Not all corporations are ruthless (4/09)

By Nicola Householder

Apr. 27, 2009

     In Mark Achbar and Jennifer Abbott’s 2003 documentary The Corporation, filmmaker Michael Moore is quoted as dismissing large businesses as caring only about “how to make as much money as they can in any given quarter.” Is it fair to lump all big businesses together in this degrading category?

     Year after year, more companies are becoming socially responsible. This trend signifies a swing towards policies that are both cost-efficient for the corporations and beneficial for employees, customers and the environment — something known by industry insiders as the Triple Bottom Line: People, Planet and Profit.
      One reason that people generally distrust big business is that they do not fully understand the concept of a corporation. A corporation is simply a way to structure a company, involving shareholders and managers. Corporations can come in all sizes, and are not limited to the billion-dollar industries most commonly associated with corruption. If we as a society learn to weigh companies’ positive and negative qualities appropriately, the virtuous businesses will receive their due appreciation, while the few truly exploitative ones will collapse. As long as we avoid supporting malicious corporations, we should be able to improve our country’s reputation of social responsibility.
      Corporations like Starbucks and Costco have been on the Corporate Social Responsibility bandwagon since they were founded. For its employees, Starbucks, the largest coffeehouse enterprise in the world, prides itself on its high starting wages, competitive healthcare packages, retirement plans, flexible vacation time, promotion opportunities and stock options, according to its CSR annual report. Starbucks has received criticism for “exploiting farmers.” In fact, statistics show that they are the largest purchaser of Fair Trade coffee worldwide. And while farmers in developing countries may receive low pay compared to their barista counterparts, Starbucks is making consistent effort to improve the welfare of its foreign workers. According to an article in an April 2006 issue of Coffee Talk, Starbucks has given access to housing, water, education, medical care and more to its farmers by paying them an average of $1.28 per pound of coffee in 2005, which is “23% higher than the average New York ‘C’ market price during the same period.” An article appearing in Corporate Citizen 2006 confirmed this evidence, stating that “Starbucks consistently pays the farmers a premium above fair trade floor prices,” and gives them “improvements in vital community services, such as health care and access to fresh water.”
      Costco, another leader in social responsibility and the fifth largest general retailer in the United States, differentiates itself from chains in the same niche, such as the comparatively satanic Sam’s Club, by allowing its employees to unionize and offering fair wages, according to an article in The New York Times entitled “How Costco Became the Anti-Wal-Mart.” It is also continually leading the way in eco-friendly efforts by big businesses, according to www.shelfimpact.com. Sam’s Club, on the other hand, has been accused of harassing and firing union sympathizers, instituting pay cuts and minimizing benefits, according to the Business Week article “How Wal-Mart Keeps Unions At Bay.”
      Constructive criticism from the general public enables corporations like Starbucks and Costco to be more effective in responding to consumer desires. Online CSR improvement forums, such as www.dotherightthing.com, are rapidly gaining both popularity and credibility. Fueled by consumer-sparked ideas, Dotherightthing.com strives to increase cost-efficiency for companies and convenience for customers. Corporation representatives are encouraged to join and use the forums as tools for improving their customer ratings.
      Some may argue that companies only push these programs to create an image of social responsibility while they continue their exploitative practices. With this in mind, we should carefully train ourselves to do a background check every time a corporation offers something unbelievably adherent to the ideal Triple Bottom Line.
      With so many recent advances in CSR, it is ignorant to automatically label large corporations as corrupt. Instead, an individual approach should be applied. A smart person tries on clothes before purchasing them, and a smart customer researches different corporations before deciding which ones to support.
      By implementing these practices, we as a society can remove the negative stigma attached to large companies, allowing corporations and their customers to exist peacefully.