Wikipedia

Talk:Conagra Brands/Archive 4

< Talk:Conagra Brands
Latest comment: 1 year ago by RWConagra in topic 2002 E. Coli section cleanup request
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

Environmental issues request

Latest comment: 1 year ago5 comments2 people in discussion

Hi editors, I was looking at the Environmental issues subsection and thought it would be possible to make a few improvements related to accuracy and sourcing. Here's what I was thinking.

−
Conagra has been criticized for its lack of response to global [[climate change]]. A 2006 report by [[Ceres (organization)|Ceres]], a non-profit organization that works to address global climate change and other [[sustainability]] issues, entitled "Corporate Governance and Climate Change: Making the Connection", measures how 100 leading global companies are responding to global warming. Companies in the report were evaluated on a 0 to 100 scale. ConAgra scored a total of 4 points, the lowest of any of the food companies rated. In a 2009 ranking by ''[[Newsweek]]'', ConAgra ranked 342nd out of U.S. 500 largest corporations in terms of overall environmental score.In 2003–2004, ConAgra participated in a [[Minnesota Pollution Control Agency]] voluntary investigation and clean-up program. Through the program, the company cleaned up a property previously used for [[lithium]] ore processing and constructed a new 80,000-square-foot (7,000 m<sup>2</sup>) office/warehouse building. This voluntary program offers "future liability protection". O January 7, 2014, a California Superior Court found that ConAgra and its co-defendants were liable in creating a public nuisance due to lead-based paint the companies sold. Ten local governments in California filed the suit and the court ordered Conagra, [[NL Industries]] and [[Sherwin-Williams]] to pay $1.15 billion to remove or abate the lead in homes located in those cities and counties. Although ConAgra never produced paint, it assumed the liabilities of W. P. Fuller & Co., a San Francisco-based paint producer, through a series of acquisitions. The disposition of ''The People v. ConAgra Grocery Products Company et al.'' in the California sixth Appellate District Court on November 14, 2017, is that <blockquote class="templatequote " >... the judgment is reversed, and the matter is remanded to the trial court with directions to (1) recalculate the amount of the abatement fund to limit it to the amount necessary to cover the cost of remediating pre-1951 homes, and (2) hold an evidentiary hearing regarding the appointment of a suitable receiver. The Plaintiff shall recover its costs on appeal.</blockquote>
+
During the 2000s and 2010s, ConAgra faced further scrutiny for its practices. It received low marks on environmental stewardship from [[Ceres (organization)|Ceres]] and ''[[Newsweek]]'', with the company ranking 342nd of 500 on the latter's inaugural "Green Rankings" list. In 2013, a [[California]] judge ordered ConAgra, along with [[Sherwin-Williams]] and [[NL Industries]], to pay $1.1 billion for the renovation of homes in 10 California counties which had been painted with [[lead paint]] sold by the companies. ConAgra was named a defendant in the suit as it had assumed the liabilities of W.P. Fuller & Co. following a series of mergers; after multiple appeals, the company reached a settlement amount of $305 million in 2019.

When fully rendered, it looks like this:

During the 2000s and 2010s, ConAgra faced further scrutiny for its practices. It received low marks on environmental stewardship from Ceres[8] and Newsweek, with the company ranking 342nd of 500 on the latter's inaugural "Green Rankings" list.[9] In 2013, a California judge ordered ConAgra, along with Sherwin-Williams and NL Industries, to pay $1.1 billion for the renovation of homes in 10 California counties which had been painted with lead paint sold by the companies. ConAgra was named a defendant in the suit as it had assumed the liabilities of W.P. Fuller & Co. following a series of mergers;[10] after multiple appeals, the company reached a settlement amount of $305 million in 2019.[11]

