How is boycotting Coca-Cola helping teachers or kids?

I recently came across this article on twitter about AFT banning coca-cola products…..I’m sorry what?

He writes:

Earlier this month, the American Federation of Teachers decided to ban Coca-Cola and Coke products from its events and facilities.  In their never-ending search for groups and companies to demonize, AFT has opted to score cheap political points with their base, instead of turning to a company that is a natural ally and working toward a common purpose.

The teachers union – America’s second largest – is basing this new ban on allegations of human rights violations that were described in a trio of books published nearly a decade ago. AFT has opted to focus on these outdated accusations to create media buzz and promote its own self interests instead of looking at the facts and nurturing a relationship with a company with common interests.

Signs of the common purpose between AFT and Coca-Cola are everywhere. Just look at where the union has spent its money and you will also see significant spending from – you guessed it – Coca-Cola. Among them are the Clinton Global Initiative, the Center for American Progress, and numerous political candidates.

This sounds to me like AFT is continuing to create disarray with those who it should be teamed up with AND creating unnecessary attention for the sake of….getting attention – while not helping to advance the causes of education. Like that time they created an entire media campaign around a magazine cover that really didn’t have anything to do with advancing education? 

Here is Coca-Cola’s rather eloquent response (maybe AFT could learn some PR lessons from Coca-cola):

We have a great deal of respect for the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), its leadership and its work. I have known and worked with them for many years, and I believe their leadership is as committed to their mission as we are to ours.

The AFT resolution pertaining to our company is based on outdated and erroneous allegations that we have repeatedly addressed. So we have initiated a dialogue with their leadership to discuss this resolution. We look forward to continuing that engagement to share the facts about our work and our commitment to respect human rights.

We will reiterate to them our aspiration to be one of the most inclusive companies in the world, where rights are respected and employees are valued. This aspiration is anchored by our foundation of policies, including our Human Rights Policy, Supplier Guiding Principles, and Code of Business Conduct. These policies are designed to ensure both our company and our suppliers meet our high workplace and human rights standards. … (click the link above for the whole response)

…When we meet with AFT leadership, we also will share information about our commitment to the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, which we formally endorsed in 2011, and the work we have done to incorporate these principles into our existing human rights and workplace rights efforts across our entire value chain.

We look forward to further engagement with AFT leadership and continuing to build our valued relationship.

And, tell me again how boycotting coca-cola is helping teachers, or kids?



Is it bashing or good marketing?

I never seem to be able to run out of examples of how inappropriate the language is used against education reformers. I’ve changed this person’s handle to [twitter handle] to protect their identity.

The article I posted was a response to a commentator on an original blog post about how much money unions spent on elections this year. In no way did the blog writer, or myself “bash” unions. See definition below. The writer simply is citing facts of actions that we believe the public has a right to know when considering what they hear and read in the media about education. As I have written before, the constituency of unions is teachers, not the education system or students. And that was confirmed here in this post.


verb \ˈbash\

: to cause or allow (something, such as part of your body) to hit something very hard or forcefully

: to hit (someone or something) very hard or forcefully

: to hurt or damage (something) by hitting or beating

1:  to strike violently :  hit; also :  to injure or damage by striking :  smash —often used with in
2:  to attack physically or verbally

Evidenced here in this post, anti-reformers are constantly on defense and will say and do anything to refuse taking responsibility. If anyone is to blame for “bashing” its the anti-reform movement for continuing to lodge personal attacks and grave insults at others.

So the double standard is that when I write a targeted post to uncover issues I believe to be important, its considered “bashing”, but when anti-reformers personally attack others for their views, its called “good marketing?”

  1. Maggie Paynich@educatinspires  Nov 18

Unions spend time defending their political power instead actively improving public ed  [twitter handle]

  1. [twitter handle Nov 18

@educatinspires Why are you tagging me in this?

  1. Maggie Paynich@educatinspires  Nov 18

[twitter handle] I share education policy commentary that I feel should be shared with people who talk about education on twitter

  1. [twitter handle] Nov 18

.@educatinspires Feel free to share education policy commentary with me. Union bashing’s not policy analysis, so please spare me those links

  1. Maggie Paynich@educatinspires  Nov 18

So when unions attack others personally it’s called good marketing? But when we point out the behavior its called bashing? [twitter handle]