Rank a Brand

How sustainable is Jockey ?

Jockey & sustainability


JockeyLogo

1 out of 16

Sustainability summary

Based on our sustainability criteria, Jockey has achieved the E-label. This is our lowest possible sustainability score, and Jockey has earned it by communicating nothing concrete about the policies for environment, carbon emissions or labor conditions in low-wages countries. For us as consumers, it is unclear whether Jockey is committed to sustainability or not.

Brand owner: Jockey International, Inc.
Head office: Kenosha, WI, USA
Sector: Lingerie & underwear
Categories : Male, Female, Kids
Free Tags: Jockey, Caps, Shirts

Compare other brands

What's your sustainability news about Jockey?

Jockey sustainability score report

Last edited: 7 April 2013 by Mario
Last reviewed: 7 April 2013 by Mario

Questions about Climate Change/ Carbon Emissions

0 out of 4
1. Is there a policy for the brand to minimize, reduce or compensate carbon emissions? Jockey does not communicate any information on its carbon emissions policy, if there is one, on its website. Sustainability information should be easily accessible for consumers to make responsible choices. Source
2. Has the brand (company) disclosed the annual absolute carbon footprint of its 'own operations' (Scope 1 & 2) and has the brand already reduced or compensated 10% of these emissions in the last 5 years? See remark for carbon emissions policy question 1. Source
3. Has the brand (company) set a target to reduce its absolute ‘own operations’ carbon emissions by at least 20% within the next 5 years? See remark for carbon emissions policy question 1. Source
4. Does the brand (company) also have a policy to reduce/compensate carbon emissions generated from the product supply chain that is beyond own operations (Scope 3)? See remark for carbon emissions policy question 1. Source

Questions about Environmental Policy

0 out of 4
1. Does the brand (company) use environmentally 'preferred' raw materials for more than 5% of its volume? Jockey uses organic cotton and Tencel®. It is however not clear what percentage of the total volume this represents. Source
2. Does the brand (company) use environmentally 'preferred' raw materials for more than 10% of its volume? See remark for environmental policy question 1. Source
3. Does the brand (company) use environmentally 'preferred' raw materials for more than 25% of its volume? See remark for environmental policy question 1. Source
4. Does the brand (company) have an environmental policy related to the ‘wet processes’ within the production cycle, like bleaching and dying of fabrics? See remark for environmental policy question 1. Source

Questions about Labour Conditions/ Fair Trade

1 out of 8
1. Does the brand (company) have a supplier Code of Conduct (CoC) which includes the following standards: No forced or slave labor, no child labor, no discrimination of any kind and a safe and hygienic workplace? All standards are mentioned in Jockey Code of Conduct (see link). Source
2. Does this CoC include at least two of the following workers rights: 1. to have a formally registered employment relationship 2. to have a maximum working week of 48 hours with voluntary and paid overtime of 12 hours maximum 3. to have a sufficient living wage? 1. Not found. 2. No, maximum working week is based on the law of the country of manufacture and overtime may be mandatory. 3. No, mentioning of minimum wage, not living wage. Source
3. Does this Code of Conduct include the right for workers to form and join trade unions and bargain collectively; and in those situations where these rights are restricted under law, the right to facilitate parallel means of independent and free association and bargaining? Freedom of association is mentioned, but nothing found about situations in which this right is restricted by law. Source
4. Does the brand (company) have a published list of direct suppliers, that have collectively contributed to more than 90% of the purchase volume? Jockey products are manufactured in Jockey-owned factories (US, Honduras, Costa Rica and Jamaica ) and also in contractors' and licensees' factories, which are spread across the globe. However, a specified list of direct suppliers is not provided. Source
5. Is the brand (company) a member of a collective initiative that aims to improve labor conditions, or does the brand (company) purchase its supplies from accredited factories with improved labor conditions? Owned factories are WRAP certified, but not clear what percentage on total this represents. Jockey is working on the implementation of WRAP in contractor and licensee facilities. Source
6. Do independent civil society organizations like NGO's and labor unions have a decisive voice in this collective initiative or in these certification schemes? WRAP is not acknowledged as a Multi Stakeholder Initiative (MSI). Source
7. Does the brand (company) annually report on the results of its labor conditions policy? According to Jockey, an independent monitoring company sends a report to Jockey after evaluating their factory. However, Jockey does not mention how often these reports are produced, nor do they make them public on their website. Source
8. Has the brand’s labor conditions policy resulted in a ‘compliance level’ of at least 30% of the purchase volume, or a ‘monitored level' of at least 80%? Factory compliance levels are not reported on Jockey's website (see former remark), nor do they indicate what % of factories are monitored. Source