References

  1. ^ "2006 Corporate Governance and Climate Change: Making the Connection". Ceres. March 2006. Retrieved October 1, 2015.
  2. ^ "Green Rankings 2009". Newsweek. September 15, 2009. Retrieved October 1, 2015.
  3. ^ Selected VIC Success Stories Archived June 1, 2007, at the Wayback Machine, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
  4. ^ Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (VIC) Program, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Archived October 10, 2009, at the Wayback Machine
  5. ^ State of California v. Atlantic Richfield Company, Conagra Grocery Products Company, E.I. Du Pont De Nemours and Company, NL Industries, Inc., and the Sherwin-Williams Company (Cal. Super.: Santa Clara County January 7, 2014), Text. Archived April 7, 2014, at the Wayback Machine
  6. ^ "Sherwin, NL, Conagra Lose $1.1 Billion Lead Paint Ruling". Bloomberg Businessweek. December 17, 2013. Retrieved October 1, 2015.
  7. ^ Judge Nathan D. Mihara; Associate Justice Eugene M. Premo; Associate Justice Franklin D. Elia (2017-11-14). "The People v. ConAgra Grocery Products Company et al". California Courts - Appellate Court Case Information. Judicial Council of California. Retrieved 2017-11-19. ...we can accept the inference that defendants' pre-1951 promotions increased the use of lead paint on residential interiors during the period of those promotions...
  8. ^ a b Siegel, Aaron (October 9, 2006). "Study grades companies on environmental efforts; Coal, food products, air transport fare worst". Investment News. Crain Communications. A recent report provided a score card detailing the hits and errors made by 100 of the world's largest corporations on how they have operated in the past and how they likely will operate in the future in a carbon-constrained world. The report from Boston-based Ceres Inc., a coalition of investors, environmental groups and other public-interest organizations, was re-presented in mid-September by Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. of Rockville, Md… The worst performers included Elk Grove Township, Ill.-based UAL Corp., the parent company of United Airlines; ConAgra Foods Inc. of Omaha, Neb.; and Linthicum Heights, Md.-based Foundation Coal Holdings Inc., recording scores of 3, 4 and 5, respectively.
  9. ^ a b Boettcher, Ross (October 8, 2009). "Union Pacific Corp., 3 others get green rankings". The North Platte Telegraph. Four companies with strong Omaha roots failed to plant themselves in the top half of Newsweek's inaugural "Green Rankings" list, indicating they can improve efforts to be sustainable and environmentally friendly but contributing to an important benchmark for future development. TD Ameritrade, Qwest Communications Inc., ConAgra Foods Inc. and Union Pacific Corp. were the only Omaha companies on the list. All ranked in the bottom 250 of 500 companies selected based on revenue, market capitalization and number of employees, even after a corrected calculation of ConAgra's water use bumped the company up 155 spots to No. 342 overall.
  10. ^ a b Rosenblatt, Joel; Kaskey, Jack (December 17, 2013). "Sherwin, NL, ConAgra Lose $1.1 Billion Lead Paint Ruling". Bloomberg News. Retrieved March 24, 2023. Sherwin-Williams Co., NL Industries Inc. and ConAgra Grocery Products LLC were ordered by a judge to pay $1.1 billion to replace or contain lead paint in millions of homes after losing a public-nuisance lawsuit brought by 10 California cities and counties…ConAgra Grocery, a unit of the Omaha, Nebraska-based maker of Pam cooking spray and Chef Boyardee, said it will appeal. The judge found that ConAgra assumed the liabilities of W.P. Fuller & Co. as the result of a series of mergers.
  11. ^ a b Schneyer, Joshua (July 17, 2019). "Paint makers reach $305 mln settlement in California, ending marathon lead poisoning lawsuit". Reuters. Retrieved March 24, 2023.

This request is asking to change quite a few things, so I'll try to break it down a bit here:

  • Significantly trims content related to Ceres. I couldn't find the report cited here and there is a lot of information in the live text that isn't on topic and not necessary according to WP:SUMMARYSTYLE. I did find an outside source talking about the report, so I replaced the citation with that third-party source.
  • Modifies the Newsweek sentence to better fit a new source. Like the Ceres content, I couldn't find the original source, but was able to locate a third-party article that discusses the ranking and added it here.
  • Removes the MPCA clean-up paragraph. I couldn't find a third-party source for this content and it's my understanding that the content should not remain under current sourcing guidelines.
  • Reworks the content related to the W.P. Fuller lawsuit. The content in the live article is not verified by the sources used (the date is wrong, for one thing) and is incomplete. I've reworked the old content, removed the block quote from an intermediary judgment as it is more confusing than helpful to understanding the situation, and added content and a source for the final resolution.

Please let me know what you think! Eventually, I'd like to propose moving this content to the 2000–2015 section. If you're curious about my overall hopes for the section, I did upload a draft and diff here. RWConagra (talk) 14:26, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

You've provided the fully rendered text to be added, but if you could provide the fully rendered text to be removed that would be appreciated, instead of having to hunt and peck the references from the infuriating {{textdiff}} template (which by design, omits references). Thanks so much for your help. Regards,  Spintendo  02:56, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
I think I understand what you're asking for. I'll do my best here!
Old
Conagra has been criticized for its lack of response to global climate change. A 2006 report by Ceres, a non-profit organization that works to address global climate change and other sustainability issues, entitled "Corporate Governance and Climate Change: Making the Connection", measures how 100 leading global companies are responding to global warming. Companies in the report were evaluated on a 0 to 100 scale. ConAgra scored a total of 4 points, the lowest of any of the food companies rated.[1] In a 2009 ranking by Newsweek, ConAgra ranked 342nd out of U.S. 500 largest corporations in terms of overall environmental score.[2]In 2003–2004, ConAgra participated in a Minnesota Pollution Control Agency voluntary investigation and clean-up program. Through the program, the company cleaned up a property previously used for lithium ore processing and constructed a new 80,000-square-foot (7,000 m2) office/warehouse building.[3] This voluntary program offers "future liability protection".[4] O January 7, 2014, a California Superior Court found that ConAgra and its co-defendants were liable in creating a public nuisance due to lead-based paint the companies sold. Ten local governments in California filed the suit and the court ordered Conagra, NL Industries and Sherwin-Williams to pay $1.15 billion to remove or abate the lead in homes located in those cities and counties.[5] Although ConAgra never produced paint, it assumed the liabilities of W. P. Fuller & Co., a San Francisco-based paint producer, through a series of acquisitions.[6] The disposition of The People v. ConAgra Grocery Products Company et al. in the California sixth Appellate District Court on November 14, 2017, is that

... the judgment is reversed, and the matter is remanded to the trial court with directions to (1) recalculate the amount of the abatement fund to limit it to the amount necessary to cover the cost of remediating pre-1951 homes, and (2) hold an evidentiary hearing regarding the appointment of a suitable receiver. The Plaintiff shall recover its costs on appeal.[7]

