INTERNATIONAL LABOUR-POLAND:

POLISH WORKERS VERSUS NESTLÉ:

The following article is from the Polish anarchist news site Centrum Informacji Anarchistycznej. It's particularly apt as the trial for unfair dismissal mentioned below began last Monday. A few notes are in order. The Polish Union of Syndicalists is an anarcho-syndicalist union federation affiliated with the AIT-IWA, the anarcho-syndicalist international. There is another anarcho-syndicalist union in Poland, less active (I believe) and not affiliated with the AIt, the Workers' Initiative. In Poland, like most of Europe and unlike here in North America there are often several unions represented at any one workplace.

The Nestlé Corporation, the largest food company in the world, has a particularly long rap sheet. It is the subject of the longest running boycott operating today. Since 1977 it has been subject to a boycott because of its promotion of infant formula over breast feeding. This action is presently coordinated by the International Nestlé Boycott Committee, and their secretariat is the British International Baby Food Action Network. During the recent melamine in milk scandal in China the Nestlé company was implicated (see Molly's Blog Sept. 25, Sept 26, Sept 28 and Oct 1 of this year). During last year's melamine in pet food events Nestlé, under the Nestlé-Purina label was also involved (See Molly`s Blog March 24 and April 19 2007).

The company has also been the target of other labour campaigns for its abuses of workers' rights. These include Russian workers (See Molly's Blog March 28, 2008 and June 9, 2008), and its operations in the Philippines. The later campaign is being found by the Filipino Union Federation the Kilusang Mayo Uno. All tolf a rather long record, and most of it isn't even described here. For further information consult Nestlé Watch.

.................................

Nestle attempts to break trade-unions in Alima Gerber in Poland:

In September this year, Jacek Kotula, the president of the workplace commission of the “Solidarity” trade-union in Alima Gerber S.A. in Rzeszow, Poland (currently owned by Nestle) has been dismissed on disciplinary grounds. This is one of many cases of contempt for workers’s rights by large corporations operating in Poland. It is not the first time that Nestle workers have to fight with Nestle in order to have their basic rights respected in various Nestle factories spread around the world. Russian workers are still in the process of struggling for the right to negotiate wages.

Below, we present an interview with Mr. Jacek, made by a member of the Union of Syndicalists of Poland (ZSP).

ZSP: The official reason given for your dismissal was a conversation you had with a Polish farmer, in which you informed him that Alima Gerber imports apples from Italy instead of buying it from the local farmers. In the opinion of the management, this conversation was detrimental to the interests of the company. Do you think it was the real reason why you got fired?

"Of course, this was just a pretext to get rid of me. The real reason was my activity and the activity of the workplace trade-union commission of “Solidarity” presided by me for 3 years. Let me just mention that since July 2008 our commission grew by 50% and our activity has expanded to Nestle in Warsaw. I have demanded wage raises of about 140 Euro monthly. Currently, a regular employee earns about 350 Euro after tax.

The employer was not interested in negotiations. I have also proposed to sign an agreement about combating stress-related problems. The management falsely claimed that there are no legal grounds to introduce such a program. I have also presented the facts related to the discrimination of our employees in comparison with another Nestle plant in Poland, where workers earn 50% more than the ones in Rzeszow, while performing similar work.

Since there was no reaction, I have sent a letter about the case to the United Nations. I have indicated the many illegal actions of the management of the factory, confirmed many times by the Work Inspectorate. I have asked the president of Nestle Poland to meet me regarding an important issue I have mentioned in writing. Each time, I was faced with a wall of indifference. In the end, they just got rid of me in the most brutal fashion - by way of a dismissal on disciplinary grounds.

The conversation with the president of the union of farmers of Alima Gerber which I had and the alleged encouragement to negotiate high prices for fruit and vegetables was only a sad pretext to get rid of me after 16 years of work there."

ZSP: How did your colleagues and union members react to the management's decision? Did the local commission act in your defence?

"The decision to dismiss me was a shock for everyone. My colleagues from the Solidarity union gathered signatures on a protest against my dismissal. Two thirds of the workforce signed the protest. The union commission, nor the work council, did accept my dismissal. Despite this, the employer knowingly broke the law by dismissing a union representative protected by the law. This is a clear violation of the worker's rights and the Labour Inspectorate in Rzeszow has initiated a proceeding against the management."

ZSP: How was the dismissal delivered to you?

"After I was informed about the intention to fire me and after I saw the September 5th letter asking the union to accept my dismissal, I felt very sick on psychosomatic grounds and I have spent a week being treated on the cardiology department. In the meantime, the management of Alima Gerber harassed my family several times. The saddest event occurred on September 13th, at 7 AM. Four of my children, aged from 7 to 13, were alone in the house, while my wife was working on a night shift. My children were woken up by the relentless bell ring. When my 12-year old son opened the door, the manager tried to give him the dismissal document.

