Chipotle grilled

Burrito chain’s Food, Inc. sponsorship generates off-screen drama over farm-worker issues 22

food inc

On July 13, Chipotle Mexican Grill announced it was throwing its marketing weight behind Food, Inc., a documentary that takes a highly critical look at the food system.

The fast-food chain would be sponsoring free screenings of the film at 32 theaters nationwide. It would also be distributing material promoting the film at all its restaurants—thus exposing people in search of a tasty burrito to a film quite different from the super-hero blockbusters that get promoted in typical fast-food chains. In addition, there’d be a Chipotle-related “bonus feature” in the film’s upcoming DVD.

The Chipotle/Food, Inc. tie-up caught my eye, because just a month before, a group of food writers and activists signed a letter to Chipotle CEO Steve Ells sharply criticizing the chain for its inaction on farm worker rights. The two signees who topped the list were Food, Inc. director Robert Kenner and co-producer Eric Schlosser, who is also prominently featured in the film. (I signed the letter as well.)

The letter was written on behalf of the Coalition of Immokalee Workers, a farm-worker-led group that has been fighting to improve sub-poverty wages, dismal living conditions, and sometimes outright slavery in Florida tomato country—source of 90 percent of the winter tomatoes consumed in the United States. The CIW wants Chipotle to commit to pay an extra penny per pound for tomatoes, in an arrangement that would ultimately deliver the hike directly to workers. Chipotle claims it supports the penny-per-pound principle, but refuses to sign an agreement with the CIW.

food inc proOff-screen drama at a Food, Inc. showing.“We view the CIW’s struggle for dignity as a non-negotiable part of the struggle for a sustainable food system,” the letter states. “Therefore, we strongly urge you to enter into an agreement with this worker-led organization that has been fighting tirelessly to improve conditions in tomato country since 1993.”

When Chipotle announced it was sponsoring Food, Inc., I assumed an agreement with the CIW was imminent. In its uphill fight to get decent wages for tomato pickers, the CIW has won agreements from some of the most profit-focused companies in the food industry, including Burger King, McDonald’s, and Yum Brands, owner of Taco Bell. More recently, two sustainability-minded companies—Whole Foods and Bon Appetit Management—have signed agreements with the CIW. Surely Chipotle, which strives to serve “food with integrity” and has a history of working with mid-sized sustainable farmers, couldn’t be far behind ... right?

But then I checked the CIW’s Web site—and it turned out there was just as much distance as ever between the farm-worker group and the burrito chain. (Ironically, the Mission-style burritos served by Chipotle probably evolved from a hearty lunch staple developed for Mexican farm workers in California’s Central Valley in the 1950s.)

I found that activists from a CIW-allied group, the Campaign for Fair Food, had been attending the Chipotle-sponsored free screenings and handing out copies of the letter signed by Kenner and Schlosser. They held up a banner reading “Food, Inc.: great film/Chipotle: Don’t believe the hype.”

Chipotle clearly resents such critical statements at events designed to demonstrate its sustainability cred. At one of its screenings in Denver, Chipotle employees barred people from the Campaign for Fair Food to speak after the screening—overturning an arrangement that had been made with Food, Inc’s public-education campaign.

I asked Chipotle communications director Chris Arnold about the incident. He referred me to Matt Cowal of Magnolia Pictures, which is distributing the film. “What happened with the Campaign for Fair Food was a mixup,” he told me. “The Chipotle screenings and what we’re doing with our social-action partnerships were always meant to be separate initiatives. Chipotle was under the correct impression that their screening was intended to be exclusively for their guests and what happened was a scheduling error on our part.”

In other words, people wanting to discuss the CIW issue aren’t to be given stage time at the Chipotle-sponsored Food, Inc. screenings. Damara Luce of Just Harvest USA tells me that after the Denver screenings, Chipotle representatives were equally inhospitable to CIW allies at showings in Kansas City, Washington, D.C., and Baltimore.

So what gives? How did a film made by Kenner and Schlosser end up being sponsored by a company being called out by Kenner and Schlosser? I contacted all the principal actors in this drama to find answers.

