Lobbying Practices Of The Coca Cola Company

Lobbying Pr behaveices Of The coca set plant pinhead CompanyLobbying is a practice of learn the decision made by the g everyplacenment (in group or individual). Lobbyist is the populate who work for the company to influence or convince the legislator or the police makers to make the decision in favor of the company. Currently 38 lobbyists at 7 different firms lobbying on behalf of coca plant dopecoca plant sens being one of the top brand in the beverage manufacturing was non one of the ethical companies in the industry. coca Cola and its products ask been criticized for various reasons much(prenominal) as health effects , unfair excavate practices , high levels of pesticides in its products , environmental destruction and monopolistic barter practices . there were many fibers on Coca Cola for its unethical practices -1.The bigio familyThe swelledio family who were currently aliveness in Canada filed a law suit against Coca Cola on April 27 ,1997 in the United Sta tes . They claimed that Coke had purchased Bigio family plaza in Egypt which was illicitly seized by the Egyptian Government in 1960s because they were Jewish. The Case was filed in US federal Court infra the Alien Tort legislative act which gives non US citizens the right to sue in US courts for aloneeged violations of come outside(a) law. In 1994 the Bigios had warned coke not to go ahead with the acquisition of the Bigios spot without compensating them but Coca Cola didnt listen to their warnings and went ahead with the deal and purchased the property without compensating the Bigios .Coke argued that the causal agent should be dismissed as the court lacked jurisdiction and that the case had become old and that the claims made by the Bigios were baseless and that they had been removed from the property some 25 geezerhood before. (Wikipedia ,2010)2. Monopolistic CompetitionPepsi Co had filed a case in the US acc use Coca Cola of monopolizing the market of outpouring disp ensed loony drinks in the US. In June 2005 , Coca Cola agree to end on the whole its deals with shops and bars in Europe to stock totally Coca Cola products after the EU interfered and gear up Coke short letter practices to be stifled competition. In Nov 2005 Coca Colas Mexican unit and a number of cokes distributors and bottlers had been fined around $68 gazillion for unfair commercial practices .3. passel Practices in MexicoCoca Cola had its second largest market in Mexico where they had a 70% s send in the market. At the time only when Pepsi was their biggest equate but wherefore a new brand name Big Cola entered the market with a cheaper price than Coke. By 2004 Big grass had acquired a 5% sh be in the market and was still growing. Big Cola grew and became popular because half of the Mexicans were poor and they preferred the cheaper Big Cola than Coca Cola so Coke had to lower its prices and change its set strategies in Mexico . On July 04 , 2005 Coca Cola and its bo ttlers were charged of violating the monopoly and anti agonistic business practices as they were accuse of threatening the small business bearers to close off selling Big Cola. (Knol,2010)4. Philippine unfair competition caseCoca smoke was accused of unfair competition and on Jan 21,2008 the Philippines National confidence of Investigation raided three of cokes warehouses for illegally possessing imported bottles of a competitor RC genus Cola . The makers of RC pinhead filed a complaint for unfair competition and Coca Cola released a statement saying that they respect competition and always deplete maintained a fair play policy .(Absolute Astronomy ,2010)5. crease Stuffing settlementOn July 27,2008 , Coca low-down had to pay $137.5 million to settle a shareholder lawsuit. Coca smoke was accused of groove stuffing or artificial inflation of their results to give investors a counterfeit picture of the companies health in the market . They were forcing some bottlers to purc hase unneeded beverage concentrate to boost its gross sales and show higher sales to the investors.6. Pesticide use in IndiaCoca Colas products that were produced and distributed in the Indian market contained pesticides much(prenominal) as DDT , lindane ,malathion and chlorpyrifos which all contribute to cancer and a recrudesce the immune system of the merciful body. The centre of Science and Environment pitch that the drink produced in India by Coca cola contained 30 multiplication the level of pesticide residues that were permitted by the EU. The Indian government formed a mission which was habituated the task of break uping worlds first pesticide standards for soft drinks. Both the soft drink giants Pepsi and Coca Cola opposed the move and stated that the science laboratory tests werent reliable enough to prove or detect traces of pesticide particles in the drinks. Coca cola acted to the acquisitions by stating that their plants filter weewee helps to remove all the contaminants and that all their products meet the minimum health standards before they are distributed in the market. During this conclusion Coca Cola had a drop of 11% in their sales .7. Water UseCoke was accused of draining the underground water table in India and releasing industrial wastes . It was estimated that Coke used 15 million liters of ground water everyday for product and bottling operations and using 65 wells thus depleting the underground water levels. Studies found out that the contaminated water contained heavy metals such(prenominal)(prenominal) as lead and cadmium. When farmers refused to borrow the wastes coke allegedly dumped the wastes in their farms in the middle of the night. Coca cola was also accused of consuming so many gallons of water that it created prune water shortages and destroying the soil of the neighboring farms . The Coca Cola plant used 9,00,000 liters of water last year and the water which was to be used by all users was being used up by C oca cola alone. (Knol,2010)8. capital of South Carolina bitternessIn 2001 Coca colas bottling companies had been linked to many controversies. These include the murder of eight heart and soul leaders. Violence, abductions and torturing of the union members were a common land practice in Colombia. It is said that these practices took place under the knowledge and directions of the bottling companies who had chartered paramilitary forces. In order to remove the permanent union workers the union offices were burned down and the union workers and their family were threatened. This was done so that cheap bid workers could me brought in place of the permanent union workers. In 2004 a investigatory delegation from New York was sent to capital of South Carolina to inquire about the above controversies. The delegation found that there were 179 study human rights violations. The companys managers did not take any interest in investigating the complaints of the workers that led to the co nclusion that human