WASHINGTON, D.C., Sep. 01 /CSRwire/ - Two leading sustainable business organizations representing 5,000 small businesses today sent a letter calling on President Obama to reject the controversial Keystone XL pipeline and, instead, invest in clean energy technologies.  

The pipeline would deliver oil from the tar sands in Canada to the Gulf of Mexico across the United States.

In their letter, Green America’s Green Business Network and The Green Chamber of Commercesaid the pipeline would further United States addiction to oil and risk disastrous new oil spills in rivers and the Ogallala aquifer. Global warming and oil spills have been seen to have an extremely detrimental effect on the economy, which affects the well-being of their businesses.

In addition to these risks, production of the 700,000 barrels of heavy crude that would travel from the tar sands every day creates a tremendous amount of greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global warming. Both the potential for environmentally harmful oils spills and increase in GHG emissions would be harmful to the environment, in addition to the harm to business in the United States.

The text of the letter to President Obama follows:

“We write to you on behalf of thousands of small businesses in the United States that are deeply concerned about the proposed Keystone XL pipeline. The well-being of our businesses and the economy in the United States are tied to the health of our environment. The Keystone XL pipeline will have an immensely negative impact on the environment. It would bring 700,000 barrels of heavy crude from Canadian tar sands to the US every day, furthering the US addiction to oil, and risking new oil spills in rivers and the Ogallala aquifer. The production of oil from tar sands would generate enormous greenhouse gas emissions, and create greater impacts from global warming.

The impacts of global warming -- from droughts, to floods, to extreme weather -- are bad for business in the United States. As we saw in the Gulf, oil spills also have a devastating impact on the economy. The failure to shift America away from its dependence on oil to cleaner fuels will further imperil our economy and reduce the number of green jobs we need for sustainable economic growth.

Your administration has taken bold and necessary steps to increase the green energy economy in the US. Now, we urge you to reject the Keystone XL pipeline, and further invest in clean energy technologies. It is the right decision for the US, and it is the right decision for business.”

ORRVILLE, Ohio - The J.M. Smucker Co. perked up coffee-lovers by announcing that after four straight price hikes in little over a year, the company was cutting prices by an average of 6 percent.

The Orrville food company, which is holding its annual shareholders meeting today, said Tuesday's news applies to the prices on a majority of its coffee products sold in the U.S., including top-selling Folgers Coffee, Folgers Gourmet Selections and Dunkin' Donuts packaged coffee sold in supermarkets.

Smucker cut prices in response to declines in the price of raw green coffee futures, which slipped to $2.10 per pound in July, down 9 percent from a 34-year-high of $2.31 per pound in April.

That's still 65 percent higher than the $1.27-per-pound price in April 2010, but represents the third-straight monthly decline after more than a year of steadily climbing prices, according to the International Coffee Organization.

Those rising prices, on top of higher fuel and other production costs, prompted Smucker to increase its own coffee prices four times:

• 4 percent on May 18, 2010;

• 9 percent on Aug. 3, 2010;

• 10 percent on Feb. 8, 2011;

• and 11 percent on May 24.

Smucker's rivals, including Starbucks, Maxwell House, Peet's Coffee & Tea and Green Mountain Coffee have raised their coffee prices over the past year, too, but have not yet responded to Tuesday's announcement.

Dominic Caruso, vice president of Caruso's Coffee Inc., a specialty coffee roaster in Brecksville, said that while prices for some kinds of raw beans have fallen, they remain significantly higher than they were a year ago.

He said that while mass-produced coffee blends like Folgers and Dunkin' Donuts can compensate for more expensive beans by increasing the amount of cheaper robusta beans, coffee houses that specialize in premium beans or single-source coffees have less wiggle room to lower prices.

"On certain coffees, like breakfast blends and doughnut shop blends, we're going to try to pass along that savings to the customer," he said. "But on other coffees, like African coffees or Indonesian Sumatras and Javas, we're stuck" with higher prices.

