Tell MEC to Stop Supporting Israeli Apartheid!

Thanks for this LT. Is there anyway to vote in absentia if you can't make the meeting?

Left Turn, thanks so much for posting about this, including the summary of the results.

I'm a member of MEC but don't spend more than $50 a year there, usually on gift certificates for friends. I don't think they'll miss my financial input, but I will spread the word about this to people I know in Toronto.

One thing I'm confused about is who directed the staff and board members to vote against the motion? I thought as a co-op that there isn't a CEO or anything like that. 

It would be great if the BIAC could do some education, and I think they will need to start with whoever gave that directive to the paid staff/board members.

I work for MEC.  I'm the Director of Ethical Sourcing.  

MEC did not REQUIRE it's staff to attend the AGM or to vote against the boycott.  MEC did ENCOURAGE its staff to attend and to vote.  At no time did anyone on MEC's behalf dictate how I should vote nor did I witness or hear of any similiar attempts with my coworkers.  

I would not be surprised if a few of my coworkers supported the boycott and chose not to vote according to their convictions because of the implicit pressure to conform to MEC's corporate position and the need for self preservation.  But then right or wrong "following the herd" is a common phenomena in any organization.   Why would this be any different at MEC.

Bottom line, MEC did not pressure nor require its staff to attend the AGM or vote according to its official position.  And if any of you want to believe otherwise, I got some secret FBI files on who really killed JFK to share (they were found on July 04, 2008 by a Smithsonian archivist in a secret compartment of Hoover's old filing cabinet and was withheld from the public due the tight election and the real fear of another eight years of a right wing demagog).   

 

 

 

nicrosoft wrote:

Imagine if a group of people were actively trying  to remove your livelihood, just because they disagree with Canada's foreign policy. Would it make a bit of difference if you had served in the Canadian Armed Forces at one point in your life? If you had the temerity to be born in Israel (or Austria, Taiwan...), you would have likely done mandatory service anyway, so the gripe that this company was started by former IDF is just spin, and weak spin at that. The very computer and the Internet you are communicating with were made as military technologies, so why don't you boycott those too and stop making claims about things you don't know about and weren't in attendance of.

Palestinians do mandatory service as victims of the IDF for all of their lives. The topic of boycotting computers manufactured with Israeli made Intel chips has been widely discussed. Thanks for reminding me.

Right. For instance, suggesting that someone is a sponsor of "international terrorism" because they hand over aid money to local authorities is speculative at best.

I am curious as to why there is no effort towards a Sri Lankan boycott, due to the way Tamils are treated there.  I won't argue with this effort, people can buy whatever they want, however why only Israel?  The US props up Israel - why not boycott USian products? Saudi Arabia treats women worse than garbage - why not boycott them as well?

I think a better message is to consider where and how every thing one buys is from and made.  Labour standards in Israel are good and I do not hold every citizen there responsible for their policies - likewise wiht the US and my other examples above.  And, NAOT sandals are absolutely the best! Good luck stopping people from buying them :

HWChan wrote:

I work for MEC.  I'm the Director of Ethical Sourcing.  

...

I would not be surprised if a few of my coworkers supported the boycott and chose not to vote according to their convictions because of the implicit pressure to conform to MEC's corporate position and the need for self preservation.  But then right or wrong "following the herd" is a common phenomena in any organization.   Why would this be any different at MEC.

Bottom line, MEC did not pressure nor require its staff to attend the AGM or vote according to its official position.

While MEC may not have formally required their staff to vote against the motion, the corporate entity that is MEC very much applied pressure to that effect, as you state above.

In many respects, MEC has become like many other corporate entities (albeit in a co-operative form).  The focus is placed on labour standards, and all other rights be damned.  I comend MEC for its stance on labour rights, however, ethical sourcing, and corporate social responsibility must be broader than labour standards alone. This is particularly so if MEC actually believes its own words when it says "We believe that consumers have the power and the passion to drive change".

What was demonstrated at the MEC AGM is what transpires in large corporations across the world. When shareholders (in this case co-op members) attempt to instigate rights-based shareholder activism, the powers that be attempt to shut them down at all costs. In this case, the MEC directors are not unlike other corporate executives, and appear to behave in much the same way.

 

Cueball wrote:

Right. For instance, suggesting that someone is a sponsor of "international terrorism" because they hand over aid money to local authorities is speculative at best.

Hamas (whether you like it or not) is not seen as "local authorities". Rather it is designated a terrorist organization by Canada. Therefore, logoically, anyone giving cash to Hamas can legitimately be viewed as sponsoring an international terrorist group.

Hi all.

Left Turn, you should know that your friend misinformed you about more than just MEC staff being instructed and required to vote against the resolution at the AGM, which we were not. Whether or not an MEC employee holds the same beliefs you do on Israel/Palestine, we know that our system of vetting factories and our buycott are effective, powerful tools for bettering the lives of factory employees; in MEC's case, this includes a good number of Palestinian men and women who work in the factories we source from in Israel. 

