A lawsuit questioning plastics recyclability claims made by Procter & Gamble (P&G) has been amicably settled on Feb. 14, with the Philippines branch of the US-based consumer goods corporation agreeing to review recommended improvements on recycling labels based on the complainants’ suggestion.
In November 2022, a group of 32 Filipino consumers filed a lawsuit against P&G, Unilever, Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Nestlé, Colgate, and Universal Robina Corp before the Philippian Department of Trade and Industry – Fair Trade Enforcement Bureau (DTI-FTEB). Only P&G entered a dialogue with the complainants, which allege false or misleading recyclability advertisement on plastic packaging.
The complainants, which included environmental activists and people involved in fishing activities, claimed that the use of recycling symbols like the Möbius loop, the tidy man, and expressions like ‘recycle me’, ‘recyclable’, ‘recycle’, and ‘recycle ready’ on the company’s product packaging is false or misleading because not all plastic is recyclable.
“It is wrong for the products to be labelled as recyclable when they are not, because consumers are paying an additional amount on top of the actual price for recycling the corporations’ product packaging,” said lawyer Rosiebelle Torrano from nonprofit Community Legal Help and Public Interest Centre (C-HELP), which represented the complainants. “In truth it is not recyclable. The plastic bottle will end up in the waterways, drains, rivers and seas,” she claimed.
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)
The Philippines produces an estimated 2.7 million tonnes of plastic waste annually. It also accounts for the largest share of global plastic waste discarded in the ocean at 36.38%, according to 2019 data.
To help tackle this issue, the Philippines introduced an EPR scheme in July 2022, which requires, amongst other things, large enterprises to set up recovery and recycling systems for its rigid and flexible plastics, as well as plastics bags and polystyrene. Associated costs are often passed down to consumers.
As part of the settlement, P&G agreed to the ‘symbolic and ‘goodwill’ refund of the purchase price of the product’, the complainants said on a Feb. 19 statement.
Whilst P&G argued that its products’ recycling labels are compliant with applicable laws and regulations, ‘there is recognition by both parties that there are opportunities to improve labelling on plastic packaging as mandated by the Extended Producer Responsibility Act, Consumer Act of the Philippines and DTI’s forum tackling plastic pollution and/or educational campaign in consumer’s rights and environmental sustainability,” said Enrique Beren, one of the complainants and leader of non-profit Young Bataeños for Environmental Advocacy Network.
Maintaining open communication
As part of the agreement, P&G will review recommended improvements on recycling labels based on the complainants’ suggestions. Although the respondents will have sole discretion on whether to implement the recommendations, the complainants reserve the right to take appropriate action should the concern remain unaddressed.
The parties will also endeavour to maintain ‘open communication’ and undertake bi-annual closed-door meetings throughout 2024, the complainants said in a statement. Their suggestions will include solutions to reduce plastic and promote reuse and refill packaging.
The complainants will be represented by Greenpeace, Ecowaste Coalition, and Break Free From Plastic Movement in the bi-annual meetings. “We look forward to seeing companies like P&G changing course toward the right direction, and we commend communities such as the fisherfolk, women’s and youth groups in Bataan who continue to be vigilant against big corporations in protecting the rights of Filipinos,” said Lea Guerrero, country director of Greenpeace Philippines.
In 2021, P&G and other consumer product companies agreed to change some labelling as part of a settlement question mail-in recycling claims by TerraCycle and its partners.