Caruso doesn't expect many coffee house regulars to switch to brewing at home, however, because coffee is still an affordable indulgence. "The customer who's going to the coffee shop is going there for a lot of reasons besides price," he said.

The price cut news also came a day before Smucker's annual shareholders meeting, where two shareholder groups that advise investors on responsible and sustainable companies are seeking more information about the company's long-term coffee strategy.

Calvert Investment Management Inc. of Bethesda, Md., and Trillium Asset Management LLC of Boston want shareholders to approve their Proposal 5, requiring Smucker to provide a report to shareholders about how the company plans to deal with possible climate changes and threats to family coffee farms within six months of the annual meeting.

Because coffee makes up 40 percent of Smucker's net sales and 48.6 percent of its profit, the groups wrote a letter to shareholders saying that they want to know how the company plans to respond to climate changes like global warming, changes in rainfall patterns, and its "responsibility for its impact on the coffee farming families in its supply chain."

Rebecca Henson, Calvert's sustainability analyst, said: "The proposal is meant to encourage the company to take more meaningful steps" to protect shareholders, because so much of its business depends on coffee. "We just think there's more they can do to manage this risk."

Calvert, a mutual fund which offers advice to more than 400,000 individual and institutional investors, owns 4,269 shares of Smucker stock.

Trillium, the oldest and largest independent adviser devoted exclusively to sustainable and responsible investing, advises several hundred clients who own about 90,000 shares of Smucker.

Both groups say Smucker has provided "woefully inadequate" guidance on these topics and that it "lags significantly behind" its global peers Nestle, Sara Lee and Kraft in providing that information.

Sara Lee, for example, aims to have 20 percent of its coffee volume certified sustainable by 2015, while Nescafe will distribute 220 million disease-resistant coffee plantlets to coffee farmers around the world by 2020.

Smucker declined to answer questions Tuesday about the price cut or Proposal 5, saying that it was in its quiet period prior to Thursday's earnings conference call.

In an Aug. 9 letter to shareholders, however, Co-Chief Executives Tim and Richard Smucker responded that the company had already answered those requests.

They said that "in making the decision and expending time and resources to voluntarily publish a corporate responsibility report, it has taken appropriate action to address shareholder concerns" and that adopting Proposal 5 would be "unnecessary, duplicative and inappropriate."

Read the original article here.

Labor Unrest at Giant Beer and Wine Distributor Could Leave Ohio Dry

DAYTON, Ohio, July 25, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- More than 300 delivery drivers and warehouse workers employed by Heidelberg Distributing throughout Ohio put up informational pickets at key distribution facilities around the state today to warn the company and the public of labor problems that could cut off Ohio's supply to beer and wine products during the busy summer season.

(Logo: http://photos.prnewswire.com/prnh/20100127/IBTLOGO )

"The last thing we want is a strike, but Heidelberg management just continues to back our members into a corner," said Varney Richmond, President of Teamsters Local 957. The Local represents more than 100 delivery drivers and warehouse workers at Heidelberg's Dayton-area distribution center, which distributes Anheuser Busch products including Budweiser.

Heidelberg Distributing is the 16th-largest beer wholesaler in the United States with sales of $206 million last year, according to Beverage World. The protest comes after a busy week of informational hand billing at the Dayton Air Show and the launch of several "Tell Budweiser: Destroying Ohio Jobs is Tasteless" billboards in Dayton.

"Heidelberg is trying to walk away from its obligation to provide health care to retirees and force employees to accept a substandard contract compared to Coke, Pepsi and Miller distributors in the area," Richmond said. "Our members have shown a willingness to take on cost-saving measures when management has pointed to legitimate issues. However, in this case the company cannot justify its changes."

The escalating conflict at the Dayton facility could extend to other collective bargaining agreements that cover more than 300 Heidelberg employees at four Ohio distribution centers, creating the possibility for a widespread labor dispute in Ohio.

