http://www.colombiajournal.org
February 19, 2007
Union-Community Solidarity in Colombia: Sintracarbón Takes a Stand
by Suzanne MacNeil
Violence in Colombia has historically affected certain groups disproportionately. Labor unions suffer the highest rates of assassination and repression of any country in the world, while rural communities suffer poverty, massacres, and forced displacement at the hands of armed groups. Meanwhile, multinationals go about their operations in Colombia with complicity or direct involvement in human rights violations when it serves their interests. But when the most powerless and vulnerable people join forces, even the most influential business players in the global economy find themselves on the defensive.
A number of Afro-Colombian and indigenous communities clinging to survival in the northeastern department of the Guajira have found an ally in Sintracarbón, the national union of coal industry workers, which represents employees of the multinational-owned Cerrejón Mine. At a time when unions are most vulnerable to attacks by armed groups, and when their own rights as workers are at stake, Sintracarbón made a courageous stand in their most recent collective bargaining proposals and insisted on including demands centered on the mine’s unjust treatment of local communities.
In a statement issued in November 2006, the union declared, “These communities are being systematically besieged by the Cerrejón Company. The company begins by buying up the productive lands in the region surrounding the communities, encircling each community and destroying inhabitants’ sources of work. Sintracarbón has committed itself to the struggle of the communities affected by the mine’s expansion.”
This surprising tale of solidarity has its origins in the forced displacement of Tabaco, a small Afro-Colombian community. A long process of coercion and intimidation of residents culminated in the destruction of Tabaco by state and mine security forces in August 2001. The forced displacement was carried out to make way for the expansion of Cerrejón, the world’s largest open-pit coal mine.
Tabaco’s former residents were left with little or no compensation, no recognition of being an Afro-Colombian community, and a Colombian Supreme Court ruling in their favor which, having been thus far unenforced, is a source of cold comfort in a region where the powerful consortium of multinational mining companies—BHP Billiton, Anglo American and Xstrata/Glencore—holds considerable political sway.
Other Afro-Colombian and indigenous communities living on the periphery of the encroaching Cerrejón Mine are not only in danger of meeting the same fate as Tabaco, but are also suffering the day-to-day difficulties of living in uncomfortably close proximity to the mining operations. None of the Cerrejón’s employees live in the affected communities, and the following statement reflects the extent to which the company’s treatment of the communities was a shocking revelation to the union. As Sintracarbón observed, “The United Nations has established categories of ‘poverty’ and ‘extreme poverty,’ but these communities have been reduced to the conditions that we could call the ‘living dead.’ They do not have even the most minimal conditions necessary for survival. They are suffering from constant attacks and violations of their human rights by the Cerrejón Company.”
It is common for corporations doing business in Colombia to contract the army, irregular armed groups or their own private security forces to defend their operations, and the Cerrejón is no exception. While Cerrejón management point to the need to protect operations from guerrillas and subversives, the people of the communities recount ongoing instances of harassment, theft of livestock and restrictions on their freedom of movement.
Intimidation via security forces is only one problematic aspect of the mine abusing its power. As some of the communities start to enter the “negotiating” process with the mine concerning their land, they recall with apprehension the same dynamic of deliberately misleading tactics, followed by threats and coercion, suffered by Tabaco’s residents before they were finally driven off their land. “Another of the company’s macabre tactics has been to cut off the communities’ electricity periodically,” Sintracarbón points out. “This is just another element in the systematic process of annihilation of the communities, to create despair so that they will negotiate from a position of weakness, desperation and hopelessness, and agree individually to the company’s terms.”
Sintracarbón’s contract negotiations with the mine ended with only a few of their own demands being addressed and with the company remaining intransigent with regards to reparations and collective relocation for Tabaco. However, the union succeeded in its insistence to be included in the future negotiations that the mine holds with communities for their land. “Initially the Cerrejón Company’s position was that it would not discuss the communities issue at all at the negotiating table,” said Sintracarbón member Jairo Quiroz Delgado, noting that international solidarity from groups in North America and Europe helped change the company’s mind. “The results may not be everything we hoped for, but knowing these multinationals, we feel it is a political advance. From now on the union will participate in everything related to the company’s social programs, and it will have a presence at the negotiations with the communities.”
