 |
|
|
|||||
Tyson Foods has agreed to stop making claims about reaching net zero or selling climate-smart beef for at least five years, part of a settlement from a lawsuit brought against it by the nonprofit Environmental Working Group (EWG). EWG sued Tyson in 2024 over false or misleading marketing claims. The lawsuit, filed in D.C. Superior Court, alleged that Tyson misled customers through materials that said the companys industrial meat production operations will reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, and also claims that it produces climate-smart beef. Beef is one of the worst climate offenders when it comes to proteins. It is responsible for eight to 10 times the carbon emissions as chicken and up to 50 times those of beans. Climate experts highlight beefs immense land and water use, deforestation, and the methane emissions from cattle as top environmental impacts. In the United States, agriculture at large accounts for about 10% of greenhouse gas emissions. About half of that comes from livestock, with cattle specifically making up 35% of agriculture emissions. “No plan” to achieve net zero goals In 2023, Tyson launched a Climate-Smart Beef Program.” It advertised that its Brazen Beef products were part of that program, and that they came from animals raised with emissions reduction practices in mind, per the lawsuit. On its Brazen Beef website, Tyson had said that its emissions were already down 10% (the website is no longer available). But EWG says that Tyson never defined what exactly climate-smart beef is, what baseline it is using for comparison, or how it is measuring any alleged [greenhouse gass] reductions, the lawsuit reads. The lawsuit also alleged that Tyson has no plan to achieve its net zero goals. In the settlement, announced this week, Tyson agreed to no longer make those environmental claims for five years. Tyson also cannot introduce new environmental claims unless they are supported by expert analysis and verified facts, per the nonprofit. The five-year restriction is meaningful because it prevents Tyson from turning around and re-introducing these claims without doing the hard work to substantiate them, Caroline Leary, general counsel and chief operating officer at EWG, says via email. Five years is a substantial window for a company of Tysons size to either make real, measurable progress on reducing its emissions, or for it to reconsider the accuracy of the claims it makes to consumers, she adds. In a statement, a Tyson spokesperson says the settlement does not represent any admission of wrongdoing by the company. Tyson Foods has a long-held core value to serve as stewards of the land, animals and resources entrusted to our care, the spokesperson added. Spin and bones The Tyson settlement comes in the same month as a separate settlement between the New York attorney generals office and JBS USA, part of the worlds largest meat company. In that settlement, JBS also agreed to stop making unsubstantiated claims about reaching net-zero emissions. JBS USA will also pay $1.1 million for agriculture programs to help New York farmers reduce emissions and become more climate resilient. The settlements highlight both the environmental impact of meat companies and also their intense marketing practices. A 2024 report found that meat and dairy companies are failing to address these impacts, and none have net-zero targets that meet UN standards. The industries spend more on advertising than on climate solutions, the report found. EWG, which was represented by the Animal Legal Defense Fund, Earthjustice, Edelson PC, andFarmSTAND in the suit, called the settlement a significant victory and says it will continue to review climate claims across the meat industry. Our hope is that this settlement raises the bar for the entire industry, and that companies like Tyson will take a fresh look at what substantiation actually requires, Leary says. If Tyson or any other company chooses to resume climate claims without the evidence to back them up, we will be prepared to take appropriate action. Consumers deserve truth in advertising, now and in the future.
Category:
E-Commerce
Starting a new job can be exhilarating and stressful at the same time. You are excited to meet new people, take on new responsibilities, and grow. You also want to demonstrate to your new employer that they made the right choice by hiring you. So, how do you put your best foot forward? Perhaps the most important thing to remember about that impression is that how you do things is more important than what you accomplish in those first few weeks. You are helping your new colleagues to get to know what it is like to work with you. This approach is valuable whether youre entering the organization near the bottom or the top of the org chart. Listen first When you first start with a new company, you dont know what you dont know. Even if you have lots of experience in similar industries, you are still entering an organization with its own history, people, and ways of doing things. In addition, you are stepping into conversations that have been going on for a long time. Of course, youre going to want to immediately demonstrate your value to others, and it will seem like the best way to do that is to make suggestions. Start by listening: How do people talk to each other? What is the best way to build on other peoples ideas? Which people in the organization have the respect of others? Who seems to have influence in meetings and behind the scenes? The best way to answer all of these questions is to listen. When you go into meetings with the intent to impress and say things, then you listen long enough to figure out what youre going to say next. When you enter meetings to learn, then you listen a lot and miss less of the subtlety of the discussion going on around you. Be curious When you get hired, you want other people to respect the knowledge and skills youre bringing to your new team. As a result, you may not want to admit ignorance. Instead, you should be a sponge. Assume you know very little and that you are there to learn from others rather than to spread your knowledge and wisdom. Ask a lot of questions of other people. When you hear a phrase or acronym that is new to you, stop the conversation and ask for clarification. When someone moves forward with a particular plan or a decision gets made, ask why it was done? Clarify that youre asking why to understand the criteria and values people are using to reach decisions. Ask your new team members whether there are documents you can read to understand how current projects have reached the point where they are. Attend as many briefings on projects as you can. Monitor communication channels like Slack to see how projects get discussed. Admit mistakes Of course, youre going to make mistakes. That is inevitable. It is particularly likely early on. Youre going to misunderstand an instruction, or try something and get it wrong. That doesnt mean you should blunder about. If you are asked to do something and youre not completely sure you understand the request, get clarification. It is better to be walked through the steps of a new task than to move forward with it and do it badly so that you or someone else has to redo it. No matter how carefully you clarify, though, youll do some things wrong. It is crucial that you tell a supervisor or other colleague as soon as you recognize that you have made a mistake. Ask for help and find out what you can do to correct any problems that arise. You might think that admitting a mistake will immediately tag you as someone who is not trustworthy. The paradox is that when you admit a mistake quickly, you are letting the people around you know that you are paying attention to the outcomes of your actions and that you are going to let others know as soon as something goes wrong. As a result, admitting mistakes quickly is likely to gain you trustas long as you dont make the same mistakes repeatedly. Be trainable and correctable When you first start in a new role, you probably feel a little apprehensive. You want to prove that you belong. When someone offers you some information or advice, you might want to demonstrate your prowess by telling others when you already know something you have been told. Resist that urge. Instead, thank people for the advice they give and for taking you under their wing. You want everyone around you to know that you can be taught and trained. Even new executives have a lot to learn. Youd like everyone in the organization to feel like they have a vested interest and a role to play in your success. In addition, if youre in a leadership role, you should also clarify to everyone that you dont want their deference. You are likely to say things that reflect that you are new to the organization (and have blind spots). Encourage people to correct things you say that are wrong and to push back on ideas they disagree with. Start early to create an atmosphere of productive disagreement and constructive criticism. If someone does offer you a critique of a position, accept it gracefully even if you disagree with it. Thank them for the feedback and take it seriously, even if you still think what you said originally is correct. After all, people are watching what you do as a guide toward how to treat you. If you dismiss well-intentioned feedback, you will probably dissuade other people from offering suggestions in the future.
