List of companies who use child labor
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Recent reporting and NGO work show that child labor remains embedded in many global supply chains — notably cocoa, textiles and food processing — and that both major brands and their suppliers have been implicated. Investigations and government actions cite specific companies or sectors (e.g., Perdue Farms and JBS settlements for U.S. slaughterhouses [1]; cocoa supply chains tied to Mars, Mondelēz, Nestlé and others [2] [3] [4]; fast-fashion and apparel firms flagged by audits and advocacy groups [5] [6]). Available sources also document enforcement data and NGO lists rather than a single definitive “blacklist” of companies [7] [8].
1. What the available sources actually list — sectoral, not simply one-by-one
Federal and NGO sources tend to publish goods, sectors and incidents more than a universal list of guilty multinational brands: the U.S. Department of Labor compiles a list of goods produced by child or forced labor rather than a single roster of offending companies [7]. Investigative journalism and NGOs then connect those sectors to corporate supply chains — for example, cocoa, cotton and meatpacking appear repeatedly across reports [3] [6] [1].
2. Named companies and high-profile cases reported by the press
Mainstream reporting and enforcement actions have tied specific firms to child-labor incidents. The Labor Department obtained settlements with Perdue Farms and JBS over migrant children working in slaughterhouses, with a combined $8 million remedy [1]. Reuters and The New York Times reporting prompted the Labor Department to sue Hyundai over child labor at a supplier in Alabama, alleging use of a 13‑year‑old in dangerous work [9]. News investigations have also linked cocoa-sourcing brands — including Mars — to farms where children still work despite corporate commitments [2] [3].
3. Fast fashion and apparel: audits, admissions and continuing risk
Fast-fashion chains and large apparel brands repeatedly appear in watchdog reports and company self-reports. SHEIN disclosed two child-labor cases uncovered in its supply-chain audits and faced congressional scrutiny and a call to pause an IPO until forced-labor risks were clarified [5]. NGOs such as Walk Free say investigations have linked child exploitation to some well-known brands in Indian cotton supply chains, underscoring structural risk in textiles [6].
4. How companies respond: commitments, programs and disputed responsibility
Many corporations publish remediation programs and supply‑chain initiatives. Nestlé highlights school-building and traceability work through its Cocoa Plan and claims progress toward sourcing commitments by 2025 [4]. Some companies dispute liability when abuses arise at subcontractors or staffing agencies; Perdue publicly disagreed with being held fully liable while settling with the Labor Department [1]. Sources show a tension between public commitments and independent investigations that continue to find children working on supplier farms or factories [2] [3].
5. The role of auditors, private equity and franchising in enabling violations
Reports point to systemic enablers: weak audits, complex subcontracting and economic pressure. Good Jobs First ties many violations to franchised fast-food brands and to private-equity ownership models that prioritize cash extraction, naming the franchise model and portfolio company structures as common contexts for child-labor penalties [8]. Journalists and NGOs highlight failures of private auditing that announce visits or rely on supplier cooperation, which can leave abuses undetected [10].
6. What enforcement and remediation look like — and their limits
Enforcement mixes civil suits, monetary settlements and corporate retraining programs. The Labor Department’s actions (settlements and lawsuits) and initiatives such as Verité/AIM-Progress retraining of U.S. suppliers demonstrate active responses [1] [11]. But sources also report that many violations involve third‑party staffing firms, complicating accountability and leaving remediation uneven [1] [10].
7. How to interpret lists and consumer claims responsibly
No single source in the provided reporting offers a definitive, up‑to‑date, global “list of companies who use child labor.” Instead, the best evidence is a mix of government enforcement records, NGO investigations and company disclosures that identify sectors, supply‑chain links and individual high‑profile cases [7] [8] [2]. Consumers and researchers should cross‑check enforcement records (Labor Department), investigative reporting, and NGO assessments rather than rely on recycled listicles [7] [8] [6].
Limitations and caveats: available sources do not mention a single authoritative blacklist covering every allegation or remediation status; many reports focus on sectors, specific incidents, or company programs rather than declaring ongoing guilt across an entire brand [7] [3] [4]. Where companies have been named in enforcement actions or investigations, sources also document corporate denials, settlements or remediation plans — meaning context matters for each case [1] [9] [4].
If you want, I can compile a sourced short list of the specific companies named in these articles (with the exact allegation and source citation for each) so you can review cases one-by-one.