After the recent change in fortunes suffered by Wal-Mart and McDonalds, is Coca-Cola the next corporation to feel the consumer backlash? Recent events certainly seem to suggest that the drinks company is in for a rocky ride over the next few months. So is the world's largest soft drinks company really about to suffer a huge backlash?
The drinks giant is facing the threat of legal action by a Nigerian lawyer, Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, representing the people of Apapa. According to The Guardian, a lawsuit is planned accusing the company of:polluting a lagoon by pumping untreated waste into the water and killing fish.
This is just one example of the movements that are growing around the globe in reaction to the methods of Coca Cola. There has been a massive move against Coca Cola in India after accusations that their products contain 27 times the maximum permitted amounts of pesticides. The state of Kerala has already banned the production and sale of Coca Cola and Pepsi following a report into the alleged pesticide content. Both Coca Cola and Pepsi have, of course, denied the accusations, but the issue refuses to go away. The trouble doesn't end there.
The corporation has also been accused of turning a blind eye to anti-union activities in their bottling plants. It is believed that one man was actually assassinated by workers who are in league with right-wing death squads. According to Forbes:That accusation is laid out in a lawsuit filed in 2001 in U.S. court in Miami by the Colombian food-and-drink union, Sinaltrainal. Earlier this year the judge dismissed the charges against Coca-Cola Co. but allowed the suit against the bottlers to proceed. In February Luisa Fernanda Solarte, a marketing manager for Coke, was killed in a terrorist bombing.
(you can read about the lawsuit here). There have also been accusations of anti-union activity in Guatemala and Nicaragua.
Coca-Cola has also faced increased criticism for its activities in Uzbekistan. With the backing of America and Britain, President Islam Karimov has been allowed to run a tyrannical regime with no regard for human rights. The corporation has been involved in a rather unpalatable relationship with the Uzbek regime, due to a business arrangement with Karimov's daughter, Gulnora, and her estranged husband, Mansur Maqsudi. Mr Maqsudi went into business with Coca Cola in 1993, opening their first bottling plant in the region. The arrangement began to turn sour in 2001 when Mr Maqsudi's wife left him. Consequently, Karimov nationalised Maqsudi's shares and proceeded to loot millions of dollars from the company that he had set up. It has been alleged that Coca Cola worked with the Uzbek government to strip Mr Maqsudi of his share in the bottling plant. According to one of the lawyers working on the arbitration claim:Coke did more than just stand by with arms folded, they were affirmatively working with the government of Uzbekistan.
Once again, Coca Cola deny working with Karimov, however, they face the prospect of having their reputation tainted by association with a brutal dictatorship.
As with Wal-Mart and McDonalds, the tide is turning against Coca Cola. Like all corporations their strength is also their weakness. They are so focused on the brand, that any damage to the brand could have far-reaching effects upon them (hence the rather litigious nature of most big corporations, they know their Achilles heel). Of course, noises will come from Coca Cola about working with the International Labour Organisation to 'assess its practices in Colombia', but this will be no more than an effort to protect their brand image in the ensuing onslaught.
If you want to read more about Human Rights in Uzbekistan, visit Craig Murray's (the UK's former ambassador to Uzbekistan) site and Amnesty International. If you want more information on Coke's activities, visit Killer Coke. For further information on the links to human rights abuses, read the NUS report (pdf file)
Posts
|