Campaign to Stop Killer Coke Update

Another “Classic Coke” Move to Deny and Delay Accountability
for Human Rights Violations in Colombia.

March 9, 2006 Newsletter

Contents of Newsletter

1. Another “Classic Coke” Move to Deny and Delay Accountability for Human Rights Violations in Colombia.
2. Coke survey for the International Labor Rights Fund
3. William Mendoza, SINALTRAINAL vice president of the Coca-Cola workers union in Barrancabermeja, in Danger!
4. Seeking stock proxies from concerned stockholders
5. Do you need a customized Campaign leaflet?
6. Main Menu Enlarged
7. Campaign's 'Student Activism' Section
8. Take Actions Against Coke!
9. Please send photos, reports of events, etc. for the Campaign website

* * * * * * * * * * * *

1. Another “Classic Coke” Move to Deny and Delay Accountability for Human Rights Violations in Colombia.

Contact: Terry Collingsworth, Executive Director, International Labor Rights Fund, Counsel for SINALTRAINAL, 202-347-4100, ext 2 (office); 202-255-2198 (cell)

Coca-Cola and its ally, the International Union of Food Workers (IUF), have announced that they will jointly “request” the International Labor Organization (ILO) to conduct an investigation of Coca-Cola’s operations in Colombia. To the uninformed, this might appear to be progress towards an independent investigation of Coca-Cola’s complicity in violence against trade union leaders at its bottling plants in Colombia. Since 1989, seven union leaders who worked at Coca-Cola bottling plants in Colombia and a plant manager friendly to SINALTRAINAL (National Food Service Workers Union), the major union representing Coca-Cola workers, have been murdered in connection with their union activities and countless others have been threatened with death, kidnapped and tortured.

A recent independent investigation into the alleged human rights abuses at Coke’s bottling plants in Colombia, led by New York City Councilman Hiram Monserrate, verified 179 separate human rights abuses at Coke bottling plants in Colombia. This same investigation found that there were credible allegations that paramilitaries carrying out violence against unionists at Coke bottling plants did so “with the knowledge of and likely under the direction of company managers.”

SINALTRAINAL and 6 individual victims of violence initiated a lawsuit against Coca-Cola and its Colombian bottlers based on the Alien Tort Statute and the Torture Victims Protection Act. The case is pending in federal court in Miami.

The story about Coke’s latest ploy to obtain a favorable investigation is not complicated; these are the objective, verifiable facts:

• Coca-Cola is reeling from its legacy of violence in Colombia. Over 23 U.S. universities, including the University of Michigan, New York University and Rutgers University have cancelled or suspended Coca-Cola's supply contracts, costing the company millions of dollars in previously guaranteed revenues, but also, and more important, countless students say they will not drink Coke beverages, thereby breaking the cycle of consumption of this optional product that is tainted with the blood of Colombian workers.

• Coca-Cola, following the corporate playbook, first denied any responsibility for its own bottlers in Colombia, asserting that these offshore companies are independent. But that did not pass the straight face test with the public as everyone knows these companies exist to bottle and distribute Coca-Cola products, and Coca-Cola has complete control over its bottling plants.

• Just before its 2005 annual shareholders’ meeting, Coke issued a report, in which they claimed, “ … a respected, independent third party found no instances of anti-union violence or intimidation at bottling plants."

The Coca-Cola Co. was referring to a bogus report by Cal Safety Compliance Corporation, a Los Angeles-based company. The report was commissioned and paid for by The Coca-Cola Co. Cal Safety's monitoring record has been widely discredited in publications from the Los Angeles Times to Business Week. According to United Students Against Sweatshops (USAS) "Cal-Safety is not regarded as a credible monitoring organization within the mainstream worker rights advocate community as a result of its track record of missing egregious violations in high profile cases and its flawed monitoring methodology." (See “United Students Against Sweatshops Statement on Cal Safety” at: www.killercoke.org/usascal.htm)

The USAS statement further exposes Cal Safety's poor monitoring track record by describing the results of a thorough investigation into Cal Safety's monitoring methodology by Dr. Jill Esbenshade, presented in the recently released book, "Monitoring Sweatshops." In her research, Esbenshade conducted extensive interviews with Cal-Safety auditors and directly observed the company's labor auditing in practice. Given the problematic practices documented, Cal-Safety's poor track record is perhaps not surprising. In numerous key areas, Cal Safety failed to adhere to minimum accepted standards for competent factory investigation.

