SWISS is dropping chocolatier Läderach from its onboard premium cabin offering due to controversial, public positions on divisive social issues by the CEO. I assess the issue differently than the Zeitgeist.
If you’ve ever flown SWISS business class over the last decade, you might remember receiving a choice of pralines after the main meal service. These were supplied by Läderach, a closely-held, family-owned company based in Ennenda, Switzerland.
33-year-old CEO Johannes Läderach and his father Jürg are social conservatives and publicly support conservative causes in their private capacity as citizens. This includes a generally Christian fundamentalist worldview in opposition to:
- abortion
- euthanasia
- homosexual marriage
- pornography
- premarital sex
- prostitution
The Läderachs helped to recently organize a Swiss edition of the “March for Life” anti-abortion rally, which prompted headlines like, “Chocolate king fights against abortion and homosexuals”.
For Swiss, headlines like that were apparently too much and the airline quietly dropped its partnership with Läderach last autumn. You’ll still find Läderach pralines onboard until this spring, when supplies are expected to be exhausted.
Was SWISS Justified In Terminating Its Contract With Läderach?
Legally and even ethically, if one believes businesses are moral actors, SWISS had every right to terminate its contract with Läderach.
The Läderachs have free speech rights to address divisive social issues. SWISS also has the right to take those publicly-expressed and financed views into account when it decides who to enter into business with. Actions have consequences and even though the Läderachs have made clear that they offer a non-discriminatory workplace and the views expressed were personal opinions of the owners, not a company opinion, it’s hard to separate the two when they share a name.
But our analysis doesn’t end here.
SWISS, by the way, is unwilling to even concede that the conservative values of the Läderachs were the reason behind the contract termination. Instead, a spokesperson would only say that it takes many factors into consideration including “the quality, various economic factors, and the brand fit.”
What does that say about this situation?
I’m reminded of a similar Delta situation, in which it eliminated discounts for the National Rifle Association then offered a contorted justification stating that it wanted to be neutral on the issue. Sorry, but I don’t see verbal neutrality as a viable position.
SWISS took strong action, but doesn’t have the conviction to defend it? Does it expect to somehow pacify its conservative customers through a nod and wink?
CONCLUSION
Companies and consumers are perfectly justified in taking into account the publicly-expressed positions of the people they are doing business with.
Frankly, though, I have more respect for Läderach than for SWISS in expressing moral clarity. At least Läderach has taken a principled position and stuck to it, knowing that it may lead to consequences. While it is understandable why any company would seek to avoid taking stands on divisive issues that could hurt business, the “read between the lines” approach to severing business while later ostensibly denying it is not a noble way to conduct business.
What is your opinion on this issue?
Just like the US conservatives – republicans, evangelicals, etc – they’re hypocrites who love to control other peoples’ choices, while usually not applying the same restrictions to themselves.
Kudos to Swiss.
SAD STATE you are a liberal idiot!!!!
Love how the conservatives are okay with priests raping kids, anti gay lawmakers being caught soliciting sex in public washrooms, and having a president who has had sex outside marriage.
Huh? I don’t know anyone who is OK with sex crimes, except folks like the Clintons, who are arch-liberals. Libs are happy to accuse conservatives of every unsavory trait owned by themselves. And as for trying to control other people’s choices, “Sad State,” that description applies to an Airline insisting that its purveyor of quality chocolate suppress its choices, even in the owners’ private lives. Yes, the airline has a right to deal with whomever it likes, but it exposes its hypocrisy and attempts to cover it up.
Swiss doesn’t have to verbally defend their action. The economic principle of dollar voting applies here and Swiss’s decision stands on its own, with or without a verbal justification.
Perhaps, if they declined to comment. Instead, they did comment in a very nebulous way.
It was a standard stock corporate response, to be honest. Perhaps take a good inward look and see if that’s *really* what’s upsetting you here.
The whole last paragraph of yours, in fact, feels very “snowflakey”. It’s hard to find another word to describe someone who feels entitled to a heartfelt explanation when Swiss switches chocolate vendors.
I don’t see any offense or entitlement in what I wrote…I’m not upset nor am I even alleging so-called religious persecution.
I am a firm believer in freedom of association between private individuals and companies. If SWISS wants to kowtow to the cancel culture of the political Left, then as a private organization, that is their right to do so. It is then my right as a private citizen to choose not to do business with them if I’m sufficiently offended by their action.
