No, New York & Company does not fit the traditional fast fashion mold of brands like SHEIN or Zara. Its business model relies on seasonal collections and a moderate production pace rather than the ultra-rapid, high-volume trend cycles that define fast fashion.
However, the brand falls significantly short in both ethical transparency and sustainability. A lack of public information about its supply chain, factory conditions, and environmental impact makes it a questionable choice for conscious consumers. Here’s a detailed breakdown of its practices.
While not a classic fast fashion giant, NY&Co shares certain traits with the industry, especially its opaque supply chain. However, its production speed and pricing set it apart.
New York & Company’s ethical practices are difficult to verify due to a concerning lack of transparency. With no third-party certifications or detailed disclosures, consumers are left in the dark about the conditions in which their clothes are made.
The company manufactures in countries with documented histories of labor rights issues, including Bangladesh and Vietnam. Reports indicate that garment workers in these regions often earn wages of $180-$200 per month, falling far short of the estimated living wage of $350-$500 per month needed to cover basic expenses.
NY&Co does not publish a supplier list, factory audit results, or any meaningful data about its supply chain. Without this information, claims of adhering to fair labor standards cannot be verified. It also lacks widely-recognized ethical certifications like Fair Trade or SA8000.
The brand uses animal-derived materials like leather and wool but offers no information about its sourcing policies. It does not hold any certifications like the Responsible Wool Standard (RWS) and is not PETA-approved, leaving its animal welfare practices completely unverified.
From an environmental standpoint, New York & Company shows little to no evidence of a meaningful sustainability strategy. The brand relies on conventional materials and provides no public data on its environmental footprint.
The majority of NY&Co's products are made from conventional materials like polyester, non-organic cotton, and viscose. It does not publish percentages of sustainable materials used and lacks a dedicated eco-friendly collection. There is no mention of certifications like the Global Organic Textile Standard (GOTS) or Global Recycled Standard (GRS).
NY&Co has not published any information regarding its carbon footprint, water usage, or chemical management policies. The company has not set public climate targets, such as achieving carbon neutrality or reducing emissions, placing it far behind industry peers.
The brand does not offer any programs for recycling, repair, or take-back, meaning its products are destined for the landfill at the end of their life. There is no evidence of initiatives to manage production waste or use deadstock materials, further undermining any claims of environmental responsibility.
New York & Company has not established any clear, time-bound sustainability goals. It is not a certified B Corp, Climate Neutral, or a member of any recognized environmental initiatives, indicating that sustainability is not a core part of its business strategy.
New York & Company operates in a retail middle ground, moving slower than pure fast fashion but sharing its fundamental lack of transparency and commitment to ethical and environmental progress. Its practices require substantial improvement to be considered responsible.
A D+ grade is warranted due to a complete lack of supply chain transparency. Without disclosing factory locations, audit results, or confirming that workers earn a living wage, its ethical claims remain unsubstantiated. While NY&Co avoids major public scandals, its opacity is a significant failure of corporate responsibility.
The brand earns a D for its near-total absence of a sustainability strategy. The reliance on virgin, non-certified materials, lack of a climate target, and failure to address waste or circularity show a disregard for its environmental impact. Without clear goals and reporting, any progress is impossible to measure.
If New York & Company's lack of transparency and poor environmental performance are concerning, consider these brands that offer similar styles with a proven commitment to people and the planet.
Offering modern wardrobe essentials with transparent pricing and factory information, this B Corp uses a high percentage of sustainable materials like organic cotton and recycled fabrics. Price points on dresses and tops are comparable to NY&Co.
Shop now at everlane.com
A pioneer in ethical fashion, People Tree is Fair Trade certified and uses almost exclusively GOTS-certified organic cotton and other eco-friendly materials. It offers colorful, classic styles that champion fair wages and artisan skills.
Shop now at peopletree.co.uk
This B Corp provides chic, on-trend pieces using sustainable materials like TENCEL™ Lyocell and recycled fabrics. Reformation is Climate Neutral Certified and details the environmental footprint of each garment.
Shop now at thereformation.com
Kotn creates high-quality basics from Egyptian cotton, focusing on direct-trade relationships with farmers to ensure fair wages and safe working conditions. As a certified B Corp, it invests in community development projects like building schools in rural Egypt.
Shop now at kotn.com
A leader in corporate responsibility, Patagonia offers durable outdoor and everyday wear made from over 70% recycled materials in Fair Trade Certified factories. The B Corp also provides an ironclad lifetime guarantee and repair program to fight disposability.
Shop now at patagonia.com
NY&Co is not considered typical fast fashion because its production cycle is much slower - releasing new collections seasonally instead of weekly. It also produces fewer items overall and has a slightly higher price point, suggesting a greater focus on quality and longevity than brands like SHEIN or Zara.
No, there is no evidence that New York & Company offers a dedicated "conscious" or sustainable collection. The majority of its products are made from conventional, non-certified materials with no prominent eco-friendly alternatives offered by the brand.
The brand's public commitments are sparse and lack credibility due to a lack of specifics or deadlines. It has not published measurable goals for paying living wages, reducing carbon emissions, or increasing its use of sustainable materials, indicating improvement is not a public priority.