KennerFood, Inc. director Robert Kenner

Standing with the farm workers
Schlosser and Kenner, for their part, stand by their support of the Coalition of Immokalee Workers. As the film’s co-producer and director, they have limited say over how it’s marketed and distributed. Those decisions ultimately lie with the film’s production company, Participant Media, and its distributor, Magnolia Pictures.

 

Participant declined to comment for this article. Cowal of Magnolia Pictures told me he was unaware of the situation in Florida’s tomato fields when he linked up with Chipotle, which he called a leading player in the movement to reform the food system. “They’re doing a lot of great things around sustainability,” he said. He added: “We do hope something positive will come of this—that it [the controversy]  will inspire Chipotle to rethink their position on the Coalition.”

As for Schlosser and Kenner, as you might expect from writer/filmmaker types, they have strong opinions. Schlosser wrote the following in an email:

I like the food at Chipotle. I think their efforts on behalf of sustainability, animal welfare, and the misuse of antibiotics are terrific.  But I care more about human rights than any of those things.

If Taco Bell, Subway, Burger King, and McDonald’s can reach agreement with the CIW, I don’t see why Chipotle can’t. It will not cost much—and it will help to end human trafficking in Florida.

Although I’m grateful for the support that Chipotle has given to Food, Inc., my views haven’t changed since I signed that letter.

Kenner took a similar position in a phone conversation. He said he admires Chipotle’s commitment to sustainability—in fact, he seriously considered featuring it in Food, Inc. as an example of a large player that’s “moving in the right direction.” “I don’t regret that they’re sponsoring the film,” he emphasized.

But he made clear that he disagreed with the company’s position on the CIW. “The film is really about fair food,” he said. “People are aware that animals are being abused [in the food system]. There’s a lot less consciousness about workers.”

In fact, just as Kenner nearly included a section on Chipotle, he also seriously considered honing in on the situation in Immokalee. If the film hadn’t ended up shining a light on harsh working conditions in the pork-proccessing industry, “we would have gone to Immokalee and told that story.”

“I was hopeful that by associating itself with a film that promotes workers’ rights, [Chipotle] might be inclined to sign with the Coalition,” he said. “And now I’m not confident they will.”

He repeated: “Frankly, I don’t understand their position.”

In the heat of the grill
So what exactly is Chipotle’s position on Florida’s ruthlessly exploited tomato-field workers? (I visited Immokalee myself last spring, and filed two reports—here and here.)

First, a little setup. Florida’s tomato pickers are currently locked in a battle with the area’s farm owners over the penny-per-pound raise the CIW wrung out of McDonald’s, Burger King, and Yum Brands. The Florida Tomato Growers Exchange is refusing to pass on the raise to workers, whose real wages have plunged to well below poverty level in the past two decades. So the CIW is locked in a bitter fight with the Growers Exchange.

Whole Foods and Bon Appetit recently intervened by signing on to the CIW’s penny-per-pound pledge, while also working with the Coalition to identify sustainable tomato growers who pay their workers decently. Chipotle has chosen to chart its own path—it has set up its own escrow account to hold an extra penny-per-pound for workers. And, like the CIW, it claims to be looking for growers willing to pass it on.

“We are escrowing a penny per pound for any tomatoes we buy from Florida, with that money earmarked for the farm workers,” Chipotle’s Arnold wrote in an email message. He continued:

But we would rather have that money get to the workers rather than simply amassing in an escrow account. That is why we are working (with assistance from the CIW) to try to find growers who will actually pay the additional money to the workers, rather than support the Florida Tomato Growers Exchange in blocking payments to the workers.

That last bit doesn’t make any sense to me. If they want to help break through the Growers Exchange and get the workers their much-needed raise, why not join McDonald’s. Burger King, Whole Foods, etc, and work hand-in-hand with the CIW?

I asked CIW staffer Greg Asbed about the situation. Why aren’t Chipotle’s efforts sufficient? “Chipotle has made no commitment, signed no enforceable agreement, behind their decision to pay the penny per pound.” he wrote in an email. He added:

All our agreements, from Yum Brands to Bon Appetit, are signed, enforceable agreements with no fixed term for the penny per pound—and so the agreement to pay the surcharge is not dependent on the whim of the company. Chipotle, on the other hand, could rescind its decision to pay the penny more tomorrow (even assuming they are really paying it today) and we would have no recourse but to protest.

