Australia's largest multi-species meat processor. Bought by Swift Australia in 2008, which is owned by Brazil's JBS, the world's #1 beef processor and exporter.
|Tasman Group Services Pty Ltd||AUS||website|
| JBS Australia Pty Ltd
owns 100% of Tasman Group Services Pty Ltd
| JBS USA Holdings Inc
owns 100% of JBS Australia Pty Ltd
| » JBS SA
owns 100% of JBS USA Holdings Inc
| J&F Investimentos SA
owns 40% of JBS SA
|Tasman Group Services Pty Ltd|
|No assessment data currently available for Tasman Group Services Pty Ltd|
|JBS Australia Pty Ltd|
This company operates five feedlots. A feedlot is an intensive confinement animal feeding operation (CAFO) for cattle, much like a factory for 'battery chickens'. Each animal has 5 to 10 square metres of space in a pen of 50 to 200 cattle. The cattle are forced to stand and sleep in their own dung and urine, and endure extremes of weather (especially heat). Close confinement means a much higher risk of disease so antibiotic drugs are routinely used. Grain feed commonly causes their digestive systems to be acidic. Cattle spend up to a year in feedlots, where they are fattened up before slaughter.
Source: company website (2020)
A 2022 Four Corners report revealed that JBS's early expansion in Australia and the US was only made possible by bribing Brazilian politicians, for which JBS's parent company paid a $3.2 billion penalty in 2017. The report also outlines further scandals including insider trading, sourcing cattle from illegally deforested land in Brazil, price fixing, and tax avoidance in Australia.
Source: ABC News (2022)
The Farm Transparency Project Repository is a public repository/gallery for videos, photos, documents and campaign materials relating to the animal rights movement in Australia. Follow the link to see their profile on this company.
Source: Farm Transparency Project (2022)
|JBS USA Holdings Inc|
In 2021 this company agreed to pay US$20 million to settle a consumer class-action lawsuit alleging the company conspired to fix prices for pork. The settlement states that JBS will pay the money into a settlement fund that will be used to compensate the consumer class and cover litigation fees and expenses.
Source: news article (2021)
In June 2011 Swift USA agreed to pay US$1.3 million to Nebraska and the United States for damaging natural resources in violation of EPA regulations. Swift Beef Company's alleged violations of the Clean Water Act took place at its Grand Island plant in Nebraska between 2006 and 2011. Swift discharged more wastewater than it was allowed, causing the death of 10,000 fish in the Wood and Platte Rivers and interfering with the city's water treatment process. Regulators also accused Swift of poor record keeping.
Source: US Dept of Justice (2011)
In 2021, the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) asked companies to provide data about their efforts towards removing commodity-driven deforestation and forest degradation from its direct operations and supply chains. Responding companies are scored across four key areas: disclosure; awareness; management; and leadership. This company received a CDP Forests Score of B.
Source: CDP (2021)
In 2021, the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) asked companies to provide data about their efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate climate change risk. Responding companies are scored across four key areas: disclosure; awareness; management; and leadership. This company received a CDP Climate Change Score of B.
Source: CDP (2021)
In 2021, the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) asked companies to provide data about their efforts to manage and govern freshwater resources. Responding companies are scored on six key metrics: transparency; governance & strategy; measuring & monitoring; risk assessment; targets & goals; and value chain engagement. This company received a CDP Water Security Score of B.
Source: CDP (2021)
The 2020 Business Benchmark on Farm Animal Welfare (BBFAW) report ranks global food companies on how they are managing and reporting their farm animal welfare policies and practices. This company appeared in tier 3, "Established but work to be done", with tier 1 being the best, and tier 6 the worst.
Source: BBFAW (2020)
Amazon Watch's 2020 report, Complicity in Destruction III, reveals how a network of leading international financial institutions is linked to conflicts on indigenous lands, illegal deforestation, land grabbing, the weakening of environmental protections, and the production and export of conflict commodities. The report found that this agribusiness company has been directly or indirectly involved in conflicts affecting Indigenous peoples and their territories.
Source: Amazon Watch (2020)
According to a 2020 report by Amnesty International, cattle illegally grazed in protected areas of Brazil's Amazon rainforest have entered this company's supply chain. JBS contributes to human rights abuses against Indigenous peoples and residents of Reserves by participating in the economic incentives for cattle illegally grazed in protected areas. JBS has been aware of these risks since 2009, but has failed to implement an effective monitoring system for its supply chain.
Source: Amnesty Intl (2020)
As You Sow's 2021 Corporate Plastic Pollution Scorecard ranks companies on plastic packaging pollution. The study measures the progress of 50 large companies in the beverage, quick-service restaurant, consumer packaged goods, and retail sectors on six core pillars where swift action is needed to reduce plastic pollution: 1) Packaging Design, 2) Reusable Packaging, 3) Recycled Content, 4) Public Data Transparency, 5) Support for Recycling, and 6) Producer Responsibility. This company received a grade of F
Source: As You Sow (2021)
In 2020/21 KnowTheChain benchmarked over 180 large global companies in the ICT, Food & Beverage, and Apparel & Footwear sectors on their efforts to address forced labour and human trafficking in their supply chains. This company received a score of 12/100.
