Comments on: 2007 World’s Most Ethical Companies

By: Joy

Joy — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 17:21:09 +0000

Wachovia is the top unethical mortgage company & the government doesn’t seem to want to do anything about it.

By: nolan

nolan — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 15:30:31 +0000

lalws… u guys are lik hell a funny… make me laff loadz

By: Rich

Rich — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 02:26:55 +0000

WAAAA WAAAA WAAAA whining bunch of women!

By: Michael

Michael — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 19:14:18 +0000

General Electric is not an ethical business. From their pollution of the
Hudson River, to pay offs of Civil Engineers to avoid the multi-billion
dollar clean up, to the Pittsfield Maine PCB contamination which lead to them “buying” and being the ONLY owner of a building in a certain Industrial Park, to firing people with drug and alcohol addictions that utilized their “Benefits” >>>>>and it goes on and on. I have seen the mark up of their products. It is simply sick. I personally made a part which in any average shop, that could make the same exact part, would cost maybe 400$, GE’s price, are you ready…$4,400!!!!!!!!! Sick
They talk the talk but don’t you know the rest…….. Everything is a fake facade. Sick, Sick,Sick
And for any of the people who may have a connection to their Power Generating equipment, I sincerely pity you. Shop around.

By: Lyle Austin

Lyle Austin — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 18:00:31 +0000

John Deere Landscapes layed me off in the middle of workmans comp case. Any others out there?

By: Blake

Blake — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 16:50:30 +0000

Yeah right Dunavant enterprises? Oh what about all those employees that just got laid off? My father worked for them for 30 years and they put him out on his ass is a hurry. Ethical, huh?

By: Joe D.

Joe D. — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 15:44:20 +0000

This is the most horrible and inaccurate piece of research I have seen in the ethical realm. I’m appalled. And I have no words. Wow.

By: Joe D.

Joe D. — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 15:43:06 +0000

I am absolutely appalled at this feature…this list is extremely inaccurate. I have no words for how wrong it is. Wow.

By: manoj

manoj — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 23:08:31 +0000

hmm. i see some major tobacco companies missing here that will go right up there with Nike and Shell.

By: johnny hollywood

johnny hollywood — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 00:44:48 +0000

Kelloggs? Ethical?
Based on most of the other comments, your rankings have little to do with ethics. Kelloggs’ has embarked on a anti-worker agenda that their founder would be ashamed of. From simply eliminating retiree’s health insurance to unfair labor practices and demanding unequal compensation for the same work,W. K. is rolling over in his grave.

By: Justin

Justin — Sun, 25 May 2008 23:21:26 +0000

You are kidding right?
Alcoa? Nike?
Who bought you out?

By: Philip Childs

Philip Childs — Tue, 20 May 2008 14:46:24 +0000

Let me invite you to a Tyson Foods poultry farm where you can examine 20 years of their non-negotiable contracts and view photographs of their conduct on our farms. Real ethics is determined by what you do when no one is watching, not by what is done on the public stage.

By: Chris Chaplin

Chris Chaplin — Fri, 16 May 2008 04:59:56 +0000

I was so excited to find what seemed like a reputable list of “ethical” companies – till I read who was on the list! Royal Dutch/Shell? I think the relatives of murdered Nigerians might dispute that. Kellog? They topped the ethical OFFENDERS list published by the Consumers International World Congress in 2007. Nike? Sweatshops – need I say more? GE? Where do we start – nuclear weapons (http://www.newday.com/films/DeadlyDeception.html), or preying on the vulnerable with GE Money’s low doc loans? Alcoa? Deplorable polluters.
Your “ethical” assessment is so bad, it’s actually deceptive. You’re either utterly disconnected from what real “ethics” means, or you’re a cleverly-disguised front for transnational greenwash.

By: ethicist

ethicist — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 19:14:28 +0000

It is unfortunate that many of the critics of Wegman’s, Alcoa, GE, Nike and the like simply do not seem capable of balancing the needs of the world’s economies with business realities. No one company will weather a perfect storm of economic performance pressures from stakeholders, and societal needs and interests. It is impossible to cite all the factors that weigh in to the decisions being made, but one thing is clear: one man’s trash is another’s treasure, and it’s how you can turn adverse business conditions into good social impact that really counts. I think that Ethisphere has done a remarkable job in sorting through the trash to find the treasures in a huge heap of self promotion, recognizing them for what they are. While I don’t condone sweatshops, or environmental irresponsibility, those organizations that go beyond the local legal minimums to ensure localized positive social impact should be recognized. Flawed methodology? Maybe. But to err is human.