Asbed also points out a stark contrast in Chipotle CEO Steven Ells’s approach to food issues. “Ells is clearly, for whatever reason known only to him, far more comfortable walking arm in arm with a small farmer than embracing farmworkers leading the fight for human rights in the fields,” Asbed wrote. “And that disparity, that contradiction, is what is so very wrong about Chipotle and its efforts to position itself at the forefront of the sustainable food movement.”

Ironically, by embracing Food, Inc., Chipotle is highlighting the whole vexed issue of how America treats the people who harvest and prepare its food—which is exactly what Kenner intended the film to do in the first place.

Grist food editor Tom Philpott farms and cooks at Maverick Farms, a sustainable-agriculture nonprofit and small farm in the Blue Ridge Mountains of North Carolina. Follow my Twitter feed; contact me at tphilpott[at]grist[dot]org.

Related Stories

Advertisement
Advertisement

  1. DenverFairFood Posted 12:00 pm
    23 Jul 2009

    Very interesting stuff... It's nice to have such great allies in Schlosser, Kenner and you Tom.The time for leaving the rights of farm labor out of the sustainability equation is past.  Chipotle needs to get on board. And maybe now they finally will... 

    Permalink

  2. Tasermons Partner Posted 3:50 pm
    23 Jul 2009

    I am all for this, and for the farmer's (i.e.: hired tomato pickers) rights......but, to play devil's advocate for a moment, how does that haveta deal with sustainable agriculture (ecologically speakin')?

    Permalink

    1. Tom Philpott's avatar

      Tom Philpott Posted 6:26 pm
      23 Jul 2009

      Tasermons Partner,You raise an important point, one that needs to be addressed and thought through. The first thing that comes to mind might be called the Schlosser response: If the sustainable food movement doesn't concern itself human rights, then to hell with it. I don't want to be associated with a movement that doesn't respect basic human rights. What precisely are we sustaining--and for whom? I agree with the Schloser take; but I realize there are folks who simply want to eat tasty food that doesn't contain traces of poison and blight landscapes. To those people, i suggest a bird's eye view of our food system. Think about the "day without a Mexican" concept. Right now, our sustenance relies almost completely on people who sneak across a perilous, militarized border to pick our tomatoes, wash our dishes (half of U.S. meals are consumed outside the home), slaughter and pack our meat animals, etc, etc, all for extremely low wages. Is that situation really sustainable? I think there's a powerful argument for building economic sustainability--for everyone in the supply chain--into the definition of sustainable food. Buying organic and avoiding fast food does no give anyone the luxury of ignoring these questions. In Immoklalee, I'm told, there are certified-organic tomato flelds owned by the same growers as conventional ones; workers often don't know that they've spent the day harvesting in an organic field; their paychecks certainly don't alert them, as pay is the same. (Importantly, they do avoid pesticide exposure.) Out in California, source of so much organic produce consumed in the U.S., scholars like Julie Guthman and Aimee Shrek, et al, have shown that many organic farms rely as much on on low-paid, undocumented workers as conventional farms. There are no easy answers to this: farming is hard, profit margins are low, a few buyers control most wholesale markets and have pricing power; but the first step to finding answers is to acknowledge the problem.

      Permalink

  3. Jpbrown1978 Posted 9:13 pm
    23 Jul 2009

    Here's what you are also NOT being told by the propaganda machine. Chipotle DOESN'T EVEN USE CIW in the first place! They came to Chipotle asking to use them to use them- Chipotle said no. If anything else went wrong in their treatment, they would have more leverage to turn on Chipotle then and say they were mistreated(if Chipotle were to use them as a supplier, but that's not the case.) These people want every restaurant to join their cause and pay them millions od dollars when they themselves can't organize their own fair treatment. Who would want to be associated with an organizations sponsors that treats their workers unfairly?? Think about all aspects before judging Chipotle. It's as if someone came to you and got mad at you because you didn't stop the spread of AIDS in Africa when you have no connection to them, wouldn't you feel a little misrepresented???? Think before you get on your high horse and read your propoganda-ridden blogature.

