Guess Canada Facing Investigation Over Potential Uyghur Forced Labor
Guess Canada is the latest brand to be slapped with an independent fact-finding investigation from Ottawa’s corporate ethics watchdog over reports of Uyghur forced labor in its operations outside the country.
The Canadian Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprise, a.k.a. the CORE, revealed the determination Monday following the completion of an initial assessment, which details alleged supply chain relationships between Guess Canada and Chinese companies flagged as using or benefitting from the use of persecuted Muslim minorities from China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region.
More from Sourcing Journal
Like similar probes into the Great White Nothern arms of Nike, Levi Strauss & Co., Ralph Lauren, Diesel, Hugo Boss, Walmart and Zara before it, the investigation stems from a complaint from a coalition of 28 organizations, including Stop Uyghur Genocide Canada, the Uyghur Refugee Relief Fund and the Uyghur Rights Advocacy Project.
The groups used a 2020 Australian Strategic Policy Institute report and 2021 and 2022 studies from Sheffield Hallam University’s Helena Kennedy Centre for International Justice to draw a line between Guess and Shandong Zoucheng Guosheng, Luthai Textile Co., and Xinjiang Zhongtai Group, which have been implicated in the forcible transfer of Uyghurs from their homes to other parts of Xinjiang or China to work in highly surveilled factory environments, which experts say is part of their indoctrination into mainstream Han Chinese culture. Xinjiang Zhongtai Group, for instance, claims to have transferred more than 5,000 citizens described as “surplus laborers,” according to its own reports.
Though Guess did not respond to a request for comment, it told the CORE that the Chinese companies identified through the reports are not present on its supplier list. The L.A.-based firm also said that it has ceased all business relationships with Tier 1 vendors in Xinjiang, claimed that the agency did not provide credible evidence and expressed reservations about the CORE’s jurisdiction, since Guess Canada does not “operate abroad” but within the domestic market.
Guess added that the “CORE decided the complaint was admissible based solely on the information provided by the complainants, and did so without any notice to Guess Canada and without giving Guess Canada an opportunity to make submissions.”
But Guess’ response “discounts risks” at the lower tiers of its supply chain and “creates a gap” in the available information that warrants an investigation, the CORE said. Should the CORE rule that Guess isn’t “acting in good faith,” it could make a recommendation to the Minister of International Trade to deny the company any trade advocacy or financial support.
“Guess Canada’s response does not fully address the complex nature of the garment supply chain,” said Sheri Meyerhoffer, the ombudsperson. “While Guess has provided information on their due diligence policies, they have not responded to the complaint which is why we will proceed to an investigation using independent fact-finding.”
