Yumi's Quality Foods
Founded in Melbourne in 1990. Australian private equity firm Anacacia Capital bought an undisclosed stake in Jan 2014. George Weston Foods became full owners in 2018.
|Yumi's Quality Foods Pty Ltd||AUS||website|
| George Weston Foods Ltd
owns 100% of Yumi's Quality Foods Pty Ltd
| Associated British Foods PLC
owns 100% of George Weston Foods Ltd
| » Wittington Investments Ltd
owns 55% of Associated British Foods PLC
| Garfield Weston Foundation
owns 79% of Wittington Investments Ltd
|Yumi's Quality Foods Pty Ltd|
|No assessment data currently available for Yumi's Quality Foods Pty Ltd|
|George Weston Foods Ltd|
This company received a packaging performance level of 3 (Advanced) in its 2022 APCO Annual Report. Australian Packaging Covenant Organisation (APCO) is a not-for-profit organisation leading the development of a circular economy for packaging in Australia. Each year, APCO Members are required to submit an APCO Annual Report and Action Plan, which includes an overall performance level from 1 (Getting Started) to 5 (Beyond Best Practice).
Source: APCO (2022)
Between 2013 and 2017 this company paid zero tax on a total income of $8.6 billion, earning the number 21 spot on Michael West's Top 40 Tax Dodgers 2019. West calculated which of Australia's largest companies have paid the least tax, or no tax, on the highest incomes using four years of tax transparency data published by the Australian Tax Office.
Source: Michael West (2019)
Fined $50,000 in February 2012 after pleading guilty at Castlemaine Magistrates' Court to the offence of failing to provide a safe plant. A worker was injured by a smallgoods processing machine on July 20, 2010 and when investigated, it was revealed that the machine did not comply with Australian standards. The company has undertaken a full evaluation of its OHS standards on all its sites since the incident.
Source: news article (2012)
In Sept 2015 the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) accepted court enforceable undertakings from this company after investigations found that it had engaged in misleading conduct by labelling pork products as 'bred free range'. From 2008, some of KR Castlemaine's pork products were promoted as 'bred free range'. The pigs used for these pork products were in fact born outdoors but raised indoors to straw based shelters from the age of approximately 21 days.
Source: ACCC (2015)
Some of this company's Jasol cleaning products have received the Good Environmental Choice Ecolabel, provided by the Good Environmental Choice Australia.
Source: GECA (2020)
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: AFGC (2019)
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 (2020)
This company has Corporate Responsibility claims on its website, including efforts in the areas of worker safety, sustainable palm oil, water conservation, waste reduction, and community support.
Source: company website (2014)
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)
|Associated British Foods PLC|
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 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)
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.
Source: BBC (2015)
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 34%.
Source: Forest 500 (2021)
This company scores Ethical Consumer's worst rating for their use of palm oil, signifying they are using no or minimal certified palm products, and with no or minimal positive commitments.
Source: Ethical Consumer (2022)
The 2019 Corporate Human Rights Benchmark assessed 200 of the largest publicly traded companies in the world from the Agricultural Products, Apparel, Extractives and ICT Manufacturing sectors on 100 human rights indicators. This company's score was in the 20-30 band range. The overall average score was a disappointing 24%.
Source: CHRB (2019)
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 26/100.
Source: KnowTheChain (2021)
This company scores Ethical Consumer's worst rating for the likely use of tax avoidance strategies, and has at least two high risk subsidiaries in tax havens.
Source: Ethical Consumer (2022)
Oxfam's 2016 Behind the Brands Scorecard assesses the agricultural sourcing policies of the world's 10 largest food and beverage companies. It exclusively focuses on publicly available information that relates to the policies of these companies on their sourcing of agricultural commodities from developing countries. This company ranked equal last with a score of 36%.
Source: Oxfam (2016)
This company received an S&P Global ESG Score of 33/100 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)
Primark is an Irish clothing retailer operating 271 stores throughout western Europe, and a subsidiary of Associated British Foods. Primark has been criticised for worker exploitation.
Source: Shop Ethical online profile (2014)
In Feb 2013 ActionAid (UK) released a report revealing that this company is dodging its tax bill in Zambia, one of the world's poorest countries. ActionAid claims ABF has avoided an estimated US$27 million in taxes in Zambia since 2007, where the company operates a sugar company. ABF denies the allegations (http://bit.ly/1j7m8l6).
Source: ActionAid (2013)
This company received a score of 34.2/100 in the Newsweek Green Rankings 2016, 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 (2016)
This company has a number of sustainability claims on its website in the areas of renewable energy, worker safety, packaging reductions and ethical business practices
Source: company website (2014)
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 C.
Source: CDP (2021)
The WWF Palm Oil Buyers Scorecard 2019 assesses 173 companies on the commitments they have made, and the actions they have taken, to ensure that there is no destruction of nature including no deforestation along their supply chains; and support a responsible and sustainable palm oil industry beyond their own supply chain. This company is rated 'middle of the pack' with a score of 10.8 out of a possible total of 22.
Source: WWF Palm Oil Buyers Scorecard 2019 (2019)
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: Modern Slavery Registry (2018)
The 2020 Sustainable Cotton Ranking, published by WWF, Solidaridad and the Pesticide Action Network UK analysed the 77 largest cotton users among international apparel brands and retailers, reviewing their policies, actual uptake of more sustainable cotton and transparency in their supply chains. According to the report, this company is "starting the journey" with a score of 16.8%. The average score was 18.2% and the highest score was 79.2%.
Source: Sustainable Cotton Ranking (2020)
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 4, "Making progress on implementation", with tier 1 being the best, and tier 6 the worst.
Source: BBFAW (2020)
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)
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 #88/350, with a total score of 29.4/100.
Source: World Benchmarking Alliance (2021)
|Wittington Investments Ltd|
Wittington Investments subsidiary Fortnum & Mason has been targeted by PETA for continuing to sell foie gras. Foie gras is made of the liver of a duck or goose that has been force fed grain through a tube for the last 12-18 days of its life under factory farm conditions. More than a dozen countries have prohibited foie gras production due to animal welfare concerns.
Source: PETA (2020)
UK-based protest group, UK Uncut, targeted Wittington Investments during protests in March 2011 for their tax avoidance policies.
Source: UK Uncut (2011)
Brands in 'bread' category received BOTTOM Rating; with a score of 54 out of a possible score of 100 in the Ethical Company Organisation's 'Good Shopping Guide' (UK), which evaluates brands with regard to their environmental, animal welfare and human rights records.
Source: Ethical Company Organisation (UK) (2020)
|Garfield Weston Foundation|
In 2010, the UK Charity Commission found that some of the family members who run the Garfield Weston Foundation allowed an investment company it controlled (Wittington Investments) to make illegal political donations between 1993 and 2007. The Charity Commission also found that the charity's nine trustees breached their duties in January 2006 by voting for a resolution allowing Wittington to make donations without giving proper consideration.
Source: news article (2010)
The Garfield Weston Foundation gives grants to UK registered charities, with the exception of animal welfare charities. Organisations with an 'exempt' or 'excepted' status such as churches, hospitals, educational establishments and housing corporations may also apply for grants.
Source: company website (2012)
|Address||67-75 Wedgewood Rd, Hallam, VIC, 3803, Australia|
|Phone||03 8787 1444|