Having the support of a union such as Sintracarbón goes a long way towards lending a bit more leverage to people who otherwise have few resources and technical assistance at their disposal, and helps to mitigate the enormous advantage enjoyed by a company that can largely set the terms of bargaining in its own favor. As Aviva Chomsky, a history professor who has worked to create awareness of the plight faced by the mine-affected communities, notes, “Here we have some of the most powerless people in the world—indigenous people with no resources, no electricity, no water—and some of the most vulnerable—a union in a country with the highest rates of assassination and repression against union activists in the world—taking on some of the most powerful multinationals in the world today. We have a lot to learn from their example.”
Suzanne MacNeil is the interim editor of Colombia Journal.
Death Threats Against SINALTRAINAL (English & Spanish)
call Coca-Cola 1-800-GET-COKE and Colombian Embassy -- (202) 387 8338 in the United States -- to express your concern regarding these threats. (From Colombia Solidarity Campaign)Some find it unbelievable that human rights abuses -- systematic intimidation, kidnapping, torture and murder -- are occurring at Coca-Cola bottling plants in Colombia. But it's not the first time Coke has committed such atocities.
In a 1987 booklet, "Soft Drink, Hard Labour," the Latin America Bureau in London said:
"For nine years the 450 workers at the Coca-Cola bottling plant in Guatemala City fought a battle for their jobs, their trade union and their lives. Three times they occupied the plant -- on the last occasion for 13 months. Three General Secretaries of their union were murdered and five other workers killed. Four more were kidnapped and have disappeared. Against all the odds they survived, thanks to their own extraordinary courage and help from fellow trade unionists in Guatemala and around the world.
"A huge international campaign of protests and boycotts was central to their struggle. As a result, the Coca-Cola workers forced concessions from one of the world's largest multinational food giants and kept the Guatemalan trade union movement alive through a dark age of government repression."
What happened at the Coke bottling plant in Guatemala in the '70s and '80s is still happening at Coke bottling plants in Colombia. The worldwide Campaign to Stop Killer Coke is dedicated to stopping such human rights abuses by Coke once and for all. We can't allow Coke's unsavory history to repeat itself anywhere in the world.
2. Colombian Human Rights Lawsuits vs. Coke
Lawsuits were filed against The Coca-Cola Company and its bottlers in Colombia in July 2001 and June 2006 by the International Labor Rights Fund (ILRF) and the United Steelworkers (USW), AFL-CIO. They sued on behalf of SINALTRAINAL, the major union representing Coke workers in Colombia, several of its members and the survivors of two murdered union leaders, Isidro Gil and Adolfo de Jesus Munera.
The 2001 lawsuit charged that Coca-Cola bottlers in Colombia "contracted with or otherwise directed paramilitary security forces that utilized extreme violence and murdered, tortured, unlawfully detained or otherwise silenced trade union leaders."
Union leader Isidro Gil was killed on Dec. 5, 1996 inside the entrance of the Coke plant in Carepa by paramilitary thugs. Minutes after the thugs showed up, they shot and killed Gil, a member of the union executive board.
Two days later, heavily armed paramilitaries returned to the plant, called the workers together and told them if they didn't quit the union by 4 p.m., they, too, would be killed. Resignation forms were prepared in advance by Coca-Cola's plant manager, who had a history of socializing with the paramilitaries and had earlier "given (them) an order to carry out the task of destroying the union," the lawsuit says.
Fearing for their lives, union members working at the Carepa plant resigned en masse and fled the area. The company broke off contract negotiations and the union was crushed. Experienced workers who made about $380 a month were replaced by new hires at $130 a month.
The 2006 lawsuit charges that managers at the Coke bottling plant in Barranquilla, Colombia, conspired with both the Colombian Administrative Department of Security ("DAS") and another gang of paramilitary thugs to intimidate, threaten and ultimately kill SINALTRAINAL trade union leader Adolfo de Jesus Munera on August 31, 2002.
The complaint states that, "despite a number of warnings to Coca-Cola management in Atlanta that management in Barranquilla continued to meet with and provide plant access to paramilitaries, the paramilitary infiltration of this bottling plant continued unabated through 2006. These same paramilitaries continued to threaten SINALTRAINAL members and leaders with death and even kidnapped one union leader's child to discourage his father's union activities." (ILRF & USW, press release, 6/2/06)
Coke boasts that the company and its bottlers have been dismissed from the human rights abuse lawsuits by Federal Judge Jose E. Martinez, but doesn't tell you that his rulings didn't deal with the merits of the cases, but with procedural and jurisdictional questions.