My son did not want to accept anything from the manager. The manager demanded that an older son be called. But the older son refused to take anything and locked the door. The manager stood at the door until 9 AM, kept ringing and knocking the windows and door. The children were terrified and informed their parents by phone of what has happened. The youngest son kept crying and asking: "why do they want to put daddy in jail?"

After the manager left, the house was under observation until noon by a man in a red car, at about 50 m away from the house. Our neighbours informed us of this fact. After I left the hospital, I went to Bulgaria on September 16th, for a training organized by the European Trade Union Institute from Brussels. The training was earlier approved by the manager of the plant.

I was the only representative from Poland. At the Okecie airport in Warsaw, after luggage check-in, I saw the manager and the Human Resources director going after me. I was shocked to see them there. I ran to passport control and haven't seen them afterwards. After I returned from the training, I was not let into the plant. It was claimed that I was fired... at the airport!"

ZSP: How did the management portray this case to the employees? Were there any attempts to turn employees against you? If so, were those attempts successful?

"The management informed the employees that I am a criminal, because I have acted to the detriment of the company, allegedly advising the farmers to negotiate the highest possible prices for fruit. The management claimed that this was the reason for falling profits and that is why the employees cannot expect any significant raises. The workplace commission was also threatened that its members will have to participate in court hearings. Was this successful? I believe in some sense, yes."

ZSP: When will the trial begin?

"I have filed the case on September 25th in the Labour Court in Rzeszow. The first court hearing will take place on November 10th. I believe I will win, as I did 6 months earlier, when the employer illegally punished me for entering with a workplace security inspector on a night shift. I did nothing wrong. As a matter of fact, the inspector admitted that I acted in the interest of the plant by informing the president of the farmer's union that apples are being imported from Italy. No one can convince me that apples imported from Italy will be cheaper than the apples from near Rzeszow. Besides, the farmers are shareholders of the company. They are not competitors, but members of a family and the plant could not function without them."

ZSP: Dismissals of active union members are quite common in Poland. The political climate for union activity is quite bad. This year several union members have been dismissed in state owned and private companies. The employers seem to act with impunity. How to reverse this negative trend?

"We must highlight cases when the employers break the law. We need to show people the of meanness of some companies which knowingly break the law by firing protected union members. We also need to change the law in order to give real protection to the union activists who are on the front line of the struggle for workers rights. All unions must act together in this area."

ZSP: Temporary work is a common phenomenon. What kind of difficulties did you encounter while trying to fight for equal treatment of temporary workers employed by temp agencies and workers with permanent contracts?

"Our plant has been hiring temporary workers from the Impel agency for three years. These employees performed the exact same work as the permanent employees, for half the wages. They did not receive compensation for working in noisy conditions, their working clothes were not washed and they did not receive meals.

They were discriminated against, which is not allowed by the law on temporary work agencies. We have reported the issue to the management, but to no avail. Two years ago, we informed the Work Inspectorate about the case. The inspection revealed that our suspicions were right. The plant was forced to employ 70 of the temporary workers on permanent contracts, with the same wages as other Alima Gerber workers. A few of the workers filed suits against Impel for discrimination. Their lawyer estimated their losses to over 3300 Euro a year. The case is still pending."

ZSP: The international character of many corporations doing business in Poland allows for international actions of support in case workers rights are being broken. What are your experiences working with other organizations internationally?

"I have excellent experiences, especially with unions from the so-called "old" European Union. There seems to be quite a different union culture there. For example in 2006 I have written a complaint to the Swiss management about the extremely poor wages in our company. I have argued that an employee of our company cannot sustain himself, let alone his family on the wages he receives. We have received support from the European Confederation of Trade Unions in Brussels, from the IUF (International Union of Food workers) from Geneva, the European Worker’s Council and many unions in France, Spain, Italy and Switzerland. A journalist from Basler Zeitung has visited us to write a big feature about the case. Another newspaper, “Input” has written an article about the topic.The western media and organizations are the only real weapon of Polish unionists."

ZSP: Since you have lost your source of income, are you in need of material help? How can union members and people interested in worker's rights help you in your situation?

"I have not received wages since September 16th. I don’t receive any unemployment benefits, since I was fired on disciplinary grounds. Our family subsists on the income of my wife, who is a nurse. I have four children, who still are very much in shock after what happened to me. I have to return a credit from the Social Fund until October 15th. I am in the same situation as many ordinary workers in Alima Gerber, who can only afford some basic necessities despite years of hard work. I believe that the good will prevail. I ask people of good faith only for prayer."

