This was mentioned in the other thread and I'm interested in knowing more about this - both the truth and the un-truths LOL
Printable View
This was mentioned in the other thread and I'm interested in knowing more about this - both the truth and the un-truths LOL
Glad you started this thread Trill, I've been thinking about this all evening after seeing it mentioned in the other thread. Will be interested to see what comes up!
I'm a bit tired but I'll have a bash and maybe come back tomorrow.
Ok, so it's now owned by Loreal. This does not mean that all of a sudden tbs starts kicking bunnies around laboratories when it was one of the first cosmetics companies to refuse to use ingredients tested on animals
TBS - never claimed to be organic or totally natural. In fact they had an actual organic babies childrens line that they ended up cutting because it didn't sell well. They have brought it back now I believe.
TBS was built on foundations of 'not tested on animals' and FAIR TRADE about 100 years before it was trendy to do so.
In 1997 'Ruby' was born - a size 16 'anti Barbie' that was the mascot.
The massive amount of change to tiny communities such as the Tungeteia Shea Co-operative (where the Shea butter was sourced from, run entirely by women) and other such initiatives were brokered directed from Anita Rod ick herself. I could bang on about that forever - google Anita Rod ick and you will get the full story. She never stopped campaigning for one thing or another.
I think they started pulling back the refilling of the bottles in the shop in the 90's - Health Department reasons they couldn't change, but still about 90% of the packaging is fully recycled/recyclable.
It's a total PITA with the Loreal thing and the only think I can say is maybe we have to try and balance it out for all the greater good TBS has been doing for years and continues to do so.
I worked for The Body Shop about 18 years ago (OK, now I feel really old), and one thing that always impressed me was the commitment to sustainability and fair trade on such an overall and often quite abstract level.
A few good examples were that they used movement sensor lighting in all of their warehouses etc so that energy was only used when needed, they sourced recycled or sustainable ribbons for their gift baskets, they were one of the first companies to not only not test on animals themselves, but to insist upon transparency amongst their raw ingredient suppliers. They were ground-breaking in so many respects.
But it's true, they never set out to, or claimed to use only natural ingredients - but because they used a proportion of natural ingredients in a majority of their products they gained a reputation as a market leader in this area. Many other companies have much better credentials in this area, but back when TBS originated they were unusual for their use of natural ingredients.
They had stopped refilling bottles when I worked there, basically because product integrity went straight out of the window when refilling a bottle that had been poorly rinsed with tap water or been sitting in a cupboard for six months (bacterial growth etc), but they had a bottle return service.
I haven't used their products for years (after working there for a while I'm really sensitive to the scent of most of their products and actually can't handle walking into a store, the smell of Dewberry makes me twitch slightly), but it's a shame to hear that they were bought by Loreal. I hope that their management strategy is still the same though.
Just about the recycled packaging thing, I attended a Body Shop party on Sunday, and was quite surprised when the consultant held up a bottle of something and said it was their first product to have 100% recyclable packaging - I thought it was all fully recyclable? But apparently not.:
Not that I'm dissing them or anything, just thought I'd mention it :)
Sorry I don't know much about it - except that Dewberry makes me twitch too Suse! :rofl:
Oh Dewberry got the boot a LONG time ago. But I'm sure at one stage it was the ONLY fragrance to wear....it makes me shiver too :lol:
Berenice - she may have got it a bit wrong, I'm not sure. Sometimes the bottle lids cannot be recycled, I know all my makeup brushes are except for one small part. Sometimes it just cannot be helped.
I still don't know why people get all uppity about "TBS claiming to be all natural" in fact they use synthetics quite proudly in some cases - such as the musk from the famous White Musk range. To use 'natural' musk would mean to extract it from the deer in a very painful manner (from a very sensitive place too mind you ;) ).
I also don't know any other company with such a community focus, even if it is just one day a year - it's still FAR MORE than anyone else I know. Lots of employees do far more than that because they want to.
The head office is just up the road from me and I used to be there all the time when I was working with them. They have a restaurant for the employees (scrummy food! and allergy free/gluten free stuff was a matter of course), a pool, and a childcare centre.
I'd often get an email requesting spare pencils and crayons as someone was jetting off o/s to help out a community in their holidays, and they had community service awards in which the prize was 2 weeks o/s helping out in one of the co-operatives or being a mentor for teenagers in far flung areas.
When the takeover was announced people were picketing out the front waving placards and we were all watching this rolling our eyes because we couldn't see how it was going to change the company itself, or how it could wipe out YEARS of humanitarian work and ground-breaking campaigns....
I have a few body shop things. Had a party a few months ago.
I have the Buriti Baby Body Wash.Its tear free & its ingredients come from the Buriti tree in the Amazon. I like it & its ok on DD2's eczema skin so far. They have a baby moisturiser & shampoo I think too.
I loooove there coco butter. My sister can't use their soaps though. She gets a rash. She's not usually sensitive to that sort of stuff.
I used to work at there head office, and personnaly whislt they do a lot i saw so much waste and it seemed to me that after working there it was all a farce. so much paper wastage etc Didn't really seem to "live teh reuse recyle reduce" (LOL) thing at all. diffrent though they are really great with ingrediants etc.resturantsn and child are center a big plus though.
Lulu, thanks for those posts, most interesting and informative :)
I sometimes think that people are just so confused with all these terms like, Fair Trade, Natural, Not tested on Animals Organic etc.. they hear one and think all these terms apply. They need to stop for just a few minutes, read, absorb and hopefully understand.