Meanwhile, the Campaign to Stop Killer Coke in January 2007, called for the recusal of Judge Martinez because of possible conflicts of interest involving the University of Miami, his old private law firm and the Coca-Cola Company.
In October 2006, after lawyers for SINALTRAINAL appealed Judge Jose E. Martinez's dismissal of the 2001 Colombian human rights abuse lawsuits, it was discovered that the judge may have had serious conflicts of interest. The Campaign to Stop Killer Coke believes Judge Martinez should be recused in light of his strong ties to the University of Miami and its athletics, which are intertwined with Coca-Cola. There are also questions regarding his work defending corporations in product liability matters. In addition, his former law firm has a relationship with a Colombian law firm in which a name partner was a vice president of Coca-Cola Colombia.
Martinez, the University of Miami and UM Sports
Martinez is very closely connected to the University of Miami and its athletics, which are in large part sponsored by Coca-Cola.
He's a graduate of the University and its law school. Back in 2002, the Miami Herald reported that "he is best known for his sideline: color commentator on Spanish radio for Los Huracanes [The Hurricanes]" and that "the judge's passion often returns to University of Miami athletics." The Herald specified that he is "active in UM law school and athletic department functions...(and) serves as color commentator for Hurricanes football and baseball broadcasts on Spanish radio." The Herald quoted UM athletic director Paul Dee at the reception for Martinez when he became a judge, saying the "crowd might be impressed that the Hurricanes have won 32 straight games...'but that's nothing compared to the fact that we've never lost a game on Spanish radio.'"
Judge Martinez's role as a sports analyst for broadcasts of UM football games as early as 2003 is also described on the University of Miami Athletic Dept. website, sponsored by Coca-Cola . The University has had an exclusive beverage contract with Coca-Cola for years.
Judge Martinez has also "been active in UM matters, serving as...a member of the Governing Board of the UM Hurricane Club," according to the biographical note supplied for an Oct. 30, 2006 luncheon at which he was the keynote speaker. UM identifies the Hurricane Club as "the primary fundraising arm of the athletic department," which is heavily subsidized by Coke. Judge Martinez continues his active participation with UM sports.
In March 2003, Judge Martinez dismissed The Coca-Cola Company from the lawsuit brought in 2001, but allowed the lawsuit to continue against its bottlers. When he inappropriately dismissed Coke's Atlanta headquarters from the lawsuit, it had nothing to do with the merits of the case. Lawyers for the Colombian union say the judge found prematurely, and in error, that The Coca-Cola Company didn't have sufficient ownership or control of its bottlers to be liable.
He ruled prior to any discovery and the opportunity for plaintiffs to show that The Coca-Cola Company does have ownership and control. Martinez's decision was also based on a single document -- a sample bottlers' agreement that Coca-Cola admitted wasn't the actual agreement with the Colombian bottlers cited in the lawsuit.
A Forbes magazine article in December 2003, "Coke's Sinful World," pointed out:
"The biggest bottlers aren't subsidiaries of Coke, nor are they completely independent. Coke effectively controls them by maintaining big equity stakes and a heavy presence on their boards, and by providing their main source of business. Yet it keeps its stakes in the bottlers below 50% thereby avoiding getting hit with their piles of debt and any unpleasant liabilities."
Coca-Cola FEMSA is Coke's largest Latin American bottler and a defendant in the litigation. FEMSA's website lists The Coca-Cola Company as owning either 31.6% or 39.6% of its capital stock (both figures are used) and 46.4% of its capital voting stock. Many of Coca-Cola's top executives serve as directors and alternate directors on Coca-Cola FEMSA's board.
When he gave The Coca-Cola Co. a pass in 2003, Martinez chose to ignore documents admittedly created by Coca-Cola, such as letters to consumers and a statement to shareholders that frankly acknowledged the company's control over workplace practices and its right to inspect the plants to ensure that local managers abide by human rights conventions and domestic law.
Martinez's Predisposition for Corporations
In 2002, President George W. Bush nominated Martinez to the Federal bench. At his confirmation hearing, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (Dem.-Calif.) drew attention to his having "specialized in product liability litigation...advising and defending large corporations in product liability suits." Predictably, Martinez promised to be an objective judge, stating: "I think that I will do the right thing and the fair thing." (Senate Hearing 107-584, Pt. 4; Serial No. J-107-23)
Another ethics question came up last year when Martinez overturned a unanimous jury conviction against the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Miami. The judge neglected to mention that he is a Eucharistic minister, playing a role in Catholic services at St. Augustine Catholic Church in Coral Gables. Fla.
