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 women's clothing, leather bags and shoes.
There's no proof Elk pays more than the legal minimum, which in China is below a living wage, and it has no full independent audit.
Better-graded bags and accessories
Graded higher than Elk, selling the same kinds of things. Second-hand first.
Second-hand and refurbished goods create no new factory work, so they're Good by rule and come first.
Know something we've missed? Send evidence. Represent Elk? Send a right of reply.
Compare Elk 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, 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 2 of 6
- Not met: Pays a living wage, or holds a strong fair-pay certificationLiving wage: no evidence
- Not met: Respects worker rightsMost of its products are made in countries such as China and India, where unions are heavily restricted, and it has no full supply chain audit.
- Not 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 and leather) traced or certified, or not a major part of its rangeNot traced or certified: cotton and leather
Red flags 2
- Red flag: No evidence it pays a living wage
- Red flag: Made mostly in countries with poor worker rights, without a full independent audit of its supply chain
Stars it would earn as Good
None yet. Stars only show on Good companies. About stars
Where it's made
From Elk's own disclosure: it publishes its supplier list.
| Country | Share | Worker rights | Legal minimum wage | Forced labour risk |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| China | 74% | No guarantee of rights | Below a living wage | Moderate |
| India | 11% | No guarantee of rights | Well below a living wage | High |
| Türkiye | Not given | No guarantee of rights | Below a living wage | Very high |
| Vietnam | 4% | Systematic violations | Well below a living wage | Moderate |
| Indonesia | 1% | No guarantee of rights | Well below a living wage | Moderate |
Evidence
What we found
- Publishes supplier list
- 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.
- Doesn't show where its leather comes from. Leather is linked to hazardous tannery work and forced labour on some cattle ranches, so it can't be graded Good until it traces or certifies it.
Research notes Elk's products are made by independent suppliers, mainly in China and India; its 2025 Transparency Report puts China at 78%, India 12%, Vietnam 4% and Indonesia 1% of Tier 1 sourcing, also names makers in Turkey, and lists its Tier 1 factories by name and address. 86% of Tier 1 suppliers had a current social audit, with 84 non-compliances found (43% still open), and 75% of Tier 1 workers were verified as paid at least the legal minimum wage. Elk says a living wage is a priority but has set no target or deadline. It uses leather, 79% from LWG-audited tanneries.
What independent sources say
| Source | Result | Details |
|---|---|---|
| B Corp directory | Certified | Certified B Corp since December 2024 with an overall B Impact score of 100.6 (Workers 22.3, Community 21.4). View |
Sources and actions
Sources 5
Show all 5 sources
- ELK - B Corp directory · search the archive · Certified December 2024, B Impact score 100.6; Workers 22.3
- Elk - Good Shopping Guide (ethical.org.au) · search the archive · Production mainly China and India; Transparency Pledge aligned; Turkmen and Uzbek cotton pledges signed
- ELK Transparency Report 2025 · search the archive · Tier 1 shares: China 78%, India 12%, Vietnam 4%, Indonesia 1%; makers in Turkey; named Tier 1 list; 86% audited; 84 non-compliances; wage data
Published by Elk or its owner
- ELK's 7th Annual Transparency Report · search the archive · B Corp in FY25 with score 100.6; 100% of Tier 1 suppliers mapped, Tier 2 98%, Tier 3 45%
- ELK - Suppliers (Ethics) · search the archive · Key suppliers in China and India; Sedex member; ETI-based code; living wage a priority with no timeline
Company details
- Headquarters
- Australia
- Last researched
- 2 November 2026
- Cite this page
- Labour Lens, "Is Elk ethical? Labour rating", https://www.labourlens.net/brand/elk, last researched 2 November 2026, accessed [date].
- Method
- Researched with AI assistance against published rules. How we check · What Lacks transparency means
Something missing or wrong?
Grades are opinions based on the evidence listed here. Send us evidence, or a right of reply if you represent Elk.