What Working Mother magazine won’t tell you: Abbott
Abbott
Show me the $$$
Abbott spent $2,260,000 for lobbying in 2006, $880,000 of which went to outside lobbying firms. The rest was spent on in-house lobbyists. Abbott gave $566,474 to federal candidates in the 2005/2006 election period through its political action committee.
Chairman and CEO Miles White has given $94,940 to political candidates and political action committees since 2000. Of that, $10,000 went to the New American Leadership Fund, $5,000 to the Keep Our Mission PAC, which gave $1,090,828 to candidates and other PACs in the last election cycle, and $500 to the Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America, which gave $123,343 in 2006 to federal candidates.
Who benefits?
Abbott, which recorded $22.5 billion in sales in 2006, has 65,000 employees in more than 100 facilities around the world, including offices in Norway and Sweden. Working Mother “loves” the family leave Abbott offers American employees:
Salaried mothers get six weeks of paid and six weeks unpaid maternity leave. Hourly employees get six weeks of partially paid and six weeks unpaid maternity leave. Fathers can take two weeks of paid paternity leave.
Abbott employees who live in Norway or Sweden get at least a year of paid family leave (mothers and fathers must share the leave) with the option of extending it to two or even three years at reduced pay.
Abbott had 150 employees (of 65,000 total) participate in lactation support for its Mothers at Work program, which “helps our employees manage their breastfeeding schedule at while at work” with lactation consultants, lactation rooms, a “breastfeeding kit” and online information. The kit says Abbott has partnered with Working Mother magazine to “raise awareness” and “encourage implementation of workplace lactation programs.”
What do they say when they speak for working mothers?
Abbott also has teamed up with Working Mother and its Moms in Action blog, Corporate Voices for Working Families and the International Formula Council, an international association of manufacturers and marketers of infant formula (individual members are not listed), to speak for working mothers in the public-policy arena. For example:
… some states are considering proposals to restrict the information new mothers receive about infant feeding options.
That’s where the formula council, which collaborates with Abbott and Working Mother, comes in. An Abbott publication called “Ensuring Optimal Infant Nutrition: A Shared Responsibility,” says that “92 percent of mothers approve of the distribution of infant formula samples,” according to an August 2002 survey conducted by Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin & Associates with Wirthlin Worldwide. It doesn’t, however, provide details of the survey. How many mothers participated in the survey? Ten? Twenty? One hundred? It’s hard to say. The survey is not available online.
If you’d like to hear what they say on behalf of working mothers, they will hold a teleconference on public policy and advocacy on Nov. 15.
They mean business
Think making the “100 best” list is just a nice pat on the back? Think again. Not only do companies send out press releases about it, promote it to prospective employees and display it in their annual reports, they testify before Congress about it.
A representative of Corporate Voices for Working Families said this before the House Committee on Education and Labor Workforce Protections Subcommittee on June 21, 2007:
Our commitment to a culture of flexibility and to helping working families has not gone unnoticed. KPMG has earned a spot on Working Mother Media’s List of 100 Best Companies for Working Mothers ten times; we have made the Companies that Care Honor Roll four times, and this past year, Fortune Magazine named KPMG one of the 100 Best Companies to Work For in 2007. — Barbara Wankoff, KPMG (Corporate Voices for Working Families partner***)
Lactation support around the world
In July 2006, the Philippines Department of Health issued regulations to ban the marketing of infant formula for babies younger than 2. The World Health Organization estimates 16,000 babies a year die in the Philippines because of a decline in breastfeeding. Filipino mothers even say their pediatricians prescribe infant formula for their babies. The Pharmaceutical and Health Care Association of the Philippines (“100 best” members include Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi-Aventis, Schering-Plough and Wyeth) sued the government to stop the new rules. The Philippines Supreme Court would not issue an injunction to stop the new rules from going into effect. The the U.S. Chamber of Commerce wrote to the president in August, complaining about the rule and issuing a threat:
If regulations are susceptible to amendment without due process, a country’s reputation as a stable and viable destination for investment is at risk. — the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in a letter to President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, August 2006
Four days later, the Supreme Court issued an injunction against the new rules.
In February 2007, U.N. Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food Jean Ziegler issued a statement by the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva, saying infant-formula advertisements in the Philippines ” … manipulate data emanating from the U.N. specialized agencies, such as WHO and UNICEF,” as well as the Philippine Health Department, “with the sole purpose to protect the milk companies’ huge profits, regardless of the best interest of Filipino mothers and children.”