New
During the 2000s and 2010s, ConAgra faced further scrutiny for its practices. It received low marks on environmental stewardship from Ceres[8] and Newsweek, with the company ranking 342nd of 500 on the latter's inaugural "Green Rankings" list.[9] In 2013, a California judge ordered ConAgra, along with Sherwin-Williams and NL Industries, to pay $1.1 billion for the renovation of homes in 10 California counties which had been painted with lead paint sold by the companies. ConAgra was named a defendant in the suit as it had assumed the liabilities of W.P. Fuller & Co. following a series of mergers;[10] after multiple appeals, the company reached a settlement amount of $305 million in 2019.[11]
Comparing the old text to the new side by side with the references looks like this:
Comparison
Conagra has been criticized for its lack of response to global climate change. During the 2000s and 2010s, ConAgra faced further scrutiny for its practices. A 2006 report by Ceres, a non-profit organization that works to address global climate change and other sustainability issues, entitled "Corporate Governance and Climate Change: Making the Connection", measures how 100 leading global companies are responding to global warming. Companies in the report were evaluated on a 0 to 100 scale. ConAgra scored a total of 4 points, the lowest of any of the food companies rated.[12] In a 2009 ranking by Newsweek, ConAgra ranked 342nd out of U.S. 500 largest corporations in terms of overall environmental score.[13] It received low marks on environmental stewardship from Ceres[8] and Newsweek, with the company ranking 342nd of 500 on the latter's inaugural "Green Rankings" list.[9]
In 2003–2004, ConAgra participated in a Minnesota Pollution Control Agency voluntary investigation and clean-up program. Through the program, the company cleaned up a property previously used for lithium ore processing and constructed a new 80,000-square-foot (7,000 m2) office/warehouse building.[14] This voluntary program offers "future liability protection".[15]
O January 7, 2014, a California Superior Court found that ConAgra and its co-defendants were liable in creating a public nuisance due to lead-based paint the companies sold. Ten local governments in California filed the suit and the court ordered Conagra, NL Industries and Sherwin-Williams to pay $1.15 billion to remove or abate the lead in homes located in those cities and counties.[16] Although ConAgra never produced paint, it assumed the liabilities of W. P. Fuller & Co., a San Francisco-based paint producer, through a series of acquisitions.[6] The disposition of The People v. ConAgra Grocery Products Company et al. in the California sixth Appellate District Court on November 14, 2017, is that

... the judgment is reversed, and the matter is remanded to the trial court with directions to (1) recalculate the amount of the abatement fund to limit it to the amount necessary to cover the cost of remediating pre-1951 homes, and (2) hold an evidentiary hearing regarding the appointment of a suitable receiver. The Plaintiff shall recover its costs on appeal.[17]
In 2013, a California judge ordered ConAgra, along with Sherwin-Williams and NL Industries, to pay $1.1 billion for the renovation of homes in 10 California counties which had been painted with lead paint sold by the companies. ConAgra was named a defendant in the suit as it had assumed the liabilities of W.P. Fuller & Co. following a series of mergers;[10] after multiple appeals, the company reached a settlement amount of $305 million in 2019.[11]

