In March 2020, Ethical Consumer searched the Earth Friendly Products website for information on the company's supply chain management. No information was found.
Supply chain policy (poor)
A strong policy would include the following commitments: no use of forced labour, permission of freedom of association, payment of a living wage, the restriction of working hours to 48 hours plus 12 overtime (without exception), no use of a child labour (under 15 or 14 if ILO exempt), no discrimination by race, sex or for any other reason.
Stakeholder engagement (poor)
Ethical Consumer deemed it necessary for companies to demonstrate stakeholder engagement, such as through membership of the Ethical Trade Initiative, Fair Labour Association or Social Accountability International. Companies were also expected to engage with Trade Unions, NGOs and/or not-for-profit organisations which could systematically verify the company's supply chain audits, and for workers to have access to an anonymous complaints system, free of charge and in their own language.
Auditing and Reporting (poor)
Ethical Consumer deemed it necessary for companies to have an auditing and reporting system. Results of audits should be publicly reported and quantitatively analysed. The company should have a scheduled and transparent audit plan that applies to their whole supply chain, including some second tier suppliers. The company should also have a staged policy for non-compliance. The costs of the audit should be borne by the company.
Difficult issues (poor)
Ethical Consumer also deemed it necessary for companies to address other difficult issues in their supply chains. This would include ongoing training for agents, or rewards for suppliers, or preference for long term suppliers. It would also include acknowledgement of audit fraud and unannounced audits, and measures taken to address the issue of living wages, particularly among outworkers, and illegal freedom of association.
The company did not have any publicly available information on any of the above, therefore it received Ethical Consumer's worst rating for Supply Chain Management and lost a whole mark in this category.

Reference:

www.ecos.com (11 March 2020)

In March 2020, Ethical Consumer viewed an article on the Top Class Actions website titled 'Settlement Reached Over Earth Friendly Products ‘Natural’ Labeling' and dated to November 2015. The article stated that Venus Laboratories Inc. dba Earth Friendly Products Inc. had settled a class action which claimed the company had misled consumers with “natural” labeling".
"California residents Rebekah Baharestan and Jena McIntyre filed the Earth Friendly Products class action lawsuit in California federal court, alleging that the labeling on the company’s cleaning products led them to believe that the products were made out of all natural ingredients.
"According to the product labeling class action lawsuit, the plaintiffs paid extra based on their belief that the products were all natural. However, the products actually contain multiple synthetic chemicals, including cocamidopropyl betaine, lauryl glucoside and methylisothiazolinone, or MIT, the class action lawsuit alleges. The plaintiffs claim that MIT is a biocide that has been linked to an “epidemic” of allergic reactions."
This reference is for information only.

Reference:

Settlement Reached Over Earth Friendly Products ‘Natural’ Labeling (9 November 2015)