ZSP: Thank you for the interview. We wish you success in your fight for reinstatement in the workplace!

CONSUMER AFFAIRS:

HALLOWEEN CANDY ALERT:


It seems that the melamine/milk scandal isn't quite over. The following product has been flagged by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency on October 8 as being possibly contaminated by melamine:
SHERWOOD BRAND PIRATES GOLD MILK CHOCOLATE COINS




These treats have been sold across Canada at Costco stores and may also have been on the shelves at various dollar and bulk stores. If you have purchased such items prior to Halloween or if you are a parent with children who may be trick or treating be advised to discard any of this product.




Sort of sad actually. The fake gold coins were always one of Molly's favourite junk foods. Even more amazing to find out that they are made with product imported from China. You don't have to go very far to find the nearest cow around here in Winnipeg. One wonders how the Chinese product could be competitive with all the transport costs included. Maybe sweatshop wages have something to do with it.



Here are two more products that the CFIA has flagged for melamine content in the month of October:
*Mengniu Strawberry Flavour Sour Milk (Oct 15)
*OK OK Kaiser Pretzels (Oct 1)



Looks bad ? It's nothing compared to the ongoing listeriosis saga. The new Conservative government may proceed with its plans to privatize food inspection, plans that led to the present listeria contamination problem. Here's another list, this time for products flagged in the month of October-so far- for containing listeria. think about this, and the deaths that have resulted so far from listeria when you hear about how much more "efficient" industry self-regulation is.
*Dunn's Famous brand smoked meat (Oct 7)
*Plaisirs Gastronomiques brand sandwiches (Oct 20)
*Roast beef sold at certain deli counters in Ontario (Oct 21)
*SAVCOM brand sandwiches (Oct 22)
*Roast beef sold at certain deli counters in Ontario (Oct 22)
*Oickles Tasty Bite sandwiches (Oct 23)
*Deli roast beef sold at certain stores in Atlantic Canada (Oct 24)
*William Davis roast beef sandwiches (Oct 24)

Molly has a little bone to pick on this matter personally as she has a standing promise to reply to a comment on this blog made by either a manager or owner of Beef Northwest in the USA, where they claim that they are oh-so-good because they conform to the "standards", as they are, of an industry set up regulatory body down America way. But more on this later.

CONSUMER PROTECTION:

MELAMINE IN MILK SCANDAL GROWS-USA AND CANADA STILL DELAY BAN:

As more and more countries worldwide institute total bans on any products containing milk byproducts from China the Canadian and American governments continue to "hold the line" by only calling for recalls on a limited range of products. As Molly has mentioned before on this blog, this is very reminiscent of the actions of the Chinese government in delaying action on the scandal because of the Olympics. In Canada and the USA the reasons are very much elections rather than Olympics. This is especially true in Canada where there is already an ongoing food contamination problem in the listeriosis outbreak, where there are plans afoot to further decrease food inspection and where the Minister in charge has been essentially gagged so that he cannot put his foot in his mouth in the coming two weeks. Sneaky Stevie Harper is nothing if not a master of the idea of "staying on message".

Two more countries that have banned all products containing Chinese milk byproducts in recent days include the Democratic Republic of the Congo and, most importantly, yesterday Russia according to a report by the Russian Novosti News Agency. This should be seen as significant as the country of my mother's birth is hardly famed for decisive action for protection of its citizens in the case of consumer goods. If nothing else the Canadian and American governments should be shamed into action by the fact that even Russia takes the matter more seriously than they do.

Meanwhile the list of high profile "western" brands implicated in the scandal grows by the day. In addition to the Starbucks, Nestlé, and Heinz companies Pizza Hut in Taiwan (in relation to its cheese) , Oreo cookies from Kraft Foods and M&Ms and Snickers from Mars in Indonesia have now come under a cloud of suspicion, according to an article in the Asian News. The reaction of Kraft and Mars has been less than sterling as they disputed the Indonesian findings, claiming that the products in question are "counterfeit". We'll see. We'll see. Denial was an early feature of many companies eventually implicated in the contaminated pet food scandal last year.

The same article also mentions that the British Cadbury Company has withdrawn 11 of its products produced in China and distributed in Taiwan, Hong Kong and Australia. The article also notes the massive size of imports to both the EU and the USA of sweets ,in the case of the EU, and the milk "protein" (maybe) in the case of the USA in the past year. In the EU, according to an article in the VOA News melamine has been found in cookies marketed under the Koala brand. This article also mentions that melamine was found in Ritz Crackers manufactured by the Nabisco Company in South Korea.

