Fined for soda ash leak

In May 2016 the NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) fined Unilever Australia $15,000 after soda ash leaked from a silo at the company's North Rocks premises. The EPA also issued Unilever with an official clean up notice.

Source: EPA (2016)

Breaching advertising codes

In 2011 the Therapeutic Goods Administration's Complaints Resolution Panel upheld a complaint about an ad by this company on the grounds that it breached advertising codes. The ad was subsequently withdrawn.

Source: TGA Complaints Register (2011)

Misleading labelling

In July 2016 the ACCC ordered this company to pay a penalty of $10,800 for making false or misleading representation on the packaging of popular products they supply that the products had been approved or were suitable as healthy options for school canteens.

Source: ACCC (2016)

Breaching advertising codes

This company has been criticised for offensive advertising. Between 2008 and 2021 the Advertising Standards Bureau upheld complaints about twelve ads by this company on the grounds that they breached advertising codes. The ads were subsequently discontinued or modified.

Source: Advertising Standards Bureau (2021)

Palm oil free products

Some, but not necessarily all, of this company's products are palm oil free, or contain segregated certified sustainable palm oil (CSPO). For more details, follow the link to see Borneo Orangutan Survival Australia's list of products which manufacturers have told them are palm oil free or contain segregated certified sustainable palm oil.

Source: BOS Australia (2020)

Renewable energy use

Greenpeace's Reenergise campaign ranks Australia's biggest electricity using companies on their commitments and actions regarding renewable energy use. This company has committed to powering their operations by 100% renewable electricity by 2030, and signed at least one power purchase agreement (PPA) to buy power from a wind or solar project.

Source: Greenpeace (2021)

Employer of Choice for Gender Equality

This company is listed by the Workplace Gender Equality Agency (WGEA) as a Employer of Choice for Gender Equality citation holder. The citation is designed to encourage, recognise and promote active commitment to achieving gender equality in Australian workplaces.

Source: WGEA (2022)

RCMI signatory

This company is a signatory to the Responsible Children's Marketing Initiative (RCMI), which is managed by the Australian Food & Grocery Council and covers products found in retail outlets. Companies that have signed up to the initiative commit to: only advertising healthier choices to children and encouraging a healthy lifestyle through good diet and physical activity; not paying for or seeking product placement television programs, editorial content or interactive games aimed at children, unless the product is a healthier choice; not advertising and marketing to children in Australian schools unless they are asked to by those schools.

Source: AANA (2023)

Partnership with WWF-Australia

In 2015, WWF-Australia & Unilever worked in partnership from to raise awareness among producers, buyers and retailers on the benefits of switching to sustainable palm oil to accelerate the uptake of Certified Sustainable Palm Oil in Australia.

Source: WWF Australia (2015)

Use of microplastics

This company uses plastic microbeads in some of its personal care products. These particles are not retained by wastewater treatment so end up in the ocean where they contribute to ocean plastic pollution, and are hazardous to sea life. While the effects of microplastics on human health are not completely understood, there are concerns about plastic additives, such as phthalates, which are known endocrine disruptors which are shown to have harmful effects on life.

Source: Beat the Microbead (2021)

Palm oil from Wilmar

A 2016 report by Amnesty International found a range of labour rights abuses on the palm oil plantations operated by Wilmar's subsidiaries and suppliers in Indonesia. These abuses include worst forms of child labour, forced labour, discrimination against women workers, people being paid below the minimum wage, and workers suffering injuries from toxic chemicals. The report confirms that Unilever purchases palm oil from Wilmar. [Listed under Information due to age of report]

Source: Amnesty Intl (2016)

Worker exploitation in Kenya

This 2011 report by the Ecologist reveals how the Kericho tea estate in Kenya, operated by Unilever, is at the centre of controversy over allegations of 'rampant' discrimination and sexual harassment of women, poor housing conditions, casualisation of labour, violations of employment regulations and low wages. [Listed under Information due to age of report]

Source: The Ecologist (2011)

