Whole Foods CEO Spurs Boycott With Health Care Views
Memo to Whole Foods CEO John Mackey: when much of your customer base consists of reusable-bag-using, wheatgrass-munching "progressive" types, it's probably not such a good idea to publish an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal criticizing current health care reform proposals. At least if you don't want said customers organizing boycotts of your stores.
It all started with Mackey's Tuesday WSJ op-ed, which suggested, among other things, that the health insurance options provided to Whole Foods employees should be a more popular option to control health care costs, tort reform should be enacted to control health care costs, and that the government shouldn't dictate to insurance companies what diseases and treatments they should cover. Oh, yeah, and that our country wouldn't be in this mess in the first place if more people shopped at Whole Foods:
Recent scientific and medical evidence shows that a diet consisting of foods that are plant-based, nutrient dense and low-fat will help prevent and often reverse most degenerative diseases that kill us and are expensive to treat. We should be able to live largely disease-free lives until we are well into our 90s and even past 100 years of age.
Blogs, including political heavy hitters like Talking Points Memo, Daily Kos and Huffington Post jumped right on the story, and calls for a boycott came soon after. The Boycott Whole Foods Group on Facebook says in its description:
Whole Foods is NOT a company that cares for communities and they have built their brand with the dollars of deceived progressives. No more. My $ will no longer go to support Whole Foods' anti-union, anti-health insurance reform, right-wing activities.
Well, at least this time Mackey is signing his name to his views instead of trolling anonymously on the Internet. A conspiracy-minded reader pointed out to us that he sold almost $1.4 million worth of Whole Foods stock a week before the piece ran. Coincidence, we're sure.
The Whole Foods Alternative to ObamaCare [WSJ]
Boycott Whole Foods [Facebook]
(Photo: AlishaV)
Post a comment
Comments:
Prediction: Shareholder resolution will be passed to oust Mackey. Even better would be a suit against him to disgorge the $1.3 million he made from the sale of stock on August 9th, in favor of the shareholders who will be watching the stock drop the next few weeks.
I can't believe the lawsuits haven't been filed yet.
@Segador: To clarify my position before the flame wars begin, I'm socially extremely liberal. Marry who you want, live how you want, smoke what you want, do what you want. As long as you're not hurting others, your life and choices are none of my or anyone's business. However, fiscally I'm extremely conservative. I want to keep my money, not give it away, which is why I read the Consumerist. If and when I choose to give away my money, I'd prefer it to be to organizations/charities of my choosing, not the government's.
So people refuse to shop at a store because their CEO doesn't agree with their political philosophies. Is it just me or is this ridiculous?
the annuls of unintended consequences: boycott of whole foods leads to the layoffs of hundreds of otherwise wonderful employees. be careful who you intend to punish.
Personally, I trust the CEO of a very successful publicly-traded company that offers one of the best health care and compensation packages of any company in its industry over politicians, pundits, lackeys, gun-toting NRA members, or wheatgrass chugging liberal elites.
His suggestions are sound, pragmatic, and rhetoric free. He is a very smart man and he has valuable information to share with us. Agree or disagree with him, but he should be heard and his willingness to bring his decades of real world experience and wisdom to bear on this issue should be applauded, not criticized.
If enough people boycott Whole Foods that they have to lay off employees, other grocery stores will see enough of a sales increase to justify hiring new employees. Wages / benefits may or may not be the same.
@Segador:
This is America - you don't need a reason to sue someone, although it usually helps if you want to win.
@Segador: What's unfortunate is that you feel compelled to attach such a disclaimer (and I don't blame you) since many would be quick to first label and dismiss you instead of responding to your words.
@ecwis: It's not ridiculous at all. If you don't like they way a company is run, don't give them your money. Simple as that.
@Haggie1: Interesting...I don't trust the CEO of a publicly traded company to do anything that doesn't benefit his shareholders' pocketbooks. A government, at least ostensibly, has a duty to all it's citizens, not just the ones that like it or own stock in it.
Memo to Laura: it's ok for one to hold opinions that may run contrary to patrons of a business that he founded. It really is.
But this isn't about how the company is run. People are complaining because the CEO has stated his personal views about a national debate.
@Segador: I wasn't aware that the Consumerist was required to be unbiased...the very notion behind the site is sticking up for consumers, not corporations. If a company makes a boneheaded move, they get called on it. If they offer a shoddy product, it gets reported. If it does something good, they get atta-boyed for it.