References

  1. ^ "2006 Corporate Governance and Climate Change: Making the Connection". Ceres. March 2006. Retrieved October 1, 2015.
  2. ^ "Green Rankings 2009". Newsweek. September 15, 2009. Retrieved October 1, 2015.
  3. ^ Selected VIC Success Stories Archived June 1, 2007, at the Wayback Machine, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
  4. ^ Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (VIC) Program, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Archived October 10, 2009, at the Wayback Machine
  5. ^ State of California v. Atlantic Richfield Company, Conagra Grocery Products Company, E.I. Du Pont De Nemours and Company, NL Industries, Inc., and the Sherwin-Williams Company (Cal. Super.: Santa Clara County January 7, 2014), Text. Archived April 7, 2014, at the Wayback Machine
  6. ^ a b "Sherwin, NL, Conagra Lose $1.1 Billion Lead Paint Ruling". Bloomberg Businessweek. December 17, 2013. Retrieved October 1, 2015.
  7. ^ Judge Nathan D. Mihara; Associate Justice Eugene M. Premo; Associate Justice Franklin D. Elia (2017-11-14). "The People v. ConAgra Grocery Products Company et al". California Courts - Appellate Court Case Information. Judicial Council of California. Retrieved 2017-11-19. ...we can accept the inference that defendants' pre-1951 promotions increased the use of lead paint on residential interiors during the period of those promotions...
  8. ^ a b Siegel, Aaron (October 9, 2006). "Study grades companies on environmental efforts; Coal, food products, air transport fare worst". Investment News. Crain Communications. A recent report provided a score card detailing the hits and errors made by 100 of the world's largest corporations on how they have operated in the past and how they likely will operate in the future in a carbon-constrained world. The report from Boston-based Ceres Inc., a coalition of investors, environmental groups and other public-interest organizations, was re-presented in mid-September by Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. of Rockville, Md… The worst performers included Elk Grove Township, Ill.-based UAL Corp., the parent company of United Airlines; ConAgra Foods Inc. of Omaha, Neb.; and Linthicum Heights, Md.-based Foundation Coal Holdings Inc., recording scores of 3, 4 and 5, respectively.
  9. ^ a b Boettcher, Ross (October 8, 2009). "Union Pacific Corp., 3 others get green rankings". The North Platte Telegraph. Four companies with strong Omaha roots failed to plant themselves in the top half of Newsweek's inaugural "Green Rankings" list, indicating they can improve efforts to be sustainable and environmentally friendly but contributing to an important benchmark for future development. TD Ameritrade, Qwest Communications Inc., ConAgra Foods Inc. and Union Pacific Corp. were the only Omaha companies on the list. All ranked in the bottom 250 of 500 companies selected based on revenue, market capitalization and number of employees, even after a corrected calculation of ConAgra's water use bumped the company up 155 spots to No. 342 overall.
  10. ^ a b Rosenblatt, Joel; Kaskey, Jack (December 17, 2013). "Sherwin, NL, ConAgra Lose $1.1 Billion Lead Paint Ruling". Bloomberg News. Retrieved March 24, 2023. Sherwin-Williams Co., NL Industries Inc. and ConAgra Grocery Products LLC were ordered by a judge to pay $1.1 billion to replace or contain lead paint in millions of homes after losing a public-nuisance lawsuit brought by 10 California cities and counties…ConAgra Grocery, a unit of the Omaha, Nebraska-based maker of Pam cooking spray and Chef Boyardee, said it will appeal. The judge found that ConAgra assumed the liabilities of W.P. Fuller & Co. as the result of a series of mergers.
  11. ^ a b Schneyer, Joshua (July 17, 2019). "Paint makers reach $305 mln settlement in California, ending marathon lead poisoning lawsuit". Reuters. Retrieved March 24, 2023.
  12. ^ "2006 Corporate Governance and Climate Change: Making the Connection". Ceres. March 2006. Retrieved October 1, 2015.
  13. ^ "Green Rankings 2009". Newsweek. September 15, 2009. Retrieved October 1, 2015.
  14. ^ Selected VIC Success Stories Archived June 1, 2007, at the Wayback Machine, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
  15. ^ Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (VIC) Program, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Archived October 10, 2009, at the Wayback Machine
  16. ^ State of California v. Atlantic Richfield Company, Conagra Grocery Products Company, E.I. Du Pont De Nemours and Company, NL Industries, Inc., and the Sherwin-Williams Company (Cal. Super.: Santa Clara County January 7, 2014), Text. Archived April 7, 2014, at the Wayback Machine
  17. ^ Judge Nathan D. Mihara; Associate Justice Eugene M. Premo; Associate Justice Franklin D. Elia (2017-11-14). "The People v. ConAgra Grocery Products Company et al". California Courts - Appellate Court Case Information. Judicial Council of California. Retrieved 2017-11-19. ...we can accept the inference that defendants' pre-1951 promotions increased the use of lead paint on residential interiors during the period of those promotions...
Please let me know if that makes sense and what you think! RWConagra (talk) 21:24, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
  Implemented With some slight wording changes. Regards,  Spintendo  17:00, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
Those changes look good to me! RWConagra (talk) 15:57, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Environmental issues move request

Latest comment: 1 year ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi editors, with the content in Environmental issues now changed, I'd like to propose removing that section heading and move the content to the end of the 2000–2015 section, based on the ideas in WP:NOCRIT. Separating it out in this way seems to me like it's placing undue weight on the topic and goes against WP:STRUCTURE. Please let me know what you think! RWConagra (talk) 15:57, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

  Not done for now That would leave the labor issues section alone under the criticism heading for a brief amount of time. That might suggest to any uninitiated readers who come upon it during that time span that the only criticisms of note are labor issues. If the goal is to eventually migrate all of the text in the criticism section to greener pastures elsewhere in the article, then these migrant sections ought to leave all at once rather than as successive caravans.[a]

Notes

  1. ^ This is an issue of WP:BALANCE. At the beginning of one of these mass migrations of text, it's understandable to go slowly by making gentle, piecemeal changes. As the section being vacated starts to dry up, that's when you want to start moving faster. Analogous to a person who walks across a balancing beam, their first few steps are going to be very slow, cautious and deliberate. As they move closer towards the other side, their pace increases and they move more quickly. The criticism section is almost empty; any justification for that heading to exist is quickly evaporating, so whatever text remains needs to be moved as quickly as possible. There ought not to be a scenario where only one paragraph of text remains under a level 2 heading that carries a label of Criticisms, no matter if it's for a day, or for a week. 
Regards,  Spintendo  17:50, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
I understand. I'll propose some changes to the Labor issues section, then propose moving all of that content at once to avoid the balance issue. RWConagra (talk) 20:45, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Labor issues request

Latest comment: 1 year ago5 comments2 people in discussion

Hi editors, based on the discussion from my previous request I have suggestions for the Labor issues section. I'll try to break them down in more detail.