But I agree with you, what angers me are these mealy-mouthed Newspeak responses. If you’re going to boycott a supplier because you disagree with their politics, then man up and admit it. All you do is anger both sides – conservatives are going to see through the BS, and liberals won’t be satisfied because they didn’t take a strong enough public stance.
I too would have preferred for Swiss to just come out and say “We no longer choose to do business with these homophobic sexist assholes any longer”.
Also, you don’t know much about liberals, so please do not speak for us and assume what will or will not satisfy us.
A much better action would have been to contract with an additional pro-abortion homosexual activist chocolatier and offer the choice between the two of them, or randomly distribute them among their routes.
Freedom of speach doesn’t protect you from bearing the social consequences. You may voice your opinion on things, but if people then walk out on you it is perfectly their right to do so.
It is a shame that Läderach, which imho was one if not the best chocolate producer in Switzerland, has such a narrow minded person on top. I’d argue this stance on these matters is not the stance of Läderach (certainly not the one of the employees), but just from that one guy on top.
This! Thank you! I’ve always wondered why it seems American Conservatives – who’re emerging to be the true “snowflakes” these days despite how much they love to sling that title at liberals – fail to understand that…
A. Freedom of speech is only a concept in the US as it applies to government, not private enterprise
B. Even if it did apply to private enterprise, freedom of speech is not freedom from the consequences of said speech
C. Expecting “liberal snowflakes” to kowtow to your more conservative mindset is just as demanding and snowflake-y and entitled. The hypocrisy is truly boggles the mind.
I don’t understand your comment. Who argued anything different in terms of Part A and Part B?
Here’s an interesting opposite side case:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-proctergamble-results/pg-posts-strong-sales-takes-8-billion-gillette-writedown-idUSKCN1UP1AD
I’m sure most here have seen the ad: Gillette criticizes “toxic masculinity” in an ad directed against men who are the top users of their product. The Gillette CEO appeared to not mind the 8 billion dollar loss.
That being said, I suppose it does make sense that a company or public figure should consider a low public profile on their political opinions if the don’t want to risk alienating their customer base or associates.
So who wants to watch a Hollywood movie? 🙂
I am sick and tired of identity politics. As food service continues to deteriorate on carriers, I care exclusively about superior food products and could care less over what the CEO supports. Bad move
Now, where can I buy Läderach products in the USA?
It is amazing that there are any conservatives in socialist EU/Swiss/etc .. They are a true minority and there views should be valued!!! Swiss Air….giving in to the liberals and socialists…SAD
This includes a generally Christian fundamentalist worldview in opposition to:
abortion
euthanasia
homosexual marriage
pornography
premarital sex
prostitution
Nice. So orgies are okay? Where is the next party my fellow Christian female friends?
Your comments show your ignorance about 1) socialism 2) the EU and 3) Switzerland.
Swiss isn’t giving in to anyone, but they are showing themselves to be on the right side of history, you homophobe.
The swiss chocolate boys sound like american christian fundamentalists.
I guess Swiss made a solid decision here to not be associated with radicals.
You just knew the comments were going to devolve into name calling …
It would seem to me that Swiss are simply (ineffectively) trying to avoid bringing further attention to matter.
No one chose Swiss because they offered these chocolates, but I could see a scenario where they could lose custom because they continue to do business with a company run by people who are outspokenly out of step with the majority of public opinion amongst Swiss’ potential customer base.*
* Such views are even less mainstream in Western Europe than they are in the United States.
What a Lächerlich move by SWISS. Jeez I just want me some good chocolate.
Matthew: for posts like this is why you became my favorite travel blogger. Läderach produces the best chocolates in the wold in my opinion and their owners have the right to express their opinions as long as they respect people that think differently. Swiss has the right to stop providing the best chocolates in the world on their flights. Hopefully they have done their research and they fly more people that have different opinions than Läderach. I find amazing other travel bloggers that are applauding Swiss for their actions but love flying airlines from the ME where people that do not follow the values defended by Läderach are severely punished. Again, freedom of speech is what makes America a great country.
“their owners have the right to express their opinions as long as they respect people that think differently”
Except they are supporting causes and groups that adversely affect the very same people you claim they respect.