Category:
E-Commerce
The flight disruptions during the record government shutdown that ended last week inspired a rare act of bipartisanship in Washington on Tuesday, when congressional representatives from both parties introduced legislation that would allow air traffic controllers to get paid during future shutdowns. The bill proposes funding salaries, operating expenses, and other Federal Aviation Administration programs by tapping into a little-used fund with $2.6 billion that was created to reimburse airlines if the government commandeers their planes and they are damaged. The bill’s sponsors, which include four of the top Republicans and Democrats on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, hope that relying on the fund might make their bill more attractive than other proposals because it would limit the potential cost of doling out paychecks. U.S. Rep. Sam Graves of Missouri, the GOP chairman of the committee, said in a statement that the bill would help keep the traveling public safe during future shutdowns. The other sponsors include Democratic U.S. Reps. Rick Larsen of Washington and Andre Carson of Indiana, along with Republican U.S. Rep. Troy Nehls of Texas, who leads the aviation subcommittee. We all saw that the system can be vulnerable when Congress cant get its job done, Graves said. This bill guarantees that controllers, who have one of the most high-pressure jobs in the nation, will get paid during any future funding lapses and that air traffic control, aviation safety, and the traveling public will never again be negatively impacted by shutdowns. The bills introduction comes ahead of a scheduled hearing Wednesday by a Senate subcommittee to examine the impacts of the 43-day shutdown on aviation. But it’s not clear whether this bill or any similar proposals that have been floating around Congress since the 2019 shutdown will have a chance to get approved before the next government funding deadline at the end of January. Nearly all the other proposals, including one from U.S. Sen. Jerry Moran of Kansas, would rely on the aviation trust fund that collects money from fees the airlines pay, and the Congressional Budget Office has given those bills a much higher price tag. Fixes have been proposed, but none approved Over the years, lawmakers have tried a handful of fixes for a long-term solution to keep air traffic controllers and other essential aviation workers paid during funding lapses. The proposals often gained bipartisan attention, especially after the 35-day shutdown that ended in 2019 during President Donald Trumps first term, but none made it over the finish line. Moran’s bill, known as the Aviation Funding Stability Act, for example, is a recurring proposal in Congress that would allow the FAA to tap into the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. Lawmakers in both chambers have reintroduced versions of it over the years, including in 2019 and 2021. The legislation resurfaced in March when Moran, the Republican chairman of the Senate subcommittee on Aviation, Space, and Innovation, put it forward. It came up again in September, weeks before the shutdown began, when Carson and U.S. Rep. Steve Cohen, also a Democrat, introduced it in the House. The new bill introduced Tuesday would cut off the money if the insurance fund dips below $1 billion. But Transportation Committee staffers estimate that would still provide enough funding to keep FAA operating for four to six weeks. Air traffic controllers stretched thin during shutdown The issue gets so much attention because of all the flight delays and cancellations that happen during a shutdown as more air traffic controllers call out of work. The existing shortage of controllers is so severe that just a few absences in an airport tower or other FAA radar facilities can cause problems. The controllers and the FAA technicians who maintain the equipment they rely on are expected to continue working without pay during a shutdown to keep flights operating. But as the shutdown dragged on this fall, more controllers began calling out of work, citing the financial pressures and the need to take on side jobs. The delays got so bad during the latest shutdown that the government ordered airlines to cut some of their flights at 40 busy airports nationwide, in what the FAA said was an unprecedented but necessary move to relieve pressure on the system and controllers. Thousands of flights were canceled before the FAA lifted the order entirely and airlines were able to resume normal operations Monday. Why the insurance fund was created The fund that the bill introduced Tuesday would use was created years ago to pay for claims an airline might file if the government uses one of its planes for a military operation or other use. But that’s not common anymore. The last time a claim was made was after Americas withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021. The fund has continued to grow as it collects interest. For a time, it was also used for an insurance fund at a time when airlines were having trouble getting any insurance coverage after 9/11. For years, airlines paid into the fund regularly to get coverage from the government. But by the early 2010s, the insurance market for airlines had stabilized. Congress let the insurance program expire at the end of 2014. Josh Funk and Rio Yamat, AP transportation and airlines writers
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||