|
Update: October 10, 2007 - "Well, umm, what I really meant to say was..." Check out this great article as a reporter asks some straightforward questions of BK's Steve Grover, and watch Grover squirm as he finally admits that the CIW, in fact, never did ask for a check or any money to be paid directly to it by BK. For the entire sordid history of this ugly lie and BK's pathetic attempts to sidestep responsibility, keep reading below. And when you're done, check out the CIW analysis here.
September 25, 2007 - Watch, read, and judge for yourself as Burger King goes dirty in its efforts to deflect growing public pressure for human rights in its tomato supply chain.
August 24, 2007 - A Lie is Born: In a story on a Burger King protest in Lawrence, Kansas, a BK vice president for corporate communication is quoted as saying, "The CIW requested Burger King write a check to the organization," marking the public debut of this unfounded -- and remarkably unprofessional -- claim.
August 31, 2007 - SFA Puts BK on Notice: During a protest at BK headquarters in Miami, SFA coordinator Marc Rodrigues confronts two representatives from Burger King's corporate communications office about the "CIW is demanding a check" lie. You can watch their
conversation in the video on the right. Rodrigues informs the BK representatives in no uncertain terms that the CIW has never asked BK to write it a check, and asks that the company stop spreading the lie.
September 17, 2007 - The Lie Refuses to Die: Ignoring the fact that his company had been told two weeks earlier to stop lying, BK vice president for compliance Steve Grover regurgitates the "check" lie in a letter to the editor in response to a Palm Beach Post editorial calling on Burger King to follow the example set by Yum Brands and McDonald's and work with the CIW. But by now, BK is on a roll... Grover's letter doesn't only attack the CIW, but even - astoundingly - calls into question the very existence of agreements between the CIW and Yum Brands and McDonald's. From the horse's mouth, as quoted here:
"If the penny-per-pound arrangement that the editorial described actually exists... the strict confidentiality surrounding the details of Taco Bell's and McDonald's payments to the coalition makes it impossible to determine who is benefiting from the payments... Fundamental respect for all workers along our supply chain is part of our corporate conscience; our value system is incompatible with the coalition's demand that we simply write it a check and consider the job done." (emphasis added)
Calling someone a liar is a serious accusation we don't take lightly. We know, however, that Steve Grover was personally involved in every conversation the CIW ever had with Burger King before the company decided that lying was a better strategy than negotiating. Grover knows the CIW never asked that a check be written to it, because he heard every word of the negotiations that occurred between the CIW and BK.
September 18, 2007 - Addicted to Lies: Just in case there was any lingering doubt that Grover and BK were just not choosing their words wisely or innocently misunderstanding the situation, the "check" lie comes out again, this time in a Naples Daily News article covering the CIW's upcoming Florida Tour. What Burger King lacks in honesty it unfortunately doesn't make up for in creativity:
"Grover said the Coalition refused to work with Burger King unless Burger King gave them a 'big check' of about $100,000 a year that would be distributed to the workers, and agreed to sign 'a secret agreement.' The company refused to do so, he said. 'We aren’t convinced that the check will get to the workers or address the issues that the CIW has raised.'" |
August 31, 2007 - SFA sets the record straight: Click on the video above to watch the conversation between SFA member Marc Rodrigues and a Burger King communications department representative. We've included the transcript of the conversation below due to crowd noise that obscures some of the audio.
Rodrigues: We're here representing SFA and a lot of other national organizations to present [BK CEO] Mr. Chidsey, who apparently isn't here, with this letter. And what we're basically saying in this letter is that we're tired of Burger King dragging their feet, not doing the right thing, and not coming to the table to work with the CIW. And we hope that happens soon and we hope this campaign doesn't have to escalate into something more serious. It would be easier for both of us if we could just resolve this at the negotiating table. And since you're from public relations or communications I also wanted to ask, where is BK getting this idea that you're saying to the media that the CIW has asked for BK to write them a check? We're kind of curious about that.
Burger King Communications rep: The way it's been presented to us is that... we, we don't know what's going on exactly because of the secret agreements, but the way it's been presented is that the CIW is asking for a check, for money, on behalf of the farmworkers. Is that true?
Rodrigues: No, actually, that's not true. Most of the Yum Brands agreement is actually on their website and we've invited you and your executives several times to sit down and talk with Yum brands about exactly how this agreement works. I mean, the "secret agreement" issue is a total red herring, you guys can sit down and negotiate with the CIW your own agreement for real social responsibility in your supply chain.
The CIW is not asking for BK to write them a check, they're asking for BK to pay a premium for the tomatoes it's purchasing, and that that passes directly to the workers. Not to the CIW, not to CIW members, but tomato pickers who are picking tomatoes that are going to your restaurants.
