Façonnable
Lacks transparency. Publishes some details, but doesn't show its workers are paid and treated fairly.
Last researched 3 November 2026 · 5 sources
Nice-founded premium label selling shirts, polos and tailoring.
There's no proof Façonnable pays more than the legal minimum, which in Bangladesh is far below a living wage, and it has no full independent audit.
Better-graded suits and tailoring
Graded higher than Façonnable, selling the same kinds of things.
No suits and tailoring brand selling new goods is Good yet. These are the strongest so far.
Know something we've missed? Send evidence. Represent Façonnable? Send a right of reply.
Compare Façonnable with another brand
Why it's graded Lacks transparency
- Not met: Meets 1 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 1 of 6
- Not met: Pays a living wage, or holds a strong fair-pay certificationLiving wage: no evidence
- Not met: Respects worker rightsSome of its products are made in countries such as the United Arab Emirates and Bangladesh, 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
- Not met: Names the factories or farms that make its products, or is fully certified by a scheme that holds and audits that 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
Red flags 2
- Red flag: No evidence it pays a living wage
- Red flag: Hidden supply chain, partly in countries with poor worker rights
Stars it would earn as Good
None yet. Stars only show on Good companies. About stars
Where it's made
These are its parent group's countries across all its brands; Façonnable doesn't say where its own products are made.
| Country | Worker rights | Legal minimum wage | Forced labour risk |
|---|---|---|---|
| United Arab Emirates | No guarantee of rights | Not rated | Very high |
| Bangladesh | No guarantee of rights | Far below a living wage | Moderate |
| China | No guarantee of rights | Below a living wage | Moderate |
| Spain | Strong protections | Close to a living wage | Low |
| France | Regular violations | About a living wage | Low |
| India | No guarantee of rights | Well below a living wage | High |
| Italy | Strong protections | Close to a living wage | Low |
| Morocco | Regular violations | Well below a living wage | Low |
| Mauritius | Regular violations | Below a living wage | Low |
| Pakistan | No guarantee of rights | Far below a living wage | High |
| Poland | Regular violations | Close to a living wage | Moderate |
| Portugal | Strong protections | Close to a living wage | Low |
Evidence
What we found
- Signed the International Accord on garment factory safety
- 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.
- Uses leather in only a few products and doesn't show where it comes from. That doesn't count against it for Good, but the "Open supply chain" star needs all of it traced, certified or upcycled.
Research notes Façonnable does not publish a factory list or its own production countries, so these are the group's countries. Its owner AWWG reported 347 supplier facilities in 2022/23 in Bangladesh, China, France, India, Italy, Mauritius, Morocco, Pakistan, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine and the UAE, with no shares or Façonnable breakdown, and left Façonnable out of its materials figures. AWWG signed the International Accord in 2022 and uses amfori BSCI, SMETA or WRAP audits (about 63% of manufacturing sites audited), but has no living wage commitment. Façonnable is a small brand (about €12m sales) with no public labour rights cases on record.
What independent sources say
| Source | Result | Details |
|---|---|---|
| Baptist World Aid Ethical Fashion Report | Not listed | Neither Façonnable nor its owner AWWG is rated in the 2026 Ethical Fashion Report, the latest edition. View |
Sources and actions
Sources 5
Show all 5 sources
- AWWG da impulso a Façonnable y traza nuevo plan de expansión internacional (Modaes, 2024) · search the archive · Owned by AWWG since 2016, controlled by M1 and L Catterton; HQ moved to Sant Feliu de Llobregat; stores in Europe and Mexico only
- Façonnable - Panaprium · search the archive · No manufacturer list published; Better Cotton only certification; uses leather, wool and down
- Façonnable - Wikipedia · search the archive · Founded in Nice in 1950; sold by Nordstrom to M1 Group in 2007; men's and women's ranges
Published by Façonnable or its owner
- AWWG Non-Financial Report 2022-23 · search the archive · Façonnable sales €12.3m; 347 group facilities in 15 countries; Accord since 2022; BSCI/SMETA/WRAP audits; Façonnable left out of materials data
- Façonnable official site · search the archive · Online shop serves European markets; shipping to the USA no longer available; no Australian store or delivery shown
Company details
- Headquarters
- Spain
- Last researched
- 3 November 2026
- Cite this page
- Labour Lens, "Is Façonnable ethical? Labour rating", https://www.labourlens.net/brand/faconnable, last researched 3 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 Façonnable.