Coke Can Kill

As it approaches the end of its third year, the "Killer Coke" campaign, an international movement in solidarity with the Colombian National Food Industry Workers Union (SINATAINAL) to hold the Coca-Cola Company accountable for anti-union violence against workers at its Colombian bottling plants, seems to be making some significant progress. Media reports in 2003 said that a consumer boycott of Coca-Cola products is gaining momentum, particularly in Europe. According to an Associated Press article printed in the New York Times, investors at Coca-Cola’s share-holders’ meeting last year in Texas expressed concerns about Coca-Cola’s lack of response to "abuses suffered by employees of its independent bottlers who work in other countries."

This March, SINATRAINAL members in Colombia carried out a twelve-day hunger strike to protest the illegal dismissal of 91 workers from several Coca-Cola bottling plants owned by Femsa, Coca-Cola’s major bottler in Colombia. After negotiating with the hunger strikers, FEMSA agreed both to rehire the workers, and to take steps to prevent reprisals against the hunger strikers. This was an unusual victory against a company whose unionizing workers have often been the target of right-wing paramilitary attacks in a country that leads Latin America in violence against union members and organizers.

In July 2001, attorneys for the United Steel Workers of America and the International Labor Rights Fund filed a lawsuit against Coca-Cola in US federal district court in Miami on behalf of SINATRAINAL, and several individual workers at Colombian Coca-Cola bottling plants who have been victims of anti-union violence. At the same time, the USWA and the ILRF launched the Killer Coke campaign in order to put grassroots political pressure on Coca-Cola.

The lawsuit points to paramilitary violence directed against union activists at Coca-Cola bottling plants, and what seem to be suspicious connections between the paramilitaries and Coke and its plant owners. Isidro Segundo Gil, whose estate is a plaintiff in the lawsuit, was involved in organizing with SINATRAINAL when he was shot to death by paramilitaries in the plant where he worked in Carepa, Colombia. The next day, the same paramilitary workers returned to the plant and forced the other workers to sign "employment agreements" prepared by Coca-Cola management in which they promised not to unionize. Several other plaintiffs were kidnapped or tortured by paramilitaries in reprisal for their union work.

In response to pressure from the campaign, Coca-Cola has both tried to dissociate the paramilitary violence from the company’s policy and to downplay the accusations. In a form letter to consumers who wrote to express concern about human rights at Coca-Cola’s Colombian plants, Coca-Cola says that the US company has no control over the actions of its bottlers in Colombia. Yet a campaign fact sheet points out that Coca-Cola is a major share-holder in Femsa and in Panamco, a Colombian plant operator that recently merged with Femsa. Coca-Cola’s contract with Femsa also gives it the right to inspect Femsa’s plants, and to ensure that plant operators respect local and international laws on human rights.

Coca-Cola also claims that SINATRAINAL’s accusations are "a shameless effort to generate publicity using the name of our company, its trademark and brands." Activists with the Killer Coke campaign find this claim particularly egregious, and point to the reprisals that union activists in Colombia face from their employers and from paramilitaries.

Dan Kovalik, a Pittsburgh USWA attorney with the team arguing the Coca-Cola case, stresses that it is because of the threat of reprisals against union activists in Colombia that the campaign to put consumer pressure Coca-Cola and raise awareness of its practices is so important. Since the lawsuit was filed, Coca-Cola has sought reprisals against workers associated with SINATRAINAL by firing workers, and bringing trumped-up charges against them. Violence and the threat of violence against workers also continues. In August 2003, paramilitaries attempted to kill Juan Carlos Galvis, the leader of SINATRAINAL. Kovalik expects the legal case to take a long time to go forward, and says that the role of the campaign in raising and maintaining public awareness of the situation at the Colombian bottling plants is crucial.

Much of the Killer Coke campaign in Pittsburgh has been conducted through student groups at the University of Pittsburgh, Carnegie Mellon, and Duquesne. There has also been some outreach to labor groups. Students have held teach-ins on the Coca-Cola situation, and leafleted to protest Coca-Cola recruiters on their campuses. The most visible demonstration took place last fall on CMU’s campus. In response to a giveaway of Coca-Cola products on campus, students held a demonstration with the theme "dump Coke" and got some local media coverage.

Kovalik says that efforts to educate and pressure institutions like universities can be particularly effective, because of the clout they have as consumers of beverages for their cafeteria and vending machine services. A student campaign to get a university to boycott Coca-Cola products can be particularly useful. Workers in offices with vending or cafeteria services can educate their employers about Coca-Cola’s abuses, and encourage them to use their institutional clout to pressure Coca-Cola.

Recently, several local activists have begun to focus their efforts on the Sports and Exhibition Authority, which operates the David L. Lawrence Convention Center. The Convention Center has an exclusive beverage service contract with Coca-Cola. At the beginning of April, a small group of activists met with the SEA board to discuss Coca-Cola’s violations in Colombia. They urged the board to use the SEA’s clout as a major buyer to express their concerns to Coca-Cola and pressure the company to give in to the campaign’s demands. Although the board has not yet taken action, Kenneth Miller, who participated in the meeting, was somewhat optimistic. "If they acknowledge that Coke is guilty of human rights abuses, then I expect they will make a business decision that reflects our community’s basic commitment to human rights," he said. "Mary Conturo is new in her role as Executive Director of the SEA. Calling Coke on the carpet on this one is a big deal. She’s up to it."

For more information about the Killer Coke campaign see www.killercoke.org, or www.laborrights.org/press/index/html#coke. To get involved in local organizing contact Kevin Mayle at homeslice@riseup.net.

- Patricia Lietz

Killer Coke activists spoke to members of the Sports and Exhibition Authority about Coke’s human rights abuses in Columbia. The SEA’s website does not yet list the current members of the SEA or their bios, but center here is our new SEA Executive Director, Mary Curoto. SEA’s budget this year is dependant on slot revenues and the main object of the board is to tie up loose financial ends and find public subsidies for a new convention center hotel. (Photo by Kenneth Miller)