On campus, Coca-Cola products can be found at every turn. They’re on tap in the Curry Student Center, they’re available in vending machines throughout university buildings and they’re available at most on-campus eateries. But if some New York University students have their way, all that fizzy refreshment could disappear.
Recent breakthroughs in a campaign accusing soft drink conglomerate Coca-Cola of labor violations are forcing the company to either agree to an independent investigation or lose business from major universities like NYU. Administration at NYU recently threatened that if Coca-Cola does not reach an acceptable agreement with the university by Dec. 8, the university is ready to ban all Coca-Cola products.
This threat has been a major boost to the Campaign to Stop Killer Coke, and although Northeastern is not involved in the campaign, some action may be required if the allegations are proven true, said Michael Vigna, director of Food Services.
“If these allegations did turn out to be true we would certainly get on the phone with our Coke representative and make sure something was being done,” Vigna said. “However, since Northeastern University has an exclusive and legally binding contract with the Coca-Cola Company, we would not have the right to boycott the company based on accusations. I just could not see a real boycott occurring until the accusations are proven true.”
Vigna said Northeastern’s contract with Coca-Cola has been in place for at least 10 years and applies to all areas in the university except Wollaston’s Market.
While NYU has made substantial progress in this campaign, they are not the only university or organization involved in the Campaign to Stop Killer Coke. The campaign was first picked up in 2001 by Corporate Campaign, a non-profit organization that takes on corporations accused of unethical conduct. Campaign to Stop Killer Coke Director Ray Rogers said Coca-Cola Company workers came to him and explained how labor violations were occurring in the Carepa Coca-Cola plant in Colombia.
“When we went to investigate the situation, not only did we find that what these workers were telling us was true, but much worse than they had explained,” Rogers said. He said the workers told him paramilitaries met with the head of the bottling factory in Colombia and collaborated with them to scare workers out of joining unions like SINALTRAINAL (National Union of Food Industry Workers). The workers alleged these same paramilitaries were responsible for the death, torturing and kidnapping of union leaders and members at the factory.
Rogers said once those involved in the campaign learned of the severity of these allegations they set goals for the campaign to force Coca-Cola to take action and protect workers, compensate victims and the family of victims and force the company as a whole to be responsible for the actions of every section of the company.
Since then, members of the campaign have been trying to get the word out about the campaign. They have set up a Web site (www.killercoke.org), written and printed literature about the topic, made graphics public and received support from students across the globe. Rogers said the movement has become largely student-driven, and he is happy so many universities are taking interest.
The Campaign to Stop Killer Coke has been active on NYU’s campus since April 2004. Owen Moore, director of dining services at NYU, said the University Senate reached a 28-10 vote about a month ago to ban Coca-Cola Company products if the company did not agree to a third-party investigation.
If the company fails to reach an agreement, the ban will begin Friday and it will take four to six weeks for all Coca-Cola products to be removed, Moore said. If an agreement is made, it will mark the start of a long process of implementing a third-party investigation of the allegations.
“No campus should allow the world of Coca-Cola, a world filled with lies, deceit, immorality and widespread human rights and environmental violations, to brand their school like a cow,” Rogers said. “No university with ethics should allow Coke to use its name in advertising.”
Coca-Cola spokesperson Kari Bjorhus said the allegations are false.
“There is no doubt that Colombia has a history of violence focused on unions, but the [Coca-Cola] company has taken no part in this violence. It is true that paramilitaries did take over the plant, burn down the union building and kill workers in the process but this was during the time of territorial disputes. In no way was the bottler involved with the paramilitaries’ actions,” Bjorhus said.
She further explained the company has looked into the allegations many times and has had the Cal Safety Compliance Corporation (CSCC) look into the allegations as well. Bjorhus said none of the investigations proved the Coca-Cola Company had anything to do with the actions of the paramilitaries, and the judicial system in Colombia came to the same conclusion.
Bjorhus also said in any situation it is hard to disprove accusations, but that Coca-Cola has actually tried to protect the workers in Colombia because of all the anti-union violence in the country, and has asserted the workers’ rights to unionize.
With all this conflicting information, Northeastern students said they don’t know enough about the allegations to know whether the school should distance itself from Coca-Cola.
“If these allegations are true, I think it’s about time they were uncovered,” said sophomore biology major Mary Avila. “Situations like this are probably going on in other places as well and something needs to be done about it. We can’t just exploit people’s services outside our country just to economically prosper here.”
