Pyrolux

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

Last researched 3 November 2026 · 7 sources

Australian cookware brand selling pots and pans.

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

Better-graded cookware and tableware

Graded higher than Pyrolux, selling the same kinds of things.

SolidteknicsHomewares, furniture & appliancesOne-piece wrought iron and stainless pansMakes its products in its own factories in Australia, where legal wages are close to a living wage.GoodPartly verified FisslerMissing: where its earlier stages happen · Homewares, furniture & appliancesPressure cookers, pots and pansPays or is working towards a living wage, with gaps still to close.On TrackPartly verified SilitMissing: where its earlier stages happen · Homewares, furniture & appliancesCeramic-coated cookware and pressure cookersPays or is working towards a living wage, with gaps still to close.On TrackPartly verified

See every cookware and tableware brand

See better cookware and tableware options

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

Compare Pyrolux with another brand

Brand to compare with

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 rightsMost of its products are made in countries such as China and India, 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
Met: High-risk raw materials (such as timber and cotton) traced or certified, or not a major part of its rangeNone recorded in a major share of its range

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; Pyrolux doesn't say where its products are made. The rest is shown as where homewares and appliances 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
IndiaUsual for the industry	No guarantee of rights	Well below a living wage	High
PolandUsual for the industry	Regular violations	Close to a living wage	Moderate
IndonesiaUsual for the industry	No guarantee of rights	Well below a living wage	Moderate
MalaysiaUsual for the industry	No guarantee of rights	Below a living wage	Moderate

Evidence

What we found

No high-risk raw materials (such as timber and cotton) are recorded in a major share of its range, so the raw-material check doesn't hold it back for Good.

Research notes Pyrolux is designed in Australia and made by contract factories that Sheldon and Hammond does not name; every CHOICE and retailer listing checked gives China as the country of origin. Sheldon and Hammond publishes no audit results, wage information or modern slavery statement, and it is not on the Australian Modern Slavery Register. No labour abuse reports involving Pyrolux have been made public, and no independent rating covers the brand.

What independent sources say

Source	Result	Details
Australian Modern Slavery Register	Not listed	No Sheldon and Hammond statement appears on the Australian Modern Slavery Register. View
Baptist World Aid Ethical Fashion Report	Not covered	Baptist World Aid does not rate cookware brands. View

Sources and actions

Sources 7

Show all 7 sources

Pyrolux Pyrostone 26cm frypan (CHOICE) · search the archive · Country of origin China; brand website listed as sheldonandhammond.com.au
Pyrolux Pyrochef 26cm/5L round French oven (CHOICE) · search the archive · Country of origin China
Pyrolux HA+ Induction 11271 (CHOICE) · search the archive · Country of origin China
Modern Slavery Register search: sheldon · search the archive · No Sheldon and Hammond statement on the Australian register
2-piece Pyrolux Xtreme fry pan set (Bunnings) · search the archive · Pyrolux Xtreme fry pans listed as from China
Sheldon and Hammond · search the archive · Importer and distributor founded 1935, over 120 staff in Australia and New Zealand; Pyrolux among its brands
Pyrolux Pyrostone 2 piece set (Kmart) · search the archive · Pyrolux cookware designed in Australia

Company details

Owned by: Sheldon and Hammond Pty Ltd (Australian importer and distributor)
Headquarters: Australia
Employees: About 120
Last researched: 3 November 2026
Cite this page: Labour Lens, "Is Pyrolux ethical? Labour rating", https://www.labourlens.net/brand/pyrolux, last researched 3 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 Pyrolux.

Send evidence Send a right of reply