Judge Martinez was a name partner at the Martinez & Gutierrez law firm from 1991 until the time of his nomination, September 2002. Upon his appointment to the bench, the firm was renamed Gutierrez & Associates, but retained as its web address, http://www.MartLaw.com, apparently referencing Martinez. The home page of Gutierrez & Associates highlights Jose Martinez's work as a partner, reflecting his importance to the firm. The Gutierrez & Associates list of representative clients includes such major corporations and governmental agencies as American Airlines; Borden, Inc.; California Insurance Commissioner; United States Tobacco International; Ford Motor Company; The Philip Morris Companies; Florida Department of Insurance; Emerson Electric Co.; BAC Florida Bank; US Education Finance Corporation; Terrabank, N.A.; E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Company, and the government of Nicaragua.
Martinez himself, while at Martinez and Gutierrez, represented the Tobacco Institute in a case before the Supreme Court.
Gutierrez & Associates lists among its associated law firms a Bogota, Colombia firm, Gamboa, Chelela, Gamboa & Useche. That firm's website, in turn, identifies as a name partner Carlos Alberto Useche-Ponce de Leon, a former vice president of Coca-Cola de Colombia, S.A., who also serves as an "Advisor" to the Council of American Companies.
"Everything we have learned about Judge Martinez's connections to the interests of Coca-Cola, the University of Miami, its Coke-subsidized athletic department and his former law firm suggests at least the appearance of impropriety, if not actual bias," said Ray Rogers, director of the Campaign to Stop Killer Coke. "To preserve the integrity of the judicial process, we believe he must be recused from the Coca-Cola cases."
4. Bogus 'Investigations' by Cal Safety and White & Case
Coke keeps claiming that it was exonerated of human rights abuse allegations by two judicial inquiries in Colombia and two "independent investigations" in the U.S. But no court in Colombia has ever ruled on the human rights claims against Coca-Cola. U.S. State Department human rights reports point out that only a handful of the thousands of murders of Colombian trade unionists in recent years have ever resulted in successful prosecutions. "Cases where the instigators and perpetrators of the murders of trade union leaders are identified are practically nonexistent, as is the handing down of guilty verdicts," said the State Department. So it's not surprising that the plaintiffs cannot secure justice through Colombian courts. That's why they're seeking redress through U.S. courts in the first place.
Coke states: "...(A) respected, independent third party found no instances of anti-union violence or intimidation at bottling plants." This refers to a bogus report issued in 2005 by Cal Safety Compliance Corporation, a Los Angeles-based company whose work was commissioned and paid for by The Coca-Cola Company. Cal Safety's monitoring record has been discredited in publications like the Los Angeles Times and Business Week. It is "not regarded as a credible monitoring organization within the mainstream worker rights advocate community as a result of its track record of missing egregious violations in high-profile cases and its flawed monitoring methodology," according to United Students Against Sweatshops, an international student movement fighting for sweatshop-free labor conditions and workers' rights.
USAS cites Cal Safety's poor monitoring track record as measured by Dr. Jill Esbenshade in her book, "Monitoring Sweatshops." Esbenshade conducted extensive interviews with Cal Safety auditors and directly observed the company's labor auditing in practice. She didn't find Cal Safety's poor track record surprising because she said they failed to adhere to minimum accepted standards for competent factory investigations.
Prior to the Cal Safety report, Coca-Cola repeatedly claimed that another group had investigated allegations of human rights abuses by Coke's bottlers in Colombia and exonerated both Coca-Cola and its bottlers. When students at Carleton College in Minnesota asked for a copy, they were told by a Coca-Cola representative that the report was done by White & Case, but was unavailable to the public. It so happens that White & Case is a large international corporate law firm that has represented Coca-Cola in lawsuits dealing with human rights abuses at its Colombian bottling plants. Alexis Rovzar, an executive partner at White & Case, serves as a director of Coca-Cola FEMSA, Colombia's largest Coca-Cola bottler and a defendant in the lawsuits.
