Ethical Union Debate - Yes

Coke may have a glossy pledge to uphold the rights of their workers, but in reality this is deeply tarnished. Sarah Wakefield thinks that a boycott is the best way to show Coca Cola and Nestle who’s boss.

Coca Cola. Caffeinated, sugary and fluid; a combination of qualities which make the most recognised brand in the world the best friend of a student half way through a long-haul session in the library. So why did UMSU vote two years ago to stop selling Coke and Nestlé products in the Union shop? It was part of a worldwide boycott to say that these powerhouses do not have the right to steamroll over human rights for fatter profit margins. Any brand that has the power to make its name synonymous with the product through its advertising muscle has the capacity, and the responsibility, to ensure that it has a positive impact where it is produced.

The point of a boycott is not to restrict students’ choice – ultimately to buy Coke or Nestle products you only have to cross the road to pick up a drink or a Kit Kat. This might lead you to question what effect a boycott can have. It is worth remembering the most important aspect of Coke is its power as a brand. Without this it is an overpriced alternative to water. As a political union the choices we make together have resonance past the SU walls. Boycotts are played out in the media that in turn gives airtime to the reasons behind them, with Nestle’s baby milk scandal publicised since the 1980s for example having a serious impact on their image as a family friendly company.

With over 30 types of soft drink stocked in the Union, including Fairtrade Ubuntu and Virgin cola, along with 10 types of water, the idea that freedom of choice is infringed upon without Coke seems spurious. Furthermore, how free is our decision to purchase Coke and Nestlé when we are consistently bombarded with adverts costing billions to convince us of their merits?

There is a plaque in the SU shop explaining the Coke boycott: workers in Colombian bottling plants were fired from their jobs, imprisoned and killed for joining and organising a union. The killings started in 1995 and in the aftermath wages dropped from between $380 and $450 to $130 per month. To this day, those who try to join a union are fired, leaving workers with no protection from exploitative conditions. This is not exclusive to Colombia either; in Turkey union leaders and 100 of their members were fired without warning. When they organised a peaceful protest and negotiations, the police gassed them, along with their wives and children.

Considering it takes over three litres of water to make one litre of pop, what happens in regions which already suffer from water shortage seems predictable. In parts of India Coke bottling plants have infamously drained local water supplies and contaminated the remaining water with the bottle-washing process. Also, given the fact that levels of pesticides of over 20 times the EU standard can be found in Indian bottles of Coke, it is hard to credit the idea that they are selling a drink of universal love – more like universal gut rot.

The boycott against Nestlé involves their aggressive marketing of low quality milk powder to poor families who can least afford expensive substitutes for breast milk. Not only is this economically damaging, it can also lead to babies becoming sick or dying because the powder is mixed with dirty water. The World Health Organisation estimate 1.5 million children die every year because they are not breast-fed. This is a product area that Nestle, with its billion dollar profits, does not need to exploit.

Massive companies have the power to promote constructive development, but without consumer encouragement incentive is limited. Without policy change, any promises they make in their PR campaign are as substantial as the nutritional value of their products.

UMSU is ultimately a political body and as reflected in the coverage of the degendered toilet debate, the decisions we make can hit the national and international radar. Dare to be brave therefore and make an impact.

Read Natalie Samuels’ NO argument: Ethical Union Debate - No