Coca cola also did not look at the bigger impact on the German economy when it closed 7 plants in Eastern Germany. 2000 jobs were lost which impacted unemployment; however coca cola focused on the bigger picture that machinery was able to produce more at a lower cost by centralizing bottling plants. Coke focused on the global picture rather than the local situation of their factory in India. It tried to show that it was a ‘giver’ by giving something back to the 2006 World Cup fans. It offered competitions to win world cup tickets which tried to portray the company in a good light. Utilitarianism
The video implied that coca cola were more interested in satisfying customers on a global level rather than keeping local people happy. They did not seem to care that:
* People were protesting because the water supply was reducing * Farmers were unable to grow crops because of pollution
* People were unemployed because most of the work was carried out by machinery * Workers that got injured were not cared for
Ethics of duties:
The biggest problem for the locals in the video seemed to be that they believed coca cola were stealing water. If every company came to the area and used the same amount of water (1 liter used for 0.33l of coke) then where would they be? What would have happened if every local consumed the same amount of water as coca cola? People were also paid the minimum wage of €1.20 a day. What would happen if people were paid this salary back in the US, especially as the workers seemed to have no rights, as highlighted by the returning man with the injured leg. It appears they were using cheap labour for their own benefit. Coca cola also refused to pay local tax claiming this was in their tender. However, any other corporation needs to pay tax so why did the rule only apply to coca cola? Ethics of rights
Everyone has a human right to life, but if coca cola are taking all of the drinking water as the locals claim, are they taking away that human right? People also have the human right of freedom of speech and expression. But in the video the locals said that they were beaten when the protested. Coca cola also took the freedom of choice away from people visiting the world cup but only selling coke products (Fanta, Sprite, Cola & Bonaqua). Not only did coke stop the filming of inside the plant, but any workers’ union was suppressed so that workers lost any rights a union could bring. Theories of justice
In the video it was noted that coca cola was making a lot of money from the factory in India, but the distribution of that wealth did not seem to have impacted the people in the area. In fact, notably the opposite seemed to have prevailed with farmers who were once seen as rich, now being at the same level as labourers.
In fact, the majority of people in India could not afford the product that the factory was making.The impact of reverting back to the can rather than the bottle also would have an impact environmentally. Coca cola did not think about the impact to society in the long-term was an important as the profits made in the short term. ACCUSATIONS
Coca Cola’s mission statement
* To refresh the world in body, mind and spirit
* To inspire moments of optimism through our brands and our actions * To create value and make a difference everywhere we engage Ethics:Our Company’s Code of Business Conduct—available in 29 languages—guides our business conduct. The Code articulates our expectation of accountability, honesty and integrity in all matters Our Company is included in the FTSE4Good Index www.ftse.com/ftse4good. Sustainability Is Key to Our Business. Coca Cola focus on: * Active Lifestyles
* Beverage Benefits
* Water Stewardship
* Sustainable Packaging
Coca Cola has an Ethics Line. A website and secure toll-free...