Human rights abuse from palm oil supplier

German NGO Rainforest Rescue launched a campaign against Unilever in August 2011. Unilever is one of world's largest buyers of palm oil. One of its major suppliers, Wilmar, is notorious for illegal logging and human rights violations, and has been criticised for hiring a paramilitary combat unit in Sumatra, Indonesia to intimidate indigenous people and peasants, destroy their homes and drive them off their land in order develop giant palm oil plantations. {Listed under Information due to age of campaign]

Source: Rainforest Rescue (2011)

Worker exploitation in India and Kenya

This 2011 report by SOMO and ICN reveals workers picking tea for Unilever in India and Kenya are subject to precarious working conditions and labor rights violations, even though this tea carries the Rainforest Alliance certificate. [Listed under Information due to age of report]

Source: SOMO (2011)

Workers rights in India

A 2015 investigation by the BBC has found workers on Indian tea plantations who pick tea for this company are paid less than £2 per day and live in inhuman conditions. Living and working conditions are so bad, and wages so low, that tea workers and their families are left malnourished and vulnerable to fatal illnesses. There was also a disregard for health and safety, with workers spraying chemicals without protection, and on some estates, child labour being used. [Listed under Information due to age of report]

Source: BBC (2015)

Class action settlement

In 2016 Unilever settled a multiple class action (some 2,294 claimants in total thus far) which claimed that the company knew of the potential for scalp burns and hair loss on use of their Suave Professionals Keratin Infusion 30-Day Smoothing Kit before it was launched in 2011, but did not warn consumers. Unilever discontinued the product in May 2012, but maintained that it was safe to use, and did not disclose reports of hair loss and scalp burns. The company has created a US$10,250,000 fund for the victims.

Source: news article (2016)

Fined for 'anti-competitive' behaviour

In March 2011 Kraft Foods, Unilever and Dr. Oetker were fined US$53.2m for illegally sharing 'competition-relevant information' by German competition authorities. [Listed under Information due to age of court finding]

Source: Australian Food News (2011)

Price fixing in Europe

Consumer goods giants Unilever and Procter & Gamble were fined 315.2 million euros ($A436 million) by EU regulators in Apr 2011 for fixing washing powder prices in eight EU countries. [Listed under Information due to age of court finding]

Source: news article (2011)

Possible GE in US brands

This company has products rated RED in the Centre for Food Safety's True Food Shopper's Guide (USA). Products on the RED list contain ingredients that come from the most common GE crops (corn, soy, canola, cotton). Companies with products on this list have confirmed that their products may have or are likely to be made with GE ingredients, or have not denied using GE foods when given the opportunity to do so.

Source: Center for Food Safety USA (2018)

Nanoparticles in food products

This 2014 report by Friends of the Earth documents a tenfold increase in unregulated, unlabeled "nanofood" products on the American market since 2008. The report named this company among those with products containing unlabeled nano-ingredients. These nanomaterials differ significantly from larger particles of the same chemical composition, and new studies are adding to a growing body of scientific evidence indicating they may be more toxic to humans and the environment.

Source: FOE (2014)

Price fixing in France

In Dec 2014 this company and 12 other consumer goods firms were fined a total of 951m euros by the French competition watchdog for price fixing in supermarkets. The regulator said the companies colluded on price increases between 2003 and 2006. Unilever received the second largest fine of 172.5m euros.

Source: news article (2014)

42.9% in Newsweek Green Ranking 2017

This company received a score of 42.9/100 in the Newsweek Green Ranking 2017, which ranks the world's largest publicly traded companies on eight indicators covering energy, greenhouse gases, water, waste, fines and penalties, linking executive pay to sustainability targets, board-level committee oversight of environmental issues and third-party audits. Ranking methodology by Corporate Knights and HIP Investor.

Source: Newsweek (2017)

Land grabs in Africa

This company is a partner of the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition, which claims will lift 50 million people in Africa out of poverty by 2022. But according to a 2015 report by ActionAid, the scheme will benefit multinational companies at the expense of small-scale farmers and is likely to increase poverty and inequality in Africa. Launched in 2012, the New Alliance provides aid money from rich countries like the US and the UK, and helps big business invest in the African agricultural sector. But in return, African countries are required to change their land, seed and trade rules in favour of big business. The New Alliance will: Make it easier for big corporations to grab land in Africa: Prevent farmers from breeding, saving and exchanging seeds: Heavily promote chemical fertilisers and pesticides, which increase farmers’ risk of debt as well as damaging the environment and farmers' health: Replace family farms with low paid, insecure jobs; and Prevent countries from restricting crop exports, even at times of domestic shortage.

