Think Progress notes Chipotle’s “climate change” reference, ignores “government regulations” in annual report

When a company files an annual report with the SEC, they cover every possibility to ensure they will not be sued by investors. You know … “prior results are not an indicator of future earnings.” But since Chipotle mentioned climate change in their annual report, Think Progress felt the need to inform the world we might not be able to get guacamole in our burritos if we don’t fix the climate! But what did Think Progress ignore in the report?

From Think Progress – a liberal blog – who used the term “guacamole crisis” in the stories URL.

It’s your choice, America. Fix the climate, or the guac gets it. Chipotle Inc. is warning investors that extreme weather events “associated with global climate change” might eventually affect the availability of some of its ingredients. If availability is limited, prices will rise — and Chipotle isn’t sure it’s willing to pay.

First off, there is no guac crisis. The prices for an avocado averaged $1.04 in 2013 and the closing price at the end of 2013 was $1.02. Think Progress admitted avocado production is “fine at the moment” but – as usual – they claim all hell could break loose in the future.

So what did Think Progress completely ignore in Chipotle’s annual report and SEC filing? Under Regulatory and Legal Risks…

We are subject to various federal and state laws governing our relationship with and other matters pertaining to our employees, including wage and hour laws, requirements to provide meal and rest periods or other benefits, family leave mandates, requirements regarding working conditions and accommodations to certain employees, citizenship or work authorization and related requirements, insurance and workers’ compensation rules and anti-discrimination laws. Complying with these rules subjects us to substantial expense and can be cumbersome, and can also expose us to liabilities from claims for non-compliance. …

… several states and localities in which we operate and the federal government have from time to time enacted minimum wage increases, paid sick leave and mandatory vacation accruals, and similar requirements and these changes could increase our labor costs.

And how about healthcare?

We offer eligible full-time and part-time U.S. employees the opportunity to enroll in healthcare coverage subsidized by us. For various reasons, many of our eligible employees currently choose not to participate in our healthcare plans. However, under the comprehensive U.S. health care reform law enacted in 2010, the Affordable Care Act, changes that become effective in 2014, and especially the employer mandate and employer penalties that are scheduled to become effective in 2015, may increase our labor costs significantly. Changes in the law for 2014, including the imposition of a penalty on individuals who do not obtain healthcare coverage, may result in employees who are currently eligible but elect not to participate in our healthcare plans now finding it more advantageous to do so, which may increase our healthcare costs. In 2015, we will either adopt a qualifying plan under the Affordable Care Act for our full-time hourly employees, which will likely increase our healthcare expenses significantly, or we will be subject to employer penalties, which could also significantly increase our labor costs.

How about environmental laws?

We are subject to federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations concerning the discharge, storage, handling, release and disposal of hazardous or toxic substances, as well as local ordinances restricting the types of packaging we can use in our restaurants. We have not conducted a comprehensive environmental review of our properties or operations. We have, however, conducted investigations of some of our properties and identified contamination caused by third-party operations. We believe any such contamination has been or should be addressed by the third party. If the relevant third party does not address or has not addressed the identified contamination properly or completely, then under certain environmental laws, we could be held liable as an owner or operator to address any remaining contamination, sometimes without regard to whether we knew of, or were responsible for, the release or presence of hazardous or toxic substances. Any such liability could be material. Further, we may not have identified all of the potential environmental liabilities at our properties, and any such liabilities could have a material adverse effect on our operations or results of operations. We also cannot predict what environmental laws will be enacted in the future, how existing or future environmental laws will be administered or interpreted, or the amount of future expenditures that we may need to make to comply with, or to satisfy claims relating to, environmental laws.

You see, the left is totally fine with speculation when it comes to climate change, global warming or whatever it is this week, but when it comes to the real-life today concerns of businesses in America, they could not give a crap.

3 replies
  1. bien-pensant
    bien-pensant says:

    I truly loathe people who equate weather with climate and then hitch an emotional issue to it and sit and wail in their soiled diaper.
    It is amazing how the Leftists and so called Progressives see their Chicken Little interpretation in everything. Pathetic.

    • Dimsdale
      Dimsdale says:

      Exactly!? A better name would be “Unthinking Progressive”.? They, like “Media Matters”, exist for no other reason than to boost the liberal screed, or obscure the truth (pretty much the same thing).

Comments are closed.