dChan
Anonymous ID: 6e9632 Jan. 27, 2019, 1:07 p.m. No.4930733   🗄️.is đź”—kun   >>0757

>>4930731

 

Both The Coca-Cola Co. and the University of Michigan are trying to use the United Nations' International Labor Organization (ILO) Evaluation Mission report to whitewash the allegations of widespread labor and human rights abuses in Coke bottling plants in Colombia. Although the report is actually damaging to Coke, it in no way touches upon or was meant to be an investigation of human rights abuse allegations involving Coca-Cola bottlers in Colombia as was claimed by the company since Spring 2006. Coca-Cola Chairman and CEO E. Neville Isdell stated at Coca-Cola's annual shareholders' meeting in April 2006: "…we have a document from the ILO, signed by the ILO, committing themselves to do exactly what you said…We have a document. We have an agreement, and they are going to investigate past and prior practices…"

 

The ILO report and the statements below prove that The Coca-Cola Company has been lying to the public, the media and their shareholders. In an April 10, 2006 letter to the University of Michigan, Coke claimed: "On March 2nd, the International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers' Associations (IUF) announced that it had requested the International Labor Organization (ILO) to investigate and evaluate past and present labor relations and workers' rights practices of the Coca-Cola bottling operations in Colombia…Our company supports the IUF in this effort and, in fact, sent our own request for an investigation to the ILO. On March 24, the ILO agreed to conduct the investigation and evaluation…"

 

Coke's claims were contradicted by the IUF, Coke representatives and the ILO:

 

  1. The IUF never asked for such an investigation.

 

The IUF's Ron Oswald: "Well, he [Coca-Cola Chairman and CEO E. Neville Isdell] was wrong, and they know he was wrong…Our proposal to the ILO was very clear: we did not ask them to do an investigation into criminal or murderous events in the 1990s…I don't think they've got the competence to do that, frankly… There are still calls for Coke to agree to an independent investigation of those incidents and that's something we thought Coke should have agreed to many years ago."

 

  1. The Company never supported such an investigation.

 

Coca-Cola's Dana Bolden wrote: "The agreed-upon scope of the assessment [in Colombia] was always of current workplace practices."

 

  1. The ILO never agreed to conduct such an investigation.

 

The ILO's Sally Paxton said: The ILO would at most be carrying out an "assessment of current working conditions at enterprises in Colombia" and not an "investigation" of The Coca-Cola Co. or past labor practices or human rights abuses of its bottlers.

 

With the release of this report, Coca-Cola and University of Michigan's integrity are the big losers!

http://killercoke.org/coke_phony_awards.php

Anonymous ID: 6e9632 Jan. 27, 2019, 1:14 p.m. No.4930789   🗄️.is đź”—kun   >>0797

>>4930757

Since Coca-Cola, like all soft drinks, is an unnecessary product (it is 99% sugar water and devoid of nutritional

content), to defend its share of the mass- market advertising has been crucial in developing a positive public

image. Thus, Coca-Cola has taken advantage of all opportunities to create a squeaky-clean image from

its early history to the present, and the Company has been blessed with great leadership and political

and business savvy to see it through obstacles both at home and abroad. Yet although the Company has

benefited from politics, has affected politics to a great extent, and has at some times been all about politics,

the Company claims to never enter politics.

9

Thus, “it has been perfectly willing to co-exist with Hitler,

bejeweled Maharajas, impoverished migrant workers, malnourished Africans, Guatemalan death squads,

clear-cut Belizean rainforests, or repressive Chinese.”

https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/8852150/AlOthman.pdf?sequence=1

Anonymous ID: 6e9632 Jan. 27, 2019, 2 p.m. No.4931294   🗄️.is đź”—kun

>>4931268

that´s the point im making, it´s not funny because you choose a fucking love song

you´re probably one of thoose "i like the beat, don´t care about the lyrics"

<Gosh

and your female, haleluja

never would have guessed it except i did