Vendor Relations Principles
On Our Line-Drawing Decisions
Because the gravity
of harm and the directness of our relationship to it are matters
of degree, and because the implementation of a policy requires
us to draw sharp lines, we want to say a word about these line-drawing
decisions.
The harms on which we presently focus in our priority
list reflect our current most urgent concerns modified by consciousness
of
our resources. These priorities may change over time.
The 1% major vendor threshold, the one-third revenue
threshold, the one-third ownership threshold, the one-third procurement
threshold, and the two-layer rule, are arbitrary. There is
some practical
basis
for them, but they are arbitrary in the sense that we could
change them, within limits, without changing our ethics.
The basis for the 1% major vendor threshold is that
it would be a hardship for us to investigate all vendors with which
we do a
small
amount of business. The basis for the one-third ownership
threshold is that owners with this much equity in a company tend
to have
a controlling interest, and those with less tend not to.
The basis for the one-third procurement threshold is that companies
which
rely
to this large extent or more on harmful enterprises make
their
customers into partners in the harm. Similarly, the basis
for the one-third
revenue threshold is that companies which rely to this extent
or more on profits from armaments and other harmful products
make
their customers into partners in the harm.
While these line-drawing decisions might be revised
without undermining our principles, we recommend that they only
be revised prospectively
and without particular vendors in view. It is better to
have a rule we can implement than to open the door to divisive
questions of degree
for which there can be no principled answers.
<< Previous | Continue >>
 |