P&G accused of “greenwashing” and “misleading” consumers with on-pack sustainability claims

Hagens Berman, a class-action law firm headquartered in Seattle, US, has filed a lawsuit against Procter & Gamble (P&G), the parent company of Charmin toilet paper. The lawsuit alleges that Charmin’s packaging makes unsubstantiated sustainability claims, including the misleading use of the Rainforest Alliance frog seal.

It also claims that P&G engages in undisclosed wood-sourcing practices, such as clear-cutting and chemical herbicide use.

“As alleged in our complaint, P&G fails to disclose that its suppliers are replanting single species conifers, evenly spaced and then covering these trees with chemical herbicides to intentionally eliminate all growth other than just a handful of tree species most valuable for logging,” Steve Berman, a managing partner at Hagens Berman, tells Packaging Insights.

“Our evidence shows that P&G’s ‘Protect–Grow–Restore’ promise about replanting one or two trees for every tree used in its products intentionally misleads consumers to believe that its Charmin suppliers are converting the specific boreal forest areas logged via thoughtful and effective replanting efforts.”

“The discrepancy between what P&G tells the public and what it allegedly does in practice is apparent to our team, and we look forward to the court’s review in hopes that it agrees with our information laid out therein.”

We reached out to P&G for a comment but have not received a response.

Hagens Berman accuses P&G of clear-cutting and chemical herbicide use in boreal forests (Image credit: Hagens Berman).Allegations against P&G

The lawsuit outlines four points against P&G in regard to its approach to sourcing wood for paper production. The “material facts,” according to Hagens Berman, are:

Charmin sources its wood pulp via industrial logging practices such as clear-cutting and burning.

Charmin suppliers are systematically converting critically important old-growth forests into environmentally devastating “Frankenforests.”

Only a fraction of its wood pulp is sourced from FSC-certified forests.

The Rainforest Alliance continues to provide certification to Charmin products.

Concerning the last point, the lawsuit states that when P&G could no longer use Rainforest Alliance’s “well-known” certified frog seal, it became one of two founding members of the Rainforest Alliance’s new Forest Allies program.

As a founding member, P&G was allowed to use an “altered but nearly identical seal” for three years at a cost of US$250,000 a year.

P&G does not disclose to its buyers that the Forest Allies program provides no certification services and does not operate in boreal forests.

Empowering consumer choice

Hagens Berman has compiled a fact sheet outlining P&G’s greenwashing with evidence from the filed complaint.

P&G’s “altered but nearly identical” Rainforest Alliance seal costing US$250,000 a year (Image credit: Hagens Berman).“Our complaint shines a light on alleged brazen untruths and disinformation touted by a major corporation to the public at will. Our firm believes no corporation is above the law and owes to the public the very basics of honesty and integrity,” says Berman.

“Our lawsuit seeks monetary payback for purchases consumers wouldn’t have made had they known the truth behind Charmin toilet paper and seeks to end Charmin’s greenwashing of its products.”

He adds that “consumers and the environment deserve better than what the evidence shows P&G has done.”

“When given choices, consumers’ power lies in their purchase. When corporations choose to mislead consumers about their options, consumers are deprived of their power to make informed buying decisions.”