“where people that do not follow the values defended by Läderach”
You mean being homophobic assholes?
Also, them providing the absolute best chocolate in the world is debatable. There are dozens of chocolates in the world that are of equal caliber, Swiss will find a decent replacement soon enough.
There are many religions and cultures where same sex-marriage and abortion is not accepted. Respect that and don’t start to feel a victim of the society. In the case of Läderach Matthew says: “The Läderachs helped to recently organize a Swiss edition of the “March for Life” anti-abortion rally.” What is wrong with that if abortion is against their values? Do they need to cave in and not express their opinion because the new snowflake generation will scream and cry? Also, if they do not support same-sex marriage they are in their right. I did not see anywhere in the news that they supported what happens in countries in the ME.
BTW, if you know another chocolate makes that is equal or better than Läderach please share here so I can try next time.
I have a company and have a lot of black employees. I afford them all due respect and they have as much chance as anyone of advancing and prospering in my company. I also PUBLICLY support the KKK.
C’mon, you can see there’s a problem here, right?
@Aztec
You make a very convincing argument through false equivalency. The majority of people around the world would agree that oppressing people and taking away opportunities from them just because of their race is wrong.
However there are many, many people from different culture, races, countries, and religions that oppose abortion except for in extreme cases and who do not want to recognize and exalt same-sex relationships and marriage.
For example Nigeria and many countries in Africa. Mongolia in East Asia. Kyrgyzstan in Central Asia. These countries have very different cultures and religions (Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism/Shamanism), yet are in line with many conservative American beliefs.
Are all these other people just beneighted, brainwashed, and backwater people? Or are @Aztec and @Aaron the narrow-minded, proud, bigoted, and offensive ones?
The truth is conservatives and liberals want to spread their ideologies and beliefs because they think their position is true or the best. Everyone needs to own up to that reality as well as the reality that people may oppose their views, as Matthew has stated.
The strange thing is that many people, especially those that support non-traditional marriage (same-sex) and abortion (a woman’s choice to abort babies) aren’t willing to admit this – they have their own position and they are trying to get others to support or submit to their beliefs and values.
“Or are @Aztec and @Aaron the narrow-minded, proud, bigoted, and offensive ones? ”
Ah, yes, calling the people who want rights for others and equality for others bigoted and narrow-minded. The tired trope of conservatives…
“I’m not racist, you are for wanting equal rights for everyone!”
@Aaron
You didn’t answer my question. So I will post it again below. Are these other cultures, religions, and countries right in their opinions and free to promote their opinions or are they bigoted, narrow-minded, and whose ideas should be shut down.
It’s one or the other, what do you think based on your views?
Repost of my question:
“However there are many, many people from different culture, races, countries, and religions that oppose abortion except for in extreme cases and who do not want to recognize and exalt same-sex relationships and marriage.
For example Nigeria and many countries in Africa. Mongolia in East Asia. Kyrgyzstan in Central Asia. These countries have very different cultures and religions (Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism/Shamanism), yet are in line with many conservative American beliefs.
Are all these other people just beneighted, brainwashed, and backwater people?”
“don’t start to feel a victim of the society”
Except these people are supporting groups that deny people their rights, so how can someone not feel like a victim?
“they are in their right”
Not when it is infringing on the rights of others. Or, see what Aztec said.
Also, why are we shifting the discussion to the ME? That has nothing to do with this topic.
@Aaron
“deny people their rights.” So you are saying that people who oppose abortion (especially pregnancy that is not due to rape and that doesn’t endanger the life of the mother) are denying people of their “rights?”
Well how about the right of “Jus Soli,” citizenship of that country granted because a person was born in that country. American allows this, for which I am very grateful as a child of immigrant parents.
But a large majority of countries, such as Switzerland, does not grant citizenship rights this way. At least one parent much be Swiss to qualify to receive Swiss citizenship – how narrow minded and racist of Switzerland!
@Aaron, will you support a boycott of Swiss air and other Swiss enterprises until Switzerland grants unrestricted Jus Soli, like the USA does? They are clearly denying rights to immigrants!
Source -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_nationality_law#Acquisition_by_filiation.
@ Ben
The Swiss would claim “the boat is full” in respect of citizenship. They’ve used that line before, in a more sinister context.