Proposed Labor issues changes
Text as it appears now in the Labor issues section Proposed replacement text Reasoning Resolution
In May 2003, ConAgra and its subsidiary Gilroy Foods agreed to pay $1.5 million to settle charges of hiring discrimination brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The charges involved a July 1999 Teamsters strike at a plant in King City, California, then owned by Basic Vegetable Products LP but later purchased by ConAgra. In August 2001, the company negotiated with the union an end to the two-year strike with a new contract that would recall workers based on seniority. However, the recall process excluded workers who were on leave at the time of the purchase including those out due to work injury or pregnancy. Others were denied jobs due to a history of previous injury or illness, despite their having no restrictions on returning to work. According to the EEOC, most of the 39 workers who were excluded from the recall process had been working at the plant for 10 to 30 years and were primarily Hispanic and female.[1] ConAgra paid a $1.5 million settlement in 2003 after charges of discriminating against disabled workers were levied against subsidiary Gilroy Foods by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission following the resolution of a strike at a plant in King City, California.[2] There is a lot of detail in the paragraph that is unrelated to ConAgra, as well as some that is not supported by the source. For example, the source says nothing about recalling workers based on seniority, and says the excluded workers had been at the plant for 10 to 20 years, not 10 to 30. I think this better keeps the focus of the paragraph on Conagra and will be more clear for readers.   Not done It made more sense to edit the existing text rather than removing large chunks. The lawsuit predated ConAgra, but it had to settle, so the context is important. STEMinfo (talk) 00:22, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
The company's Greeley, Colorado, plant had been cited almost 10 times from 1999 to 2002 for violating worker safety.[3] ConAgra also drew attention for its labor and health practices. Three company plants were cited for multiple worker safety and health violations in the late 1990s and early 2000s.[4] The source doesn't specify where the plant is, so identifying it as a plant in Greeley isn't correct. I also don't think "almost 10" is a useful descriptor, and the source discusses more issues beyond the Colorado plant (at least 3 plants are specified), so I think this is a more useful summarization of the source for readers. In addition to making these changes, I'd also suggest moving these sentences ahead of the labor settlement to better flow chronologically.   Not done The source doesn't say the other plants were cited. Revised to match source but left it closer to how it was.STEMinfo (talk) 00:02, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
In July 2004, six people were killed in a shooting inside the ConAgra Foods plant in Kansas City, Kansas.[5] (remove sentence) While this event was a tragedy, it was not a labor issue and should not be in this section. If editors feel this content should remain somewhere in the article, I'd suggest adding it to the end of the first paragraph in the 2000–2015 section.   Done Moved STEMinfo (talk) 00:02, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

All together, the new text looks like the box below:

ConAgra also drew attention for its labor and health practices. Company plants had several worker safety and sanitation citations in the early 2000s.[4] ConAgra paid a $1.5 million settlement in 2003 after charges of discriminating against disabled workers were levied against subsidiary Gilroy Foods by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission after the resolution of a strike at a plant in King City, California.[2]

References

  1. ^ "ConAgra to Pay to Settle Disability Lawsuit". Los Angeles Times. Bloomberg News. May 21, 2003. Retrieved October 1, 2015.
  2. ^ a b "ConAgra to Pay to Settle Disability Lawsuit". Los Angeles Times. Bloomberg News. May 21, 2003. Retrieved March 21, 2023.
  3. ^ Winter, Greg (July 20, 2002). "Beef Processor's Parent No Stranger to Troubles". The New York Times.
  4. ^ a b Winter, Greg (July 20, 2002). "Beef Processor's Parent No Stranger to Troubles". The New York Times. Retrieved March 21, 2023.
  5. ^ Draper, Bill (July 2, 2004). "KCK meatpacking plant shooting kills several". The Topeka Capital-Journal. Associated Press. Retrieved October 1, 2015.

Please let me know what you think. I think these changes are a net improvement for reader understanding and accuracy of the section. Due to my COI I won't make any changes myself. RWConagra (talk) 20:45, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

@STEMinfo: Appreciate you taking a look! RWConagra (talk) 15:42, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Content move request

Latest comment: 1 year ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Hi editors, after recent changes were made, I have a request to move the content in the Criticism section to appropriate places in the History section. I think this will better align with WP:STRUCTURE and the ideas in WP:NOCRIT. I also suggest adding a sentence as a transition to help it all flow a bit better.

Proposed Criticism moves
Text as it appears now in the Criticism section Proposed placement
During the 2000s and 2010s, ConAgra faced further scrutiny for its environmental practices. It received low marks on environmental stewardship from Ceres[1] and Newsweek, with the company ranking 342nd of 500 on the latter's inaugural "Green Rankings" list.[2] On January 7, 2014, a California Superior Court found that ConAgra and its co-defendants were liable in creating a public nuisance due to lead-based paint the companies sold. Ten local governments in California filed the suit and the court ordered Conagra, NL Industries and Sherwin-Williams to pay $1.15 billion to remove or abate the lead in homes located in those cities and counties. ConAgra was named a defendant in the suit as it had assumed the liabilities of W.P. Fuller & Co. following a series of mergers;[3] after multiple appeals, the company reached a settlement amount of $305 million in 2019.[4] (end of 2000–2015 section)
(Add) ConAgra also drew attention for its labor and health practices. (after previous sentences)
In May 2003, ConAgra and its subsidiary Gilroy Foods agreed to pay $1.5 million to settle charges of hiring discrimination brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The charges involved a July 1999 Teamsters strike at a Gilroy Foods plant in King City, California, then owned by Basic Vegetable Products LP but later purchased by ConAgra. In August 2001, the company and union negotiated an end to the two-year strike with a new contract, but the recall of workers excluded some workers who were on leave at the time of the purchase including those out due to work injury or pregnancy. Others were denied jobs due to a history of previous injury or illness, despite their having no restrictions on returning to work, according to the EEOC. Also according to the EEOC, most of the 39 workers who were excluded from the recall process had been working at the plant for "10 to 20 years, some even longer," and were primarily Hispanic and female.[5] (after sentence about plant in Colorado)
A company plant in Colorado had been cited numerous times from 1999 to 2002 for violating worker safety.[6] (move ahead of EEOC paragraph)
In February 2022, ConAgra paid $18 million to settle a class action from over 8,000 food-processing workers in California who argued that the company had violated California wage law.[7] (at the end of 2016–present)

In essence, what I'm suggesting here is taking all of the Criticism section minus the final sentence and putting it at the end of the 2000–2015 section, then taking that remaining final sentence and putting it at the end of 2016–present. You can hopefully get a clearer idea of what I'd originally hoped for in my draft, though the content is slightly different now.