5. Real Investigations by Monserrate, Gill & Higginbottom
In January 2004, New York City Councilmember and former police officer Hiram Monserrate led a delegation on a 10-day, fact-finding tour to Colombia to investigate allegations of human rights violations by Coca-Cola. "We heard one story after another of torture and injustice," said one member upon returning. "The sheer number of these testimonials was overwhelming."
The delegation issued a scathing report in April 2004 that said: "Coca-Cola is complicit in human rights abuses of its workers in Colombia...The conclusion that Coca-Cola bears responsibility for the campaign of terror leveled at its workers is unavoidable."
The report referred to "a total of 179 major human rights violations of Coca-Cola's workers, including nine murders. Family members of union activists have been abducted and tortured. Union members have been fired for attending union meetings. The company has pressured workers to resign their union membership and contractual rights, and fired workers who refused to do so...Most troubling to the delegation were the persistent allegations that paramilitary violence against workers was done with the knowledge of and likely under the direction of company managers...The delegation calls on the company to rectify the situation immediately, and calls on all people of conscience to join in putting pressure on the company to do so."
See Monserrate report, WB11 news feature and "State of the Union:"
Click here for the Monserrate Report
Click here for the appendices to the Monserrate Report
Click here or in the video for the WB11 News Feature
In an Oct. 29, 2004 report prepared for the Human Rights Committee of the American Anthropological Assn., entitled "Labor and Human Rights: The Real Thing in Colombia," American University Professor Lesley Gill wrote: "Eighty percent of the Coca-Cola work force is now composed of non-union, temporary workers, and wages for these individuals are only a quarter of those earned by their unionized counterparts. Coca-Cola has consistently pressured unionized workers to resign...Coca-Cola is in fact a stridently anti-union company, and the destruction of SINALTRAINAL, as well as the capacity to drive wages into the ground, is one of the primary goals of the extra-judicial violence directed against workers..."
"Murdered unionists are not the product of indiscriminate, chaotic violence . . . They are the victims of a calculated and selective strategy carried out by sectors of the state, allied paramilitaries, and some employers to weaken and eliminate trade unions. It is a strategy that emerges from, and is facilitated by, pervasive impunity." Based on interviews and discussions held in Bogota from July 3-17, 2005, Gill believes there is little evidence to suggest that The Coca-Cola Co. has substantially changed its business practices in Colombia.
In July 2005, the London-based Colombia Solidarity Campaign published "The Anti-Coke Manifesto," a booklet by its secretary, Andy Higginbottom, a frequent visitor to Colombia. He reported that in 1993, SINALTRAINAL had 1,440 members working in Coke plants, but by 2004 that number had fallen to 389. Since at least the early 1990s, he says, Coke has used brutal methods to maximize return on its investments in Colombia and takes full advantage of the government's anti-labor policies.
6. 'Solid Relationships with Organized Labor:' A Big Lie
Coke CEO E. Neville Isdell boasts: "We have solid relationships with organized labor in Colombia."
Responding to inquiries in April 2003, The Coca-Cola Company stated: "Coca-Cola bottlers have ongoing, normal relations with labor unions in Colombia and throughout Latin America . . . More than half the employees of our bottling partners in Latin America are unionized; in Colombia alone, almost 12,000 bottler employees are unionized."
In response to another inquiry in August 2005, the company said:
"The Coca-Cola Co. and our bottling partners have been valuable members of the Colombian community for more than 70 years and we respect the rights of all employees, including those who choose to be represented by labor unions...more than 30 percent of Coca-Cola system workers in Colombia are unionized, in a country where the average for all companies is about four percent...and employs approximately 8,000 people in Colombia..."
These claims are simply preposterous. Coca-Cola considers the vast majority of Coke workers in Colombia to be "flexible" workers employed through various subcontracting schemes, not employees. These workers have no chance of union representation, receive low pay and meager benefits (if any), have no job security and often are mired in poverty. Due to Coke's lobbying efforts in Colombia and the campaign of terror directed at union leaders, only about 4% of Coke's workers in Colombia belong to unions.
Andy Higginbottom of England's Kingston University has written: "In Colombia, neoliberalism as an economic model -- identified especially by the policies of privatisation, deregulation and the 'flexibilisation' of labor -- was imposed from 1990 onwards." In that year new labour laws were passed that eliminated nearly every legal protection for permanent employment contracts, which encouraged subcontracting and temporary working. As a result, Higginbottom noted, "there are very few private industry trade unions left."
