Hugo Boss AG
ETR : BOSS
2016 Apparel & Footwear
DOWNLOAD SCORECARD
Company Ranking
13 out of20 Companies
Company Score
SUMMARY
Hugo Boss AG (Hugo Boss), a Germany-based developer and marketer of clothing and accessories, ranks tenth out of 43 companies, disclosing more information on its forced labor policies and practices than its peers on all themes except Recruitment, where the company scores zero. Compared to 2016, the company improved its rank from 13th to tenth. Since 2016, the company has improved its performance and disclosure by training its suppliers; disclosing a supplier list; joining the Better Cotton Initiative, YESS: Yarn Ethically & Sustainably Sourced, and the 2018 Accord on Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh; improving its purchasing practices; strengthening its corrective action plan processes; and disclosing worker engagement and evidence of its grievance mechanism being used by its suppliers’ workers. Additional steps the company could take to address forced labor risks in its supply chains include strengthening its disclosure and practices on the themes of Purchasing Practices, Recruitment, and Worker Voice.
HOW DO THEY COMPARE?
The comparison tool allows companies' results to be easily compared. Up to two additional companies can be selected and compare against each other as shown below.
SELECTED COMPANIES
SCORE HISTORY
THEME & indicator score
The benchmark methodology has seven themes, selected to capture the key areas where companies need to take action to eradicate forced labour from their supply chains. The themes are comprised of a total of 12 key indicators. For each indicator, a company can score a total of 100 points.
Commitment and Governance
The company's top-level commitments on forced labor, supply chain standards, management processes, training programs and stakeholder engagement.
| Awareness and Commitment | 100 / 100 |
| Supply Chain Standards | 60 / 100 |
| Management and Accountability | 100 / 100 |
| Training | 50 / 100 |
| Stakeholder Engagement | 50 / 100 |
Traceability and Risk Assessment
The extent to which the company traces its supply chain and conducts forced labor risk assessments, and discloses information about these processes.
| Traceability and Supply Chain Transparency | / 100 |
| Transparency | / 100 |
Purchasing Practices
The company's awareness and action on purchasing practices that can exacerbate forced labor risks, and its process for selecting suppliers, integrating standards into contracts and cascading them down the supply chain.
| Purchasing Practices | 25 / 100 |
| Supplier Selection | 100 / 100 |
| Integration into Supplier Contracts | 50 / 100 |
| Cascading Standards Through the Supply Chain | 100 / 100 |
Recruitment
| Recruitment Approach | 0 / 100 |
| Recruitment Fees | 0 / 100 |
| Recruitment Audits | 0 / 100 |
Worker Voice
The extent to which the company proactively communicates with workers through the supply chain, enables freedom of association and ensures access to effective and trusted grievance mechanisms.
| Communication of Policies | 25 / 100 |
| Worker Voice | 0 / 100 |
| Worker Empowerment | 0 / 100 |
| Grievance Mechanism | 20 / 100 |
Monitoring
The company's process for auditing (including whether it includes non-scheduled visits, document review, worker interviews) and disclosure about the audit process and findings.
| Auditing Process | 100 / 100 |
| Auditing Disclosure | 80 / 100 |
Remedy
The extent to which the company has corrective action plans for non-compliant factories, as well as processes for remedying workers who are victims of forced labor, and reports on remedies provided.
| Corrective Action Plans | 75 / 100 |
| Remedy Programs | 50 / 100 |