Altogether, the end of the 2000–2015 section would like this with these changes:

In 2008, ConAgra purchased Watts Brothers Farms from Don Watts[8] and purchased Ralcorp in 2012.[9] Also in 2012, the company joined with PepsiCo, Nestlé and other food firms to defeat Proposition 37, a California ballot measure which would have mandated the labeling of genetically modified foods.[10] The following year, Conagra joined with Walmart and approximately 20 other companies to seek the establishment of national labeling standards for genetically modified foods.[11] In 2014, ConAgra acquired TaiMei Potato Industry Limited, an Inner Mongolian potato processor.[12] ConAgra sold Ralcorp to TreeHouse Foods for $2.7 billion in 2015[13] and purchased Blake's All Natural Foods the same year.[14] ConAgra spun off Lamb Weston into an independent company in 2016.[15]

During the 2000s and 2010s, ConAgra faced further scrutiny for its environmental practices. It received low marks on environmental stewardship from Ceres[1] and Newsweek, with the company ranking 342nd of 500 on the latter's inaugural "Green Rankings" list.[2]

On January 7, 2014, a California Superior Court found that ConAgra and its co-defendants were liable in creating a public nuisance due to lead-based paint the companies sold. Ten local governments in California filed the suit and the court ordered Conagra, NL Industries and Sherwin-Williams to pay $1.15 billion to remove or abate the lead in homes located in those cities and counties. ConAgra was named a defendant in the suit as it had assumed the liabilities of W.P. Fuller & Co. following a series of mergers;[3] after multiple appeals, the company reached a settlement amount of $305 million in 2019.[4]

ConAgra also drew attention for its labor and health practices.A company plant in Colorado had been cited numerous times from 1999 to 2002 for violating worker safety.[16] In May 2003, ConAgra and its subsidiary Gilroy Foods agreed to pay $1.5 million to settle charges of hiring discrimination brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The charges involved a July 1999 Teamsters strike at a Gilroy Foods plant in King City, California, then owned by Basic Vegetable Products LP but later purchased by ConAgra. In August 2001, the company and union negotiated an end to the two-year strike with a new contract, but the recall of workers excluded some workers who were on leave at the time of the purchase including those out due to work injury or pregnancy. Others were denied jobs due to a history of previous injury or illness, despite their having no restrictions on returning to work, according to the EEOC. Also according to the EEOC, most of the 39 workers who were excluded from the recall process had been working at the plant for "10 to 20 years, some even longer," and were primarily Hispanic and female.[17]

References

  1. ^ a b Siegel, Aaron (October 9, 2006). "Study grades companies on environmental efforts; Coal, food products, air transport fare worst". Investment News. Crain Communications.
  2. ^ a b Boettcher, Ross (October 8, 2009). "Union Pacific Corp., 3 others get green rankings". The North Platte Telegraph.
  3. ^ a b Rosenblatt, Joel; Kaskey, Jack (December 17, 2013). "Sherwin, NL, ConAgra Lose $1.1 Billion Lead Paint Ruling". Bloomberg News. Retrieved March 24, 2023.
  4. ^ a b Schneyer, Joshua (July 17, 2019). "Paint makers reach $305 mln settlement in California, ending marathon lead poisoning lawsuit". Reuters. Retrieved March 24, 2023.
  5. ^ "ConAgra to Pay to Settle Disability Lawsuit". Los Angeles Times. Bloomberg News. May 21, 2003. Retrieved October 1, 2015.
  6. ^ Winter, Greg (July 20, 2002). "Beef Processor's Parent No Stranger to Troubles". The New York Times.
  7. ^ Dailey, Kathleen (8 February 2022). "ConAgra Workers Finalize $18 Million Deal in Wage, Breaks Suit". Bloomberg. Retrieved 31 August 2023.
  8. ^ "ConAgra adds Watts Brothers to food empire". East Oregonian. March 2, 2008. Retrieved March 21, 2023.
  9. ^ "ConAgra Foods to make big purchase". KTVO. Associated Press. November 27, 2012. Archived from the original on November 29, 2012. Retrieved March 21, 2023.
  10. ^ Strom, Stephanie (September 13, 2012). "Uneasy Allies in the Grocery Aisle". The New York Times. Retrieved March 21, 2023.
  11. ^ Strom, Stephanie (January 31, 2013). "Genetic Changes to Food May Get Uniform Labeling". The New York Times. Retrieved March 21, 2023.
  12. ^ "ConAgra Foods Acquires Chinese Potato Processor TaiMei Potato Industry Limited". MarketWatch. July 14, 2014. Archived from the original on June 28, 2017. Retrieved January 20, 2023.
  13. ^ Picker, Leslie (November 2, 2015). "ConAgra Sells Private-Label Business for $2.7 Billion". The New York Times. Retrieved January 26, 2023.
  14. ^ Chen, Angela (May 12, 2015). "ConAgra Buys Blake's All Natural Foods". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved March 21, 2023.
  15. ^ "Conagra Brands completes Lamb Weston spinoff, name change". Associated Press. November 10, 2016. Retrieved January 30, 2023.
  16. ^ Winter, Greg (July 20, 2002). "Beef Processor's Parent No Stranger to Troubles". The New York Times.
  17. ^ "ConAgra to Pay to Settle Disability Lawsuit". Los Angeles Times. Bloomberg News. May 21, 2003. Retrieved October 1, 2015.