    Permalink

    1. Tom Philpott's avatar

      Tom Philpott Posted 6:21 am
      24 Jul 2009

      Yes, JP, as Denverfairfood says, you seem to be under the mistaken impression that the CIW is some sort of supplier or wholesaler. It's not--it's a coalition of farm workers who have little to sell but their labor. And (as cllearly stated in the story), Chipotle freely acknowledges it buys tomatoes from Florida; and is holding an extra penny per pound in escrow. The issue, as clearly stated above, is accountability.

      Permalink

  4. DenverFairFood Posted 10:00 pm
    23 Jul 2009

    As to JPBROWN, you seem to be highly ill informed about the situation.  CIW is not a supplier but a farmworker-led human rights oranization in Florida.   And Chipotle has tomato suppliers in Florida.  The CIW isn't asking for money for the organization but better wages for workers.  Please do your homework before spouting off.As for Tom's comments, you could also call it the Carlo Petrini response: "On some organic fields you see Mexican migrants working as if slavery were never abolished! The tomatoes and citrus fruits may well be organic and tasty, but justice is important too."And following up about organic tomato fields being owned by the same growers as conventional fields in FL, in fact one particular grower - a FL-based company called Ag-Mart  that produces grape tomatoes (some organic, some not) up and down the East Coast including in Immokalee - was threatened with some of the largest fines in history for exposing farmworkers to pesticides.  This happened in both FL and NC (and apparently NJ too).  In Immokalee several women who worked in Ag-Mart's fields gave birth to children without arms or legs. But this is just one of the abuses that Ag-Mart workers face - there is a laundry list of other egregious behavior by the company toward farmworkers.One final thing to mention is that as a result of the CIW agreements, as the article mentions Whole Foods and Bon Apetit (I think) arranged to purchase from two medium-sized organic farms in Florida who are willing to pass the "penny-per-pound" along to their workers and to ensure workers rights are respected.  Whole Foods used to purchase from Ag-Mart.  So organic farms that are willing to respect human rights are actually seeing their market grow as a result.  I'd say creating powerful new markets for respectable organic growers is one way these agreements help ecological sustainability.

    Permalink

  5. Jpbrown1978 Posted 6:27 am
    24 Jul 2009

    CIW does not represent every single tomato group in Florida though, and although I'm sure Chipotle feels for the plight of those workers, Chipotle does not use tomatoes grown from farmers represented by the CIW.

    Permalink

    1. Tom Philpott's avatar

      Tom Philpott Posted 6:40 am
      24 Jul 2009

      Wait, a while ago, CIW was a wholesaler. Now it represents farms? No. It's a coalition of (landless) farm workers. I'm sure the Florida Tomato Growers Exchange would be amused--or outraged--by the idea that the CIW "represents" Florida's large-scale tomato farmers. Let me quote Chipotle communications director Arnold (again): “We are escrowing a penny per pound for any tomatoes we buy from Florida, with that money earmarked for the farm workers.” That implies that Chipotle is buying at least some tomatoes from Florida farmers who refuse to pass on the penny-per-pound raise. Got it?

      Permalink

  6. Jpbrown1978 Posted 7:09 am
    24 Jul 2009

    So Chipotle taking a stand and trying to find a grower themselves (with CIW help) willing to pay the extra penny is a bad thing? Why must it be done in a contract with CIW?

    Permalink

  7. haleyjack Posted 9:33 am
    24 Jul 2009

    "JPBROWN1978" - you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.  You have repeatedly gotten the basic facts wrong. How about you do a little research before posting your ignorant opinions? Or do you have another agenda here?

    Chipotle is engaging in pure hypocrisy.  I certainly won't be eating there until they come to an agreement with the CIW.

    Permalink

  8. Jpbrown1978 Posted 10:14 am
    24 Jul 2009

    HaleyJack- You're absolutley right. You are SSOOOOO very informed with all the inner-workings of Chipotle, and I'm surprised you aren't a CEO there, because you seem to know all about them. So tell me how Chipotle is evil now since they have not signed an agreement with CIW and since they are trying to find a grower themselves (with CIW help) willing to pay the extra penny? Read the quote again from Chris Arnold. So will you now be eating at Qdoba where they don't care a single iota about what goes into their food from the ground up? I dare you to find any international restaurant chain that cares more about what goes into their food AND what does/does not go into their ingredients, from the people that grow the food to the care taken of the vegetables and animals before they are used for food.