Prior to the Cal Safety report, Coca-Cola repeatedly claimed that another group had done an investigation into allegations of human rights abuses by Coke's bottlers in Colombia that totally exonerated both Coca-Cola and its bottlers from any wrongdoing. When students at Carleton College in Minnesota asked who did the report and could they obtain a copy, they were told by a Coca-Cola representative that the report was done by White & Case, but it was unavailable to the public. What the Coca-Cola representative did not reveal is that White & Case is a large international corporate law firm that represents Coca-Cola in the Alien Tort Claims lawsuit regarding human rights abuses at its Colombia bottling plants. Alexis Rovzar, who is an executive partner at White & Case, serves as a director of Coca-Cola FEMSA, Colombia's largest Coca-Cola bottler and a defendant in the lawsuit.

• Coca-Cola, through its newly-hired Director of Global Labor Relations, Ed Potter, then created a “Commission” consisting of representatives of major universities and prominent worker rights advocacy organizations, including the Worker Rights Consortium (WRC), the Solidarity Center, and United Students Against Sweatshops (USAS). The Commission was tasked with developing a methodology for conducting an independent investigation of Coca-Cola’s complicity with the paramilitaries in Colombia that have targeted for violence the leaders of SINALTRAINAL who were organizing Coca-Cola bottling plants. When the Commission actually asserted its independence by kicking Mr. Potter out of the group so that it could indeed be independent from the company, Coca-Cola backed away from the Commission and began creating reasons to delay and obstruct the commission’s work. Ultimately, Mr. Potter’s clever idea was to insist that the attorneys for SINALTRAINAL and the individual victims of violence agree that any findings of the Commission, as well as any evidence uncovered by the Commission, could not be used in the court case. Because this demand would require them to violate the rules of legal ethics, something Mr. Potter knew, the lawyers refused this demand.

• Now, Mr. Potter and his colleagues have a new, clever plan — they announce that they will “request” that the ILO do the “independent” investigation. Well, we should immediately suspect that something is up because Mr. Potter has not asked SINALTRAINAL’s lawyers to agree that any findings of the ILO, as well as any evidence uncovered by the ILO’s investigation, could not be used in the court case. What does Coca-Cola and Ed Potter know that you don’t?

— Ed Potter has been the U.S. employer representative to the ILO for at least 15 years and holds that position today. The U.S. employer representative is a very powerful and influential position within the ILO. In addition, CokeFacts.org, a site set up by The Coca-Cola Co. to respond to the Campaign to Stop Killer Coke (www.KillerCoke.org), states: “Ed Potter, our director of global labor relations, serves on the Applications of Conventions Committee within the International Labor Organization…”

— Further, Coca-Cola recently hired Stan Gacek, who used to work for the AFL-CIO, and was himself for years one of the U.S. labor representatives to the ILO, to help grease the wheels with the ILO and international labor unions. Gacek’s large Coca-Cola paycheck permanently disqualifies him from claiming to be independent or to speak for the interests of labor.

— The ILO has refused for years to create a Commission of Inquiry to examine the unprecedented situation of violence against trade union leaders in Colombia, generally due to blocking efforts by Mr. Potter, other employer representatives, and the government of Colombia. Mr. Potter’s sudden willingness to “request” the ILO to conduct a company-specific study, something the ILO has never done, means that Mr. Potter and Coca-Cola are pretty confident of the results of the study before it has even begun.

— As SINALTRAINAL has informed us, even before this investigation has gotten off the ground, officials from Coca-Cola FEMSA, which owns almost all of the Coke bottlers in Colombia, have visited the Coke bottling plants in Colombia and told employees that Coca-Cola FEMSA management will hand-select the employees it will allow to give testimony in any upcoming investigation.

