First off, my position on corporations is not that they are happy fun nice things but they are amoral things designed to make money for their stockholders (assume it is a public corporation which I believe Coca-Cola is)
squatterandtheant wrote:
Alleged murders in colombia
I highly doubt that Coke executives ordered the murders of union members in Columbia. If actual evidence rather then rhetoric was the basis of these claims, then I would want them extradited immediately.
squatterandtheant wrote:
In November 2000, The Coca-Cola Co. in Atlanta paid $192.5 million to settle a highly publicized class-action lawsuit involving about 2,000 African-American employees who alleged wide disparities in pay and promotions. In terms of illustrating racial bias as corporate policy, the settlement represented just the tip of the iceberg...
The fact that the corporation settled is not proof in itself, in fact corporations often settle in such circumstances simply to get the story off the front-pages and to avoids calls for boycotts from the
likes of Jesse Jackson..
squatterandtheant wrote:
Aggressive marketing to children of nutritionally worthless and damaging products. Coke paid Warner Brothers, a subsidiary of Time Warner, $150 million for exclusive global marketing rights to the Harry Potter movies, the first of which was released in November of 2001. Obviously, the whole point of Coke’s investment was to entice kids to consume more soft drinks...
How dare Coca-Cola try to legally advertise it's product in a way that has been widely known to be done for decades?!
squatterandtheant wrote:
Coke admits marketing fraud, settles ‘whistleblower’ lawsuit. In June, 2003, the public got a rare glimpse of Coke’s corrupt business practices when the company acknowledged that employees manipulated the results of a marketing test of Frozen Coke at Burger King restaurants.
True.
Quote:
Coca-Cola Co. admitted Tuesday that employees rigged a marketing test of Frozen Coke at Burger King Corp. stores three years ago, one of a series of allegations in a whistleblower lawsuit under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Burger King said it was disappointed by Coke's actions in the test and is continuing its own probe. The fast-food chain is among Coke's largest customers.
An auditing committee, investigating several allegations by a former Coke manager, also found that the company's fountain division had improperly valued some equipment. The company will take a $9 million pretax writedown to correct the value.
The former manager, Matthew Whitley, also accused the world's largest beverage maker of discriminating against minority employees. In a lawsuit containing his complaints, he said he was fired for raising his concerns to president and chief operating officer Steve Heyer.
Coke's audit committee said Tuesday there is no evidence it discriminates against minorities or women. It also said it found no evidence to support another charge: that the fountain division improperly shifted $4 million of capital funding to a fountain project in 2002.
(source)Quote:
Overexploitation and pollution of water sources in India.Of the 200 countries where Coca-Cola is sold, India reportedly has the fastest-growing market, but the adverse environmental impacts of its operations there have subjected the parent company and its local bottlers to a firestorm of criticism and protest. There has been a growing outcry against Coca-Cola’s production practices in India, which are draining out vast amounts of public groundwater and turning farming communities into virtual deserts...
I don't really know enough about this issue to comment fairly. However here is a link to
a article from the Wall Street Journal that is fair and critical of both sides (link).
Quote:
”Repressive, anti-worker policies in many foreign countries. Coke’s reputation has already suffered because of the actions of its subsidiaries and/or bottlers in Brazil, Guatemala, Zimbabwe, the Philippines and elsewhere. (According to reports that seem to echo the horror stories from Colombia...
I'm not sure what this is in reference to. Obviously I am not going to defend repressive policies, however on the other hand it is worth pointing out that conditions and wages of a Coca-Cola factory in the US are not necessary going to be the same as one in Guatemala. However, at the same time, when a large company like Coca-Cola is allowed to move into a less developed region they will have conditions and wages better then the generally available to attract employees. Indeed, this process can gradually turn entire areas for the better.
Quote:
Anti-competitive practices around the world. Coke frequently gets in trouble because of its trade practices and attempts to monopolize the beverage sector in many countries..
A monopoly is defined as having sole control over an entire industry. Unless a government were to restrict other beverage corporations from operating, this will not occur.
25 Mar 2007, 5:18 pm
