CIW responds: Unilateral move by Trader Joe’s leaves too many questions unanswered…
Is a website update enforceable?
How do you audit a promise?
Why can’t Trader Joe’s make a real commitment to social responsibility?
Confronted with mounting pressure from the Campaign for Fair Food, Trader Joe’s recently posted an update to its website entitled, “A Note to our Customers about Florida Tomatoes.” Its key passage states that:
| “Trader Joe’s is working directly with wholesalers and growers to pay an extra penny per pound to all growers from whom we buy tomatoes grown in Florida. We have no problem paying an extra penny per pound as a ‘fair food’ premium to certified growers.” read more |
The CIW has responded to the Trader Joe’s announcement, and you can read that response in its entirety here.
The heart of the CIW response is found in the following passage:
“… But there is much more to unpack in this cleverly deceptive update. For while it is comforting to hear that Trader Joe’s apparently no longer has a problem with paying a penny per pound to support human rights, there are two fundamental problems with the company’s new found claim to social responsibility:
|
The CIW response dissects the three main points of the Trader Joe’s announcement, and concludes:
| “… In short, no amount of verbal gymnastics can hide the fact that Trader Joe’s can have a supply chain that is socially responsible or a supply chain that is opaque. They can’t have both, and so far social responsibility is the loser.” read more |
Check out the Trader Joe’s statement and the CIW response in their entirety here.