Source: Action Aid (2015)

Palm Oil breakthrough

Thanks to the staggering public support for Greenpeace's Dove campaign in April 2008, Unilever has now agreed to play their part in saving the Paradise Forests of South East Asia. As the biggest single buyer of palm oil in the world, Unilever has a special responsibility to help clean up the industry that's behind so much forest destruction.

Source: Greenpeace International (2008)

Sustainable sourcing of paper packaging

Unilever has committed to sourcing 75 per cent of its paper and board packaging from sustainably managed forests or from recycled material by 2015, rising to 100 per cent by 2020.

Source: Aus Food News (2010)

Microbeads scorecard

In 2016 Greenpeace East Asia ranked the world's 30 biggest personal care companies on their commitment to eliminating microbeads from their personal care products. The scorecard was based on four main criteria: commitment & transparency, definition, deadline and global application. This company ranked joint second. Microbeads are not retained by wastewater treatment and end up in the ocean where they are a threat to the marine environment.

Source: Greenpeace (2016)

Climate action commitments

As listed on the We Mean Business website, this company has committed to the following climate action initiatives: adopt a science-based emissions reduction target; commit to 100% renewable power; responsible corporate engagement in climate policy; report climate change information in mainstream reports as a fiduciary duty; put a price on carbon; climate smart agriculture; commit to electric vehicles.

Source: We Mean Business (2021)

Soy scorecard 2016 - WWF

This company received a score of 10 out of a possible total of 24 in the WWF Soy Scorecard 2016, which rates companies on their use of responsible soy, grown without damaging the environment and harming people. [Listed under Information due to age of report]

Source: WWF Soy Scorecard 2016 (2016)

Rainforest Alliance honouree

In 2017 the Rainforest Alliance presented this company a Corporate Sustainability Champions award, which recognizes companies who have demonstrated an exceptional commitment to sustainability, improving livelihoods, and conserving forests all around the world.

Source: Rainforest Alliance (2017)

Mum-friendly employer

This company was named in Seramount's 100 Best Companies 2022 for being a mum-friendly employer. Listed companies provide inclusive benefits for families, including paid gender-neutral parental leave, phase-back programs, bereavement leave after miscarriage, reimbursement for fertility expenses, and increased mental health benefits for employees.

Source: Seramount (2022)

Gender equality

This company appears on the 2023 Bloomberg Gender-Equality Index, signifying a commitment to supporting gender equality through policy development, representation, and transparency.

Source: Bloomberg (2023)

Good Egg Award 2008 (UK)

Compassion in World Farming is a UK-based organisation which works with the European food industry to encourage and reward commitment, transparency, performance and innovation in the field of animal welfare. This company won their Good Egg Award in 2008 for converting their flagship mayonnaise brands Amore, Hellmans and Calve, to use free-range eggs only across the EU.

Source: Compassion in World Farming (2008)

Cage-free eggs commitment

This company is listed on the RSPCA Australia website as 'cage-free and proud', signifying a commitment to source 100% cage-free eggs by 2025. Essentially cage-free means barn laid, which is better than cage eggs, but still much worse than free-range or organic eggs when it comes to animal welfare.

Source: RSPCA Australia (2024)

UN Global Compact participant

The United Nations Global Compact asks companies to embrace, support and enact, within their sphere of influence, a set of 10 values in the areas of human rights, labour standards, the environment, and anti-corruption. However it's non-binding nature has been widely criticised, and many signatory corporations continue to violate the Compact's values.

Source: UN Global Compact (2020)

Sustainable Agriculture Initiative member

This company is a member of the Sustainable Agriculture Initiative (SAI) Platform, the main food industry initiative supporting the development of sustainable agriculture worldwide. Created by Nestle, Unilever and Danone in 2002, the SAI Platform is a non-profit organization to facilitate sharing, at precompetitive level, of knowledge and initiatives to support the development and implementation of sustainable agriculture practices involving the different stakeholders of the food chain.

