Some companies are good for animals. Some are bad. Most
are somewhere in
between. As cruelty-free investors, we spend a lot of time examining
those
companies that fall somewhere in between the two extremes, and then we
make
decisions within our own definition of what it means to invest
cruelty-free. The
purpose of this article is to examine our currently listed stocks in
terms of �those
gray areas�. As always, your comments are welcome.
Most mutual funds and portfolio managers that screen
investments for ethical
issues look for companies that, IN THE COURSE OF BUSINESS, meet their
criteria. Is that sufficient?
If a company behaves in an animal-friendly manner during
the business day, so
to speak, does it matter what its employees and owners do after work?
What if
they show up at pigeon hunts, or wear fur coats in public? Most everyone
wears
leather shoes to work, even at the so-called cruelty free companies. And
they�re
not all vegans and their cafeterias serve meat. Is the cafeteria
considered �in the
course of business?�
When we invest in an ethical manner, we seek to either
not benefit from cruelty
(avoidance), invest in alternatives (encouragement), or invest in
unethical
companies for the express purpose of changing them from within
(activism). Is
an examination of after-work activities relevant to any of these goals?
Absolutely!
Avoidance. If we�re uncomfortable investing in an
unethical company, then we�re
probably uncomfortable with unethical people as our business partners.
Since
company executives are those partners, it seems reasonable to avoid
companies
whose executives are seen in public wearing fur coats or attending such
anti-
animal events as pigeon hunts -- or hunts in general.
Encouragement. If we�re seeking companies that are
working for a more
animal-friendly world, then presumably we have some faith that company
executives share our ethical concerns. If we find, for example, that an
avid
supporter of alternatives to animal testing, turns out to be an equally
avid hunter,
or that the president of a vegan food company is a major shareholder in
a fast-
food company, then we have to question their commitment to the cause,
don�t
we?
Activism. The activist is buying stock in an
acknowledged offender in the hopes
of changing them for the better. The offensive �after hours� practices
is not of
interest to the activist -- unless they attempt to change that practice
too. When
they buy the stock, they know what they�re dealing with. Sometimes the
more
egregious the offense, the more attractive the stock.
So, is it sufficient to restrict our selection criteria
to only those companies that
�behave well� in the normal course of business? No it seems
insufficient. Those
who want to avoid companies that harm animals will probably also want to
avoid
partnering with out-of-hours offenders. Those who want to own stocks in
companies that benefit animals would probably also find good reason to
avoid
such stocks as well. Only the activist, who seeks to change, would buy
stock
in companies with bad �after hours� records. Everyone else should
consider these
activities as they would any other business practice. Since we can�t
verify every
internal decision, isn�t it key that we invest in companies with
�enlightened�
management, so we can trust their judgment?
We�ve yet to find a perfectly ethical investment that is
acceptable to all investors.
It�s up to each of us to understand the gray areas and then invest
within our own
ethical guidelines. If you have any comments on this or any other issue,
please
send e-mail ([email protected]) or write us at our new mailing address
11654 Plaza America Drive, #627, Reston, Virginia, 20190, USA
David A. Kodner (MPA, CFS)
Editor and Publisher
Cruelty Free Investment News
11654 Plaza America #627
Reston, Virginia 20190 USA
[email protected]
Go on to Vegetarian
Summerfest '99
Return to 23 June 1999 Issue
Return to Newsletters
** Fair Use Notice**
This document may contain copyrighted material, use of which has not been
specifically authorized by the copyright owners. I believe that this
not-for-profit, educational use on the Web constitutes a fair use of the
copyrighted material (as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law). If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your
own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner.