Legal minimum wage | Forced labour risk |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| China | 97% | No guarantee of rights | Below a living wage | Moderate |
| BangladeshUsual for the industry | 1% | No guarantee of rights | Far below a living wage | Moderate |
| VietnamUsual for the industry | 1% | Systematic violations | Well below a living wage | Moderate |
| IndiaUsual for the industry | 1% | No guarantee of rights | Well below a living wage | High |
| CambodiaUsual for the industry | under 1% | No guarantee of rights | Far below a living wage | Moderate |
| TürkiyeUsual for the industry | under 1% | No guarantee of rights | Below a living wage | Very high |
| IndonesiaUsual for the industry | under 1% | No guarantee of rights | Well below a living wage | Moderate |
| PakistanUsual for the industry | under 1% | No guarantee of rights | Far below a living wage | High |
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 Dangerfield is made by independent suppliers for parent Factory X; about 95% of the group's international apparel suppliers are in China, with others in India, Taiwan and Australia. Its 2026 tier 1 and 2 supplier lists cover all final-stage production, and all 37 tier 1 suppliers had independent social audits in FY2025. It committed in 2019 to a living wage, uses Anker benchmarks and has done a tier 1 wage gap analysis, but has set no deadline. Suppliers pledge not to knowingly use Xinjiang cotton, but there is no outright ban.
What independent sources say
| Source | Result | Details |
|---|---|---|
| Baptist World Aid Ethical Fashion Report | Listed | Owner Factory X scored 48 out of 100 in the 2026 Ethical Fashion Report (average 31.5), after 49 in 2024. View |
| Australian Modern Slavery Register | Listed | Factory X FY2025 statement: about 95% of international apparel suppliers are in China; all 37 tier 1 suppliers independently audited; suppliers pledge not to knowingly use Xinjiang cotton. View |
| Business & Human Rights Resource Centre | Listed | Factory X responded in 2019 to reports that Dangerfield sourced up to 7% of its cotton from Xinjiang. View |
Confirmed issues 1
Only confirmed problems are listed, and old ones drop off after 10 to 15 years. A problem the company has fully put right no longer counts against it, and nor does one it finds and is fixing itself. How problems are counted
| Last recorded | What happened | Made amends? |
|---|---|---|
| 2019 | Link through a supplierAfter a 2019 ABC investigation into forced labour in Xinjiang's cotton industry, Dangerfield said up to 7% of its cotton came from Xinjiang (ABC via Business & Human Rights Resource Centre, 2019). | PartlyFactory X had suppliers sign pledges not to knowingly use Xinjiang cotton and says it traces fibre origin; no outright ban, testing or remedy for workers has been reported. |
Sources and actions
Sources 5
Show all 5 sources
- Response by Factory X - Dangerfield (BHRRC) · search the archive · Dangerfield said in 2019 it sources up to 7% of its cotton from Xinjiang; suppliers signed agreements against forced labour cotton
- Factory X Group - Good Shopping Guide (ethical.org.au) · search the archive · 2026 Ethical Fashion Report: Factory X scored 48/100 (average 31.5)
- Factory X commit to pay a living wage (Oxfam Australia) · search the archive · Factory X committed in 2019 to pay a living wage, with no deadline stated
Published by Dangerfield or its owner
- Factory X Modern Slavery Statement FY2025 · search the archive · About 95% of suppliers in China; 37/37 tier 1 audited; Xinjiang pledge, no ban; Dangerfield committed to wage gap analysis
- Our Ethics (Dangerfield) · search the archive · 2026 tier 1 and 2 supplier lists cover 100% of final-stage production; all factories audited yearly; Anker living wage benchmarks
Company details
- Headquarters
- Australia
- Last researched
- 2 November 2026
- Cite this page
- Labour Lens, "Is Dangerfield ethical? Labour rating", https://www.labourlens.net/brand/dangerfield, 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
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 Dangerfield.