Marmot
Lacks transparency. Publishes some details, but doesn't show its workers are paid and treated fairly.
Last researched 2 November 2026 · 7 sources
Californian outdoor brand selling rain and insulated jackets.
Marmot can't show that the workers who make its products in Vietnam earn a living wage, which workers there are very unlikely to.
Better-graded outdoor
Graded higher than Marmot, 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 Marmot? Send a right of reply.
Compare Marmot 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 Vietnam, China and Bangladesh.
- 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
- Met: High-risk raw materials (cotton) traced or certified, or not a major part of its rangeOnly in a few products: 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 product labels; Marmot 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vietnam | Systematic violations | Well below a living wage | Moderate |
| ChinaUsual for the industry | No guarantee of rights | Below a living wage | Moderate |
| BangladeshUsual for the industry | No guarantee of rights | Far below a living wage | Moderate |
| IndiaUsual for the industry | No guarantee of rights | Well below a living wage | High |
| 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 |
| 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
- Uses cotton in only a few products, so the raw-material check doesn't hold it back for Good. It doesn't show where its cotton comes from. The "Open supply chain" star needs all of it traced, certified or upcycled.
- Modern slavery statement
- Independent social audits of all its main factories
- Uses recycled metals or fibres
Research notes Marmot's clothing and gear are made by independent suppliers under parent Newell Brands' supplier code and responsible sourcing programme, which uses third-party and internal audits, announced and unannounced, in high-risk countries and is a Sedex member. Neither Marmot nor Newell names its production countries or publishes a factory list; retailer listings show Vietnam as country of origin for some jackets. There is no living wage commitment: the code requires only legal minimum wages. Marmot uses RDS-certified down and many recycled synthetic fabrics.
What independent sources say
| Source | Result | Details |
|---|---|---|
| Australian Modern Slavery Register | Listed | Covered by parent Newell Brands' 2025 modern slavery statement: 396 social audits in 2025, five supplier action plans on migrant labour and recruitment fees; Marmot is not named. View |
Sources and actions
Sources 7
Show all 7 sources
- Marmot - Good Shopping Guide (ethical.org.au) · search the archive · Wholly owned by Newell Brands; HQ California; has a modern slavery statement; Shop Ethical rating D-
- Newell Brands 2025 statement (Australian Modern Slavery Register) · search the archive · 396 social audits in 2025; five action plans on migrant labour and recruitment fees; no confirmed forced labour
- Marmot Guides Down Jacket (Scandinavian Outdoor) · search the archive · Retailer listing gives country of origin Viet Nam
- Marmot Hype Down Hoody (Scandinavian Outdoor) · search the archive · Retailer listing gives country of origin Viet Nam
Published by Marmot or its owner
- Marmot - Sustainability: People · search the archive · Supplier code of conduct with Newell Brands; regular on-site vendor audits; bans forced and child labour
- Newell Brands Modern Slavery and Supply Chain Transparency Statement (2025) · search the archive · 18,000+ suppliers in 90+ countries; third-party audits in high-risk countries; Sedex member; minimum wage code; cotton named high-risk
- Marmot - Sustainability: Product · search the archive · RDS-certified down; 44% of volume recycled, upcycled or renewable materials; mainly synthetic technical fabrics, cotton not a focus
Company details
- Owned by
- Newell Brands
- Headquarters
- United States
- Last researched
- 2 November 2026
- Cite this page
- Labour Lens, "Is Marmot ethical? Labour rating", https://www.labourlens.net/brand/marmot, 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 Marmot.