Higginbottom estimated that in 1990, the Coca-Cola "system" in Colombia employed more than 12,000 workers, of whom 9,000 had permanent employment contracts. By 2001 there were only 2,500 direct employees, and by the beginning of 2005 less than 1,000 workers had stable employment contracts. The workforce employed...in Colombia is still nearly 10,000 workers, but 90% of these are now 'flexible' workers, employed indirectly through various forms of sub-contracting..."
7. The ILO and the 'Investigation' That Never Was
Coke's claims that the United Nations' International Labor Organization is doing an "independent investigation" of the company's past and present labor practices in Colombia have no credibility whatsoever. The company's extensive personnel and financial links with the ILO and other UN agencies make such claims ridiculous, and the ILO itself contradicts Coke's assertion that it is conducting such an investigation.
On April 12, 2006, the ILO's Sally Paxton told Campaign to Stop Killer Coke Director Ray Rogers in a telephone conversation that the ILO would only do an "assessment of current working conditions," not of past labor relations practices. She also insisted that the ILO was not going to conduct "an investigation," adding that there won't even be an "assessment" of the parent company, Coca-Cola. High-level ILO officials confirmed Ms. Paxton's interpretation in December 2006 and January 2007.
The ILO's very structure favors corporate interests. The ILO is made up of 28 representatives of governments, 14 from employers and 14 from labor. Labor observers and advocates who are familiar with the ILO say it's heavily skewed against workers, since most government representatives align themselves with the employers.
Coca-Cola's plans for worldwide growth specifically include partnerships with the United Nations, including a $1.5 million fund to support up to 100 projects over five years. The projects involve education, the environment, culture/arts and sports, but essentially serve as vehicles to promote Coca-Cola beverages to young people, the primary target group for Coke's marketers, through sponsorship of events like the national youth day in Turkey and a music festival called Rock 'n Coke. Because of Coke's partnerships and financial relationships with the United Nations, no arm of the UN could assess Coca-Cola's labor relations and labor rights practices in an impartial, independent manner.
Coca-Cola announced in March 2006 that it had signed on to the UN Global Compact, another public relations scam. Its senior officer, Gavin Power, described the Global Compact as "a voluntary initiative to promote and advance a principles-based approach to corporate responsibility." He emphasized that it "is not a regulatory body nor monitoring instrument...It is a platform for companies to work on universal principles and related challenging issues and improve their performance over time."
�The Global Compact is another public relations vehicle for imperfect companies,� said Ray Rogers. �Nothing is expected of them nor do they expect to do anything to become perfect or even respectable.�
When college students and others campaigning against Coke told the company that any investigation in Colombia must include both current and past issues and that issues relating to the human rights lawsuits already in process can't be excluded, they were rebuffed.
Why should investigators avert their eyes from murders, torture and kidnapping of union workers? Edward E. Potter, Coca-Cola's Director of Global Labor Relations and Workplace Accountability, can't or won't say.
One reason Potter apparently feels comfortable about the ILO's involvement in the controversy is that he is himself a member of its Applications of Conventions and Recommendations Committee. He has been and is currently the head spokesperson for the entire Employers' Group, a powerful role within the ILO structure that allows him to promote the interests of big business and Coca-Cola, in particular.
Potter was involved earlier, in 2005, in the creation of a "Commission" consisting of representatives of major universities and prominent worker rights advocacy organizations that were trying to develop a methodology for evaluating how or whether Coca-Cola aided the paramilitaries. When the commission asserted its independence by kicking Mr. Potter out, so it could then be truly independent, Coca-Cola began backing away from and creating reasons to delay and obstruct any meaningful investigation.
Finally, Mr. Potter insisted that Coke couldn't participate at all unless the attorneys who sued the company agreed that any evidence of Coke's abuses could not be used in their lawsuits. The lawyers refused this demand since compliance would require them to violate the rules of legal ethics, something Mr. Potter knew. Whether such a demand by Coke indicates its guilt is a legitimate question.
The proposed ILO assessment of current conditions still hasn't occurred as this is written in February 2007. If it ever does, it will be exactly what Coca-Cola and Potter have wanted all along: a blatantly biased evaluation that will ignore past abuses and will not hold the company accountable in any meaningful way.