@Ben
“So you are saying that people who oppose abortion (especially pregnancy that is not due to rape and that doesn’t endanger the life of the mother) are denying people of their “rights?”’
Yes, I am. It’s just another way to control women and their bodies.
“But a large majority of countries, such as Switzerland, does not grant citizenship rights this way.”
And…? Are you seriously trying to make this argument? Even by diverting the topic standards, this is by far one of the more ridiculous ones. It’s only racist if specific races are excluded. Since a child of French parents, Chinese parents, Nigerian parents, etc, doesn’t get automatic citizenship, then it isn’t a racist policy since all races are excluded.
“At least one parent much be Swiss to qualify to receive Swiss citizenship – how narrow minded and racist of Switzerland!”
You really don’t understand the definition of racism, do you? If an immigrant is granted Swiss citizenship, they can pass that citizenship to their child, regardless of whether they are White, Black, Arab, Hispanic, Asian, whatever. Again, as above, unless Switzerland has a specific policy where only Swiss citizens of certain races can pass on citizenship to their kids, your point is a moot one.
Please try and do better next time.
None of any of this changes the fact that Swiss did nothing wrong by no longer wanting to be associated with these homophobic assholes.
@Aaron
1.) “Yes, I am. It’s just another way to control women and their bodies.”
Unfortunately you cannot and will not win the logical argument to those who are pro-choice in terms of abortion.
It is quite difficult for those who are opposed to same-sex marriage to argue their points (especially without going to religion), which is that any two consenting adults should be allowed to get married and for their marriage to get equal recognition from the government.
However it is very easy for those who are opposed to abortion to argue their point (even without religion). The main point is this – is an unborn baby a human?
Yes -based on every single biological metric (and every pregnant parent that wants to give birth to their child will also emphatically agree). So no matter what, every human has the right to life and this right trumps every other right of the mother.
2.) You really don’t understand the definition of racism, do you?…”Again, as above, unless Switzerland has a specific policy where only Swiss citizens of certain races can pass on citizenship to their kids, your point is a moot one.”
Yes I do understand racism, but I think your definition is too narrow.
Switzerland is not being racist to any one or two different races, it is being racist to ALL non-Swiss races – whether African, Asian, or even other Europeans.
One way to make sure there are very few ethnically non-Swiss people in Switzerland is to only grant citizenship if at least one parent is already Swiss and then make it very difficult and arduous to gain Swiss citizenship (it takes 10 years of residency and a lot of other rules, cited below).
By doing it this way, you make it seem like you are not racist because you are letting all different people in, but you are severely limiting the number of immigrants who will become Swiss. This means the total percentage of those not ethnically Swiss will remain very low.
One example – in 2013 (most current data I could find), Switzerland only naturalized 34,000 people. Of those 34,000 only 5,401 were from Asia and Africa combined. I’d say there is some systemic racism and anti-immigration in these numbers.
So I will ask you – is Switzerland denying people around the world of their “right” to Swiss citizenship by making it extremely difficult and slow to obtain Swiss citizenship, even if you are born legally on Swiss soil? Should we call them racists and bigots as you and @Aztec and many others are so prone to do?
Or are the Swiss people allowed to make decision based on their own values, which are different from the US, Canada, and Australia?
In the same way, are the CEO of Läderach and many Christians around the world (including those in Africa and Asia) allowed to freely express their values around abortion and other issues?
3.) “Please try and do better next time.”
I am actually interested to have a debate with you and see what your logical arguments are. Too many times people just resort to name calling and shaming others when they don’t have logic and facts.
Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Switzerland#Demographic_statistics
I am a 79 year old Traditional Roman Catholic. I will likely never have a chance to fly on SWISS or buy their stock. If I did I would NEVER fly on their crummy airline of buy their stock. This is a cave-in to the culture of death now so prevalent in Europe. When some terrible catastrophe happens to SWISS you will know why it happened. Check out this site for the horrors of abortion. http://www.abortionno.org . This tells it all. Watch the actual abortion and get back to me about how wonderful it is.
I’ve often thought your picture makes you look like a pompous ass and now siding with the christofascist you prove it. Good bye.
What?
Bill, I don’t think I sided with them as much as I did not side with Swiss. Goodbye?
