Jabra

Lacks transparency. Publishes some details, but doesn't show its workers are paid and treated fairly.

Last researched 3 November 2026 · 6 sources

Copenhagen brand making headsets and headphones.

There's no proof Jabra pays more than the legal minimum, which in China is below a living wage, and it has no full independent audit.

See other TV and audio options

Know something we've missed? Send evidence. Represent Jabra? Send a right of reply.

Compare Jabra with another brand

Brand to compare with

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.

How grades are decided

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 countries such as China and Malaysia, 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: Traces its cobalt, gold and other conflict minerals to the mine

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

Where it's made

Jabra names some of the countries it makes in: China. The rest is shown as where electronics are usually made.

Where it's made, and conditions there
Country	Worker rights	Legal minimum wage	Forced labour risk
China	No guarantee of rights	Below a living wage	Moderate
VietnamUsual for the industry	Systematic violations	Well below a living wage	Moderate
TaiwanUsual for the industry	Strong protections	Close to a living wage	Low
MalaysiaUsual for the industry	No guarantee of rights	Below a living wage	Moderate
South KoreaUsual for the industry	No guarantee of rights	Close to a living wage	Low
IndiaUsual for the industry	No guarantee of rights	Well below a living wage	High

Evidence

What we found

Risk across the industry, not a finding about this company: cobalt, tin, tantalum, tungsten and gold mining carry child and forced labour risk (DR Congo, Indonesia), and assembly overtime is widespread.
Modern slavery statement
Relies on metals such as cobalt, gold and tin from artisanal mines where miners, including children, face toxic dust, mercury exposure and deadly tunnel 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 Jabra does not name the countries that make its products or name its suppliers; GN's 2017 annual report said contract manufacturers make all its hardware, with headsets made by selected manufacturers in China, and gave no shares. GN Audio is an Affiliate Member of the Responsible Business Alliance and says it audits its suppliers against SA8000 and RBA standards, with worker interviews and corrective action for major findings, but publishes no audit numbers or results. It follows OECD guidance for tin, tantalum, tungsten and gold and makes no living wage commitment.

What independent sources say

Source	Result	Details
UK Modern Slavery Statement Registry	Listed	GN Group publishes a modern slavery statement covering its businesses, including Jabra. View
Business & Human Rights Resource Centre	Not listed	No labour abuse allegations involving Jabra, GN or their suppliers were identified. View

Sources and actions

Sources 6

Show all 6 sources

GN - Corporate sustainability: Social · search the archive · Annual ESG audits of tier 1 and 2 suppliers; RBA and EcoVadis platforms; RBA Affiliate Member for audio, video and gaming.
Sustainability at Jabra · search the archive · Says all suppliers audited against SA8000 and RBA standards; no audit counts, findings or production sites.
GN: GN temporarily suspends operations at its Xiamen production site · search the archive · GN operates a production site in Xiamen, China (products not specified)

Published by Jabra or its owner

Jabra - Supply chain responsibility · search the archive · GN Audio is an RBA Affiliate Member; supplier audits based on SA8000 with worker interviews; OECD conflict minerals due diligence; no countries named.
GN Modern Slavery Statement · search the archive · GN Group publishes a modern slavery statement.
GN Annual Report 2017 · search the archive · Subcontractors manufacture all GN Audio (Jabra) hardware; headsets produced by selected manufacturers in China; GN Audio runs a repair centre in China

Company details

Owned by: GN Store Nord A/S (GN Group)
Headquarters: Denmark
Last researched: 3 November 2026
Cite this page: Labour Lens, "Is Jabra ethical? Labour rating", https://www.labourlens.net/brand/jabra, last researched 3 November 2026, accessed [date].
Method: Researched with AI assistance against published rules. How we check · What Lacks transparency means

Other TV and audio brands

Nothing we've rated in TV and audio is better than Lacks transparency yet.

See every TV and audio brand

Something missing or wrong?

Grades are opinions based on the evidence listed here. Send us evidence, or a right of reply if you represent Jabra.

Send evidence Send a right of reply