Also, discounting the nine members of the Board, there were at most 20 MEC staff members present at the AGM. Further, the only staff paid to be there were those working, for instance at the membership table. Also, the Board, though they are allowed to vote, abstained as everyone who was there knows.

In all, the information your friend gave you was very flawed indeed.

Winnifred and others, thanks for reminding us that hearsay just doesn't further or dignify an argument.

 

Winnifred wrote:

Cueball wrote:

Right. For instance, suggesting that someone is a sponsor of "international terrorism" because they hand over aid money to local authorities is speculative at best.

Hamas (whether you like it or not) is not seen as "local authorities". Rather it is designated a terrorist organization by Canada. Therefore, logoically, anyone giving cash to Hamas can legitimately be viewed as sponsoring an international terrorist group.

I can see why you used the fine print. Since when did Canada, Canadians, or its government aquire the right to determine who is or is not the "local authorities", outside of its own jurisdiction? Said elected members of the Palestinian Parliment were members of a "terrorist organization" before they were allowed to run in elections partly sponsored by the Canadian government, and ran openly on that ticket. They were legitimate enough to run candidates in an election process we approved of on the way to becoming the local authorities.

Why? Simply because the election would have appeared completely illigitimate without the participation of the most popular opposition to Fatah. Fatah lost. But its still too late to backtrack now, because any reneging on that premise is a hypocritical denial of the so called "democratic" principles that the "only democracy in the middle east" pretends it upholds. But lets not pretend any longer. It doesn't. And you don't. Zionism is not a shining beacon of "democracy", there, as far as Arabs are concerned, or here, as far as allowing those whose opinions differ from those you hold a platform from which to be heard. It is a sham.

 I looked at the legal definition of terroist organizations used by the Canadian government, and running successful election campaigns is not in the defintion, yet, however much you wish it were so.

Cueball, you simply continue to wear your blinders. No amount of words will change the facts. Hamas is recognized by our government as a terrorist group, end of story.

Whether or not it should be is an entirely different discussion.

 

 

But can't you boycott the Israeli products in the same way you boycott Israeli products in a supermarket without boycotting the supermarket itself? Isn't that how the boycott has been organized so far?

As I said, the promoters of Israeli fascism are well-organized, and able to mount demonstrations which make their dwindling numbers appear more formidable than they are.

Let's see them keep MEC in business all by themselves.

Quote:

But can't you boycott the Israeli products in the same way you boycott Israeli products in a supermarket without boycotting the supermarket itself? Isn't that how the boycott has been organized so far?

 

That addresses the bathwater, but what about the baby?

 

Also, what makes better press: marching around outside MEC with signs that say "MEC = Global Collaborator With Apartheid", or marching around a display of backpacks in aisle 4?

I didn't think snert was trolling. His point makes sense to me.

"promoters of Israeli fascism" Who knew? First, apartheid and now fascism. What's the next epithet?

Aren't words like "oppression" and "violation of human rights" strong enough?

From an historical point of view it's a pretty hard case to make that the Israeli government is fascistic.

Am I unique in characterizing Israel as fascist as of late?

Not unique, just historically anachronistic.

Although you can examine it's origins, fascism was essentially an inter-war phenomenon and wartime phenomenon.

Woolf's European Fascism is a good overview of how it manifested itself differently in diverse European states.

 

 

I think I will look for some summer gear in my MEC catalogue tonight - thank you for the inspiriation

Lard Tunderin Jeezus wrote:

BTW, SSC - that 'anti-Israel group' you spoke of was a group of Canadian Jews expressing their disapproval of Israeli oppression. And they were bullied, threatened, and shouted down. Did you approve?

If they were, indeed, bullied and threatened, then no, of course I don't. Just as I hope you would not "approve" of, for example, pro-Palestinian demosntrators assaulting and harassing people trying to hear Netenyahu give a speech at Concordia. I think it's quite possible to disagree and remain civil or at elast not descened into that kind of shit.

I'm trying to understand the issue here. MEC gets some of its products from Israeli owned companies. And? Do you know that these companies are engaging in unethical behaviour? Are they direct contributors to the oppression of Palestinians? If they were to go out of business and workers lost their jobs (Jews and Palestinians alike, I'd imagine), would the world be a better place? Given what I've heard about MEC's policies with regards to suppliers, they are careful to ensure ethical treatment of workers, environmental stewardship, etc. But buying backpacks from a company based in a country with policies we don't like is unethical? Again, why single out Israel? Would you buy a backpack made in China? Made in America? What's the obsession with israel?

Unlike about 99.99% of retail organizations, MEC has a co-op/membership model that encourages involvement, and provides members opportunities to influence the organization.  But because that didn't result in what you want, now an all-out boycott is "necessary"?  Well, THAT should teach them not to listen to their members, eh?  I mean, what kind of corrupt, Israel-lovin' co-op would go with what the majority of votes support??

Democracy is great, when it gives you what you hope for.