As late as June 2007, both sides were still in court. The World Health Organization and UNICEF issued a statement in August 2007, condemning misleading advertisements. (Abbott’s infant formulas include Alimentum Advance, Isomil, Similac 2, Similac Advance and other Similac products.)
Abbott recorded in its 2006 annual report “pediatric nutritionals” in the United States of $1,128,000,000 in 2006, $1,097,000,000 in 2005 and $1,146,000,000 in 2004. International sales were $899,000 in 2006, $698,000 in 2005 and $598,000 in 2004.
The decrease in sales of U.S. pediatric nutritionals in 2005 was primarily due to overall infant nutritionals non-WIC category decline and competitive share loss. International Pediatric Nutritionals sales increases were due primarily to volume growth in developing countries.
Gross profit margins were 56.3 percent of net sales in 2006.
In the U.S., states receive price rebates from manufacturers of infant formula under the federally subsidized Special Supplemental Food Program for Women, Infants, and Children. There are also rebate programs for pharmaceutical products. These rebate programs continue to have a negative effect on the gross profit margins of the Nutritional and Pharmaceutical Products segments. In addition, pricing pressures unfavorably impacted the gross profit margins for the Nutritional Products segment in 2006, 2005 and 2004.
Healing the world
Abbott’s product Kaletra is a vital drug for treatment of HIV/AIDS, but the company charges inflated prices for the drug in many developing countries.
From Abbott’s 2006 annual report:
Increased sales volume of HUMIRA and increased volume and price for Kaletra and Depakote favorably impacted U.S. Specialty sales.
Abbott recorded U.S. Specialty (pharmaceutical) sales of $3,505,000,000 in 2006, U.S. Primary Care sales of $2,505,000,000 in 2006 and international pharmaceutical sales of $5,157,000,000 in 2006.
In April 2007, an organization called USA for Innovation (its Web site started in April and went down in August) started a public-relations campaign against Thailand, sending out press releases, placing full-page advertisements in The Wall Street Journal, The Nation (editorial statement on the ad) and the Bangkok Post. Everyone, transcribing press releases, quoted USA for Innovation and its spokesperson, but nobody seemed to know anything about the organization. Nobody asked. Turns out it’s a 501(c)4 non-profit organization, run by Ken Adelman as president/director, Nancie Marzulla (president of Defenders of Property Rights; more info here) as secretary/director and Abner Mason (founder of the AIDS Repsonsibility Project) as treasurer/director, whose main interest is protecting intellectual property rights. Among other things, Adelman is a senior counselor to Edelman PR firm.
Former President Bill Clinton announced in May 2007 that his foundation negotiated price cuts for AIDS drugs and endorsed Thailand and Brazil’s decisions to American pharmaceutical company patents, saying their prices were exorbitant.
Abbott has been almost alone in its hard-line position here over what I consider to be a life and death matter. — Former President Bill Clinton, May 2007
::::::::Psst! Bill, your wife has taken $58,100 since 2002 from the pharmaceutical industry. She’s taken $146,000 so far in the 2008 presidential campaign. Speaking of presidential campaigns, you took $71,500 from the pharmaceutical industry in 1996. But, hey. I guess you’re all about Oprah and Giving these days, right?::::::::
Abbott planned to introduce new antibiotic, painkiller, high-blood-pressure and AIDS drugs to Thailand, but it withdrew them in retaliation for Thailand’s decision to break patents and buy cheaper generic drugs for patients. Abbott has since reached agreements with Thailand and Brazil to sell its drugs for $1,000 a year per patient.
…
***In addition to Abbott and KPMG, other “100 best” Corporate Voices for Working Families partners include:
Accenture
Allstate Insurance Company
AstraZeneca
Bank of America
Booz Allen Hamilton
CitiGroup
Deloitte & Touche, LLP
Discovery Communications
Eli Lilly Company
Ernst & Young
GlaxoSmithKline
Goldman, Sachs & Co.
HP
IBM
Johnson & Johnson
JP Morgan Chase
Lehman Brothers
Marriott International, Inc.
MassMutual
Merck & Company, Inc.
Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.
Morgan Stanley
Phoenix Companies
PNC Financial Services Group, Inc.
