Julius Marlow
Lacks transparency. Publishes some details, but doesn't show its workers are paid and treated fairly.
Last researched 2 November 2026 · 5 sources
Australian men's footwear brand selling leather shoes and boots.
Julius Marlow's parent, Brand Collective, scored 9/100 in the 2026 Ethical Fashion Report, and workers in Bangladesh and Vietnam are very unlikely to earn a living wage.
Know something we've missed? Send evidence. Represent Julius Marlow? Send a right of reply.
Compare Julius Marlow 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 a failing or very low rating (Ethical Fashion Report 9/100 in 2026, for the company it's rated with). 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 Bangladesh, 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 and leather) traced or certified, or not a major part of its rangeNot traced or certified: leather
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: Failing or very low score on an independent rating: Ethical Fashion Report 9/100 (2026, the company it's rated with)
Stars it would earn as Good
None yet. Stars only show on Good companies. About stars
Where it's made
These are Brand Collective's countries across all its brands; Julius Marlow doesn't say where its own 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 |
| Bangladesh | No guarantee of rights | Far below a living wage | Moderate |
| Vietnam | Systematic violations | Well below a living wage | Moderate |
| India | No guarantee of rights | Well below a living wage | High |
| Indonesia | No guarantee of rights | Well below a living wage | Moderate |
| Brazil | Systematic violations | Below a living wage | Moderate |
| Spain | Strong protections | Close to a living wage | Low |
| Thailand | No guarantee of rights | Below a living wage | Moderate |
| CambodiaUsual for the industry | No guarantee of rights | Far below a living wage | Moderate |
| TürkiyeUsual for the industry | No guarantee of rights | Below a living wage | Very high |
| PakistanUsual for the industry | No guarantee of rights | Far below a living wage | High |
Evidence
What we found
- Modern slavery statement
- Doesn't show where its leather comes from. Leather is linked to hazardous tannery work and forced labour on some cattle ranches, so it can't be graded Good until it traces or certifies it.
- Uses cotton in only a few products and doesn't show where it comes from. That doesn't count against it for Good, but the "Open supply chain" star needs all of it traced, certified or upcycled.
Research notes Julius Marlow shoes are made by independent suppliers. Brand Collective says most of its suppliers are in China, with others in India, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Thailand, Indonesia, Brazil and Spain, but it gives no factory counts or shares and no current public factory list. It runs in-house audits from its China sourcing office plus third-party audits, but reports no results. Its supplier code asks only for the national minimum wage, with no living wage commitment. The group scored 9/100 in the 2026 Ethical Fashion Report, well below the 31.5 average.
What independent sources say
| Source | Result | Details |
|---|---|---|
| Baptist World Aid Ethical Fashion Report | Problem found | Owner Brand Collective scored 9 out of 100 in the 2026 Ethical Fashion Report (average 31.5). View |
| Australian Modern Slavery Register | Listed | Covered by Brand Collective's modern slavery statement for FY2024, which names key supplier countries but gives no factory counts, audit results or remediation figures. View |
Sources and actions
Sources 5
Show all 5 sources
- Brand Collective - Good Shopping Guide (ethical.org.au) · search the archive · 2026 Ethical Fashion Report: Brand Collective scored 9/100 (average 31.5); Leather Working Group member; owned by LK Group
Published by Julius Marlow or its owner
- Brand Collective QLC Holdings Modern Slavery Statement FY2024 · search the archive · Julius Marlow listed as owned brand; supplier countries named, no counts; in-house and third-party audits; minimum wage only
- Brand Collective QLC Holdings Modern Slavery Statement FY2023 · search the archive · Majority of suppliers in China, India, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Thailand, Indonesia, Brazil and Spain; no audit or remediation figures
- Brand Collective Holdings Modern Slavery Statement FY2021 · search the archive · Majority of suppliers and factories in China; China sourcing office runs in-house audits
- Brand Collective - Ethics · search the archive · States zero tolerance of modern slavery and supplier ethical sourcing standards; no supplier list or audit data
Company details
- Headquarters
- Australia
- Last researched
- 2 November 2026
- Cite this page
- Labour Lens, "Is Julius Marlow ethical? Labour rating", https://www.labourlens.net/brand/julius-marlow, last researched 2 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 Julius Marlow.