"Despite enormous profits and sales, management is seeking drastic cuts from these workers," said Greg Nowak, Teamsters International Representative for the union's Beverage Conference. "If Heidelberg wants to wage war on workers, the company is going to have to answer to all of its employees and the communities that support its business."

Founded in 1903, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters represents 1.4 million hardworking men and women in the United States, Canada and Puerto Rico. Visit www.Teamster.org for more information.

 SOURCE Teamsters Local 957

Read more here.

NEW YORK – Target is having labor pains.

Until recently, the Minneapolis discounter largely had avoided the labor disputes and public relations challenges that have plagued Wal-Mart, the world’s largest retailer. But now Target could face the same union opposition as its much bigger rival.

Target had its first union election in two decades in June amid allegations by workers of skimpy wages and reduced hours at a Valley Stream, N.Y., store. The measure ultimately failed after Target suggested to workers that the store might not survive if they vote to unionize.

But the labor dispute – and Target’s handling of it – is widely seen as a precursor to a bubbling national battle between Target and labor groups similar to the one Wal-Mart has been locked in for at least a decade.

“There is no question that this is becoming a hostile, caustic battle of wills,” says Don Schroeder, a Mintz Levin labor attorney who has represented corporations in labor battles for 18 years.

While Wal-Mart Stores Inc. remains the biggest target for labor groups as the largest U.S. private employer, unions are increasingly setting their sights on the nation’s No. 3 retailer as it adds locations across the country and aggressively expands into the heavily unionized grocery business.

In addition to New York, more labor disputes are expected in big cities such as San Francisco, Seattle and Minneapolis – where Target is based and remains the second-largest employer behind the Mayo Clinic.

The opposition is coming at a particularly vulnerable time for Target, which is grappling with slack sales growth as shoppers are pulling back amid the painfully slow economic recovery.

Already, the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union’s Local 1500 New York chapter, which organized the election in the Valley Stream store, intends to contest the election results and ask the government to order a new one because it says Target intimidated workers. It also plans to fight to get all 26 stores in the New York area unionized.

And the UFCW’s local 1189 in St. Paul, near Minneapolis, is using the New York election as an impetus to recharge its campaign, which failed a couple of years because it didn’t collect enough votes.

The chapter is organizing a group of people to go door-to-door to almost 2,000 Target workers in four stores. It’s also planning to reach out to UFCW’s local Chicago, San Francisco and Seattle chapters to enlist them to join the battle.

“I was inspired. Once we heard that Local 1500 had been building toward an election, we thought we better ramp it up,” said Bernie Hesse, director of special projects at UFCW’s St. Paul chapter. “We have been intrigued with what a national campaign may look like.”

Target Corp. declined to comment on its strategies to counter an escalating labor fight, but spokeswoman Molly Snyder said the company does not intimidate workers or have any “companywide efforts to restructure or reduce hours.”

“Our emphasis is on creating a workplace environment where our team members don’t want or need union representation,” Snyder said.

Labor disputes new

Labor disputes are new for Target, which has used its marketing prowess to become the discount industry’s darling by offering trendy products while Wal-Mart built its no-frills business by offering everyday low prices.

The companies started in the same year: 1962. And analysts say they pay workers similar wages of between $9 and $11. But the similarities end there.

Wal-Mart., which has 1.4 million U.S. workers, for years has been battling labor unions and politicians seeking to block it from opening stores in big cities amid allegations of poor treatment of workers, among other concerns.

By contrast, Target has faced little to no opposition and at times has even had the red carpet rolled out for it – literally.

For instance, Wal-Mart, based in Bentonville, Ark., so far has not been able to penetrate New York City after fighting for years to get its stores there, but Target has opened 10 stores in the five boroughs without any union protests. And when Target’s Harlem location opened last year, there was a red carpet event attended by New York politicians and celebrities such as Jerry Seinfeld and Moby.