Let me know what you think! As always I won't make changes myself due to my COI. RWConagra (talk) 15:42, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

  Comment: I just want to point out two issues I see with this text-to-be-moved: During the 2000s and 2010s, ConAgra faced further scrutiny for its environmental practices the word "further" should be removed. I believe that word is a leftover from previous versions that had other environmental issues being mentioned ahead of it, which have now either been moved or removed. So if this is the first salient part of the article where we're hearing about environmental issues after this move is made, then that word should be taken out. Also, It received low marks on environmental stewardship from Ceres and Newsweek, with the company ranking 342nd of 500 on the latter's inaugural "Green Rankings" Newsweek's Green Rankings are, I don't believe, notable. If this were a non-notable award of merit from Newsweek that the COI editor was asking to add to the article, I would not be inclined to add it — so it's fair to ask, why would we add a non-notable award of demerit to the article?[a] I understand this portion of the text has already existed for some time now, I'm just questioning why it needs to remain.

Notes

  1. ^ And that's just the Newsweek as it existed in the timeframe of the years 2000—2015. The Newsweek of today probably wouldn't even be allowed in the article.

Regards,  Spintendo  08:14, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Spintendo: I'm perfectly fine with those changes being made. With those changes the end of the 2000–2015 section would look like this:
In 2008, ConAgra purchased Watts Brothers Farms from Don Watts[1] and purchased Ralcorp in 2012.[2] Also in 2012, the company joined with PepsiCo, Nestlé and other food firms to defeat Proposition 37, a California ballot measure which would have mandated the labeling of genetically modified foods.[3] The following year, Conagra joined with Walmart and approximately 20 other companies to seek the establishment of national labeling standards for genetically modified foods.[4] In 2014, ConAgra acquired TaiMei Potato Industry Limited, an Inner Mongolian potato processor.[5] ConAgra sold Ralcorp to TreeHouse Foods for $2.7 billion in 2015[6] and purchased Blake's All Natural Foods the same year.[7] ConAgra spun off Lamb Weston into an independent company in 2016.[8]

During the 2000s and 2010s, ConAgra faced scrutiny for its environmental practices.

On January 7, 2014, a California Superior Court found that ConAgra and its co-defendants were liable in creating a public nuisance due to lead-based paint the companies sold. Ten local governments in California filed the suit and the court ordered Conagra, NL Industries and Sherwin-Williams to pay $1.15 billion to remove or abate the lead in homes located in those cities and counties. ConAgra was named a defendant in the suit as it had assumed the liabilities of W.P. Fuller & Co. following a series of mergers;[9] after multiple appeals, the company reached a settlement amount of $305 million in 2019.[10]

ConAgra also drew attention for its labor and health practices.A company plant in Colorado had been cited numerous times from 1999 to 2002 for violating worker safety.[11] In May 2003, ConAgra and its subsidiary Gilroy Foods agreed to pay $1.5 million to settle charges of hiring discrimination brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The charges involved a July 1999 Teamsters strike at a Gilroy Foods plant in King City, California, then owned by Basic Vegetable Products LP but later purchased by ConAgra. In August 2001, the company and union negotiated an end to the two-year strike with a new contract, but the recall of workers excluded some workers who were on leave at the time of the purchase including those out due to work injury or pregnancy. Others were denied jobs due to a history of previous injury or illness, despite their having no restrictions on returning to work, according to the EEOC. Also according to the EEOC, most of the 39 workers who were excluded from the recall process had been working at the plant for "10 to 20 years, some even longer," and were primarily Hispanic and female.[12]

References

  1. ^ "ConAgra adds Watts Brothers to food empire". East Oregonian. March 2, 2008. Retrieved March 21, 2023.
  2. ^ "ConAgra Foods to make big purchase". KTVO. Associated Press. November 27, 2012. Archived from the original on November 29, 2012. Retrieved March 21, 2023.
  3. ^ Strom, Stephanie (September 13, 2012). "Uneasy Allies in the Grocery Aisle". The New York Times. Retrieved March 21, 2023.
  4. ^ Strom, Stephanie (January 31, 2013). "Genetic Changes to Food May Get Uniform Labeling". The New York Times. Retrieved March 21, 2023.
  5. ^ "ConAgra Foods Acquires Chinese Potato Processor TaiMei Potato Industry Limited". MarketWatch. July 14, 2014. Archived from the original on June 28, 2017. Retrieved January 20, 2023.
  6. ^ Picker, Leslie (November 2, 2015). "ConAgra Sells Private-Label Business for $2.7 Billion". The New York Times. Retrieved January 26, 2023.
  7. ^ Chen, Angela (May 12, 2015). "ConAgra Buys Blake's All Natural Foods". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved March 21, 2023.
  8. ^ "Conagra Brands completes Lamb Weston spinoff, name change". Associated Press. November 10, 2016. Retrieved January 30, 2023.
  9. ^ Rosenblatt, Joel; Kaskey, Jack (December 17, 2013). "Sherwin, NL, ConAgra Lose $1.1 Billion Lead Paint Ruling". Bloomberg News. Retrieved March 24, 2023.
  10. ^ Schneyer, Joshua (July 17, 2019). "Paint makers reach $305 mln settlement in California, ending marathon lead poisoning lawsuit". Reuters. Retrieved March 24, 2023.
  11. ^ Winter, Greg (July 20, 2002). "Beef Processor's Parent No Stranger to Troubles". The New York Times.
  12. ^ "ConAgra to Pay to Settle Disability Lawsuit". Los Angeles Times. Bloomberg News. May 21, 2003. Retrieved October 1, 2015.
Would you be willing to make that move? I'd appreciate it! RWConagra (talk) 18:40, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
  Done STEMinfo (talk) 18:58, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
@STEMinfo: Thanks so much for doing that! RWConagra (talk) 15:13, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

