CCRcorp Sites  

The CCRcorp Network unlocks access to a world of insights, research, guides and information in a range of specialty areas.

Our Sites

TheCorporateCounsel

TheCorporateCounsel.net

A basis for research and practical guidance focusing on federal securities laws, compliance & corporate governance.

DealLawyers

DealLawyers.com

An educational service that provides practical guidance on legal issues involving public and private mergers & acquisitions, joint ventures, private equity – and much more.

CompensationStandards

CompensationStandards.com

The “one stop” resource for information about responsible executive compensation practices & disclosure.

Section16.net

Section16.net

Widely recognized as the premier online research platform providing practical guidance on issues involving Section 16 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and all of its related rules.

PracticalESG

PracticalESG.com

Keeping you in-the-know on environmental, social and governance developments

A new class action lawsuit filed in the US District Court for the District of Columbia alleges that Starbucks was complicit in forced labor and human rights violations on plantations in Brazil. The Complaint argues that Starbucks’ tier 1 supplier Cooxupé is at the center of numerous human rights violations on coffee plantations. The plaintiffs attempt to show a pattern of labor abuses by Cooxupé member farms to establish that Starbucks knew or should have known that forced labor exists in its supply chain:

“For almost a decade, Starbucks has been called out by news reporters and consumers for human rights abuses taking place in its product supply chain, especially in Brazil where Starbucks maintains a major presence. Cooxupé, Starbucks’ main Tier 1 supplier in Brazil, is regularly cited for trafficking and forced labor violations, including having several farms on Brazil’s ‘Dirty List,’ which is widely publicized, yet, Starbucks has continued to receive its products from those sources.”

This case is very similar to the Bumble Bee Foods lawsuit I wrote about previously. Both detail cases of workers being whisked away to remote locations by recruiters who promise decent wages and adequate working conditions, only to find themselves stranded in slavery conditions and subject to abuse. Both also use the Trafficking Victims Protection Act as the basis for their claims. One primary difference is that, unlike Bumble Bee, Starbucks has long positioned itself as proactively fighting forced labor in its supply chain through its Coffee and Farmer Equity (C.A.F.E.) program. The complaint argues that the C.A.F.E. program is inadequate and that various abuses have continued despite the program. We’ll see how Starbucks responds and what facts come out as the litigation progresses.

Our members can learn more about human rights and supply chain issues here.

If you aren’t already subscribed to our complimentary ESG blog, sign up here for daily updates delivered right to you.

DID YOU KNOW … we are much more than just blogs. Check out our range of resources and become a member today.

Photo credit: Sundry Photography – stock.adobe.com

Back to all blogs

The Editor

Zachary Barlow is a licensed attorney. He earned his JD from the University of Mississippi and has a bachelor’s in Public Policy Leadership. He practiced law at a mid-size firm and handled a wide variety of cases. During this time he assisted in overseeing compliance of a public entity and litigated contract disputes, gaining experience both in and outside of the courtroom. Zachary currently assists the PracticalESG.com editorial team by providing research and creating content on a spectrum of ESG… View Profile