Source: SAI Platform (2023)

Bonsucro member

This company is a member of Bonsucro - Better Sugar Cane Initiative, a global non-profit, multi-stakeholder organisation fostering the sustainability of the sugarcane sector through its leading metric-based certification scheme and its support for continuous improvement for members.

Source: Bonsucro (2019)

Sustainability strategy

Deloitte developed a Zero Impact Growth Monitor that was used in 2012 to assess and rank 65 different companies' attempts to become more sustainable. Six companies reached the "Ecosystem" level: Puma, Nike, Nestle, Natura, Unilever and Ricoh. These pioneering companies have not only set measurable and ambitious mid- to long-term targets (beyond 2020), but have also embedded their sub-policies in a holistic strategic vision of their attempt to minimize their negative environmental and societal impacts.

Source: Deloitte (2012)

Sustainability Consortium member

This company is a member of The Sustainability Consortium, an organization of diverse global participants that work collaboratively to build a scientific foundation that drives innovation to improve consumer product sustainability. They develop transparent methodologies, tools, and strategies to drive a new generation of products and supply networks that address environmental, social, and economic imperatives.

Source: Sustainability Consortium (2019)

Sustainable Brands member

This company is a Bronze Member of the Sustainable Brands Network, the leading peer to peer, learning and networking group designed to support brands in meeting their sustainability goals and ultimately become those leaders of the next sustainable economy.

Source: Sustainable Brands (2018)

Green Bond Principles member

Green Bonds enable capital-raising and investment for new and existing projects with environmental benefits. The Green Bond Principles are voluntary best practice guidelines that recommend transparency and disclosure and promote integrity in the development of the Green Bond market by clarifying the approach for issuance of a Green Bond.

Source: IMCA (2018)

Plastics Commitment signatory

This company is a signatory to the New Plastics Economy Global Commitment, whose goal is to eliminate plastic pollution at its source.

Source: New Plastics Economy (2022)

How2Recycle member

This company is a member of How2Recycle. The How2Recycle Label is a voluntary, standardized labeling system that clearly communicates recycling instructions to the public. It involves a coalition of forward thinking brands who want their packaging to be recycled and are empowering consumers through smart packaging labels. Companies must be a member of the program to use the How2Recycle Label.

Source: How2Recycle (2023)

Cocoa & Forests Initiative signatory

This company is a member of the Cocoa & Forests Initiative, demonstrating a commitment to no further conversion of any forest land for cocoa production in Ghana and Cote d'Ivoire. On March 2019, thirty-three company signatories, accounting for about 85% of global cocoa usage, released detailed individual action plans. The action plans focus on forest protection and restoration, sustainable cocoa production and farmers' livelihoods, and community engagement and social inclusion.

Source: World Cocoa Foundation (2020)

US Plastics Pact signatory

This company is a signatory to the US Plastics Pact, a collaborative effort organized by The Recycling Partnership and the World Wildlife Fund, launched as part of the Ellen MacArthur Foundation's global Plastics Pact network to unify diverse public-private stakeholders across the plastics value chain to rethink the way we design, use, and reuse plastics, to create a path forward to realize a circular economy for plastic in the United States. In line with the Ellen McArthur Foundation's vision of a circular economy for plastics, which unites more than 850+ organizations, the US Plastics Pact brings together companies, government entities, NGOs, researchers, and other stakeholders to work collectively toward scalable solutions tailored to the unique needs and challenges within the U.S. landscape, through vital knowledge sharing and coordinated action.

Source: US Plastics Pact (2023)

Global Plastics Treaty endorsee

In 2022 after more than 170 nations backed a historic UN resolution to end plastic pollution, global businesses across the plastics value chain, financial institutions, and NGOs came together to announce a common vision for an effective and ambitious Global Treaty to End Plastic Pollution. The vision will form the basis for future policy engagements with governments through a newly launched Business Coalition for a Global Plastics Treaty which will be convened by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and WWF. This company has endorsed the vision statement of the treaty.