Texas Instruments
Wachovia
Posted by Becky @
4:18 pm |
Will you let Working Mother magazine speak for you?
Will you let Working Mother, Abbott, and two organizations of corporations speak to U.S. policymakers for you?
Working Mother, Abbott, Corporate Voices for Working Familes and the International Formula Council will hold a teleconference on Nov. 15 to discuss public policy, advocacy and working mothers.
An example of an issue important to them:
… some states are considering proposals to restrict the information new mothers receive about infant feeding options.
An Abbott publication called “Ensuring Optimal Infant Nutrition: A Shared Responsibility,” says that “92 percent of mothers approve of the distribution of infant formula samples,” according to an August 2002 survey conducted by Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin & Associates with Wirthlin Worldwide. It doesn’t, however, provide details of the survey. How many mothers participated in the survey? Ten? Twenty? One hundred? We have no idea, and the survey is not available online. What they intend to do with this survey is to say, hey, why all the fuss about advertising for infant formula? They want to fight laws that ban or restrict their ability to sell formula.
Does this top your list of important issues as a working mother? Or do you have other ideas about what’s important to you and your family? If you’d like to hear what these groups plan to say to policymakers on your behalf, why not register and participate in the teleconference?
Mark your calendar: Nov. 15, 2007, noon-1 p.m., Raise Your Voice: Advocating for Better Working Family Policy
Posted by Becky @
3:22 pm |
This is for Arwen … cheers!
From the Working Mother October 2007 issue, “You’re Cut Off,” p. 104
One day last spring, Lorie Baker walked into her home office just outside Annapolis, Md., and logged on to her computer to catch up on a bit of work. As the mother of twin daughters and a director in the advisory practice at PricewaterhouseCoopers (“I’m a type A person, and I work in a type A company”), she struggles to fit in everything she feels she needs to get done. So she’d often log in to the work system on her days off, stealing whatever moments she could.
On this occasion, as she stared at her computer screen, something unexpected happened. An official-looking pop-up appeared, beginning with this simple declaration: “It’s the weekend.” What happened next was nothing short of an aha experience.
“I actually asked myself, ‘What am I doing on my PC? Can’t this wait until Monday?'” Lorie recalls. She turned the computer off, gathered her girls — Allison and Amanda, 7 — and headed straight for the swing set at the park. “It really was a stark wake-up call that the weekends are so valuable,” she says.
Sure. It could happen.
[pause]
Pah-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!
But seriously. Do these “programs” elicit such a breathless, dewy-eyed response in real life? Really?
Posted by Becky @
5:57 pm |
Know your Working Mother press releases
Along with a media kit (for advertising in the coming year, natch), Working Mother apparently provides canned press-release text for each of the winning companies. It goes like this.
Headline: [Insert company name] Named to Working Mother ‘100 Best Companies’ List
[Insert dateline] Sept. 25 — For the [insert number] consecutive year, [insert company name] ([insert NYSE link]) has been named one of the “100 Best Companies” by Working Mother magazine, the company announced today. [Optional sentence, if applies] In 2006, [insert company name] was inducted into the Working Mother Hall of Fame in recognition of its [insert number] consecutive year on the list.
“Every year our winning companies raise the bar for what it means to be an employer of choice for working families,” said Carol Evans, CEO and President, Working Mother Media. “[Insert company name] not only offers essential benefits like flextime and telecommuting — they go above and beyond with a range of best practices and policies to ease the difficulties for working parents and their families. Their supportive culture makes a huge difference to employees who want to be great moms and great workers.”
Added Suzanne Riss, Editor-in-Chief of Working Mother magazine, “As a working mother myself, I understand how absolutely essential it is for companies to find ways to nurture the personal and professional lives of employees. I commend [insert company name here] for conceiving and effectively implementing programs and benefits that offer an inspiring paradigm for the rest of corporate America: it is possible to be both family-friendly and financially successful.”
Working Mother measures and scores companies in seven areas when compiling its list of the best companies for mothers: workforce profile, compensation, child care, flexibility, time off and leaves, family-friendly programs, and company culture. Profiled in the October issue, [insert company name] fosters an environment and culture that recognizes the professional and personal needs of all employees — including working mothers.
[Insert company name] was selected for the 2007 Working Mother 100 Best Companies based on an extensive application of 575 questions. The application included detailed questions about workforce, compensation, child-care and flexibility programs, leave policies, and more. It also checked the usage, availability and tracking of programs, as well as the accountability of managers who oversee them. Seven areas were measured and scored: workforce profile, compensation, child care, flexibility, time off and leaves, family-friendly programs, and company culture. For this year’s 100 Best, particular weight was given to flexibility and family-friendly policies.
“We are proud and honored to be included in the Working Mother ‘100 Best Companies’ list again this year,” said [insert name, title and department]. “[Insert company name] is committed to attracting, developing, and retaining talented individuals, and we are pleased that the success of our efforts is once again recognized by Working Mother.”
For example, [insert company name] offers a number of attractive options to help employees balance their professional lives with their personal responsibilities. Today, many women find it difficult to return to the workforce after having children — or staying out of the workforce longer than expected.(1) [Insert option reference.]
“At [insert company name], more than [insert percentage] of our employees are women, so we have a vested interest in encouraging them to return to work after having children — and facilitating that process,” [insert name] said. [Insert company name] has seen significant improvement in its employees’ work/life balance by offering flexible work schedules, including [insert example, such as telecommuting, job-sharing, and flextime]. In addition, employees have access to [insert another example, such as company-sponsored on- or near-site child care centers]. [Insert other examples].
One of the themes of the October issue of Working Mother is benefit equity: at the 100 Best, benefits are available to everyone — from the top executives to hourly-wage earners. To illustrate that point, the issue features a profile of [insert carefully selected success story, title, work location].
[Insert company name] also offers a number of development programs for its female employees, including [insert program name].
In addition to recognition by Working Mother, [insert company name] has also earned [insert names of other awards].
About Working Mother
Founded in 1979, Working Mother magazine reaches nearly 3 million readers and is the only national magazine for career mothers. Its 22-year signature initiative, Working Mother 100 Best Companies, is the most important benchmark for work/life practices in corporate America. The publication also releases the annual list of the Best Companies for Multicultural Women in the June issue. Working Mother is published by Working Mother Media (WMM), which also owns the National Association for Female Executives (NAFE), NAFE Magazine, the annual 100 Best Companies WorkLife Congress, as well as the Best Companies for Multicultural Women Conference and regional Town Halls. In 2006, WMM acquired Diversity Best Practices, the preeminent organization for diversity thought leaders.
About [insert company name, information and link].
Editor’s Note: For more information on the 2007 Working Mother 100 Best Companies and for a complete list of winners, visit www.workingmother.com.
(1) McGrath M, Driscoll M, Gross M. “Back in the Game — Returning to Business After a Hiatus: Experiences and Recommendations for Women, Employers, and Universities.” Wharton Center for Leadership and Change. June 2005.
Examples
Carlson
General Mills
GlaxoSmithKline
Goldman Sachs
The McGraw-Hill Companies
Verizon Wireless
P.S. Internet search hits are up to 364 368.
Posted by Becky @
10:37 pm |
Parents face jail for truancy in children
Editorial writer Joseph H. Brown said sending parents to jail for not sending their kids to school is a good thing: “Making Parents Accountable.”
When it comes to our public schools, accountability is mandatory. That’s why we have the FCAT here in Florida and the No Child Left Behind Act at the federal level.
Teachers and administrators are held accountable, he said. So are governments and schools, he said, but parents aren’t.
There’s one important component in the education process, however, that always escapes accountability: parents.
That’s about to change, though, because Circuit Judge Ross Goodman in Escambia County plans to charge parents of chronically truant students with misdemeanors and the possibility of jail time. (His wife, Marci Goodman, is a judge in Santa Rosa County and once sentenced a woman to two years in jail for keeping her child out of school for two years.) This came about because 583 students (of 40,000 total) in his county were absent without an excuse for at least 30 days last year.
If the parent is not sending the child to school, then I can send the parent to jail. — Circuit Judge Ross Goodman
Brown says everyone else is held accountable, and it’s time to hold parents accountable too. My question is, though, when teachers, administrators, schools and governments fail children, do they go to jail too?
This isn’t new. Parents across the country were arrested for their children’s truancy, according to a 2005 article in the Christian Science Monitor. And they’ve established similar programs in the United Kingdom.
What do you think? Should parents go to jail if their children are chronically truant from school?
Posted by Becky @
2:37 pm |
