Coca

Coca-Cola: Diversity Essay Analysis of an Organization: Traci Jancasz June 15, 2010 MGT 540: Diversity Professor Venecia Morris Graduate School of Management Table of Contents Introduction3 Racial Discrimination Issues3 â€Å"Quota Cola† Case3 Cincinnati Case4 Hawaii Case4 Coca-Cola Company Reaction to Lawsuits5 Analysis of Coca-Cola Diversity Initiatives8 Works Cited10 - Introduction In order for any organization to flourish, there must be inclusion of cultural diversity throughout. In saying that, the management of diversity in an organization is a direct reflection of realizing, accepting, and acknowledging differences, whether it is based upon race, ethnicity, age, etc. The following report will focus on the diversity issue of racial discrimination that the Coca Cola organization has been dealing with for a great deal of time. There will be evidence analyzed of several cases dealing this issue for the past ten years. In addition, the analysis will go one step further by referencing the various programs that have been adapted, in order to deal with the diversity issues, as well as what the organization can and should be done to avoid future problems. - Racial Discrimination Issues Although the Coca-Cola Company has had a long-standing reputation for its diversity programs, there have been several discrimination cases that have been filed against the organization within the last decade. Even though in some of the cases filed, the organization is denying the charges, it still must react to the allegations in order to comply with opinions from both internal and external stakeholders. In all the cases that will be mentioned, management is accused of underpaying, creating hostile work environment, and general discrimination regarding whistle blowing. â€Å"Quota Cola† Case The case brought forth in 1999 and settled in 2000, set the stage for a great deal of changes to be made in the Coca-Cola Company. Four black, dissatisfied employees filed a racial discrimination lawsuit based upon charges of Coca-Cola underpaying them since they were black and creating a hostile work environment. This case ended up becoming a class-action lawsuit that was settled out of court. More commonly known as, â€Å"Quota Cola Case†, it opened the flood gates for many more cases of racial discrimination allegations to be brought against Coca-Cola. The settlement for this case, with all additional fees totaled a little over $475 million, which covered all â€Å"salaried blacks employed by the organization in the U. S. rom April 22, 1995 to June 14, 2000. † The settlement and fees not only included the salaried employees, but also donations to such organizations as: NCAA (national effort and Atlanta Coke Bottler), Minority Suppliers and Contractors, Coke pension funds, and other minority activism and non-profits (Things Go Better with Quotas? Case 26: Quota Cola! , 2002). Even though there wa s a great deal of changes that Coke went through as a result of the previous case, which will be discussed later, there have been two other cases revolving around racial discrimination. Both cases are currently still on-going in the court system. Cincinnati Case Another class-action lawsuit was filed in October of 2001 by a group of approximately 1,000 African-Americans that worked for the company since 1995. The allegations of the case accuse Coke of â€Å"creating a hostile, intimidating, offensive and abusive workplace environment for its African-American employees. † Claims stated that supervisors allowed white employees to both physically and mentally abuse minority employees, minorities (including Asians and Native Americans) were disciplined more sternly than white employees, and were denied overtime and promotional opportunities. A spokeswoman for Coca-Cola made a generic statement in response to the accusations, stating that the organization â€Å"does not tolerate discrimination of any kind† and that if there are any allegations, it is taken seriously and dealt with quickly. On the other hand, Kevin Johnson, African-American and former HR manager (appointed after the first lawsuit), had some insights into the organization that was stated in a memorandum regarding the evaluation of race relations at the plant. He notes that there is a â€Å"very apparent need for education in the area of racism, diversity and fundamental training for supervisors and key roles in the organization. † Additionally, Johnson explained the workers as being â€Å"tense† due to â€Å"disparate treatment† to minorities. The judge that awarded the case to become a class-action lawsuit informed the plaintiffs that they will have to seek monetary compensation separately (Lovel, 2003). Hawaii Case Most recently, in early 2009, two former Coca-Cola employees filed suit against the company. Both of Asian ancestry, the plaintiff’s claimed that they had been fired for whistle-blowing on an executive that was pressuring employees for positive reviews, in order to receive increased bonuses. Months after a complaint was filed with the organization’s hotline the two men were terminated from their long-standing positions. There was an attempt of their part