According to yet another article in the Christian Science Monitor Lipton's milk tea has had to be pulled from shelves across Asia. Add Lipton's to the list. The article also notes a couple of interesting facts. One is "strong laws" cannot solve the continuing problem of food adulteration in China (or in many other countries such as the USA and Canada) because the "policing" aspect of such laws is missing. China is actually very "strict" in terms of its laws, and execution would be a probable fate of any arrested executive found implicated in this most recent scandal. Yet stern penalties hardly deter opportunists when the chance of "getting caught" are minimal given the state of inspections in that country, a situation that conservatives in both the USA and Canada see as an admirable situation. The second point is that the company most deeply implicated in the problem in China, Sanlu, is actually a joint venture with the New Zealand Fonterra (mentioned before on this blog) and the Chinese state itself. Yup, this problem developed in a situation where the government itself was the major stakeholder. Interesting ! According to an article in the New York Times over 200,000 children have been brought in for examination in the Chinese province of Hubei alone. the Chinese government has not issued any updates about the number actually affected since last week.

Meanwhile back in the USA the Department of Health has responded by finally promising to press for more stringent 'country of origin" labelling , according to an article at the ABS-CNN News. this comes in the wake of the American ban on milk imports from China (a basically nonexistent item) while not addressing the much more prevalent problem of "milk byproducts".Wait a minute here, for those with a memory. Weren't such "requirements" part of the "lessons learned" to be implemented from last year's pet food scandal ???? Love those promises ! Let's see what happens with the latest vows.

If you want to follow this story as it develops Molly can recommend the following blogs:

1)From a scientific point of view the Science Base blog.

2)For the political and "scandal" aspects (and practical recommendations) the Daily Kos blog.

The material on this matter is starting to accumulate in a pile beside Molly's desk. Last year during the pet food scandal the pile of printouts reached about 1.5 foot high in a box . Molly suspects that this matter may exceed that amount when all is said and done.

Meanwhile, here is yet another view from the IUF website, properly referenced this time for those with touchy feelings, on the role of New Zealand's Fonterra Group in these events.

.....................................

Fonterra and the China milk scandal - too many unanswered questions:

Share this article.

State media in China first began reporting about babies falling ill from milk formula on September 11, after one baby had died from kidney stones in Gansu province. The first reports spoke of "an unknown number of infants in at least seven provinces and regions suffering from kidney stones after drinking milk formula marked San Lu".

San Lu is the joint venture partner of New-Zealand-based dairy giant Fonterra Co-operative Group.

The following day, as Chinese authorities revealed that the chemical compound melamine had been found in samples of baby milk powders, Chinese media reported that the San Lu Group had issued an immediate recall of milk formula made before August 6. The only comment that could be drawn from Fonterra was, "We understand that the product involved is only sold in China."

On September 15, as the Chinese media reported a second death from melamine-laced milk powder, the New Zealand Prime Minister announced that it was her government that had blown the whistle on the tainted milk scandal and set off the recall following the failed attempt by Fonterra to have its joint venture partner's products removed from sale.

That same day, Fonterra issued a statement which was stunningly ambiguous and evasive. They revealed that they had been advised of the contamination of baby formula at a San Lu Board meeting which had taken place on August 2! The statement goes on to say that they "pushed hard" for San Lu to recall the formula and that San Lu "immediately implemented a trade recall of infant formula" followed by "a full public recall of all infant formula". However, this "immediate recall" didn't happen until September 12 - 5 days after the New Zealand government alerted the Chinese government after having been alerted by Fonterra 3 days before.

What was Fonterra doing between August 2 and September 5, when it took the step to inform the New Zealand government?

At a media conference on September 24 to announce its 2007/08 results and cash distribution to farmer-shareholders, Fonterra management offered an answer to explain its scandalous omission: "We firmly felt the most effective way to get the product off the shelves and away from consumers was to work within the Chinese system".

But did it take one month for Fonterra to realize that working within the Chinese system wasn't working? The long history of official complicity and complacency in the face of food contamination scandals in China should have been taken as a call to immediate action.

Amazingly, company management continues to contend they had done all they possibly could during this period, and are now trying to relativize their responsibility by calling San Lu's handling of the melamine scandal "appalling" and accusing them of having attempted to cover up the contamination since December 2007.

Fonterra's own handling of the crisis can only be called a cover up - not only of the contamination scandal, but of its own negligence. Why was Fonterra not aware that San Lu had been receiving complaints about contaminated milk powder since December 2007? The answer might be found in the company's own admission that only one of its 3 directors on the Board of San Lu is a Mandarin speaker. Unofficial websites had been asking questions about tainted milk powder from San Lu for months. Why was Fonterra not monitoring these blogs about food safety? Why did Fonterra fail to put people and systems in place to ensure standards and product safety? Why did it fail to put any efforts into securing the safety of the supply chain?