— Finally, the IUF, the “union” that joined Coca-Cola in making the “request” to the ILO, benefited from the violence against SINALTRAINAL in Colombia and has been defending Coca-Cola’s record of human rights violations ever since. When Isidro Gil, the leader of SINALTRAINAL’s union in the Coca-Cola bottling plant in Carepa, was murdered inside the plant by paramilitaries brought in by Coca-Cola management, the company then, in a classic move, found a “company union”, and recognized IUF’s affiliate, SINTRAINAGRO, without an election by the workers. This was the official end of SINALTRAINAL at the plant, and IUF has never raised its voice to inquire about the murder of Isidro Gil that paved the way to Coke’s recognition of IUF’s affiliate.

In short, Coca-Cola won’t agree to any process it can’t control. To this latest ploy, we must say, three strikes and you’re out. Coke bought the Cal Safety report, abandoned the Commission when it asserted its intent to act independent of the company, and now has used its extraordinary power and resources to “request” the ILO to issue a report. Coke did so without disclosing Coke’s direct relationships to the ILO. Everything that happens next, you can be sure, has already been scripted by Coca-Cola, like a television jingle.

We must also not lose sight of the real issue. Regardless of any findings regarding Coca-Cola’s current activities in Colombia, the murder and torture of SINALTRAINAL’s leaders at Coca-Cola bottling plants in Colombia is not in dispute. Those things happened, and the union’s demand that Coca-Cola extend its human rights policy to employees of bottling plants must be met before we can even begin to discuss a process for Coca-Cola to return to the campuses that have done the right thing by booting Killer Coke.

2. Coke survey for the International Labor Rights Fund

Hey all you students out there: As the campaign continues and spreads throughout the US and around the world, it is important for us to try to collect as much information as possible concerning the specifics of each Coca-Cola contract whether at a university or at a public school district. Coca-Cola contracts come in all shapes and sizes and so this is a survey to help us develop a database. PLEASE TAKE 10 MINUTES TO ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS. If you don’t know the answers, see the end of this document.

*** This is a survey for institutions within the United States as other countries have different rules pertaining to obtaining information related to tax payer funded institutions.

Please send all completed surveys to Trina.Tocco@ILRF.org by Friday March 17, 2006.

1. Does your institution have a contractual relationship with Coca-Cola? If so, how when is it up for renewal?

2. Does your institution have a contractual relationship with a vending company or distribution service that carries Coca-Cola products? If so, please outline anything you know about this relationship.

3. Is your institution funded with tax payer money? If so you have a right to obtain all the information to answer the questions above.

4. If you are unable to answer these questions, what is the process you have taken so far to find out this information?

5. Please list the names and contact information for anyone in your group interested in going to protest at the Coke Shareholder Meeting on April 19th In Wilmington, DE? There will be buses leaving from various cities in order to make sure everyone has the ability to get there.

6. Please include your name, institution name, address, phone number, and email address.

If you are running a Killer Coke campaign at a state funded institution which could be a public university, public high school, or a municipality, you have the right to obtain this information through the Freedom of Information Act. The International Labor Rights Fund will help you through this process if you need it. Email Trina.Tocco@ILRF.org if you would like support.

Trina Tocco
Program Assistant
International Labor Rights Fund
2001 S St., NW Ste 420
Washington, DC 20009
202/347-4100 x112

3. William Mendoza, SINALTRAINAL Vice President of the Coca-Cola workers union in Barrancabermeja, in Danger!

Dear friends,

The bodyguards of William Mendoza; vice president of the Coca-Cola workers union in Barrancabermeja, Colombia; were dismissed by the Colombian government on February 28. The government then offered William two new bodyguards. He didn’t know or trust those two men, so he refused their service and is now without any bodyguards. William is demanding that the government either rehire his bodyguards or allow him to choose two new bodyguards that he knows and trusts. I just talked with William and he’s very concerned about his situation. I’ve know William for five years and I’ve never heard him as concerned as he is now.

Barrancabermeja is controlled by the right-wing paramilitaries and they have repeatedly threatened to kill William because of his leadership in the Coke workers union. The Interamerican Human Rights Commission ordered the Colombian government to provide protection for threatened human rights activists, like William, and that program allows those individuals to select their own bodyguards.

