Italian antitrust authorities allege that Giorgio Armani S.p.A. and G.A. Operations S.p.A. disseminated deceptive ethical and social responsibility statements. These claims, found in the companies’ Ethical Code and on the Armani Values website (linked from Armani.com), starkly contrast with the actual working conditions uncovered at suppliers and sub-suppliers handling a significant portion of Armani-branded leather goods production.
Investigators found the companies heavily emphasized their commitment to sustainability – particularly social responsibility and worker safety – transforming these principles into marketing tools designed to meet rising consumer expectations. The authority cited the name “Armani Values” and internal documents explicitly stating goals to “enhance the brand’s positive perception regarding sustainability” and commercially encourage “customers to make purchases conscious of the ‘values’ conveyed through our products.”
However, the firms outsourced most leather bag and accessory production to suppliers who further subcontracted work. Inspections revealed that safety devices were often removed from machinery at these sub-suppliers to boost output, severely endangering worker health and safety. Hygiene conditions were frequently inadequate, and workers were often employed wholly or partially off the books (“in nero”).
This context demonstrates that the respect for worker rights and health did not align with the ethical and social responsibility declarations made by the Armani companies. The authority asserts clear awareness of these severe violations, evidenced by the presence of a G.A. Operations employee during a police inspection. This employee, responsible for quality control, admitted to visiting one problematic workshop monthly for about six months.
Furthermore, a 2024 internal Giorgio Armani S.p.A. document, predating a judicial administration request by Milan prosecutors, contained a damning assessment: even in the best observed scenarios, “the working environment is borderline acceptable,” while other cases raised “serious doubts about their adequacy and healthiness.”
Riproduzione riservata © Copyright ANSA