Source: Global Plastics Treaty (2023)

Ellen MacArthur Foundation strategic partner

This company is a strategic partner of the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, whose stated mission is to accelerate the transition to a circular economy. The Ellen MacArthur Foundation works with business, government and academia to build a framework for an economy that is restorative and regenerative by design.

Source: Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2023)

World Cocoa Foundation member

This company is a member of the World Cocoa Foundation (WCF), an international membership organization representing more than 100 member companies across the cocoa value chain. WCF is committed to creating a sustainable cocoa economy through economic & social development and environmental stewardship in cocoa-growing communities.

Source: World Cocoa Foundation (2024)

C grade in Keep Forests Standing report

Rainforest Action Network's 2022 report and scorecard "Keep Forests Standing" assessed 17 brands and banks on their efforts to address their contribution to the destruction of forests, ongoing land grabs, and violence against local and Indigenous communities. This company received a 'C' grade in the evaluation.

Source: RAN (2022)

Guide to Healthy Cleaning grade (A-D)

EWG's Guide to Healthy Cleaning provides safety ratings for household cleaning products, with over 2,500 products rated from A (lowest concern) to F (highest concern). This company's score range is A to D, with over 43% their products scoring an D.

Source: Environmental Working Group (2020)

Labour rights in Vietnam

This 2013 Oxfam report is a study of labour issues in Unilever's Vietnam operations and supply chain. The report, based on research in Vietnam, explores the reality on the ground in Unilever's operations and wider supply chain, and compares the findings with the company's high-level policy commitments. Unusually, the company co-operated fully with the study, providing access to its staff, operations, data and suppliers.

Source: Oxfam (2013)

42/100 in KnowTheChain Benchmark

In 2023 KnowTheChain benchmarked 60 food and beverage companies on their efforts to identify and tackle forced labour risks in their supply chains. This company received a score of 42/100. The average score was a disappointing 16/100 and the highest score was 56/100.

Source: KnowTheChain (2023)

Modern Slavery statement

California, the UK and Australia have all enacted legislation requiring companies operating within their borders to disclose their efforts to eradicate modern slavery from their operations and supply chains. Follow the link to see this company's disclosure statement.

Source: company website (2017)

Chocolate scorecard

Be Slavery Free's 2024 Chocolate Scorecard rates all the major chocolate companies on their labour and environmental policies and practices. Companies were asked questions in six areas: traceability and transparency; living income; child labor; deforestation and climate; agroforestry; and pesticides. This company received a yellow rating: "Progressing in policy and practice."

Source: Be Slavery Free (2024)

BHRRC company profile

Business & Human Rights Resource Centre digital platform presents news and allegations relating to the human rights impact of over 20,000 companies. Their enhanced Company Dashboards also include financial information, key data points based on corporate policies, and scores from prominent civil society benchmarks. Follow the link and use the search function to view this company's dashboard.

Source: BHRRC (2022)

36.1% in Gender Benchmark

The 2023 Gender Benchmark ranks 112 companies from the apparel and food and agriculture sectors on their efforts to drive gender equality and women's empowerment across their entire value chain. Companies are assessed on governance and strategy, representation, compensation and benefits, health and well-being, violence and harassment, and marketplace and community. This company ranked #19/112, with a total score of 36.1%. The average score was 23% and the highest score was 55%.

Source: World Benchmarking Alliance (2023)

Tier 4 in farm animal welfare rankings

The Business Benchmark on Farm Animal Welfare (BBFAW) 2023 Report ranks global food companies on their farm animal welfare policies, practices and performance. This company appeared in tier 4, "Making progress on implementation", with tier 1 being the best, and tier 6 the worst.

Source: BBFAW (2023)

Investment in nanotechnology

Friends of the Earth's 2014 report "Tiny Ingredients, Big Risks" names this company as one of over 200 transnational food companies engaged in nanotechnology research and development, and on their way to commercializing products. New studies are adding to a growing body of scientific evidence indicating nanomaterials may be toxic to humans and the environment.

Source: FOE (2014)