William has been in contact with Dr. Carlos Franco, director of the Presidential Human Rights Program. Thus far, Dr. Franco has not taken action so that William can again have bodyguards that he knows and trusts. William is asking that we e-mail Dr. Franco so that he will take the proper action to protect William’s life.

At the end of this message is the e-mail address for Dr. Franco and a suggested message in Spanish (that you can copy and send – just add your name, city, state, and country at the end), and the English translation of that message.

William is one of my closest friends. I’ve accompanied him for each of the past four summers – he’s asked for that accompaniment because the paramilitaries are less likely to kill him in front of international witnesses. On behalf of our beloved compañero, please take a moment now to send a message to Dr. Franco.

In solidarity,

Scott Nicholson
Montana Human Rights Network

*********************************************************************

E-mail address: cefranco@presidencia.gov.co
Subject: URGENTE: Retiro de los escoltas de William Mendoza
Suggested message:

Dr. Carlos Franco
Director
Programa Presidencial de Derechos Humanos
Bogotá, Colombia

Estimado Dr. Franco,

Me dirijo a usted para expresar mi grave preocupación por el retiro de los escoltas de confianza de William Mendoza Gómez, el vice-presidente de la seccional de SINALTRAINAL (Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de la Industria de Alimentos – que representa a los trabajadores de la Coca-Cola) en Barrancabermeja.

El Departamento Administrativo de Seguridad, DAS, retiró a los dos escoltas de William el 28 de febrero. Dos personas nuevas fueron asignadas a William, pero él no los conoce ni sabe de donde vienen, y obviamente no son de su confianza. Por eso, William no aceptó a esas personas y en estos momentos él se encuentra en Barranca sin escoltas – una situación de alto riesgo. El programa de protección contempla la posibilidad que William escoja las personas que serán sus escoltas, pasando por los estudios de confiabilidad del DAS. Dado las amenazas en contra de William y la grave situación de seguridad para él en Barranca, apoyo su posición en relación con la necesidad urgente de contar con escoltas de confianza. Estoy muy preocupado por la seguridad de William y pido a usted que tome las acciones necesarias para que él cuente de nuevo con escoltas de confianza – sean los dos que fueron retirados o dos nuevos escogidos por él.

Desde 1999, William tiene medidas cautelares por la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos de la Organización de Estados Americanos. Desde 2002, tiene esquema de seguridad que consiste en dos escoltas, dos pistolas, arma de apoyo, radios Avanteles, chalecos anti-balas, y vehículo.

El 18 de junio de 2002, tres paramilitares intentaron secuestrar a la hija de William, Karen (quien tenía cuatro años en ese momento), cuando estaba con su madre, Luz, en la plaza central de Barranca. Gracias a la llegada oportuna de dos policías a la plaza, y la fuerte reacción de Luz, Karen se salvó. El 17 de enero de 2003, un hombre llamó a la casa de William y Luz. La hija de William, Paola, respondió. El hombre amenazó a William y Luz, dijo a Paola el nombre de la escuela donde ella asistía, y dijo que el hijo de William, Heyner, estaba lavando el frente de la casa – que era la verdad y que indicó que se estaba vigilando la casa y la familia de William. Estos hechos demuestran el alto nivel de riesgo en lo cual se encuentra William ahora.

Le pido que tome las acciones necesarias para que William cuente de nuevo con escoltas de confianza.

Atentamente,

***********************************************************

English translation of message:

Subject: URGENT: Dismissal of William Mendoza’s bodyguards

Dr. Carlos Franco
Director
Presidential Human Rights Program
Bogotá, Colombia

Dear Dr. Franco,

I’m writing to you to express my grave concern for the dismissal of William Mendoza Gómez’s trusted bodyguards. William is the vice president of SINALTRAINAL (National Food Industry Workers union that represents the Coca-Cola workers) in Barrancabermeja.

