Igloo Won't Pay For Your Meat Expenses

[rachelmum 11]

On 08/03/2020 at 15:00, makapaka said:

How are you linking all this back to an employer reimbursing for a salad sandwich but not a ham salad 

The argument raised by yourself and Pettytom in particular has been that profitability is an outdated concept and sustainability should be foremost now to repair the damage of previous generations to pave the way for generations to come. This goes way beyond a ham sandwich or a salad sandwich, but it is small steps needed and the debate has been interesting. It does seem changes are needed and while I don't like to think they are imposed and choice is taken away i can see the merit. Let's hope that we can all make some changes now big or small to redress damage caused to date and be more socially responsible for my grandchildren and their children. 

[Guest makapaka]

4 minutes ago, rachelmum said:

The argument raised by yourself and Pettytom in particular has been that profitability is an outdated concept and sustainability should be foremost now to repair the damage of previous generations to pave the way for generations to come. This goes way beyond a ham sandwich or a salad sandwich, but it is small steps needed and the debate has been interesting. It does seem changes are needed and while I don't like to think they are imposed and choice is taken away i can see the merit. Let's hope that we can all make some changes now big or small to redress damage caused to date and be more socially responsible for my grandchildren and their children. 

Nice one.👍🏻

[alchresearch 214]

I would imagine a month on, the Igloo staff have just taken this on the chin and got on with their lives.

 

Not Sheffield Forum though.  

[melthebell 863]

2 hours ago, alchresearch said:

I would imagine a month on, the Igloo staff have just taken this on the chin and got on with their lives.

 

Not Sheffield Forum though.  

Well it wouldn't be sf without plenty of gammon

[ECCOnoob 1,030]

I'm sure the igloo staff have got over it but the debate is about the bigger principle.

 

Allowing the personal opinion and moral judgement of a Director to dictate a company wide policy affecting all staff is an extremely dangerous precedent.  Even more so if such policies may cause conflict with widely accepted employment regulations or industry wide standard.

 

It's a slippery slope.  

 

Igloo are clearly lucky as they can get away with it being a small firm with a particular type of image.     I bet such a circumstance wouldn't go down so well with a huge national corporation particularly one that was heavily unionised.

 

That is the real point to this.

[Guest makapaka]

On 10/03/2020 at 20:24, ECCOnoob said:

I'm sure the igloo staff have got over it but the debate is about the bigger principle.

 

Allowing the personal opinion and moral judgement of a Director to dictate a company wide policy affecting all staff is an extremely dangerous precedent.  Even more so if such policies may cause conflict with widely accepted employment regulations or industry wide standard.

 

It's a slippery slope.  

 

Igloo are clearly lucky as they can get away with it being a small firm with a particular type of image.     I bet such a circumstance wouldn't go down so well with a huge national corporation particularly one that was heavily unionised.

 

That is the real point to this.

It’s not personal opinion or moral judgement that meat production damages the environment - it’s fact.

 

which is why your whole argument is flawed.

Edited March 11, 2020 by makapaka

[apelike 10]

3 hours ago, makapaka said:

It’s not personal opinion or moral judgement that meat production damages the environment - it’s fact.

It's also a fact that growing vegetables can also damage the environment so encouraging more people to be vegetarian may also have a negative impact in the long run. With an increasing number of vegetarians to cater for you will need more land, more water, more pesticides (unless it's GM)  , more fertiliser, more energy for harvesting and transportation and the waste products from it produce methane as they degrade and compost. What people should be doing is having a balanced diet and not just rely on vegetables.

 

4 hours ago, makapaka said:

which is why your whole argument is flawed.

Its Igloos ethics that are a bit flawed but good publicity nevertheless.

[Halibut 12]

5 hours ago, apelike said:

It's also a fact that growing vegetables can also damage the environment so encouraging more people to be vegetarian may also have a negative impact in the long run. With an increasing number of vegetarians to cater for you will need more land, more water, more pesticides (unless it's GM)  , more fertiliser, more energy for harvesting and transportation and the waste products from it produce methane as they degrade and compost. What people should be doing is having a balanced diet and not just rely on vegetables.

 

Its Igloos ethics that are a bit flawed but good publicity nevertheless.

To a much smaller degree than livestock production.

[Guest makapaka]

4 hours ago, Halibut said:

To a much smaller degree than livestock production.

Exactly - our existence damages the environment - were never going to get it to zero - we can try and hit the big impact areas.

[apelike 10]

6 hours ago, Halibut said:

To a much smaller degree than livestock production.

Mmm... That may be how it is now but what I am arguing is that a big increase in vegetarianism may also make a big difference in the long term. A lot of vegetables on a calorie to calorie comparison with meat actually require more resources in terms of energy and water usage alone and can result in more emissions, and Rice is a prime example. Protein is also needed in a diet and meat is a good source for protein.

 

Consuming less meat is a good thing but it's not as simple as stating stop eating meat and save the planet as other factors come into play.

 

 

1 hour ago, makapaka said:

Exactly - our existence damages the environment - were never going to get it to zero - we can try and hit the big impact areas.

Me bolded.. With that I agree  Something Igloo seems to not bother about.

Edited March 12, 2020 by apelike

[Guest makapaka]

20 minutes ago, apelike said:

Mmm... That may be how it is now but what I am arguing is that a big increase in vegetarianism may also make a big difference in the long term. A lot of vegetables on a calorie to calorie comparison with meat actually require more resources in terms of energy and water usage alone and can result in more emissions, and Rice is a prime example. Protein is also needed in a diet and meat is a good source for protein.

Whilst there are examples of unsustainable methods of vegetarian farming it has been established that generally it is much more sustainable than meat farming.

 

so if there is more vegetarian farming than meat farming the planet will be better off.

[Robin-H 11]

54 minutes ago, apelike said:

Mmm... That may be how it is now but what I am arguing is that a big increase in vegetarianism may also make a big difference in the long term. A lot of vegetables on a calorie to calorie comparison with meat actually require more resources in terms of energy and water usage alone and can result in more emissions, and Rice is a prime example. Protein is also needed in a diet and meat is a good source for protein.

 

Consuming less meat is a good thing but it's not as simple as stating stop eating meat and save the planet as other factors come into play.

 

 

Me bolded.. With that I agree  Something Igloo seems to not bother about.

https://humaneherald.files.wordpress.com/2019/05/calories-and-protein-produced-per-acre-1.pdf

 

• Soybeans are the highest producer of protein per acre at 513,066 (g)/acre
• Soybeans, dry peas, and dry beans all yield more protein per acre than the most productive animal product, chicken for meat (163,212 g/acre)
• Soybeans produce 314% more protein per acre than chicken
• Soybeans are the highest producer of calories per acre at 6,271,268 (g)/acre
• All plant-based crops (soybeans, dry beans, dry peas, lentils, wheat, and sunflower seeds) yield more calories (kcal) per acre than the most productive animal product, chicken for meat (1,496,809/acre)
• Soybeans produce 419% more calories per acre than chicken