Does anyone really listen to Mackey any more? This is the guy who talked down his competition on Yahoo finance forums hoping to drive the stock price down so his own company could more easily buy them out. I mean, seriously ... what credibility does he have left? Who could possibly believe a word he says?
Best thing to do with a troll like this, is to ignore him.
Holy crap I am going to spend more money @ Whole Foods now. I love how people who want socialized health care call anyone who opposes them right wing.
There are plenty of us who are quite liberal in our social views who know you can't SPEND MONEY on everything.
Ah well even though it's at a higher price than my local Publix I will give my support to companies I agree with.
I like his health care plan. I think the more common such a plan, the less inflationary health care would be. We would be more price sensitive and the drug companies, medical equipment manufacturers and the rest of the industry would not have been able to raise prices above inflation.
I guess trying to tell Americans to give up their deep fried and meat based diet is just too much.
@wrjohnston19283: I daresay a CEOs view will quite frequently have some bearing on how a company is run. Furthermore, Mackey is biting the hand that feeds him. He chairs a company that is supported in very large part by people who's philosophy he just disparaged...so no surprise there's going to be backlash.
@Segador: An officer and director of a public company, as Mackey is with regard to Whole Foods, must avoid saying and doing things that will cause artificial swings in the stock price. That's particularly true when they're an insider doing a stock trade around the same time.
At most public companies, folks in Mackey's position keep their mouths shut. Also, most companies limit insider trades to a 30 day window following a quarterly or annual statement. It looks a bit odd to me that Mackey sold his stock on August 6, which was eight days before that window would have begun; Whole Foods filed their 10-Q (quarterly report) with the SEC on August 14.
If there is a Whole Foods boycott or other negative publicity due to Mackey's comments, and if Whole Foods' stock price declines compared to Mackey's sale price... well, I've seen stockholder suits filed for less. And if Mackey then buys shares at a lower price than he sold at, that's going to look extremely dodgy.
One might ask if Mackey can't exercise his free speech rights like the rest of us. No, sorry, he can't. Just like I can go to Vegas and bet on baseball and Pete Rose couldn't - at least, not and expect to get into the Baseball Hall of Fame. Choosing certain professions means you give up things. If Mackey wants to become a pundit and make controversial statements, he should quit Whole Foods.
I love he sold his stock! LOL! He is sooooo concerned about our health but he will sink his own company, cash out and i am sure will leave his employees to suffer. Typical Republican.
@Laura Northrup: Surely the inclusion of the bit about his online activities and timing of his sale of stock at the end of your commentary was to build up Mackey's image for Consumerist readers, right?
@dreamsneverend: I went today, and will go much more often.
Congrats to the boycotters who are going to hurt WF employees who get paid more than other grocery stores, and have much better benefits.
/sarcasm
My favorite was the line about "People with pre-existing conditions not needing health insurance but needing a loan". Wow...someone needs a brimstone based God lesson.
@Segador: I am a social and fiscal conservative and agree with your original post, as well as your point about your choosing (rather than the government) who you should be giving your money.
I love this website .. but the WHOLE PAYCHECK label is BS .. Why would you put a great humanitarian company and belittle it with an old un funny and untrue label ?
They have some of the best benefits for workers in the world ,they pay amazing starting pay for even cashiers, they do more for 3rd world countries then any other major corporation i can think of.. never mind the effects on the earth etc ... so i hope you are happy with your self Laura... Its sad because i love what this website stands for .. but attacking wholefoods is not in the best intrest
And no i am not John Mackey : )
@wrjohnston19283: i have friends who work there. they say the benefits are above average for the type of job it is [as in, my insurance is better but i am in a different industry, different type of job]
P.s. A week before the piece ran the stock was up to about $30 because they had great sales over last year and shocked wall street.. when it was at about $8 earlier in the year .. i am pretty sure i would have sold my shares as well
@veg-o-matic: Largely plant-based diets are fine, but people still need to consume meat or fish. Humans require certain essential fatty acids which are difficult to get from a vegetarian diet. You can get them from grubs, termites, fish, or meat, but you can't get them from plants and they are essential for proper brain functioning (and for the building of brain tissue in infants and fetuses).