The Administrative Security Department, DAS [security police], dismissed William’s two bodyguards on February 28. Two new people were assigned to William, but he doesn’t know them or where they come from, and he obviously doesn’t trust them. Because of that, William didn’t accept those people and right now he’s in Barranca without bodyguards – a situation of high risk. The protection program allows William to choose the people that will be his bodyguards, providing that they pass the DAS background check. Given the threats against William and the grave security situation for him in Barraca, I support his position in relation to the urgent need to have bodyguards that he trusts. I’m very concerned for William’s security and I ask you to take the necessary actions so that he again has bodyguards that he trusts – whether they’re the ones that were dismissed or two new ones chosen by him.

Since 1999, William has had security measures through the Interamerican Human Rights Commission of the Organization of American States. Since 2002, he has had a security system that consists of two bodyguards, two pistols, a support weapon, two-way radios, bulletproof vests, and a vehicle.

On June 18, 2002, three paramilitaries tried to kidnap William’s daughter, Karen (who was four-years-old at the time), when she was with her mother, Luz, in the main plaza of Barranca. Thanks to the timely arrival of two policemen, and the strong reaction of Luz, Karen was saved. On January 17, 2003, a man called William and Luz’s house. William’s daughter, Paola, answered. The man threatened William and Luz, told Paola the name of the school that she attended, and said that William’s son, Heyner, was cleaning the front of the house – which was true and indicated that William’s house and family were being watched. These events demonstrate the high level of risk facing William now.

I ask that you take the necessary actions so that William again has bodyguards that he trusts.

Sincerely,

4. Seeking stock proxies from concerned stockholders
Stockholders will soon be receiving their notice of the annual meeting and proxy card from The Coca-Cola Co. If you are not able to attend the annual meeting and would like to help the Campaign, we would like your proxy assigned to us so that others can attend. You can contact us at (718) 852-2808 or stopkillercoke@aol.com and we will explain how to transfer your proxy. If proxyholders plan to attend the shareholders' meeting and would like to join protest activities, please contact us. This year's annual meeting is expected to be held on April 19 beginning at 10:30 am in Wilmington, Delaware.

5. Do you need a customized Campaign leaflet?
In mid-September, the Campaign to Stop Killer Coke sent out a bulletin that listed links to customized leaflets for numerous colleges. We invited supporters to contact us to "customize a leaflet for your campus, union or group." The response was terrific! We immediately began getting emails asking us to produce customized leaflets for numerous colleges, universities, high schools and middle schools. We put them up as soon as we could. We have leaflets for Australia, Canada, Colombia (in Spanish), India, Ireland, the UK and the US.

Look for your customized leaflets

If you would like a customized leaflet, please contact us at StopKillerCoke@aol.com. Please state the name of your school and the name of the sponsoring group and a local email address, if you want us to put them into the flyer. If you want the flyer for a group, please state the name of the group and an email address. Also, whenever you email the Campaign to Stop Killer Coke, please include a phone number, if possible, in case we have a need to talk with you.

6. Main Menu Enlarged We have now added new sections to our main menu. Included is Health: There have been many articles published about the danger to the health of consumers of Coke and other sodas: aspartame, benzene, obesity and diabetes.

7. Campaign's 'Student Activism' Section
Students have been writing us from schools interested in beginning a Campaign to Stop Killer Coke. We recommend that students begin by checking out the two organizing packets in our "Student Activism" section:

1. "Unthinkable! Undrinkable! A Campus Campaign Overview," a USAS Campus Guide

2. Campus Activism Packet — Campaign for a Coca-Cola Free Campus

3. Schools Active in the Campaign to Stop Killer Coke

In addition, there are numerous reports, resolutions and articles in the "Student Activism" section that can be useful to students.

8. Take Actions Against Coke!
a. Call Coca-Cola and tell them to stop their worldwide abuses at 1-800-GET-COKE.
b. Sign a Petition protesting Coke's abuses:
Sign the Petition
c. Join the Boycott at Karmabanque's web site at: www.karmabanque.com

9. Please send photos, reports of events, etc. for the Campaign website

Please send photos, reports of events, and if you are in a school, union or organization that has banned Coke products, please send us the resolution or description of how the decision was made. We would like the Campaign website to be up-to-date and to share the information with all supporters via our newsletter.

###