By: Ellis Jones

Ellis Jones — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 00:28:39 +0000

I have to say, while I’m not a big fan of the research itself, the fact that you allow for this running commentary by online readers really says a lot about your integrity, or at the very least, you’re willingness to receive open comments, critiques, and feedback. I really appreciate this aspect of your work and hope you continue to provide this kind of discussion venue with your upcoming rankings. It makes for some thought-provoking material.

By: Bobc

Bobc — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 16:15:04 +0000

You guys are a bunch of mean people that dont know how to be peace bulider

By: Malayna

Malayna — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 17:54:16 +0000

I’ve been working on the Garments Without Guilt campaign, and from all of my research, I absolutely agree with your inclusion of Nike and Gap in your apparel section. Thought Gap continues to find instances where their suppliers have tried to cut corners, I truly believe that they do their best to avoid incidents and make changes when they’re brought to their attention. This is why it’s so important for consumers and the media to continue these discussions–it makes a difference! Go to http://www.garmentswithoutguilt.com to find out more and help support those companies that care enough to change the way they do business. Thanks!

By: A Vegan

A Vegan — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 16:20:07 +0000

Wegmans? Ethical? I had to check to make sure you didn’t have “Un-” in the title.
Wegmans raised chickens in battery cages. See http://www.wegmanscruelty.com. When they got too much criticism for the cruelty after an activist filmed the atrocities, they sold it to someone else who still sells them the eggs, and Wegmans still support battery cages. So it’s only a “convenience” that they no longer “own” the facility and can be declared “ethical”. By the way, Wayne County Probation had recommended only community service for the filmmaker, but he was handed the maximum sentence for his misdemeanor charges because the Wegmans insisted. As for Wegmans’ cattle – animal agriculture is bad for the environment, it aggravates global hunger, it brutalizes animals and compromises our health. The number one source of methane worldwide is animal agriculture. Methane is responsible for nearly as much global warming as all other non-CO2 greenhouse gases put together.

What next? Maybe McDonald’s, or Exxon Mobil? Perhaps De Beers …

By: Bradley Hallihan

Bradley Hallihan — Sun, 02 Mar 2008 04:27:04 +0000

Your naming Baxter makes me question your research.

By: GregR

GregR — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 17:33:24 +0000

Interesting to see Google on here. Seems in conflict with the results of a report from Privacy International that named Google at the bottom of the barrel and described them as being “hostile to privacy”. Doesn’t sound too ethical to me… (details for those interested: privacyinternational.org)

By: J

Sat, 05 Jan 2008 15:51:50 +0000

If you work on the premise that only multinationals, which is what this list seems to be comprised of, were considered for the “Worlds Most Ethical Companies” then maybe their picks make sense. Hate to generalize, but having worked in an international acccounting firm and currently working at one of the largest insurance companies in the world, I can say with confidence that ethics initiatives in large corporations are implemented only to the extent necessary for Executive Management to tell everyone they are “serious about ethics”. So, on a scale of 1 to 10 (10 being the highest rating), maybe the winners listed above WERE the outstanding companies with solid ratings of 2. My friends, we live in bad times.

By: arek

arek — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 19:15:51 +0000

Living out environment out of the ehtical cryterior means this is not trully ethical list! It some kind of promotion for big guys buy big guys companies. Am not taking any of this seriously!

Peace

Arek

By: anna g

anna g — Sat, 03 Nov 2007 13:24:01 +0000

please send me a list of the companies included in your research, and details on the winners of the “apparel” section.

or a link to where i can find all the information on the web

thank you

By: Richard

Richard — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 05:21:27 +0000

To me ethical is ethical if you are not ethical for all things then clearly you are not ethical. Looking at these comments it seem that this is a PR stunt that has no postion in ethics. Cant you here the expression of upset these comments pose. clearly your research is flawed.

By: Ethisphere.com

Ethisphere.com — Mon, 24 Sep 2007 22:28:32 +0000

Official Ethisphere Response to Mitch Gold:

The substance of your thinking about ethics is clearly faulty. Those identifying global standards to achieve Sustainability, and Corporate Social Responsibility encourage the use of Triple Bottom Line Accounting (as a minimum) and generally includes the aspects of the Four Eâ€™s = Economics, Energy (efficiency), Ethics (Equity), and Education. Your models do not consider the MDGâ€™s, the UN Global Compact, or the Earth Charter as principled documents. Where is the ethics in that?

Mitch Gold, homeplanet.org

Ethisphere Response: In actuality, the WME CSR and Citizenship analysis does take into account Triple Bottom Line adoption, GRI Reporting Guidelines use, adherence to ISO14001, SA8000, involvement with the UN Global Compact, World Business Council for Sustainable Development and World Economic Forum. In fact, we go beyond memberships, certifications and the Davos speeches and look into a host of other criteria including environmental protection record, local community involvement, product innovation that contributes to public well-being, supplier diversity and supplier conduct, etc.