We recently had a Body Shop open near us (2 hours away) and when we are near them, my DH goes in to stock up.. I spent years telling him how they help little communities all over the world etc and now he is actually taking a little notice of me and finds out what product has what ingredient and where it comes from etc.. then he proudly goes and tells his mum who looks at him like he is some weirdo :rolleyes:
The only reason I will not buy bodyshop items is that Nestle will profit, and I will not do anything consciously that will support Nestle.
The shop itself I have no problem with, but I prefer Lush cosmetics.
Wasn't there a huge scandal years ago where they reportedly DID test on animals?
I know it was ages ago, but that was when I stopped buying it (oh the musk and dewberry perfume, how I loved it!!)
i thnk ther was ascandal but for me after working at the head office even though there product repose and line are prettty ethicaletc i still see it as a joke sien ci know how much waste at the head office
Thanks so much for that Lulu and Suse, I really appreciate that info. that's what I always thought, that they never claimed to be natural, just free from animal testing you're right, if they were 100% natural, then they'd be using real musk etc. I have used their products for years - not a lot because I don't *do* beauty stuff LOL, but I have always admired their humanitarian work.
Traveller, I guess this is the conundrum. They may be, in a round about way, owned by Nestle now, but so long as TBS continues in it's present form and keeps their programs running in the same manner as they were before the takeover, I think the benefits of that far outweigh the fact that they are owned by Nestle. And the ironic thing about that is the same women that TBS helps are probably being targeted by Nestle to use formula :rolleyes: but for me personally, I would rather see sustainable communities being built and supported kwim? So I wouldn't stop buying TBS products, because if everyone stopped buying their products, it isn't Nestle you are hurting, it is those communities and sometimes you have to look at the bigger picture.
Nope, they never tested on animals. They test on people.
Some companies get around it by not testing on animals themselves but buying the research on the ingredients - that has been tested on animals which is by and large the same but they can still put the 'not tested on animals' badge on the technicality. TBS may have been caught up in that which is why things changed.
I'd also like to say that any sort of product from paper, pens etc were all sourced from companies with ethical practices as well.
In fact in recent years (I think it was the U.S) were going to change the laws to say that ALL cosmetics had to be tested on animals. TBS fought that strongly and were prepared to shut down all their US shops.
But yeah - what a bunch of nasty paper wasters :rofl:
lulu u crack me up!1 you alwasy seem to understand my crappy typing!! PMSL!! seeriulsy though I remmmber thinking OMG- this isssssssss badd. but cafe food made up for it!!. they way the ran there offices and treateed some staff ugh!!
ah OK, thanks Lulu :)
I wonder how much say Nestle have in this. I wonder if it's a dirty tactic to "buy" an ethical company to keep money coming in even tho it's a conflict of interest. If the campaigns of TBH meet with tremendous success... could they pull the plug on it?:
It just seems strange to me. Perhaps it's the old saying of Keep your friends close but your enemies closer...
Liz, it would not surprise me in the least if something like that was going on. It could certainly be seen as a way of covering their bases.
This is my suspicion, and the reason that I would prefer my money go to companies or charities who do not have the nestle influence in the background. I distrust them that much.:
Hmm, I dunno. Loreal took them over...and Nestle have 20% share in Loreal yeah? They have their fingers in everything, but with a 20% share is that enough to call the shots.
Aren't Nestle too busy waiting for the next natural disaster so they can air drop formula all over the place? lol
LOL Lulu, because getting women to use formula after a natural disaster when there is no clean water to bathe in, let alone drink is a top idea ;)
A 20% stake may not be enough in some situations, but even with only 20% if they were the single biggest shareholder, then yes, they would have significant sway when these things would get voted on. In that situation, Nestle would only need votes from other shareholders totalling 31% to gain a majority vote, but if they only owned 10% for example, then they would need 41% of the other shareholders to vote with them, which is a bigger task kwim?
Also, for every penny of profit that TBS makes, 20% goes to Nestle. That 20% is used to fund formula ad campaigns, formula giveaways, pay for bribes and legal action to stamp all over smaller and more ethically aware businesses, yadda yadda yadda. To say the good that TBS does is worth it, is akin to buying only one nestle product because they are running a voucher campaign to buy books for Oz schools. It is all just marketing and a way to build their reputation. And I am not buying it.
No one is saying you have to 'buy it', but that's entirely up to you. Again it comes back to what is most important to you. For me, I would rather have those communities breaking the poverty cycle and doing something that will support them and enable their children to get an education and hopefully a decent shot at life.
With regards to animal testing, Anita was always against it and had "not tested on animals" printed on her products. In the early days a law was proposed to make all european makeup HAVE to be tested on animals. That's when she became vocal and fought back. She changed the labels to "against animal testing" and roused up enough people to fight the change in laws.
I think Anita was an amazing woman and highly recommend her autobio. She changed the face of business. Such a ground breaker!
It's great to hear from some others who still see the benefits of TBS. I've bene unsure since the Loreal buyout but of course the fairtrade products are still there and there is still plenty to support at TBS.
She WAS amazing, I met her and she was this amazing ball of energy and inspiration.
OK from this and another post I am assuming that L'oreal bought a share in TBS, is that correct?:
'tis enough reason for me to stand clear if that is right. Don't get me wrong, I haven't bought TBS stuff since I was about 15, but if it's fairtrade, ethically produced cosmetics that you are after then there are plenty of other companies that I would rather support.
No Loreal bought the WHOLE thing.
Fair enough chick, better for that reason than crap that is totally UNtrue.