Z Magazine Online http://zmagsite.zmag.org Printer Friendly Version February 2007 Volume 20 Number 2 | |
|
As many of you know, the North Shore Colombia Solidarity Committee helped to organize protests at the Coaltrans conference in Miami last week, where major players in the global coal industry met. Among those presenting were Leon Teicher, president of Cerrejon Coal, and Hernan Martinez Torres, Colombian Minister of Mines and Energy. (Mike Tracy of Drummond was on the program, but did not show up.)
While protesters gathered outside the luxury resort, Steve Striffler was inside the conference, and managed to raise a pointed question after Leon Teicher's talk. Below, Steve's description of the events, a transcript of the exchange, and an excerpt from the speech by Brent Blackwelder of Friends of the Earth, in which he included information that Steve provided him. Blackwelder was invited by the conference organizers, apparently to be the "alternative" perspective on the program.
Excerpt from Steve's report:
Our friends on the outside gave me some excellent newspapers with articles about mountain top removal and other problems associated with coal mining that I distributed throughout the conference – along with “facts” and “information” about events in Colombia, including statements by Sintramienergetica and Sintracarbon as to problems at Drummond and Cerrejon. Conference participants got an alternative perspective. Participants were aware of the protests, and apparently Coaltrans conferences in other countries often see such protests. They had also seen our presence on the web. They saw the protesters as being against both mountain top removal and the poor treatment of Colombian workers.
Exchange after the Colombia panel:
Steve Striffler: As you suggested in your talk, Colombian coal brings additional political challenges in terms of being a good partner with communities [a terms he continually used], human rights issues, etc. And some of this perhaps can be dismissed as “noise” or “rubbish” just as some of what environmentalists say about US coal can be dismissed in that way. The problem, though, is that [these kinds of issues] makes the utilities that are buying coal kind of nervous in the United States and in Europe. And also that with some of this “noise” and “rubbish” there is really something to it: In the case of Cerrejon there has been problems with displaced communities, indigenous communities and Afro-Colombian communities that have been there for a long time. My question is: To what extent is it possible for coal companies in Colombia to address these kinds of political problems in addition to simply being “good neighbors.” And in the case of Cerrejon in particular what is being done on behalf of these [displaced] communities?
Leon Teicher, President of Cerrejon Coal: What I call rubbish is the fact that some people choose to ignore the facts..not the fact that we have to be conscious of our responsibility and be fully responsible as corporate citizens. What I tried to show in the Cerrejon presentation is that not only are our shareholders, but ourselves, are extremely conscious of our responsibility vis-à-vis the environment, vis-à-vis the safety of our workers, vis-à-vis the appropriate distribution of income that we generate, the payment of taxes, our relationship with the communities, etc. I tried to show you some facts, and some information about what we are doing, and so I would hope that that conveys at least in the case of our company..I cannot speak for any other company.. what we are doing and how responsible we are. Rubbish is when people who are politically and ideologically biased, who choose to ignore facts and information despite the fact that we open our doors and we show them what we are doing, and despite the fact that we talk to people around us...they choose to start campaigns of disinformation which obviously are designed to make our customers nervous. Customers that do know us, and come and see what we do, know what I am talking about. I don’t mean to minimize at all the importance of all those elements, just like the coal industry needs to be aware of our impact on the environment, our impact on global warming, and the power generation industry needs to be aware about that, and we are, and companies all over the world are doing something about that. And so again, anyone of good faith who wants to come and take a look at what we are doing is welcome. And we intend to continue to increase our focus on all those aspects of our business.
Hernan Martinez Torres, Minister of Mines and Energy, Colombian government: I would like to add something because this is a very delicate issue. In support of what Leon just said, Colombia has very strict regulations and rules to be applied… To my knowledge, none of the major companies in Colombia has acted without full compliance with the local regulations. Obviously, when you are trying to transfer a community there are all kinds of stories out there and obviously there are a significant amount of people who want to take advantage of the situation for their own benefit. And I think we had that case in certain communities that wouldn’t move in La Guajira. But I can assure that the majority of companies in Colombia comply with the regulations.
Excerpt from Brent Blackwelder's speech: (Blackwelder was representing Friends of the Earth, and was invited to speak at the conference. He used information that Steve provided him in his speech.)
Human rights abuses associated with coal mining are not confined to the United States. Researchers Garry Leech, Aviva Chomsky, and Steve Striffler have compiled a shocking account the forced displacement of villagers by coal mining operations in Colombia, South America. Many abuses are associated with the Carrejon mine, the world’s largest open-pit coal mine. They provide a chilling account of massacres, kidnappings, and assassinations.
