Goldmark
Lacks transparency. Publishes some details, but doesn't show its workers are paid and treated fairly.
Last researched 3 November 2026 · 2 sources
Jewellery chain selling gold, silver and diamond jewellery.
There's no proof Goldmark pays more than the legal minimum, which in China is below a living wage, and it has no full independent audit.
Know something we've missed? Send evidence. Represent Goldmark? Send a right of reply.
Compare Goldmark with another brand
Why it's graded Lacks transparency
- Not met: Meets 1 of 6 Good requirements.
- Holds the grade back: It has 3 red flags: no evidence of a living wage, unaudited production in high-risk countries and untraced high-risk mined materials. Two or more red flags means a poor grade.
- 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 rightsMost of its products are made in China, India and Thailand, 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: Conflict-free: diamonds, gems and gold traced to the mine, lab-grown, recycled or Fairmined (the Kimberley Process alone isn't enough)
Red flags 3
- 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
- Red flag: Relies on high-risk mined materials it can't traceShown to explain the grade. It isn't one of the 2 red flags that set it.
- Red flag: Fails its category's raw-material check (means Lacks transparency)
Stars it would earn as Good
None yet. Stars only show on Good companies. About stars
Estimates for its products
Our rules applied to one kind of product at a time, using Goldmark's evidence and, where it has product lines, that line's countries. They're estimates: we don't know which factory made any single item.
Rings, Engagement & wedding rings, Necklaces & pendants, Earrings, Bracelets, Watches: Lacks transparency, the same as Goldmark overall, because nothing we know differs between them.
Holding one? Scan its barcode for an estimate that uses its care label or ingredients.
Where it's made
These are James Pascoe Group's countries across all its brands; Goldmark doesn't say where its own products are made. The rest is shown as where jewellery and watches are usually made.
| Country | Worker rights | Legal minimum wage | Forced labour risk |
|---|---|---|---|
| China | No guarantee of rights | Below a living wage | Moderate |
| India | No guarantee of rights | Well below a living wage | High |
| Thailand | No guarantee of rights | Below a living wage | Moderate |
| Italy | Strong protections | Close to a living wage | Low |
| Vietnam | Systematic violations | Well below a living wage | Moderate |
| SwitzerlandUsual for the industry | Regular violations | About a living wage | Low |
Evidence
What we found
- Risk across the industry, not a finding about this company: gold and gemstone mining are linked to child labour, forced labour and mercury poisoning.
- Modern slavery statement
- Relies on gold and gemstones from artisanal mines where workers face mercury poisoning, silica dust and deadly collapses. It hasn't shown any steps to trace these materials to the mine, so it's graded Lacks transparency until it does.
Research notes Goldmark sells jewellery bought from third-party manufacturers and does not publish a supplier list or factory locations. The only modern slavery statement on the Australian register, covering Prouds, Angus & Coote and Goldmark for 2022, says it buys from 161 manufacturers in over 18 countries, with China, Italy, India, Vietnam and Thailand making 88% of jewellery by value, but reports no completed supplier audits and a supplier code still being drafted. It gives no information on where gold, diamonds or gems are mined, holds no Responsible Jewellery Council certification, and does not mention wages.
What independent sources say
| Source | Result | Details |
|---|---|---|
| Australian Modern Slavery Register | Listed | Prouds Jewellers Pty Ltd lodged a 2022 modern slavery statement covering Prouds, Angus & Coote and Goldmark; no later statement is on the register (checked November 2026). View |
| Business & Human Rights Resource Centre | Not listed | No Business & Human Rights Resource Centre allegations involving this brand were identified. View |
Sources and actions
Sources 2
Show all 2 sources
- Australian Modern Slavery Register – Prouds Jewellers Pty Ltd · search the archive · Only statement on the register for Prouds Jewellers Pty Ltd (checked November 2026) covers January to December 2022.
Published by Goldmark or its owner
- Prouds Jewellers Pty Ltd – Modern Slavery Statement (2022) · search the archive · Prouds Jewellers, wholly owned by NZ's James Pascoe Ltd (Prouds, Angus & Coote, Goldmark): 161 makers in 18+ countries; CN, IT, IN, VN, TH 88% of jewellery by value; no audits yet.
Company details
- Owned by
- James Pascoe Group
- Headquarters
- Australia
- Last researched
- 3 November 2026
- Cite this page
- Labour Lens, "Is Goldmark ethical? Labour rating", https://www.labourlens.net/brand/goldmark, last researched 3 November 2026, accessed [date].
- Method
- Researched with AI assistance against published rules. How we check · What Lacks transparency means
Better-graded fine jewellery
No fine jewellery brand selling new goods is Good yet. These are the strongest so far.
Something missing or wrong?
Grades are opinions based on the evidence listed here. Send us evidence, or a right of reply if you represent Goldmark.