Read Related Articles
and Press Releases

Kickstart your campaign
Contact Trina for more info

Campaign Resources

ILRF Statements

Follow the conversation between ILRFs Executive Director and Coke's Director of Global Labor Relations

Litigation

Concerns from around the world

Information on Colombia

UPDATE! Jun 2: ILRF & USW Bring New Complaint Against Coca-Cola [view complaint]

Shareholder Meeting Reportback

April 19, 2006

Read ILRF's Statement

Coke Webcast of 2006 Annual Meeting

Trina Tocco, ILRF Program Assistant and Eryn Schornick, ILRF Legal Assistant made their way into the meeting in Wilmington, DE on April 19th around 10:30am just as the meeting began. All around there was strong evidence of support for the Killer Coke Campaign. The Teamsters and students showing their proxies and IDs, getting past the 2 security check points, and finding their seats all eager to confront the Coke CEO Neville Isdell concerning Coke's policies in relation to organized labor's concerns in the US, Colombia, Turkey and Indonesia. The meeting began with short comments from Mr. Isdell. The format of the meeting was so that there were various proposals presented with time for questions after each proposal was introduced. Many stood up and expressed their concerns and demanded Coke develop a plan for a true independent investigation. ILRF waited patiently with their yellow proxy card waving in the air hoping to be chosen. Unfortunately ILRF was not given the opportunity to present their statement and so here is the statement prepared by Trina Tocco that would have been directed to Mr. Isdell if only Ms. Tocco had been selected to speak.

Thank you Mr. Isdell for providing me the opportunity to speak to you this morning. I am Trina Tocco and I represent the Coca-Cola shares held by the International Labor Rights Fund. I am a representive of the campaign effort to grant justice to those in Colombia and Turkey that have suffered from the actions of Coke. At the ILRF we have voiced to Coke many times a need to develop a human rights policy that includes the bottlers. Ed Potter has continued to falsely imply that ILRF and others are in support of the current draft though this document currently does NOT apply to bottlers. Until Coke commits to a human rights policy that includes bottlers, ILRF and others will continue to support the efforts of students and others to terminate Coke contracts at universities, school districts, and other public entities. In addition because of Coke's constant delays to adopt a comprehensive human rights policy, ILRF has set up a scholarship fund for Isidro Gill's, the slain Colombian trade unionist, two daughters so that they will have the ability to continue their education without fear of violence towards them. These young girls are waiting for Coke to do the right thing and I hope that you and your company will move quickly to develop a human rights policy. Furthermore, the ILRF and others continue to wait for Coke to make a public statement denouncing trade union violence in Colombia and Turkey. My question to you, Mr. Isdell, is how will Coca-Cola proceed to develop a human rights policy that includes bottlers? How will Coke fix the wrongs that the young Gill daughters are forced to live with for the rest of their lives? Thank you for your time, Mr. Isdell.


Colombia and Turkey: Coca-Cola Abuses

In Colombia, trade union leaders from SINALTRAINAL, the national union of food and beverage workers, have been murdered and tortured by paramilitary death squads brought in by local Coca-Cola bottling plant managers to suppress with violence the workers’ organizing efforts. In Turkey, the local Coca-Cola managers fired 110 Coca-Cola transport workers when they joined a union. When the workers peacefully gathered with their families at the Coca-Cola headquarters in Istanbul, Coca-Cola unleashed about 1,000 of the Turkish riot police, the Çevik Kuvvet , on the crowd. About 90 people, including women and children, were hospitalized after they were brutally beaten.

The International Labor Rights Fund (ILRF) has filed lawsuits against Coca-Cola on behalf of the Colombian and Turkish victims of Coca-Cola’s violations of human rights. ILRF’s Executive Director, Terry Collingsworth, who is counsel in the cases, stated of the NYU victory, “we will ultimately prevail in the litigation, but these human rights cases can take years. In the meantime, Coca-Cola has an army of public relations staff deceiving the public about Coca-Cola’s complicity in human rights violations. The USAS victory at NYU, and a number of other campuses, shows the public is not buying Coca-Cola’s deceptions. It is no coincidence, as was reported recently in the Wall Street Journal, that Coca-Cola’s market share is in sharp decline. People have a choice of beverages, and Killer Coke is not very refreshing.”

Coca-Cola and Anti-Union Death Squads in Colombia

Violations of human rights are rampant in Colombia due to lawless activities of both the right wing paramilitaries and leftist guerillas. The paramilitaries in Colombia are particularly well known for murdering, abducting and torturing trade union leaders. Specifically, much of the violence against trade unionists in Colombia is directed at leaders of unions at multinational firms, including the Coca-Cola company. One union representing workers at Coca-Cola, Sinaltrainal, has sustained heavy losses of leaders and members who were employed by the company. Having no other options and facing ongoing violence, Sinaltrainal requested ILRF and the United Steelworkers Union to file an ATCA case against Coca-Cola and its Colombian bottlers. The case was filed in the Federal District Court for the Southern District of Florida, No. 01-03208-CIV, on July 21, 2001. Plaintiffs are Sinaltrainal, and five individuals who have been murdered, tortured, and/or unlawfully detained. They are seeking to hold Coca-Cola, and two of its Colombian bottlers liable for using paramilitaries to engage in anti-union violence. This case also presents the issue of corporate liability for acts of subsidiaries or agents. Coca-Cola's defense is not that the murder and terrorism of trade unionists did not occur; rather, Coca Cola argues that it cannot be held liable in a US federal court for occurrences in Colombia. Coca-Cola also argues that it does not "own", and therefore does not control, the bottling plants in Colombia. This case seeks to develop a standard under which a multinational company cannot have the best of both worlds by profiting from human rights violations but limiting liability to a local entity that is a mere facilitator for the parent company's operations. The defendants' motion to dismiss is pending, and a decision is expected in early 2002.