Jockey
Lacks transparency. Publishes some details, but doesn't show its workers are paid and treated fairly.
Last researched 2 November 2026 · 7 sources
US underwear brand sold in Australia under licence.
There's no proof Jockey 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 Jockey? Send a right of reply.
Compare Jockey 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 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 rightsMost of its products are made in countries such as China and Cambodia, 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) 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, 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
From product labels; Jockey doesn't say where its products are made. The rest is shown as where clothes and shoes are usually made.
| Country | Worker rights | Legal minimum wage | Forced labour risk |
|---|---|---|---|
| China | No guarantee of rights | Below a living wage | Moderate |
| Cambodia | No guarantee of rights | Far below a living wage | Moderate |
| BangladeshUsual for the industry | No guarantee of rights | Far below a living wage | Moderate |
| VietnamUsual for the industry | Systematic violations | Well below a living wage | Moderate |
| IndiaUsual for the industry | No guarantee of rights | Well below a living wage | High |
| TürkiyeUsual for the industry | No guarantee of rights | Below a living wage | Very high |
| IndonesiaUsual for the industry | No guarantee of rights | Well below a living wage | Moderate |
| PakistanUsual for the industry | No guarantee of rights | Far below a living wage | High |
Evidence
What we found
- 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 Jockey in Australia and New Zealand is a licence from US company Jockey International; Melbourne underwear company Mitch Dowd took it over from Hanes Australasia in April 2026. Mitch Dowd publishes a supplier code banning sourcing from Myanmar and Xinjiang and reserves the right to audit, but names no factories, production countries or audit results, publishes no modern slavery statement and makes no living wage commitment. Jockey's Australian site lists cotton trunks as made in Cambodia and China. Jockey International requires WRAP or equivalent audits but names no factories. Jockey is not rated in the Ethical Fashion Report.
What independent sources say
| Source | Result | Details |
|---|---|---|
| Australian Modern Slavery Register | Listed | Hanes Australasia's 2025 modern slavery statement says it held the Jockey Australia and New Zealand licence until 31 March 2026, with sell-through rights; no Jockey-specific sourcing or audit data. View |
| Baptist World Aid Ethical Fashion Report | Not listed | Not rated in the 2026 Ethical Fashion Report; Shop Ethical lists Jockey under licensee Mitch Dowd (Mistiyarn Pty Ltd), which is unrated. View |
Sources and actions
Sources 7
Show all 7 sources
- Mitch Dowd takes on Jockey license for AU/NZ (Ragtrader) · search the archive · May 2025: Mitch Dowd replaces Hanes Australasia as Jockey licensee; sold via Myer, David Jones, Target and Big W
- Mitch Dowd: Ethical Sourcing Policy · search the archive · Supplier code: bans sourcing from Myanmar and Xinjiang; right to audit; minimum wage only; no factory list or countries
Published by Jockey or its owner
- Jockey International names Mitchdowd new licensee for Australia · search the archive · Mitchdowd named multi-year Australia/NZ licensee; no manufacturing details given
- Hanes Australasia Modern Slavery Statement 2025 · search the archive · Hanes Australasia held the Jockey AU/NZ licence until 31 March 2026, with sell-through rights; no Jockey-specific sourcing data
- Jockey: Ethical Production · search the archive · Jockey International requires WRAP or equivalent factory audits; no factory list, countries or living wage commitment
- Jockey Australia: Cotton Edge Trunk · search the archive · Cotton/elastane trunk; country of manufacture Cambodia
- Jockey Australia: Comfort Classics Trunk · search the archive · Cotton/elastane trunk; country of manufacture China
Company details
- Headquarters
- Australia
- Last researched
- 2 November 2026
- Cite this page
- Labour Lens, "Is Jockey ethical? Labour rating", https://www.labourlens.net/brand/jockey, last researched 2 November 2026, accessed [date].
- Method
- Researched with AI assistance against published rules. How we check · What Lacks transparency means
Better-graded underwear and sleepwear
Something missing or wrong?
Grades are opinions based on the evidence listed here. Send us evidence, or a right of reply if you represent Jockey.