As union opposition against Wal-Mart grew across the country, the retailer began employing hardball tactics to discourage workers from organizing.

In 2004, for instance, the company shuttered a Canadian store after it became the first in North America to win union certification, for instance. In 2000, 11 workers in the meatpacking department at a store in Jacksonville, Texas, voted to join the UFCW. Soon after, Wal-Mart began stocking only pre-wrapped meats, effectively eliminating the positions.

The moves hurt Wal-Mart’s public image, and anti-Wal-Mart sentiment spread among labor groups. So, the retailer beefed up its public relations staff, spent hundreds of millions of dollars to settle lawsuits alleging that its workers were denied breaks and rolled out lower-priced health insurance to its employees, among other changes.

Wal-Mart acts

Analysts say Wal-Mart’s efforts to repair its battered reputation worked and deflected the attention at least partly over to Target, which is a fifth of the size of Wal-Mart with annual revenue of $65.7 billion in its latest fiscal year.

To be sure, some of the increased focus Target is experiencing from labor unions is simply a growing pain of being a bigger employer. Target now employs 355,000 workers and operates more than 1,700 stores, up from about 280,000 workers and 1,050 stores ten years ago.

But there is another big reason unions are beginning to scrutinize Target. The company is aggressively expanding its grocery business, which threatens to shrink market share of unionized supermarket chains. The UFCW says 80 percent of its 1.3 million members are grocery workers.

How Target handles the new scrutiny will be critical, analysts say.

So far, they say, the union battle in Valley Stream, N.Y., exposed how a still-harsh economy has pushed Target to compete better with Wal-Mart and copy the retailer on all fronts – including wages and benefits.

Over the past year, Target has followed Wal-Mart by shifting more of its workers to part-time, analysts say. Some employees say their hours have been cut from 30 per week to less than 10. Part-timers must bank at least 20 hours a week, on average, to qualify for benefits.

Tashawna Green, 21, who started working at Target’s Valley Stream, N.Y., store a little more than a year ago, said she voted in favor of organizing because her weekly hours have been cut from 30 to just over 20 in the past year. She recently got an 8-cent raise added to her $8 per hour pay – an increase she says isn’t satisfactory.

“I can’t live off this,” said Green, who has a 6-year old daughter and lives with her aunt in Queens. “We’re just looking for more respect.”

When addressing workers’ concerns, analysts say Target should look closely at what worked – and didn’t work – for Wal-Mart. They say one of the biggest mistakes Wal-Mart made was to not respond quickly enough.

Schroeder, the Mintz Levin labor attorney, says Target should get ahead of the attacks by making sure managers are sensitive to workers’ needs.

It also should hone a message that’s conciliatory, not arrogant, he says, and communicate better with workers.

“You have to think how you’re going to change,” he says. “If you don’t change, it will come back to you.”

Read more here.

Teamsters at an Anheuser-Busch InBev distributor in Ohio are threatening to walk off the job after contract negotiations broke down.

The union is accusing Heidelberg Distributing Co. , which handles a variety of beers made by Anheuser-Busch InBev (NYSE:BUD), including Budweiser beers, of breaking off negotiations and implementing a wide range of changes, including eliminating retiree health-care benefits for longtime employees.

“Coca-Cola, Miller and Pepsi are willing to pay their employees the industry standard for the beverage market and provide them with decent benefits,” Varney Richmond, president of Teamsters Local 957, said in a statement. “Budweiser’s distributor needs to stop being greedy and step up to the plate.”

The union, which represents more than 100 workers at Heidelberg, alleges the company wants to force its employees to work up to seven days a week, eliminate retiree health care for longtime employees and take away employees right to take unpaid leave for family medical emergencies.

Heidelberg officials could not immediately be reached for comment.

Anheuser-Busch InBev of Belgium, the world's largest brewer, owns St. Louis-based Anheuser-Busch.