Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostsuit  "They see business as a one-*dimensional financial world," said Peter Williams, speaking for members of the ETI including Oxfam and Christian Aid. "It's not what the consumer wants. They don't want the cheapest product if the person at the end of the supply chain is paying the cost."
I thing this person is talking shite. Just look at primark, people just don't want to know the person at the end is suffering, even after they are told they still buy from primark.
Shame really. |
I dunno, after that outrage at Primark's child labour they did start putting up signs and saying they were improving their practices, which was reassuring to some people who'd previously stopped shopping there. They're still not brilliant but people did want to at least be told that things were getting better before they spent their money. I'd say that the public is getting more aware of ethical standards and, whilst it's not a huge factor is many people's shopping choices it
is slowly becoming a bigger issue.
Quote:
|
Boots vehemently denied the decision to pull out was linked to being owned by an aggressive private equity firm. "Our decision not to renew our ETI membership is not connected in any way to the ownership of the business," it said. "Boots UK was monitoring its suppliers very vigorously before taking up membership of ETI in 2003 and has received a national award for the robustness of our approach in relation to supply-chain verification. Boots UK will be broadening our approach to include many more aspects of sustainability in the future, so our approach will become even more robust."
|
So, if they're committed keeping and even improving their standards,
why did they cancel their membership?