Major players in Colombia's coal industry, including the Minister of Mines, the President of the Cerrejon coal company, and the President of Drummond's mining division, are speaking today at a highpowered international coal conference at a luxury resort in Key Biscayne: Coaltrans Americas, "The International Networking Event for the North and South American Coal Markets."
We will be there! The North Shore Colombia Solidarity Committee is working with Mountain Justice Summer and other organizations (see list below) to organize a protest outside the meeting, and we have a person on the inside who will be distributing our literature and asking some hard questions.
For those of us who are not there, we can take the opportunity to support the protest and SEND A FAX to some of these players. The fax number for guests at the resort is 305-365-4505.
If you want to write to Leon Teicher, the President of Cerrejon you could express satisfaction that the union contract was successfully signed yesterday, but point out that the company continues to violate the human rights of Afro-Colombian and indigenous communities in the area. We support the rights of the displaced residents of Tabaco and Bahia Portete, and the right to collective negotiation, collective relocation, and compensation for all communities affected by the mine (Tabaco, Roche, Chancleta, Patilla, Tamaquito).
If you want to write to Mike Tracy, president of Drummond's mining division, you could mention the unsolved murders of union leaders Valmore Locarno, Victor Orcasita, and Gustavo Soler, and the growing evidence of ties between Drummond management and the paramilitaries. You could also mention that you are aware the Essent Energy in Holland and Dong Energy in Denmark have decided not to renew contracts with Drummond until the Company's involvement in the murders is clarified.
If you want to write to Hernan Martinez Torres, Colombia's Minister of Mines and Energy, you could remind him of the congressional hearings on January 19 on Coal, Mining and Energy, in which Sen. Jorge Robledo said "Martinez Torres is not Colombia's Minister of Mines, he is foreign capital's Minister of Mines." The hearings examined the high levels of violence and human rights violations in the coal mining regions, and the lack of any return to the population on the resources extracted.
Please let them know that even at their exclusive resort, we are watching! Send a fax today!!
A description of their panel presentation, and a list of the organizations organizing the protest, are below, fyi.
Avi
ON TODAY'S PROGRAM
0915 KEYNOTE ADDRESS: OUTLOOK FOR COLOMBIAN COAL PRODUCTION AND EXPORTS TO NORTH AMERICA
Regulatory developments affecting the coal industry Forecast for the growth of the coal sector
Export logistics and the role of the Ministry of Mines and Energy
Investment opportunities for international players
Hernán Martínez Torres, Minister of Mines and Energy, Government of the Republic of Colombia
0935 DRUMMOND’S CONTINUED EXPANSION DRIVE AND VIEW ON THE COAL INDUSTRY’S DEVELOPMENT
Forecast for output and exports in 2007 and beyond
Growth strategy: Investment in greenfield and brownfield projects and infrastructure
Enduring challenges for Colombian coal producers
Mike Tracy, President - Mining Division, Drummond Company Inc.
0955 CERREJÓN COAL: ANALYZING DEMAND AND SUPPLY FOR COLOMBIA’S MAJOR EXPORT MARKETS
Current and projected production
Assessment of demand in established and new markets
How will Colombia retain its status as a world-class coal producer?
León Teicher, President, Cerrejón Coal
1015 DEVELOPMENTS IN COLOMBIAN COAL EXPORT INFRASTRUCTURE
Analyzing existing infrastructure
Where are the bottlenecks? Views on coal commercialization constraints
Requirements for sustained growth of coal exports
Producer’s perspective: Coalcorp’s projects and infrastructure developments
Efrain Carrera Saud, President, Coalcorp Colombia
1035 Questions and Discussion
Organizations supporting the protest:
Mountain Justice Summer (Southern Appalachia region: Kentucky, Tennesee, Virginia, and West Virginia), Save It Now Glades (Glades County, FL) Bridges Across Borders (Gainesville, FL), Yat Kitischee Native Center (Naples, FL), Miami Sierra Club, Beehive Collective (international), Jeaga Earth First! (South Florida), and Rising Tide North America (continental network confronting the root causes of climate change).
July 2004 December 2004 August 2005 March 2006 May 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February 2007 March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 January 2008 February 2008 June 2008 July 2008 November 2008 December 2008 January 2009 February 2009 March 2009 April 2009 May 2009