It is clear that working within the Chinese system has not brought the hoped-for results. Four babies have died and some 50,000 more are ill from adulterated milk powder; Fonterra has taken an impairment charge of the equivalent of USD 95 million to cover the cost of the product recall and loss in San Lu's brand value; and Fonterra's own goodwill has been damaged as the public continues to ask how the company could possibly have let this scandal for so long without publicly sounding the alarm.

Fonterra have talked about the tragedy of the deaths and the thousands seriously ill. They have talked about damage to the brand and loss to their investment. What they have not talked about is that their negligence in China and damage to their reputation puts jobs and livelihoods at risk, including in New Zealand where their products represent 25% of export revenue.

CURRENT EVENTS-CONSUMER AFFAIRS:

HALF THE WORLD BANS CHINESE MILK PRODUCTS WHILE CANADA AND USA DITHER:

The list of products and companies implicated in the growing scandal of melamine contamination of milk and milk byproducts in China and its export markets continues to widen. At the same time the number of countries that have instituted either total or partial bans on Chinese products made with milk continues to grow. Here's the list so far:

*Bamgladesh (three brands banned and melamine testing to be done on all imports)

*Benin (powdered milk products)

*Bhutan (total ban)

*Brunei (total ban)

*Burundi (total ban)

*Cameroon(ban on milk and powdered milk)

*Columbia (ban on powdered milk)

*Costa Rica (total ban)

*Columbia (powdered milk)

*European Union (powdered milk, infant foods)

*France (total ban)

*Gabon (total ban)

*Ghana (total ban)

*India (total ban, three month moratorium)

*Indonesia (total ban)

*Ivory Coast (total ban)

*Malasia (total ban)

*Maldives (total ban)

*Nepal (total ban)

*Papua New guinea (total ban)

*Philippines (dairy products, infant food)

*Singapore (total ban)

*South Korea (ban on all products with powdered milk)

*Suriname (total ban)

*Taiwan (dairy products ban)

*Tanzania (total ban)

*Togo (total ban)

*Vietnam (total ban)

The above list, taken from several different sources, is undoubtedly out of date as I speak. Most problematic is Japan where melamine has been found in several different products either imported from China or made with Chinese milk based ingredients. Given the scale of the problem in Japan it is likely that a total ban will be instituted soon. Within China itself, and Hong Kong, companies that have had to institute recalls notably include the Starbucks chain, Nestlé and the Heinz brand. Meanwhile, according to an article in the Bloomberg Report the World Health Organization has stated on September 26 that there was "deliberate failure" in reporting the problems with the contaminated milk. Information on when concerns were first voiced and by whom have become a disputed matter. The main dispute is between New Zealand based Fonterra Cooperative Group which held a 43% interest in Santu Group, the first company identified as a peddler of tainted milk, and Chinese authorities. Fonterra claims that it began to pressure its Chinese affiliate last March, after the first complaints about their product has been received as early as last December. Chinese authorities fault Fonterra for keeping the news "private"until the matter was finally reported to city authorities in Shijiazhuang on August 2. The central government of China, however, did not begin any action until September 10. This was despite having definitely incriminated melamine as the problem as early as September 1.

It was not until September 13 that the Chinese Ministry of Health gave its first news conference on the matter and declared a national food-safety emergency. Since them heads have rolled as the Chinese government has attempted to attach blame to anyone but its central agencies. The mayor of Shijiazhuang has been dismissed. The CEO of Sanlu, Tian Wenhua has been arrested. This basic timeline is confirmed by an article in The Economist magazine (September 20,2008) entitled 'Formula for Disaster' (complete article to subscribers only). For a Chinese perspective and continued reporting on the matter go to the English language Danwei website.

Here we come to the crux of the matter. The timeline is suggestive of a deliberate cover-up of the matter on the part of central authorities because of one cardinal fact. The Chinese government had put considerable pressure on all domestic news agencies to report only "positive news" in the run-up to and during the Olympic and Paralympic games in Beijing. Did this also means deliberate foot dragging in the case of local and even central government authorities ? Or was it simple bureaucratic sloth and incompetence ? You be the judge.

What does this have to do with Canada and the USA ? Perhaps everything. The ruling parties in both countries are now in the midst of election campaigns. The last thing they would need would be a major "food safety" scandal on the level of what happened with pet foods and toothpaste last year, even though Canada is in the midst of at least one such problem, the listeriosis outbreak. This especially true as a full bodied move would expose the fact that both countries have done little or nothing to safeguard their publics from repeats of what happened last year.There would never be any smoking guns found in such a situation, as the pressure to "tone-down" any response would be conveyed more by subtle "suggestions" than anything else. It this perhaps the reason why most of the world has reacted much more vigorously to the problem than Canada and the USA have in only recalling a very limited number of products ?

