Why Unilever employees in Russia might be sent to war in Ukraine

Few want to have links with Russia after it invaded Ukraine last year. Countries have distanced themselves from the Kremlin and companies have pulled out of the country. However, some continue to do business. Unilever has stayed put despite the conflict and now is ready to send its employees to war. The consumer packaged goods company, which makes products like Cornetto and Magnum ice creams, Marmite and Dove soap, has now said that it will comply with Russia’s conscription law , which calls upon men aged 18 to 27 to perform compulsory military duty. This means those working with Unilever in Russia could be sent to fight the war in Ukraine. Complying with Russia’s conscription law The Anglo-Dutch firm, which is facing heat for its decision to continue operating in Russia, employs close to 3,000 workers in the country across four manufacturing sites which produce personal care and hygiene products and ice creams. While the company has policies that cover the safety of its workers, in a letter to campaign group B4Ukraine, which urges companies to cease operations in Russia, Unilever said that it would comply with the conscription law. The firm said it was “aware of the law requiring any company operating in Russia to permit the conscription of employees should they be called”, adding that it had a “responsibility” for its workers and followed “global principles including the safety and well-being of our employees”. “We always comply with all the laws of the countries we operate in,” Unilever’s chief business operations and supply chain officer, Reginaldo Ecclissato, wrote in a letter to B4Ukraine. Unilever said that it continued its operations in Russia as “exiting is not straightforward”. It decided not to pull out “both to avoid the risk of our business ending up in the hands of the Russian state, either directly or indirectly and to help protect our people”. [caption id=“attachment_12909132” align=“alignnone” width=“640”] Protesters at a demonstration in London in 2022 hold placards demanding that Unilever stops doing business in Russia. Reuters[/caption] In the letter in response to questions raised by B4Ukraine, Ecclissato said none of the options it had was “desirable”. By selling the business, the Russian state could “gain further benefit”. If it shut operations, its brands would be “appropriated – and then operated – by the Russian state”, according to a report by Telegraph, UK. However, the company said, that it condemned the war in Ukraine “as a brutal, senseless act by the Russian state and we continue to join the international community in calling for stability and peace in the region”. Uniliver’s spokesperson did not reveal whether its Russian employees had been called upon for military duty. However, if the workers were to be conscripted by the Russian army, their employment contracts would be suspended and they would not be paid by the firm. Hitting out at Unilever, Valeriia Voshchevska, of the Ukraine Solidarity Project (USP) campaign group, wrote on Twitter, “If this is protecting your workers, I’d hate to see what putting them in harm’s way looks like. And what about innocent Ukrainian civilians – does Unilever not think they deserve protecting too?”

Last year, the company, which also owns brands like Knorr and Ben & Jerry’s, said that it would review its operations in Russia. But it continues to sell “everyday essential food” in the country including ice cream. ‘International sponsor of war’ Earlier in the month, the Ukrainian government named Unilever as the international sponsor of war after new Russian law required all large organisations operating in the country to contribute directly to its war efforts. In a letter to B4Ukraine, the company said it paid 3.8 billion roubles (Rs 343 crore) in tax to the Russian state in 2022, an amount similar to the previous year. The Ukraine Solidarity Project (UKP) led protests against the firm outside its London headquarters on 3 July. Unilever was placed on the “sponsors of war” list alongside Procter & Gamble (P&G) and the French supermarket group Leroy Merlin.

The war in Ukraine has crossed the 500-day mark and Unilever along with well-known companies like Heineken, Philip Morris International and Oreo maker Mondelez, have been accused of breaking their promises to leave or scale back operations in the country. Yale professor Jeff Sonnenfeld, who championed and chronicled the corporate exodus in Russia after the invasion, is now naming firms that continue to benefit the country. “These companies are breaking their promises. They are functioning as wartime profiteers,” Sonnenfeld told CNN in an interview on 11 July. “It’s beyond disappointing. It’s shameful and unethical.” [caption id=“attachment_12909182” align=“alignnone” width=“640”] While Unilever said it would sell only essential food in the country, it continues to sell ice cream like Cornetto. Image courtesy: Unilever[/caption] The Kyiv School of Economics and the Moral Rating Agency, an organisation that tracks companies’ promises to leave Russia, estimate that Unilever’s support for the Russian economy equates to about $712 million (Rs 5,826 crore) a year, reports CNN. “A bar of Dove soap starts to look pretty dirty when there are enough of them being produced to purchase a Russian tank,” Mark Dixon, founder of the Moral Rating Agency, said in a statement. Unilever had said last March that it had ceased all imports and exports of its products in and out of Russia. The company has stopped all media and advertising spending and capital flows. But is that enough? According to Voshchevska, Unilever is out of excuses. “It needs to do the right thing and stop doing business in Russia now.” With inputs from agencies