to communicate with the vice president of HR, but their efforts were not reciprocated. Harrison Bergeron EssayRacial discrimination is most commonly thought of a superior race dominating and even holding back the progress of another race. In the business world, this is usually thought of as white managers being in the superior role and minorities (blacks, Hispanics, Asians, etc. ) being the latter. The Civil Rights Act of 1964, prohibits discrimination in education, housing, public accommodations, and employment. Since its inception, organizations have attempted to find the right diversity methods that not only comply with regulations, but also meld with the company culture/environment. There are various paradigms or approaches that organizational leaders have developed and implemented that allow for organizations to manage diversity. In relationship to the cases, there are two such paradigms that should have been followed by Coke. The first is the Discrimination-and-Fairness Paradigm, which â€Å"makes efforts to recruit and, to some extent, to retain diverse employees, but treats all people within a given social demographic category as the same. There are issues that go along with following this paradigm, which include that the company may not have a developed strategy for diversity management and it may leave minorities without a true voice in the company. The notable paradigm is the Access-and Legitimacy Paradigm, which companies â€Å"accept and celebrate differences so they can better serve their diverse pool of customers† (Sondak, 2011). In reading the cases and has reacted, thus far, it appears that they have transitioned from utilizing the Discrimin ation-and-Fairness Paradigm to the Access-and Legitimacy Paradigm. There is a possibility that the organization could have avoided many of the discrimination lawsuits by reinforcing the tactics of the Access-and Legitimacy Paradigm. The company was in great need of revamping their policies and procedures in diversity and the â€Å"Quota Cola† suit made them take those drastic actions. Although these changes were necessary for continued success of the organization, it is difficult to praise the organization for changes that they were forced into. The cases all mentioned that there were issues with management’s treatment towards minorities, i. e. ostile work environment. Even though the programs, procedures and committees are established at the corporate level, the real diversity issues are happening in the plants. There is no mention in any of the literature researched that Coke does any follow-up with their plant managers to evaluate the progress of diversity initiatives. In addition, since the first case had such a large out of court settlement, this quite possibly opened the flood gates for other such cases to be filed. What is it Coke’s best interest in the long-run to not have their day in court? Some might say no. The changes that Coke has made in regards to diversity in the workplace have been significant to the organization. This is reflected in the many awards and recognitions the company has received. In order to continue success with diversity, it is important that Coke is constantly evaluating not only corporate policy, but also that the policies are being implemented appropriately. As previously stated, the lawsuits were all stemming from issues with management from the plants. These managers are a direct reflection of the organization and should have random diversity evaluations on a regular basis. This type of step will only add to the already company diversity strategy of being a model for all other top Fortune 500 companies. - Works Cited Coca-Cola Staff. (2009). Public Issues And Divesity Review Committee Charter. Retrieved June 15, 2010, from The Coca-Cola Company: www. thecoca-colacompany. com/investors/governance/public. html F. Dobbin, A. K. (2007). Diversity Management in Corporate America. American Sociological Association , pp. 21-27. Johnston, L. (2006, August 25). Coca-Cola doubles diversity efforts. Retrieved June 15, 2010, from Atlanta Business Chronicle: www. atlanta. bizjournals. com/atlanta/stories/2006/08/28/focus4. html? tt=printable Lovel, J. (2003, May 2). Race Discrimination Suit Targets Coke Bottler CCE. Retrieved June 13, 2010, from Atlanta Business Chronicle: www. atlant. bizjournals. com/atlanta/stories/2003/05/05/story1. html Magin, J. (2009, February 20). Ex-Hawaii Workers Sue Coca-Cola for Discrimination. Retrieved June 15, 2010, from Pacific Business News: www. atlantabizjournals. com/pacific/stories/2009/02/23/story5. tml Our Progress. (2009). Retrieved June 15, 2010, from Coca-Cola: http://www. thecoca-colacompany. com/citizenship/our_progress. html Sondak, K. c. (2011). Opportunities and Challenges of Workplace Diversity. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education, Inc. Staff. (2009). No. 17: The Coca-Cola Co. . Retrieved June 14, 2010, from Diversity Inc. : www. diversityinc. com/article/7278/No-17-The-CocaCola-Co Things Go Better with Quotas? Case 26: Quota Cola ! (2002). Retrieved June 13, 2010, from Adversity. Net: www. adversity. net/c26_quota-cola_1. htm