Once more, you be the judge. China and the Olympics ? Canada and the USA and the elections ? Perhaps so.

CURRENT AFFAIRS:

MELAMINE IN MILK SCANDAL GOES WORLDWIDE:

The number of children affected by melamine adulterated infant formula in China continues to grow. According to the World Health Organization Outbreak Report (dated September 22) 40,000 children in China have been presented for medical treatment, and, at that time 12,000 were hospitalized. Four days ago there were three confirmed deaths related to the products, and, according to the WHO at least one child in Hong Kong has been hospitalized because of the poisoned formula.

While the WHO is, of course, an official and fairly reliable source its updates are often not "breaking news". More recent reports such as one from the CBC yesterday put the number of cases at up to 53,000 and the number of deaths at four (so far).

Meanwhile different governments are taking the matter with different degrees of "seriousness". Yesterday the European Union banned all imports of dairy based child and infant products from China, and India imposed a three month ban on all dairy based products from China according to Bloomberg.Com. In the USA and Canada so far only certain products have been flagged for recall. These include:

-Mr. Brown 3-in-1 Instant Coffee

-Nissin Cha Cha Deserts

-White Rabbit brand candies.

In Canada, at least, infant formula from China was previously prohibited from import, but it may still be available for sale, imported illegally given the lax state of inspection, at Asian food stores. The reader should note that none of the above three products that have been flagged so far are exactly "infant related" (unless your baby has to start his or her day with a good stiff cup of coffee). Like the pet food scandal last year the likely course of this story will be that gradually more and more products will be implicated, and governments such as those of the EU and India will be seen to have taken the prudent course, rather than depending upon "inspection" regimes that have been proven to be haphazard and the furthest thing from complete. According to the CBC article mentioned above officials from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency have said that a complete ban on Chinese dairy based products would be an "over-reaction" as "many are still safe". Does this remind anyone of what happened last year with pet foods ? It also begs the question of "how the hell do they know?". Have they checked each and every product, in all its various shipments (batch #s from China may be next to useless) ? That should take them the next two decades, devoting all their resources to this one question (2 centuries if a new Conservative government has its way and depends on the 'self-regulation-cough,cough, of the corporations). Finally...how about a poll of the parents in China about what would be an "over-reaction".

No doubt this story will grow in the days to come. To keep abreast of it please check the WHO Disease Outbreak Reports mentioned above. From an American perspective watch the Food and Water Watch website. The Center for Science in the Public Interest website also has current news, but their site is difficult to navigate to find current matters.

Despite the sang-froid of the Canadian officials some Asian food chains such as T&T have responded by pulling many more products than those named by the CFIA. Wise move actually. Down Hong Kong way, according to Canwest News Service, foods made under the very famous Heinz brand name, have been pulled by the company because melamine was found in some of the formula. Heinz none the less.

Ah, the age of globalization. Continued scandals such as this are continued proof of the anarchist contention that production of essential things such as foodstuffs should be as decentralized and local as possible. They are also proof of the anarchist contention that people cannot rely on the "benign" procedures of government and business for their protection. Independent organizations, whether they be unions, communities or research and regulatory agencies not funded by government, are as essential component of safety in a global world.

Here's yet another view, from the IUF website, about the meaning of this scandal, one that says that such things are not the result of occasional crooked Chinese businessmen but rather of the whole corporate system under which the whole world suffers today.

................................

Melamine milk contamination exposes the reality of 'global brands':

Share this article.

Behind the melamine milk scandal lies an emerging crisis in corporate branding. One of the reasons for the heavy promotion of "global" brands was so that consumers wouldn't know (and would eventually stop caring) where products are made. Now with a major food contamination scandal that has killed at least 4 babies in China and sickened thousands, consumers are asking why their favourite "local" ice creams, biscuits and dairy products are made overseas.

The major transnational food companies spent the 1980s in a frenzy of mergers and acquisitions, buying up local brands and grabbing bigger market shares. The takeover boom continued into the first half of the 1990s and was complemented by a massive shift in company financial resources into marketing these brands, building an image and creating consumer loyalty. By the mid-90’s companies like Nestle, Unilever and Kraft had built up extensive brand portfolios and held the largest market shares in a range of food products - everything from cooking oil to ice cream, instant coffee and biscuits. They were also under investigation for monopoly practices and price fixing in several countries as a result.