Nutters trying to impose their values on others, just like Chick-fil-a. They must suffer the consequences. Well done, Swiss and good riddance to the creepy chocolate company. I’d sooner eat equal opportunity Cadbury than support delicious but morally bankrupt Läderach.
I agree with @Mallthus that these views are not nearly as mainstream in Western Europe as they are in the United States.
The Swiss system of government also more closely resembles a democracy than that of the US (or many other countries), so in theory the legality of abortion and same sex marriage in Switzerland are actually based upon the will of the people.
I just wish airlines and those railing against homophobia were at least consistent. How come no one seems to have a problem with airline alliances that involve destinations and carriers that come from places in the ME that have national policies that discriminate against homosexuals and women ? Dubai is an example.
Laderach makes fantastic chocolates, arguably best in the world. Shame about their politics.
Matthew you just lost a loyal reader. There is enough homophobia in the world, there is no need to support that… full stop!
Sorry to lose you Mario. FWIW, I’m not supporting the public positions Läderach has taken. I’m also not, however, hailing SWISS for this action, since it seems unwilling to actually criticize Läderach publicly.
For all that love one of the best chocolate in the world you can order them here: https://www.laderach.com/shop/en/full-catalog.html
Hi Matthew,
I have a few points to make. If it makes any difference – I work for an airline, so perhaps I can give an insight into some of the decision making in cases like these. I’d also note, it seems you don’t have a great deal of experience in handling the communications for a large business, where nuance of position doesn’t matter as much overall brand standing – as is the case here. . Really, it doesn’t matter to what extent the Läderach company made comments from their capacity as a chocolate producer or as a successful family business- there is no way in which these can’t be linked.
At the end of the day, – the impacts were two fold;
a)Swiss has an employee population that is impacted by comments such as this, and as such has a duty of care to do something about that. Additionally, Swiss has a global customer base, and having headlines associating you with a discriminatory voice is not helpful in their mission.
b) a) Regardless of the headlines, why would Swiss want to be associated to it for such a trivial aspect of their product – plenty of other chocolate products that they could champion from Switzerland. There would be no desire for the Swiss media or marketing department to want to deal with chatter associated to a chocolate brand they serve on board rather than a revenue driving initiative they would have on otherwise.
Given their position, SWISS don’t need to make a pro or contra statement to the chocolate producers given that it is a cost to Swiss either way – at the end of the day, SWISS is entitled to vote with their Francs. Similarly, if they changed a biscuit provider, nobody would bat an eyelid.
Finally, I find this statement of yours to be very odd:
“Frankly, though, I have more respect for Läderach than for SWISS in expressing moral clarity. At least Läderach has taken a principled position and stuck to it, knowing that it may lead to consequences.”
– The definition or principle is as follows: ‘acting in accordance with morality and showing recognition of right and wrong.’ Obviously this is objective, but you sure do seem to be declaring your side early on if you believe the Läderach position to be morally correct….
Cause is not without effect – if the chocolate creates negative chatter, Swiss has every right to move to a new supplier (I’m sure there’s no shortage in Switzerland).
Hi Ofla8145, I appreciate your comments. What I tried to express in my last paragraph was not solidarity with Läderach nor an endorsement of their opinions, as much as a respect that at least they are clear in their convictions. I value that — even if I don’t agree with the position. It’s not the morality of the position that I am lauding in this post, but the morality of taking a clear position. Hope that distinction makes sense.
For everyone thinking Läderach just participated in a “march for life” and expressed objections to same sex marriages they should read this article (German, but Google translate usually does a good enough job) https://www.watson.ch/blogs/sektenblog/318218963-laederach-bosse-stehen-wegen-ihres-radikalen-glaubens-am-pranger
They are really the worst kind of Christian fundamentalists and one should wonder what took Swiss so long to ditch them.
It is possible that this issue came to a head right now given that there is a nation wide vote on changing the anti discrimination law to also include sexual orientation on 9 February. Swiss’s lack of comment could be related to Swiss companies not wanting to seem to influence votes.
Way more information would be found on SwissInfo in English, French and German. The French and German would be aimed at those who actually will be voting.
https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/in-depth/vote-february-9-2020
https://www.swissinfo.ch/fre/dossiers/votations-9-février-2019
https://www.swissinfo.ch/ger/dossiers/abstimmung-vom-9–februar-2020