    Permalink

  9. PermieWriter's avatar

    PermieWriter Posted 11:38 am
    24 Jul 2009

    I haven't eaten at Chipotle for quite a while, both because the East Bay has the far superior Cactus Taqueria and because Chipotle's food is salty enough to be nearly inedible (if you go, steer clear of the chips). This is just more typical corporate BS that scrapes away some of the thin layer of greenwashing.

    Permalink

  10. RecycleYogi Posted 11:56 am
    24 Jul 2009

    How does McDonald's ownership of Chipotle factor into this?Does McDonald's, the over-arching corporation and thus, their subsidiaries (i.e. Chipotle), support CIW?Or is it the McDonald's chain of restaurants that supports the CIW?

    Permalink

    1. Tom Philpott's avatar

      Tom Philpott Posted 12:03 pm
      24 Jul 2009

      McDonald's sold its stake in Chipotle a couple of years ago. The two are no longer connected. And yes, McDonald's has signed the CIW penny-per-pound pledge.

      Permalink

  11. Dusana Posted 1:55 pm
    24 Jul 2009

    Great article! Is there any way for the public to get a hold of and sign this letter to put pressure on Chipotle?

    Permalink

  12. michellechristiana Posted 7:36 pm
    24 Jul 2009

    JP, stop being a jerk. chilllllll.and if i don't want to support chipotle i'm not going to go to qdoba, i'm going to cook my own damn food.

    Permalink

  13. Jpbrown1978 Posted 11:53 pm
    24 Jul 2009

    I'm just being honest. If you want a sugar coated answer, go to Qdoba. If you wanna eat at home, do it...you'll (hopefully) know where your food came from then. You won't be hurting anyone. 

    Permalink

  14. toph Posted 7:40 am
    25 Jul 2009

    Remind me again how Chipotle is evil for not pledging a penny-per-pound that isn't even reaching the workers? It sounds to me like saving that money in a holding account is for now a better alternative to further lining the already fat pockets of the landowners and hoping that the generosity will trickle down to the worker.

    Permalink

  15. DenverFairFood Posted 6:38 pm
    25 Jul 2009

    DUSANA, yes you can add your name to open letter to Chipotle to put pressure on the company!  Thousands of people have already taken action.Go to this link:http://action.americanrightsatwork.org/campaign/chipotleJPBROWN & TOPH, the CIW is demanding that Chipotle find a grower THAT IS WILLING to pass the "penny-per-pound" along to the workers.  Just because Chris Arnold says that they're looking for a grower that will do this doesn't mean they actually are.  In fact that's the real problem, as the quotes by Greg Asbed from the CIW explain.  Chipotle is not willing to be accountable and transparent to the very workers whose lives are impacted by these decisions.  So farmworkers (and all us consumers) just have to take Chipotle's word for it that they doing what they claim to be doing.  I'm not willing to trust Chipotle on blind faith, especially when the only reason that Chipotle said it would start paying the penny per pound in the first place is because the CIW and their allies (such as Denver Fair Food) pressured it to with protests and public actions - "power concedes nothing without a demand."  It's naive to believe a corporation will do things right on its own accord.It's also extremely condescending of Chipotle to tell farmworkers "well we'll do all these nice things for you but we won't allow any control over how they're implimented, monitored, enforced, etc."  That farmworkers are treated as human beings with the right to participate in the decisions which effect their lives - that they aren't just treated as peons to be ignored, exploited or pitied - is another goal of the campaign, and one the Chipotle refuses to agree to.  Here's a great article that talks about this more.

    Permalink

  16. Jpbrown1978 Posted 4:40 pm
    26 Jul 2009

    No one but a company's own employees should "control" how "nice things they do for others are implimented, monitored, enforced, etc." I bet anyone who buys a share of Chipotle can go and speak their opinion and have a SAY in a company, but no one outside of Chipotle gets to CONTROL what they do, as long as it's done legally, and I don't see any laws being broken. Who in their right mind would want to give up ANY control in their company?

    Permalink

  17. Username's avatar

    Username Posted 10:39 am
    28 Jul 2009

    Thanks for the article!

    Permalink

Add a Comment

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Hello, Visitor!    Why not register?

Viewed
More
Commented
More
Advertisement