2002 E. Coli section

Latest comment: 1 year ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi editors, I wanted to follow up on my last request. As Spintendo found, there was a source that better supported the content in the 2002 E. Coli outbreak section (thanks for finding that!); however, there are still some issues with that section.

  • The live version still says "third-largest recall", which isn't accurate and doesn't make sense
  • The final sentence is ripped straight from the NYT with no changes
  • The second reference is still broken

With that in mind, I'd like to propose changing the section from:

  • Conagra recalled 19 million pounds of ground beef in July 2002 with E. coli bacterial contamination. It was the third-largest recall up to that time. That meat was linked to the illnesses of 19 people in six Western and Midwestern states.[1][2]

To

  • The company recalled 19 million pounds of ground beef suspected of contamination with Escherichia coli in July 2002 after 19 people in six states became ill following its consumption.[3] It was the second-largest meat recall in U.S. history.[4]

References

  1. ^ Becker, Elizabeth (20 July 2002). "19 Million Pounds of Meat Recalled After 19 Fall Ill". The New York Times.
  2. ^ Becker, Elizabeth (October 7, 2002). "Parents of Sickened Children Ask for Tighter Rules on Food". The New York Times. Retrieved October 1, 2015.
  3. ^ Becker, Elizabeth (October 17, 2002). "Parents of Sickened Children Ask for Tighter Rules on Food". The New York Times. Retrieved March 21, 2023.
  4. ^ Becker, Elizabeth (July 20, 2002). "19 Million Pounds of Meat Recalled After 19 Fall Ill". The New York Times. Retrieved November 8, 2023.

This fixes the broken reference, changes wording to avoid any potential copyright issues, and corrects the bit about the size of the recall. Let me know what you think! RWConagra (talk) 16:37, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

  Approved  Spintendo  19:01, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Product incidents request 1

Latest comment: 1 year ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hi editors, in my efforts to continue to look at the neutrality of content in the article, I thought I'd turn to the Product incidents section. You can see my hopes for the section in my draft, in the final paragraphs of the 2000–2015 section, but I thought first I'd look at the language specifically in the section now.

First, I'd like to propose changing the 2002 E. Coli section from:

  • Conagra recalled 19 million pounds of ground beef in July 2002 with E. coli bacterial contamination. It was the third-largest recall up to that time. That meat was linked to the illnesses of 19 people in six Western and Midwestern states.[1]

To

  • The company recalled 19 million pounds of ground beef after 19 people became ill after consuming it in 2002.[2]

References

  1. ^ Becker, Elizabeth (October 7, 2002). "Parents of Sickened Children Ask for Tighter Rules on Food". The New York Times. Retrieved October 1, 2015.
  2. ^ Becker, Elizabeth (October 17, 2002). "Parents of Sickened Children Ask for Tighter Rules on Food". The New York Times. Retrieved March 21, 2023.

I think this does a few things:

  • It fixes a broken link
  • It trims some of the detail, which I think becomes a bit excessive, per What Wikipedia is not and due weight
    • The bit about the recall in the source is quite short, and the final sentence is copied directly from the Times article with no paraphrasing
  • It makes the content more accurate
    • The source does not say the beef was contaminated with E. Coli
  • Removes the bit about the "third largest recall at the time" which even in the original source is confusing

Let me know what you think! As always I won't make the change myself due to my COI. RWConagra (talk) 15:13, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Reply 7-NOV-2023

   Edit request declined  

  • The changes suggested removing content that is well-cited or where sources exist.
  • The source does not say the beef was contaminated with E. Coli — I've added a NYTimes source that says it was.
  • Removes the bit about the "third largest recall at the time" which even in the original source is confusing — The updated NYTimes source I added said it was "the second-largest recall of meat in the country's history." (as of 2002, when the piece was published).

Regards,  Spintendo  03:48, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

@Spintendo: Ah, thanks for adding that source! RWConagra (talk) 16:37, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
@Spintendo: Thanks for doing that! RWConagra (talk) 22:23, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

2002 E. Coli section cleanup request

Latest comment: 1 year ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi editors, I had a small request to clean up the 2002 E. Coli section after Spintendo's recent changes based on my last request. Could editors remove the second paragraph in that section? It's now redundant. Thanks! RWConagra (talk) 22:23, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

  Done STEMinfo (talk) 00:18, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
@STEMinfo: Thanks so much for doing that! RWConagra (talk) 15:17, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Conagra_Brands/Archive_4&oldid=1192278742"