Source: KnowTheChain (2021)
This company received a score of 14.8/100 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)
'The Big Con' is a 2021 report by Corporate Accountability, Friends of the Earth and others that makes clear that Big Polluters' idea of "net zero" is part of their continued plan to protect deeply unjust global systems, distract from taking the real action needed, and to evade responsibility for the climate crisis and to continue to pollute. This company was named in the report as one whose "net zero" climate commitments are anything but real action.
Source: Corporate Accountability (2021)
The livestock sector is the single largest contributor to man-made methane emissions. Even though rapid reductions of methane emissions are needed to slow the rate of global warming, the largest meat and dairy corporations are oblivious to the problem. Changing Markets' 2021 report 'Blindspot' investigated the policies and actions of 20 meat and dairy giants to reduce their methane emissions. This company scored 9.6/100 for their methane policy and actions.
Source: Changing Markets (2021)
In their 2019 report 'Feeding Ourselves Thirsty', Ceres looks at how food sector companies are responding to water risks. 40 companies were assessed on a 0-100 point basis across four categories of water management: governance and management, direct operations, manufacturing supply chain and agricultural supply chain. This company received a score of 22.
Source: Ceres (2019)
In 2021 was fined US$3.6 million by a local Brazilian court in respect to damages related to employees following a Covid-19 outbreak at a beef processing facility.
Source: Just Food (2021)
This company is 40% owned by J&F Investimentos, which has criticisms and an overall Shop Ethical rating of 'F'
Source: Shop Ethical (2018)
This company received an S&P Global ESG Score of 21/100 in the Food Products category of the S&P Global Corporate Sustainability Assessment, an annual evaluation of companies' sustainability practices (last updated 7 Feb 2021). The rankings are based on an analysis of corporate economic, environmental and social performance, assessing issues such as corporate governance, risk management, environmental reporting, climate strategy, human rights and labour practices.
Source: S&P Global (2021)
The 2021 Food and Agriculture Benchmark assessed 350 keystone companies across the entirety of the food system, from farm to fork. It covers three dimensions where transformation is needed: nutrition, environment and social inclusion. This company ranked #146/350, with a total score of 20.9/100.
Source: World Benchmarking Alliance (2021)
Despite making commitments in Oct 2009 to no longer purchase cattle from ranches that have recently deforested or that are located on indigenous lands in the Amazon, this 2011 Greenpeace report reveals that JBS purchased cattle from properties connected to deforestation, slave labour and invasion of indigenous land in the Brazilian Amazon in early 2011, in contravention of their agreement. [Listed under Information due to age of report]
Source: Greenpeace (2011)
Brazilian prosecutors have brought a civil lawsuit against this company, alleging that over the last four years, JBS purchased cattle from land in the Amazon that was illegally deforested and from farms linked to slavery. However, JBS has insisted that all cattle purchased from Acre comply with its commitment to the mandates of the Brazilian Environmental Agency and the Ministry of Labour.
Source: news article (2011)
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.
Source: We Mean Business (2021)
This company is a member of the Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef (GRSB), who's stated mission is to advance continuous improvement in sustainability of the global beef value chain through leadership, science and multi-stakeholder engagement and collaboration. However the GSRB has been criticised by a group of NGOs for its failure to address misuse of antibiotics and animal welfare concerns, among other things (http://bit.ly/1xWw5pV).
Source: GRSB (2017)
This company is a member of the Leather Working Group, a multi-stakeholder group who's objective is to develop and maintain a protocol that assesses the compliance and environmental performance of tanners and promotes sustainable and appropriate environmental business practices within the leather industry.
Source: Leather Working Group (2022)
Forest 500 identifies the 350 companies and 150 financial institutions with the greatest exposure to tropical deforestation risk, and annually assesses them on the strength and implementation of their deforestation and human rights commitments. This company received a score of 42%.
Source: Forest 500 (2021)
As a result of the Greenpeace report 'Slaughtering the Amazon', JBS committed to no longer buying cattle raised in areas of the Amazon that were deforested after Sept. 23, 2009. They also announced that they will remove from its suppliers' lists any farms in the region involved with slave labor or caught raising cattle on Indigenous Lands or Protected Areas.
Source: Greenpeace (2009)
OpenSecrets.org tracks the influence of money on U.S. politics, and how that money affects policy and citizens' lives. Follow link to see this company's record of political donations, lobbying, outside spending and more.
Source: Open Secrets (2020)
The Coller FAIRR Protein Producer Index is a comprehensive assessment of how this sector is managing critical sustainability risks factors: GHGs; deforestation and biodiversity; water scarcity; water pollution; antibiotics; animal welfare; working conditions; food safety. This company was rated as medium risk.
Source: FAIRR (2021)