Labour Lens

Oroton

Lacks transparency

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

Clothing & footwear

Partly verified: what this means

Last researched 2 November 2026 · 3 sources

Australian brand selling leather handbags and wallets.

There's no proof Oroton pays more than the legal minimum, which in China is below a living wage.

Better-graded bags and accessories

Graded higher than Oroton, selling the same kinds of things. Second-hand first.

15 op shops and resale platforms, Good by ruleBuying second-hand or refurbished: GlamCorner and Blue Spinach and 13 more · See them allGoodJoyyaClothing & footwearFair trade organic tees and bagsIts own factories in India hold WFTO Guaranteed Fair Trade.GoodGoes Above and Beyond: Gives workers a real voice; Open supply chain; Finds and fixes problems, or invests in communities5 starsThe Social StudioClothing & footwearSocial enterprise fashion labelIts own factories in Australia hold Ethical Clothing Australia accreditation.GoodGoes Above and Beyond: Gives workers a real voice; Finds and fixes problems, or invests in communities4 starsThe Social OutfitClothing & footwearSydney-made social enterprise fashionIts own factories in Australia hold Ethical Clothing Australia accreditation.GoodGoes Above and Beyond: Gives workers a real voice3 stars

Second-hand and refurbished goods create no new factory work, so they're Good by rule and come first.

See every bags and accessories brand

See better bags and accessories options

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

Compare Oroton with another brand

Why it's graded Lacks transparency

  • Not met: Meets 2 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.

How grades are decided

Good requirements 2 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 China and India.
  • 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 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

China has the largest share, 98%. Italy is next, at 1%.

Where it's made, share by country, and conditions there
CountryShareWorker rightsLegal minimum wageForced labour risk
China98%No guarantee of rightsBelow a living wageModerate
Italy1%Strong protectionsClose to a living wageLow
India1%No guarantee of rightsWell below a living wageHigh

Evidence

What we found

  • Modern slavery statement
  • Independent social audits of all its main factories
  • 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 Oroton's FY25 modern slavery statement says about 98% of its leather goods and accessories by volume, and all of its apparel, are made by independent suppliers in China, with small amounts from Italy and India. Audits found excessive overtime, wage record gaps and safety problems; only 37% of accessory corrective actions were closed. It began Anker-method living wage audits at 60% of its Chinese Tier 1 suppliers in FY26, with no results yet, and publishes no supplier list. It scored 40/100 in the 2026 Ethical Fashion Report.

What independent sources say

SourceResultDetails
Baptist World Aid Ethical Fashion ReportListedScored 40 out of 100 in the 2026 Ethical Fashion Report (average 31.5), up from 36 in 2024. View
Australian Modern Slavery RegisterListedFY25 modern slavery statement: 28 Tier 1 accessory suppliers (about 98% of volume in China) and 8 apparel suppliers (all in China); social audits at all Tier 1 accessory suppliers. View

Sources and actions

Sources 3

Show all 3 sources
  1. OrotonGroup - Shop Ethical! (ethical.org.au) · search the archive · 2026 Ethical Fashion Report score 40/100 against 31.5 average; Leather Working Group member; owned by Will Vicars since 2018

Published by Oroton or its owner

  1. Oroton Group (Australia) FY25 Modern Slavery Statement · search the archive · Tier 1 accessories volume: China 98.42%, Italy 1%, India 0.53%, Australia 0.05%; apparel 100% China; audits, hotline, living wage audits; 483 staff
  2. Our Responsibility - Oroton · search the archive · General commitments to ethical conduct and engaging suppliers on sustainability; no production countries named

Company details

Headquarters
Australia
Employees
About 483
Last researched
2 November 2026
Cite this page
Labour Lens, "Is Oroton ethical? Labour rating", https://www.labourlens.net/brand/oroton, 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 Oroton.

Send evidenceSend a right of reply