Hunter
Lacks transparency. Publishes some details, but doesn't show its workers are paid and treated fairly.
Last researched 3 November 2026 · 6 sources
British brand best known for rubber wellington boots.
We couldn't confirm where Hunter makes most of its rubber wellington boots and rainwear.
Also worth knowing
Most clothes and shoes are made in countries such as China and Bangladesh, where pay is usually below a living wage and unions are heavily restricted.
Know something we've missed? Send evidence. Represent Hunter? Send a right of reply.
Compare Hunter with another brand
Why it's graded Lacks transparency
- Not met: Meets 1 of 6 Good requirements.
- Holds the grade back: It has 2 red flags: no evidence of a living wage and a hidden, unaudited supply chain, probably in high-risk countries. 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 rightsWhere clothes and shoes are usually made, such as China and Bangladesh, 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 (natural rubber) traced or certified, or not a major part of its rangeNot traced or certified: natural rubber
Red flags 2
- Red flag: No evidence it pays a living wage
- Red flag: Hidden supply chain, probably mostly 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
We couldn't confirm where Hunter makes most of its products, so this shows where clothes and shoes are usually made.
| Country | Share | Worker rights | Legal minimum wage | Forced labour risk |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| China | 30% | No guarantee of rights | Below a living wage | Moderate |
| Bangladesh | 20% | No guarantee of rights | Far below a living wage | Moderate |
| Vietnam | 15% | Systematic violations | Well below a living wage | Moderate |
| India | 10% | No guarantee of rights | Well below a living wage | High |
| Cambodia | 8% | No guarantee of rights | Far below a living wage | Moderate |
| Türkiye | 7% | No guarantee of rights | Below a living wage | Very high |
| Indonesia | 5% | No guarantee of rights | Well below a living wage | Moderate |
| Pakistan | 5% | No guarantee of rights | Far below a living wage | High |
Evidence
What we found
- Uses little or no cotton (e.g. wool, linen or leather products)
- Doesn't show where its natural rubber comes from. Natural rubber is linked to forced and child labour on some rubber plantations, so it can't be graded Good until it traces or certifies it.
Research notes Since Authentic Brands Group bought Hunter's intellectual property in 2023, the brand has been run by licensees: Batra Group designs, makes and sells it in the UK and Europe, and Marc Fisher runs US footwear. Neither publishes where Hunter products are now made, a supplier list, audit results or a modern slavery statement for the brand. Before the sale, Hunter said 86% of its rubber was FSC certified from spring 2023 and aimed for 100% by 2025, but no current figure is published. Good On You rates its labour practices very poor (2024).
What independent sources say
| Source | Result | Details |
|---|---|---|
| Baptist World Aid Ethical Fashion Report | Not listed | Hunter and its owner Authentic Brands Group are not rated in the 2024 Ethical Fashion Report. (2024 edition; latest is 2026) View |
| Business & Human Rights Resource Centre | Unclear | No labour abuse reports involving Hunter boots or its suppliers were identified. View |
Sources and actions
Sources 6
Show all 6 sources
- FSC Spotlight: Hunter Boots · search the archive · 2022 commitment to source 100% FSC-certified natural rubber for footwear by 2025
- Hunter - Good On You · search the archive · People rated very poor (April 2024); final production in extreme-risk countries; no evidence of living wages
- Authentic Brands Group snaps up British heritage brand Hunter (FashionUnited) · search the archive · Authentic Brands bought Hunter's IP in 2023; Batra Group runs design, retail and wholesale in UK/Europe; Marc Fisher is US footwear partner
- Authentic Brands Group Acquires Intellectual Property of Hunter (License Global) · search the archive · Hunter evolved from a rubber boot into footwear, outerwear, bags and accessories; licensee roles
- Hunter Original Tall Gumboots - ASOS Australia · search the archive · Hunter boots sold online to Australian shoppers via ASOS Australia
Published by Hunter or its owner
- Hunter - Sustainability (Hunter Japan) · search the archive · Natural rubber boots; 68% FSC rubber in 2022, 86% from SS23, target 100% FSC by 2025; no factory or audit details
Company details
- Owned by
- Authentic Brands Group (US); run under licence by Batra Group (UK and Europe) and Marc Fisher (US)
- Headquarters
- United Kingdom
- Last researched
- 3 November 2026
- Cite this page
- Labour Lens, "Is Hunter ethical? Labour rating", https://www.labourlens.net/brand/hunter, last researched 3 November 2026, accessed [date].
- Method
- Researched with AI assistance against published rules. How we check · What Lacks transparency means
Better-graded footwear
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 Hunter.