By the end of the 1990s the new logic of financialization set in. The brands themselves became valuable financial assets and their value could be boosted through a blend of Wall Street wizardry and aggressive marketing rather than better manufacturing. So there was an irrational shift to rationalization: cutbacks, restructuring and consolidation. Less is more. Now fewer brands were better. By focusing on a few global brands in overseas markets the financial value of these brands would skyrocket. Nestle and Unilever called these their “billion dollar brands”, while Kraft would “shrink to grow” - with just 10 global “power brands” by 2008.

With the focus on “global brands" many of the popular local brands bought up in the 1980s and 1990s were sold off or simply disappeared. Local jobs disappeared too with them as plants were closed, merged or sold-off. In some cases the global brand was simply the logo alongside the local brand name ... then the name disappeared, and the jobs. Unilever’s "Heartbrand"” ice cream logo, for example, carries global recognition, but is known as “Walls” in the UK and Asia/Pacific regions as well as Selecta (Philippines), Kwality (India), Algida (Italy), Langnese (Germany) and Kibon (Brazil).

With global brands location no longer mattered. Production was relocated overseas (and relocated again and again), while aggressive brand marketing ensured that consumers continued to believe they were buying a locally made product with a global identity. The locally branded frozen fish stick could make a round trip detour of thousands of kilometers for filleting in China on its way to the supermarket shelf, with no questions asked.

The power of the global brand for companies like Nestle, Unilever and Kraft lies with their ability to shift production to countries like China, while loyal consumers believed it was the same product. As an added bonus, the companies could trumpet their "green" credentials and commitment to tackling global warming while loading up the products with thousands of additional food miles. Behind the familiar local brand stands a caring, concerned global company…

Consumers loyal to the brands would also continue to believe that their favorite Kraft, Nestlé or Unilever products were made by… Kraft, Nestlé or Unilever. The global branding exercise provided a convenient cover for these companies to outsource a significant portion of production to third party contractors, known as "co-packers", to manufacture their branded products. For example, one of the melamine-contaminated Nestlé Purina pet food products recalled in North America last year, after thousands of pets were sickened or died, was made by just such a North American co-packer.

Consumers who knew the reality of subcontracting were nevertheless supposed to derive comfort from the brand owners' supposed commitment to rigorous quality control. But finance-driven global branding encouraged a tidal wave of casualizing and subcontracting work within the companies' own operations. Even quality control personnel are managed and hired as casual employees through labour hire agencies. And since they're not formally employed by the company, they can't join the union.

The contamination of milk with melamine in China has now exposed the weakness of these powerful global brands. People throughout the Asia/Pacific region are suddenly finding out that their branded biscuits, ice creams and dairy products are made in China. When did that happen? And how long will it take for these products to find their way onto grocery shelves in the rest of the world - if they haven't already? Meanwhile the companies are rushing to assure consumers that products made outside of China are safe. But who is going to look beyond the global brand to the fine print that reads “Made in ...”? Too late. Companies like Nestle and Unilever long ago obscured the meaning of “made in” to refer to anything from packaging to the printing on the package!

Even the brands of companies like Fonterra and Friesland (both dairy cooperatives that went global) could suffer serious damage to their brands. Friesland’s Dutch Lady dairy products were pulled off supermarket shelves in Southeast Asia after contamination was found in Singapore. Instead of importing Dutch Lady from nearby Malaysia (where quality control is strictly regulated and the workplace is unionized) Friesland was importing from its factories in China where it has a minority ownership stake. Meanwhile Fonterra is trying to explain why it is Sanlu (its joint venture partner in China) and not Anmum made in New Zealand (strictly regulated quality control and unionized) that is tainted with melamine....

As the contamination scandal grows there is a greater likelihood that consumers will react against the global brand regardless of whether it contains milk or milk powder from China. The global brand will be tainted. Consumers will now associate Oreo (Kraft’s top global “power brand”, recently pulled from the shelves in Singapore after melamine turned up), Friesland’s Dutch Lady and Nestle’s Dreyer’s ice cream with melamine. Expensive and aggressive marketing may fix this. Maybe.

The financial impact of product recalls and lower sales (and possible lawsuits) and new marketing drives will be passed on through the company and won’t be limited to the operations in China. Workers in other countries will face more cost cutting and restructuring as a result.

CURRENT EVENTS:

TAINTED BABY FORMULA NOW:

Last year the news in the spring was all about tainted pet foods which were laced with melamine in order to give a false high protein content. These products were produced in China, and the Chinese government made claims that it had addressed the problem. This year the news is restricted to China itself, and the victims are human, babies poisoned by infant formula adulterated with melamine. The following article from the IUF website tells how there is another culprit in the scandal besides the Chinese government- the Nestlé corporation. Molly would like to extrapolate from what is said below to insist that what the IUF says is very much true, that consumers cannot depend upon either the corporations or the state for protection, that there has to be independent organizations to monitor both government and the corporations. Note also how the Chinese government is still in its own business of censorship, something it seems to do quite more effectively than monitoring food safety.

