OCA & Starbucks Negotiations - Report on June 28, 2001 Meeting in Seattle

by: Ronnie Cummins, Organic Consumers Association

On 6/28/01 OCA National Director Ronnie Cummins and OCA Campaign Manager

Rose Welch met in Seattle at Starbucks headquarters with a Senior Vice-president of Starbucks, Dennis Steffanaci, as well as Sue Mecklenberg, Director of Environmental and Community Affairs. Previous conversations with Starbucks since March 20, 2001 had all been conducted with Sue Mecklenberg via telephone, fax, and email.

OCA went into the meeting with the following four demands:

(1) A demand that Starbucks make a public statement that the company was committed to removing recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH) and all other genetically engineered ingredients from all of their beverages and foods as soon as possible. The OCA made it clear that what we were looking for was a public commitment by Starbucks similar to public commitments already made in the United States by companies such as Gerber (baby food), Heinz (baby food division), Whole Foods (natural food supermarkets), and Wild Oats (natural food supermarkets). We explained that Starbucks in the UK apparently was already telling UK consumers that their UK foods and beverages were GMO free, and we wanted them to do the same thing in the USA.

Starbucks refused to make such a public statement. They repeated what Starbucks had already stated in public statements (posted on the OCA website) on March 18 and June 21: (a) Starbucks will offer, by the end of July, 2001 organic milk as an "option" for customers who demand it; (b)Starbucks is looking into the "possibility" of replacing the current rBGH-tainted milk they purchase (they claim that 25% of the 32 million gallons of fluid milk they currently purchase every year is already rBGH-free), and will know by the end of the year whether it is possible to offer rBGH-free milk exclusively; and (c) that they are currently test marketing organic baked goods in Seattle and Portland.

Starbucks claims that supplies of rBGH-free milk and organic milk are limited, and therefore it may be too expensive to guarantee its customers that all the 32 million gallons of milk they use is rBGH- free. We countered that there is an ample supply of rBGH-free milk and organic milk available (surveys have shown that 10% of all conventional milk is labeled or advertised as rBGH-free and organic dairies have assured us they're ready to start supplying Starbucks) and offered to have dairy experts and brokers contact Starbucks company representatives to prove this to them. They made a similar statement regarding GE-free ingredients for the food products that Starbucks sells (baked goods and chocolates). We countered that if they can be GE-free in the UK they can do the same thing in the USA. We again offered to have brokers call them to prove that GE-free ingredients are available now for all of their product needs.

(2) Our second demand was that Starbucks make a public statement that they will never use GE coffee beans. They repeated previous company statements (that Starbucks isn't using GE coffee beans now) but refused to make a public statement that they will never use GE coffee beans. In the course of the conversation over GE coffee beans and GE ingredients in their food products it became clear that representatives of the biotech industry have successfully convinced Starbucks that there are, or may be in the future, beneficial aspects of genetically engineered crops. We argued strongly that GE foods and crops are hazardous and should be taken off the market. We gave them a copy of my book, Genetically Engineered Food: A Self-Defense Guide for Consumers to read.

(3) Our third demand was that Starbucks show good faith and concern for economic justice by buying a significant amount of Fair Trade coffee so as to offer Fair Trade coffee as Starbucks "coffee of the day" at least one day a week in all of its USA cafes. They refused. We pointed out that CEO Orin Smith's admission, on National Public Radio April 28, that Fair Trade coffee constitutes a mere one tenth of one percent of Starbucks sales - constituted "green-washing" and hypocrisy, rather than a real commitment to paying a decent price to impoverished coffee farmers. Starbucks said that most Fair Trade coffee was of inferior quality, and that therefore the company would not meet our minimal demand of brewing up Fair Trade coffee as the coffee of the day at least one day a week. We argued that Transfair USA and other groups across the world have pointed out over and over again that there is an ample supply of high quality Fair Trade coffee right now available for Starbucks to purchase.

(4) Our final demand was that Starbucks reaffirm its previous statements that it would raise the wages and improve the working conditions of all the coffee workers who work on the plantations which supply 99% of its coffee. They refused. We emphasized that they must not continue to purchase coffee from unethical companies such as their supplier in Guatemala, whom CEO Orin Smith admitted, in the Chicago Tribune April 22, would not even tell  them the locations of its plantations and farms who supply Starbucks in that country. Starbucks argued that they pay the farmers who supply them with coffee beans very good prices, comparable to what Fair Trade coffee producers get. We countered that (a) there is no proof of this; (b) paying a middleman or middlewoman a so-called decent price means nothing unless you can prove (as Fair Trade certification does) that the middleman is paying a living wage to his/her workers and suppliers; and finally (c) how can you possibly avoid being entangled in a sweatshop-type situation in repressive societies like Guatemala where your wholesaler won't even tell you where its plantations and farms are located? We repeated what we told Starbucks in our letter of June 12: Can you imagine Nike standing up and saying they'd like to avoid using sweatshop labor, but that they don't know where their sub-contractors' factories are located?

We left Starbucks offices June 28 disappointed and angry, but determined. Even though Starbucks are still unwilling to make public statements‹and give us a clear time-line for implementation--that correspond to our four major demands, they are, slowly but surely, starting to make changes in their company behavior, for example: (1) they have stopped making statements defending the safety of rBGH, and have started using terms like "rBGH-tainted" milk; (2) for the first time they have begun, or will soon, offer organic milk and baked goods in their cafes; (3) they have for the first time brewed Fair Trade coffee as the coffee of the day in most or all their USA cafes on two different days during the last nine months; (4) they are promoting Fair Trade and now organic bulk coffee beans more than they did before; and (5) they are now publicly saying they will brew Fair Trade coffee on an "ongoing" (whatever that means is not clear) basis; and finally (6) they are saying they will offer Fair Trade coffee beans in (bulk form) all their cafes overseas, as well as in the USA.

The pressure from our Frankenbuck$ campaign and from Starbucks' customers reading our leaflets and talking to our volunteers is obviously making an impact. One need only compare Starbucks' official company statements dated March 18 and then compare these statements to the one dated June 21 to see what a difference three months of determined campaigning has made. Three months from now we expect to see the company move even farther.

As we made clear to Starbucks in our meeting with them on June 28, we think they need to listen more to us and their customers, rather than their pro-rBGH, pro-GE foods business partners, such as Phillip Morris/Kraft who distribute Starbucks coffee in mainstream supermarkets and Pepsi, who distribute their bottled Frappucino coffee beverages to convenience stores. Our prediction is that as our campaign grows in the USA and expands more internationally, we may be able to force Starbucks to come to their senses and "do the right thing." In the meantime the Frankenbuck$ Campaign must continue. Thank you for your help in helping us move closer to a precedent-setting victory in this campaign.

For a Sustainable, Equitable, and Organic Future,

Ronnie Cummins, Organic Consumers Association

**Leafleting will continue weekly at these locations.
**To take action, go here!