The Coca-Cola Company faced the risk of losing their business in the University of Michigan due to their unethical practices in India and Columbia. In the spring of 2004, the University of Michigan created a Vender Code of Conduct. The goal of this code of conduct was to define the standards that the university expected its vendors to uphold. Moreover, the code of conduct instructed vendors to abide by the laws where they operated, and to uphold standards such as nondiscrimination, health, and safety. The code also established a Vendor Code of Conduct Dispute Review Board (DRB). This board consisted of a committee of students, faculty and staff. Their duty was to investigate charges against vendors who may have potentially violated the conduct code. An offshoot of this board was the Students Organizing for Labor and Economic Equality (SOLE). In 2004, SOLE became more and more involved in charges against the Coca-Cola Company.
Based on the complaints of the SOLE, Phil Abruzzi, the director of procurement and logistics services at the university asked the board to investigate the Coca-Cola companies for a number of ethical issues. These included the use of groundwater in India, …show more content…
In an era in which human rights and environmentalism are held in high regard, the Coca-Cola Company cannot afford to conduct their business in this manner. The Coca-Cola Company, stressed the fact that the company neither owned nor managed most of the bottling companies that it works with. Because of this, they argued that they had no legal right to control the environmental practices or to require them to report the practices. This is a situation in which Coca-Cola is cooperating with the law, but not operating ethically. They are operating under a system in which they allow their partners to act any way that they want, because Coca-Cola themselves will not be held accountable for
Based on the complaints of the SOLE, Phil Abruzzi, the director of procurement and logistics services at the university asked the board to investigate the Coca-Cola companies for a number of ethical issues. These included the use of groundwater in India, …show more content…
In an era in which human rights and environmentalism are held in high regard, the Coca-Cola Company cannot afford to conduct their business in this manner. The Coca-Cola Company, stressed the fact that the company neither owned nor managed most of the bottling companies that it works with. Because of this, they argued that they had no legal right to control the environmental practices or to require them to report the practices. This is a situation in which Coca-Cola is cooperating with the law, but not operating ethically. They are operating under a system in which they allow their partners to act any way that they want, because Coca-Cola themselves will not be held accountable for