• 52fighters@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    11 months ago

    The entire executive suite should all be arrested for financing terrorist operations in Ukraine. Replace them with people who will cut operations with Russia!

  • average650@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    11 months ago

    Presumably if they somehow didn’t allow it, some higher ups in Russia might find themselves suicided.

  • MercuryUprising@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    11 months ago

    Unilever has been under pressure to pull out of Russia, but says the situation is “not straightforward”.

    Yes, what makes it complicated is that Hein Schumacher, CEO of Unilever, would get a smaller bonus if he didn’t support an attempted genocide. Just to repeat that for SEO purposes, Hein Schumacher and the board of Unilever support a genocide in Ukraine.

  • noqturn@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    11 months ago

    While I wish it was easy to condemn Unilever for this, I get it. They have a lot of employees in russia and shuttering operations would have a decidedly negative effect on those people, and it’s not like they can prohibit their employees from taking legally required actions.

    • BeardyGrumps@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Then why not say every rouble made in Russia will go to humanitarian aid? I’ll tell you why; it’s because they are still making money by being in Russia. It’s corporate greed through and through. These fuckers make no sacrifice until it hurts their bottom line.

      • noqturn@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        11 months ago

        Agreed, but the alternative is not much better. Unilever dips, Russia probably tries to take over their properties and make it a state owned venture.

        • Alto@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          11 months ago

          What part of the last year and a half makes you think the Russian government is capable of taking over and smoothly running a business that pulls out.

        • Schmeckinger@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Then destroy everything in an “accident” and then dip, since its “too costly to rebuild”

    • dimath@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s not about prohibition, no one wants to be drafted and people are hiding from it, it’s about sharing employees details and location with military recruiters.

      • noqturn@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        Genuine question: where in the article is it mentioned that Unilever is sharing those details? I don’t doubt that they are, but I don’t see that here.

        By no means am I defending Unilever here-I consider myself very anti corporate and I don’t think any company should exist that is the size of Unilever, but the real world is less black and white.

    • ivanafterall@kbin.social
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      “Shuttering operations would have a decidedly negative effect on those people”

      Yeah, that’s why they’re still operating there. It’s for the good of the employees.

      • noqturn@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Zero chance there isn’t corporate greed involved-that’s why all mega corps like this exist. But if they dip, the Russian state would at least attempt to take over the Unilever properties and operate. That would be no better for the workers-possibly worse.