Gorman
Lacks transparency. Publishes some details, but doesn't show its workers are paid and treated fairly.
Last researched 2 November 2026 · 7 sources
Melbourne women's label known for colourful prints.
There's no proof Gorman pays more than the legal minimum, which in China is below a living wage.
Better-graded everyday fashion
Graded higher than Gorman, 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 Gorman? Send a right of reply.
Compare Gorman 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, Bangladesh and Vietnam.
- Met: Supply chain independently audited or certified, or at least 80% made in countries with strong labour standards
- Met: No confirmed child or forced labour findings or linksAn unconfirmed report of forced labour is listed below. It doesn't affect the grade.
- 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 Factory X Pty's supplier list, which covers Gorman and its sister brands. Gorman 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 Gorman 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. Factory X publishes its factory names, and all 37 tier 1 suppliers had independent social audits in FY2025. It committed in 2019 to a living wage, has completed living wage audits and a wage gap analysis for tier 1 suppliers, and ring-fences wages, but has set no deadline for paying a living wage. A 2022 audit found excessive hours and missing machine guards at one supplier, which the group says were fixed.
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; no modern slavery found. View |
| Business & Human Rights Resource Centre | Listed | Factory X responded in 2019 to reports that its Dangerfield brand sourced cotton from Xinjiang. View |
Unconfirmed reports
Credible reports that haven't been confirmed by a regulator, completed investigation or the company. They're shown for your information and don't affect the grade.
- ABC Four Corners reported in 2019 that sister brand Dangerfield, also owned by Factory X, sourced up to 7% of its cotton from Xinjiang, where forced labour of Uyghur workers is widespread; no link to Gorman products was reported (ABC via Business & Human Rights Resource Centre, 2019). Source
Sources and actions
Sources 7
Show all 7 sources
- Factory X Group - Good Shopping Guide (ethical.org.au) · search the archive · 2026 Ethical Fashion Report: Factory X scored 48/100 (average 31.5); Oxfam 2024 credits tier 1 list, living wage commitment and wage ring-fencing
- Factory X commit to pay a living wage (Oxfam Australia) · search the archive · Factory X, including Gorman, committed in 2019 to pay a living wage, with no deadline stated
- Response by Factory X - Dangerfield (BHRRC) · search the archive · Dangerfield said in 2019 it sources up to 7% of its cotton from Xinjiang
- Gorman take a step forward on transparency (Oxfam Australia) · search the archive · Gorman published the names and locations of its factories in 2018
Published by Gorman or its owner
- Factory X Modern Slavery Statement FY2025 · search the archive · About 95% of international apparel suppliers in China; 37/37 tier 1 audited by Qualspec; tier 1 living wage audits and wage gap analysis done
- Our Ethics (Gorman) · search the archive · 2026 tier 1 and 2 supplier lists cover 100% of final-stage production; all factories audited yearly; living wage commitment (Anker method)
- Factory X Modern Slavery Statement FY22 · search the archive · One supplier rated Amber for excessive hours and missing machine guards, later remediated; factory list on brand websites
Company details
- Headquarters
- Australia
- Last researched
- 2 November 2026
- Cite this page
- Labour Lens, "Is Gorman ethical? Labour rating", https://www.labourlens.net/brand/gorman, 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 Gorman.