Leave a comment

Comments 62

ymarkov May 5 2011, 04:26:46 UTC
But the meat was probably slaughtered completely correctly, so why not trust them? Because of how they behaved in their personal lives?

It wasn't a matter of trust. Banning meat slaughtered by an opponent is a Jewish "nuclear option" of very long standing. Unlike the Karaite shekhita controversy, this method is purely political.

Reply

onionsoupmix May 5 2011, 04:28:47 UTC
Do you think this current opposition to the magen tzedek crowd is mostly political as well?

Reply

Duh ymarkov May 5 2011, 06:43:34 UTC
Of course it's political ( ... )

Reply

Re: Duh onionsoupmix May 5 2011, 11:57:19 UTC
I like your point abt cholov yisroel.

Reply


anonymous May 5 2011, 10:47:41 UTC
Some of the criteria of the Magen Tzedek is legal- all workers must be documented. Who says that is ethical?
Some of things are great to have but aren't ethical issues. Paid maternity leave?

Reply

onionsoupmix May 5 2011, 11:59:06 UTC
It is an ethical issue. Without paid maternity leave, you're basically controlling the reproductive rights of your female workers.

Reply

What? righteousrasha May 6 2011, 19:25:06 UTC
How do you figure? No one is forcing female employees to bear children.

Reply

Re: What? onionsoupmix May 6 2011, 19:35:02 UTC
you are forcing them to choose between having a child and keeping their jobs.

Reply


mrn613 May 5 2011, 13:27:28 UTC
LOL so there's like two companies on the planet that can meet all the standards and afford to pay for the emblem to be placed on the packaging? If people are only going to buy products with this hechsher they are going to be incredibly hungry.

Reply

onionsoupmix May 5 2011, 14:14:01 UTC
well, it's just getting off the ground. So I think we should give them a chance, like 5 years or so.

But yeah, when I looked at the rules I kind of thought the same thing.

Reply


anonymous May 5 2011, 15:03:24 UTC
> All this seal is trying to do is raise an awareness that God doesn't only care about whether meat utensils were separated from dairy, but also that God cares about whether you treat your workers well, follow the law of the land and aren't cruel to animals. Is that really such an outrageous position

Yes. Yes it is.

Reply


sethg_prime May 5 2011, 15:06:30 UTC
I have nothing against the goals of the program, but I do object to the tag line “kashrut for the 21st century”. If you run a food-processing plant and you treat your workers like shit, you are being a schmuck (and possibly a crook), but it doesn’t treyf the food that comes out of the plant. And treating workers fairly, proper animal care, not polluting, etc., are not 21st-century concepts: they were just as important in the 20th century, the 19th, the 18th, and so on (although the specific standards of Magen Tzedek may have been utopian in the 19th century).

And if we are giving out good-behavior certifcations for companies, why only give them to companies that produce food? What about, say, clothing? (“Shatnez for the 21st century!”)

Furthermore, given the number of things they are checking for, if the mark actually became something that a lot of consumers cared about, then I am concerned that Magen Tzedek wouldn’t have the resources to catch manufacturers who are cheating.

Reply

onionsoupmix May 5 2011, 16:03:57 UTC
I think the tag line is more about keeping kashrus relevant to consumers.

I, speaking for myself here, may care very little about whether a cream cheese spread is cholov yisroel or not, but I might care if the company goes to great length to deny health insurance to their workers and violates OSHA.

So what is that called? It's not called "kashrus" then? Why not? Why can't I argue that if this company treats their workers terribly, maybe I shouldn't trust their kashrus either, like chabad doesn't trust satmar kashrus because the latter behaved poorly?

Reply

sethg_prime May 5 2011, 16:33:54 UTC
I think the tag line is more about keeping kashrus relevant to consumers.

Even if this is a worthwhile goal, you don’t do this by redefining “kashrut” (and explaining in the fine print that you’re not really redefining it, because everything with a Magen Tzedek will still need to be certified as kosher in the conventional sense by someone else). You don’t make books relevant to children by taking a DVD and calling it a book.

I, speaking for myself here, may care very little about whether a cream cheese spread is cholov yisroel or not, but I might care if the company goes to great length to deny health insurance to their workers and violates OSHA.

I feel the same way, but if a company’s managers don’t protect their workers’ safety out of a basic sense of morality, and they don’t do it out of fear that the government will fine them for OSHA violations, then why should I expect a certification mark to keep them any more honest?

Reply

onionsoupmix May 5 2011, 16:44:13 UTC
Because OSHA enforcement is notoriously poor, but if people don't buy your stuff it might hurt your pocketbook, assuming enough of this catches on with a large number of people

You can ask the same thing for any real kosher symbol. Why would a company care to put an OU on the box? In the hopes that more people will buy it. There is also a sense that some secular people buy kosher out of a feeling of higher standards and quality control and for those folks, the standard symbols are really misrepresentative.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up