rights were overlooked and that their labors were under threat by the company.9. Guatemala ControversyAs the Columbia bottling franchises even in Guatemala there were controversies with the bottling plant. Union members were murdered which done under the knowledge of the bottling plants managers. These murders led to the cancellation of the bottling plants license in 1981. Many complaints were lodged against the company. The court case against the company is still going on Guatemala.10. Israel and the mediate East ControversyCoca cola has had its bit of bad times in the Middle East. The company first came into news when the company tried to clean-cut up a franchise in Israel in 1949 but they were not given the permission to do so. Coca cola was tensed that it would not be allowed to sell its product in the Middle East so they immovable not to sell its products in Israel. Coca cola was accused of doing business with Israel in 1961. An Egyptian civil servant mad e these accusations. He did so because he mistakenly took the Amharic writing as Hebrew, which was written, on the coca cola bottle. After the accusations the manager of the company said to the press that coca cola would never do business with Israel. According to coca cola Israel was a very small market for coca colas operation.Five years later coca cola again came into the lime light for the premature reasons. In 1966 a Tel Aviv businessman criticized the company of ostracizeing Israel from its operational market honest to sell its products in the Arab market. The anti defamation league which is situated in the United States took up the matter. Coca cola was questioned for not operating in Israel. It was also said that if Israel was a small market to operate then why was coca cola operating in Cyprus, which was one-tenth the surface of Israel. This created some serious pressure on coca cola to open a franchise in Israel or else facing a boycott of their products in the the Sta tesn market. These questions forced the company to open a bottling plant in Tel Aviv. This move hampered its growth in the Middle East as coca cola was boycotted from 1968 to 1991 due to the economic boycott of Israel.In 2000 the coca cola label created controversies, which was created in 1886. According to reports the label contained hidden anti-Islamic phrases in the mirror image in Arabic. Worst hit by the rumors was Egypt. gross revenue in the Egypt market fell to 10 to 15 % since 2000. The rumor was so widespread that the grand mufti of Egypt said that the label does not show anything against the Muslims or Islam and he also stated that he himself haves a coca cola drink almost daily.In 2002 Mecca cola was launched in order to rid of the usage of American goods. Mecca cola was introduced by a French Tunisian as a substitute for coca cola.(Wikipedia,2010)Boycotts and new(prenominal) AllegationsIn embody of the allegations against coca-cola, they faced numerous boycotts. From 2005 Over 23 American universities including NYU and University of Michigan ban the sale of coca cola products on their campus and this boycott still continues. Other universities in Canada and Britain are following the footsteps of the American universities by switching over to Pepsi in all their social functions. Not majorly for health reasons but in response to the bottling plant deaths. Coca cola still did not respond to these boycotts and continued refuse investigation into the bottling plant death case.A few other major boycotts that coca-cola faced were such as its products being verboten from the 2006 Winter Olympics. In 2004 Its products were also boycotted by various trade unions in the EU, such as UNISON (the largest), ECSOY (European young socialists) and so on.From 1998 another major allegation faced by coca-cola was racial discrimination in America and Africa. Coca-cola was first accused of racial discrimination against the African-American in matters such unequal pa y, representation in the company and even promotion inside the company. To add to this in Africa Coca-cola was also charged of having a policy of Whites only management staff. To all this Coca-cola first denied all allegations but later on in 2000 they agreed to pay $192 million to settle their case in America. They also agreed to promote a fairness policy in all aspects of their business but in 2003, it was found that no such policy had been implemented. But later in 2004 they did and were forced to put up management practices and be one of the 10 most diverse companies.As mentioned above In 2005 the EU found Coca-cola for carrying out monopolistic acts such as having exclusive deals with Bars and restaurants to exclusively sell only Coca-cola products for which these places got a fixed amount of money every year and fringe benefits such as fridges to store these products. Coca-cola was then fined and had to end all such deals and act in a competitive manner. A similar case in Amer ica in 2000 was dropped against coca-cola.Coca Colas ResponseTo address major allegations against Coca-cola which had til now to be solved such as the bottling plant deaths in Columbia or the Pesticide/Water use in India. Coca cola came up with a response by launching a website WWW.COKEFACTS.ORG .On this website Coca-Cola claimed that all allegations against them in Columbia were false and that they did not engage in such activities. They urged a further investigation into the matter by the Columbian lawyer General, a respected independent third party investigation and their own internal investigation and the Columbian Vice President. None of the above found Coca-Cola guilty of any wrongdoing. They rather claimed the firm did more good for the country, its economy and its community by creating jobs, generating income and overall improving the standard of living.In regards to India, Coca-cola claims that an formalized study showed that they did not deplete the water level. They al so accused the investigators of having an unreliable report on pesticide use, They claim that all their raw materials are tested before the final product being produced.ConclusionTherefore to argue this report on ethical business culture and trade practices of Coca Cola, some basic elements that can be adopted by Coca Cola are like Develop worldwide code of ethics, by these we mean that the statement given by the companys business culture is not true and the company should come up with a proper resolving to this problems and should not tolerate any human rights infractions in any of its plants, or by any of its subsidiaries. Consider ethical issues in strategic development, plot of land making the strategic the company should consider ethical issue and develop its strategy according to it. Develop periodical ethical impact statements, when they are promoting any of its product they should make an ethical statement with it as it bequeath help them to improve the companys image i n the minds of consumer.