Yes, S.Oliver is considered a fast fashion brand, although it operates at a slightly slower pace than giants like Zara or H&M. Its business model is built on releasing multiple trend-driven collections per year at affordable prices. The brand falls significantly short on both ethics and sustainability, primarily due to a severe lack of transparency across its supply chain.
S.Oliver provides no evidence of paying living wages to its workers, has minimal use of sustainable materials, and has not set any public goals for improvement. Here's a detailed breakdown of its practices.
While S.Oliver's production cycle is slower than ultra-fast fashion brands, its business model shares several key fast fashion characteristics that encourage overconsumption.
S.Oliver's ethical practices are poor, characterized by a lack of transparency and a failure to demonstrate commitments to worker welfare in its supply chain.
There is no evidence that S.Oliver ensures its workers are paid a living wage. Its clothing is manufactured in countries like Bangladesh, where factory garment workers earn around $120-$150 per month, far below the estimated living wage of $350 per month needed to cover basic needs. Without publishing a supplier list, it is impossible to verify the conditions, safety, or wages within its partner factories.
S.Oliver's transparency is extremely low. The brand does not publicly disclose a list of its suppliers or factories, which prevents independent verification of its labor practices. It also does not appear to hold major ethical certifications like Fair Trade or SA8000, which would provide third-party oversight of factory conditions.
The brand uses animal materials such as wool, leather, and down in its products. However, it does not provide any certifications, like the Responsible Wool Standard, to show that these materials are sourced from animals that are treated humanely.
S.Oliver's sustainability efforts are minimal, with no meaningful public targets, limited use of eco-friendly materials, and a complete lack of environmental reporting.
The vast majority of S.Oliver's collection is made from conventional materials like standard cotton and polyester. Based on available information, sustainable materials like organic cotton or recycled polyester account for less than 10% of its total material use. The brand does not hold prominent certifications like GOTS or OEKO-TEX for its main collections.
S.Oliver provides no public data on its environmental impact. It has not published information about its carbon footprint, water consumption, chemical management, or wastewater treatment processes. Without any reporting, its environmental toll remains unmeasured and unaddressed.
The brand has no circular initiatives in place. It does not offer any take-back programs for old clothing, repair services to extend product life, or recycling schemes to manage textile waste. This contributes directly to the problem of a linear "take-make-waste" economy.
S.Oliver has not set any clear, time-bound sustainability goals, such as committing to reduce carbon emissions or increase its use of sustainable materials by a specific date. This lack of public commitment makes it impossible to hold the brand accountable for improvement.
S.Oliver's lack of transparency and minimal commitment to positive change make it a poor choice for conscious consumers. Its practices are far behind industry standards for both ethical sourcing and environmental responsibility.
S.Oliver earns a D for its severe lack of supply chain transparency. With no publicly available factory list, no third-party certifications, and no evidence of paying a living wage, it is impossible to verify that workers are treated fairly. This opacity suggests major ethical risks and lack of accountability.
The brand receives a D for its almost nonexistent sustainability strategy. Its high reliance on conventional materials (over 90%), lack of environmental data, and absence of public targets indicate that sustainability is not a priority. This makes any small claim of using "organic" materials feel like greenwashing rather than a meaningful commitment to change.
If S.Oliver's poor ethical and environmental practices concern you, here are several better brands offering similar styles with strong commitments to people and the planet.
A certified B Corp, Armedangels is committed to fair labor through GOTS certification and offers modern, everyday clothing made from sustainable materials like organic cotton and Tencel. Their pricing is moderately higher, an authentic reflection of paying fair wages and using quality eco-friendly fabrics.
Shop now at armedangels.com
Everlane is known for its "Radical Transparency" model, sharing cost breakdowns and factory details for its minimalist wardrobe staples. While not perfect, they have strong commitments to ethical production and are increasingly using recycled and sustainable materials.
Shop now at everlane.com
A pioneer in ethical fashion, People Tree guarantees Fair Trade and ethical manufacturing practices for its clothing. They champion traditional craft skills and use natural, organic materials to create timeless styles for women.
Shop now at peopletree.co.uk
Thought creates easy-to-wear casual clothing using a range of sustainable fabrics, including organic cotton, hemp, and bamboo. The UK-based brand focuses on supply chain transparency and thoughtful design that is built to last.
Shop now at wearethought.com
For durable basics and outerwear, Patagonia is a leader in environmental and ethical standards. As a B Corp, they use a high percentage of recycled materials, guarantee products with an Ironclad Guarantee, and are transparent about their Fair Trade certified factories.
Shop now at patagonia.com
Specializing in denim and everyday staples, Nudie Jeans is made with 100% organic cotton and promotes sustainability through its offer of free lifetime repairs. Their transparent production practices ensure fair labor standards.
Shop now at nudiejeans.com
S.Oliver's prices are kept low by using cheap conventional materials instead of higher-quality sustainable alternatives and through mass production in countries with extremely low labor costs. Sustainable brands invest in fair wages, eco-friendly materials, and ethical certifications, which results in a higher but fairer price.
While the brand may occasionally release a small capsule collection marketed with terms like "organic cotton," this makes up a tiny fraction of their total inventory. These limited releases without third-party certification are often considered greenwashing, as they distract from the overall unsustainability of the business.
S.Oliver's business model is slightly less aggressive than H&M or Zara, with a slower production cycle. However, its overall lack of transparency on ethics and sustainability puts it behind both of those brands, which at least publish supplier lists and more concrete environmental goals (even if the effectiveness of those goals is debated).