I hope we can clarify that point because whenever we talk to the media we tell them what's up and we're honest and we don't make things up and hope you guys don't do that either.
BK Communications rep: "Fair enough." |
Clearly, the evidence points to one conclusion: In the absence of any real justification for its current behavior, in its utter failure to explain to its consumers why it can't take the same simple steps to address human rights violations in Florida's fields that its competitors have already taken, Burger King has been left with one option: to lie, lie, and lie some more.
Amazingly, Burger King used the "check" lie not once, but twice after being directly confronted on the issue.
What you reap, however, is what you sow. Now backed into a corner by its ill-advised attack on the CIW, there remains only one way out for Burger King: To come to the table and negotiate with farmworkers to improve sub-poverty wages and abysmal working conditions. (Conditions, after all, that BK's own tomato purchasing practices have directly contributed to. See "Big fast-food contracts breaking tomato repackers.")
And, if we really want to get technical, a crucial piece of information has been omitted in the sequence of events detailed above, information that actually reveals that we've been too easy on Burger King.
 |
Postcard produced by young student in Boston. For more like this, click here. |
In fact, Burger King executives have not only been invited to discuss the details of the penny pass-through system with representatives from Yum Brands - as stated by Mr. Rodrigues in the above video - but actually had a detailed debriefing by Yum Brands representatives about the exact mechanism by which the penny is passed directly to the workers (just TRY and deny that, Mr. Grover!) and at one point in late 2006 appeared ready to implement a similar system in their own tomato supply chain. This was followed by months of silence from Burger King, despite the CIW's best efforts to keep negotiations alive, a silence broken only by BK's bizarre rejection of the CIW's demands in February of 2007.
Clifton Kirkpatrick, Stated Clerk of the Presbyterian Church (USA), puts it all into perspective in a recent letter sent to Mr. Grover at Burger King:
I have been privileged to be at the table during some of the key, confidential dialogues that produced the ground-breaking [Yum and McD's] agreements. During such conversations the CIW specifically rejected any and all proposals that might route a corporation’s payment of an increase to the farmworkers through the CIW. The central provision of the CIW’s campaign is that fast-food corporations change their purchasing practices so that they ensure workers’ human rights, rather than create conditions where human rights abuses flourish. If this is to be accomplished, it is the corporation’s own supply chain that must itself route the payment to the workers. Neither conceptually nor mechanically would it work for CIW to act as a conduit for these payments.
What does this all mean? It means that when your opponent is left with nothing but lies in its defense, victory can’t be long in coming.
Where we go from here
As the CIW states in its announcement of the major march and mobilization on Burger King headquarters this November-December in Miami,
"Today, in the wake of the Yum Brands and McDonald’s agreements, we stand on the threshold of a more modern, more humane agricultural industry in Florida. Yet, facing this historic opportunity, Burger King seems to have chosen business as usual over progress, continued exploitation over justice."
 |
Grover |
Instead of seizing this historic opportunity, and despite its claims to be concerned with "the dignity of workers," Burger King has instead chosen to drag through the mud the CIW's reputation and 15 years of sacrifice and diligent work toward the reform of labor relations in Florida's fields.
By calling into question the legitimacy of the agreements with Yum Brands and McDonald's, by characterizing the CIW - an organization recognized by the Robert F. Kennedy Center for Human Rights as well as the FBI for its role in uncovering, investigating and helping to prosecute 5 separate cases of modern-day slavery in the fields - as some kind of two-bit outfit seeking personal financial gain, Grover and his company are effectively spitting in the faces of Immokalee's farmworkers and the tens of thousands of consumers, students, people of faith, workers, and others who have stood at their side over the course of the Campaign for Fair Food.
In the face of Burger King's lies, the CIW can only offer the truth - "the truth," as one CIW member once put it, "of our existence." Who you believe is ultimately up to you, but we are confident that increasing numbers of people will see Burger King's current actions for what they are- an insult to the dignity and intelligence of farmworkers and their allies alike.
Where do we go from here? Where does the trail of deceit and the dodging of responsibility end? The answer, to a great extent, is in Burger King's hands. But it is also in ours - and depends on what we decide to do in the weeks and months ahead.
 Join SFA and the CIW for upcoming actions and the mobilization in Miami, and let Burger King know that you won't sit idly by while human rights abuses continue in the fields and its only response is to launch cheap attacks.
Together with farmworkers, we have arrived at a crossroads in the struggle to once and for all end the rampant abuse and poverty that for too long have fattened the profits of the fast-food industry and marred the essential and dignified work of tomato pickers. If Burger King doesn't want to walk down the right path on its own, we'll just have to bring it along.
|