................................

Nestlé Puts Public Relations Before Precaution in China Milk Scandal:

Share this article.

The Olympics have come and gone, and melamine, the toxic chemical used in the production of plastics, fertilizers, fire retardants and inks, among other products, is back in the news. Melamine, which can cause acute kidney failure when ingested, has become a favorite ingredient of Chinese food manufacturers to boost apparent protein content in adulterated products. In early 2007, it turned up in North American pet foods, including those marketed by Nestlé's Purina brand. It periodically surfaces in animal feed and even toothpaste. Now it's the culprit in the widening scandal arising from the contamination of Chinese-made milk products, fresh and powdered, which has resulted in the death of at least 4 babies, sickened over 53,000 and hospitalized some 13,000.

While other dairy producers initiated recalls and suspended production, Nestlé, putting public relations before safety, asserted that "that none of its products in China is made from milk adulterated with melamine." Shortly thereafter, the Hong Kong government found traces of melamine in a Nestlé milk product manufactured in mainland China. The traces were low, according to the government authorities, but it was recommended that it not be given to children. Following on a recall by leading supermarket chains, the product was eventually recalled at the request of the government. Nestlé responded with a press statement that all its milk products manufactured in China are "absolutely safe".

Massive, often fatal food contamination scandals have become a matter of such routine in China that no company, operating directly or through a joint venture, can claim to be manufacturing safely unless all stages of production and distribution are monitored for every possible source of contamination and adulteration. The policy of official laxness bordering on complicity was summed up in the official China Daily, which observed that the largest dairy manufacturers were exempt from safety inspections on the grounds that it was necessary to assist "internationally competitive producers of high quality products" by…sparing them regular testing. The explosive growth of China's booming market for dairy products, which saw annual sales double over the last five years to USD 18 billion, was an important spur to this regulatory exemption. Several Chinese commentators (since banished from the internet) have suggested that melamine adulteration was one way for companies to pass on rising input prices.

In this context of widespread corruption, criminally loose standards and the total absence of independent worker organizations to monitor worker and consumer health and safety, companies bear a particular responsibility. Repeated iterations of product safety aren't enough. Death and illness are the price of laxness

Safety concerns with Nestlé milk products aren't new. In 2002, Nestlé imported spent milk powder to Colombia, where it was repackaged (with new best before dates). Health inspectors found it before it was released for sale. Nestlé said it was repackaging the powder for health reasons.

In 2005, Chinese authorities detected excessive levels of iodine in Nestlé infant milk formula. Nestlé contended that the levels were "only a little bit higher" than the prescribed limits, and had to be dragged into a product recall and eventual apology. In 2005 again, this time in Europe, 30 million litres of Nestlé baby milk products were confiscated in Italy and the products were recalled in four other European countries when ink was found to be leaking off the packaging into the contents. Tetra Pak, maker of the packaging, claimed it had been aware of the problem and changed its production methods in September. The recall came only in November, after Italian police began confiscating the product from supermarkets, depots and lorries. Nestlé CEO Brabeck called this "a tempest in a teapot", insisting that the product posed no health risks.

Other transnational producers with operations in China have hardly covered themselves with glory in this affair - there are significant gaps in the chronologies spanning the discovery of the contamination and the effective implementation of product recalls and suspensions of productions. But Nestlé - the world's largest food company - has again distinguished itself by its dogged insistence on spin over precaution.

LATEST ON RECALLED PET FOODS:

Since she last posted Molly has learned a little bit more about the situation about recalled pet foods. first of all the Pet Connection site, a good resource for breaking news now has 2,900 suspicious deaths listed. The most recent news is that the American FDA has issued a "detention without examination" order of wheat gluten from the Chinese company Xuzhou Anying Biologic Technology Development Co. Ltd. . A spokesman for the Chinese company, based in Peixian, China, Mao Liju, has denied his company's responsibility but says that they "are investigating" the possibility of contamination of their product by melamine. Deny first, investigate later- Molly. Ellen Morrison of the FDA stated that all samples of wheat gluten from this supplier have tested positive for melamine.

It should also be noted that spokesmen for the Del Monte Company who have withdrawn some products voluntarily say that the wheat gluten was supplied as a "food grade" additive, grade that is considered fit for human consumption. This increases the possibility that some of this product has entered the human food chain.

Finally, the Petsit USA site has provided a list of pet foods that are not on the recall list. Concerned owners are urged to consult this site and other sites previously mentioned on this blog to determine that NEW items haven't been listed by companies other than Menu Foods.

Molly