The other problem, of course, is that there's an utterly erroneous assumption that eating right, exercise, and steering clear of harmful substances of any kind will prevent health problems from developing. It will decrease the chances, sure, but genetic predispositions are in place. Children die of cancer. People are born with diabetes and the propensity for degenerative diseases. There are also stress-related illness, mental health, etc. which have to do with the sensitivity of one's nervous system and factors often beyond one's control.
The idea that making the right choices will lead to a particular desired outcome in any endeavor in life is the mindset of the privileged of this world. If you're born with a good set of genes and have the right options in life for economic or career success, that holds true. It simply isn't so for everyone.
@ecwis: This is called voting with your wallet. The CEO profits from the company's success. If you don't like his views and don't want him to prosper, you don't patronize his business.
There's nothing irrational about it. It's a choice not to further empower people who's views you find repugnant because giving them more power is tantamount to giving them political influence.
@StrangeTikiGod: Although I disagree with you, at least your points are clear and rational, not angry. Hearted.
Consumerist needs to take a lesson from Whole Foods about stating their political views to their customers when the customer might not necessarily agree with the political views and might boycott the company/website. It seems that just in the past few days that Consumerist has turned into a raging liberal/progressive site -- I've been reading Consumerist for a long time and about to stop because of the left-wing bias now present. I know there has been some personnel changes and it seems to have had a major shift in the attitudes of the articles. While I absolutely support the right of citizens to their political opinions, a business with customers/readers should be very careful about alienating said customers/readers. I put plenty of signs in my yard during election season but would never put them up in my place of business.
I completely agree with the CEO of Whole Foods when it comes to their health care plan. Health care costs will never be contained unless people take responsibility for their own health care spending and when it's given to them at little/no cost, they will use as much as they can. We do not have a Whole Foods anywhere near where I live or I would shop there in support of him. However, I don't think he made the right decision in writing this article because it does go against the beliefs of many of his CUSTOMERS. Boycotts of this type typically blow over pretty quickly however, so he probably doesn't have much to worry about.
@JonThomasDesigns: Not in who's best interest? Perhaps not Whole Foods's, no, but the Consumerist is doing what it's intended to do...look out for the consumer.
And the "Whole Paycheck" joke existed LONG before this site used it. Face it, Whole Foods is expensive, and if you were to do all your grocery shopping there, it could very well eat up your whole paycheck. Unless you're John Mackey, I suppose.
@ShariC: Largely plant-based diets are fine, but people still need to consume meat or fish. Humans require certain essential fatty acids which are difficult to get from a vegetarian diet.
I have to disagree, and I think medical science would disagree as well. Millions of people live their whole lives as vegetarians, and they tend to live longer than meat-eaters, even when controlling for life-style factors.
Oh my God!?! I can't believe the consumerist has liberal leanings after all it's based in New York City and sides with people who are screwed by companies. Shame on you consumerist for giving people a FREE website to save them money & frustration, and denying companies the right to freely make and alter contracts as they wish...for shame!
@JonThomasDesigns: StrangeTikiGod, think this bit of data would be relevant for Laura to "report" as well?
Brilliant man; saying things that gives reason for almost his entire customer base to not buy there. That's like if I owned a gun store chain and decide to give a rant on the benefits to illegal immigration and the Spanish language slowly invading the US. Sure, I have a right to an opinion, but making my customers angry is just... stupid.
Personally, I am way over the organic-ecofriendly-green-mania (or obsession) that swept the nation, so, whatever.
I don't agree with him myself, but that was fairly well-written and much better than the "it's MY DAMN MONEY!" argument I keep hearing over and over. His point about tort reform, though, that needs to be seriously taken into account.
@ShariC: i agree about the erroneous assumption issue! i ate "right" for most of my life and it didn't stop me from getting autoimmune issues. they run in the family. and medical science knows that people with close family members with autoimmune disorders are at higher risk, regardless of diet and lifestyle. [multiple sclerosis, lupus, type I diabetes etc]
now i can't eat most of what is sold at whole foods at all because of autoimmune nerve damage to my stomach.
Mackey giddily takes the money of clueless yet certainly well-meaning "progressive wheatgrass types" but he himself is a libertarian who cares for little more than the bottom line.
What he says about a plant-based diet is true, but when people complain about how prohibitively expensive it is to eat that way, they should realize that Mackey is one of the big reasons why that is so.
This latest drivel comes as no surprise to those who have been boycotting Whole Foods for years now.