Latest news with #Unilever
Business Recorder
a day ago
- Business
- Business Recorder
CCP imposes Rs1bn in penalties on cartels and deceptive advertisers
ISLAMABAD: The Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP) issued 12 major orders during FY 2024-25, imposing penalties worth Rs1.007 billion on businesses involved in anti-competitive practices across key sectors including fertilizers, poultry, automobiles, pharmaceuticals, real estate, food, hygiene products, paints, and education. The Commission has strengthened its enforcement arm and streamlined hearings by curbing unnecessary delays. This fast-track approach is helping CCP resolve cases swiftly and enforces the law more effectively. Out of the 12 orders issued, eight were related to deceptive marketing. Three orders involved cartelization and price fixing. One order was issued on the direction of the Lahore High Court to address the issue of CCP's jurisdiction in a case involving the deceptive and fraudulent use of a trademark under Section 10(2) of the Competition Act. In a landmark case, CCP fined six urea manufacturers and their trade group — Fertilizer Manufacturers of Pakistan Advisory Council (FMPAC) — a total of Rs375 million for price-fixing. Each company was fined Rs50 million; the association was fined Rs75 million. Another major penalty of Rs155 million was slapped on eight poultry hatcheries for fixing prices of day-old broiler chicks. In deceptive marketing cases, Kingdom Valley was fined Rs150 million for false claims about its housing project. Unilever and Friesland Campina Engro were fined Rs75 million each for marketing frozen desserts as ice cream. Unilever also faced an additional Rs60 million penalty for deceptive ads for Lifebuoy products. Al-Ghazi Tractors was fined Rs40 million for false fuel efficiency claims. Hyundai Nishat Motors received Rs25 million fine for misleading ads about the Hyundai Tucson SUV. 3N Lifemed Pharmaceuticals was fined Rs20 million for using fake certification for dialysis machines. The fine was later reduced to Rs2 million by the Competition Appellate Tribunal (CAT). British Lyceum and Diamond Paints were fined Rs5 million each for publishing misleading advertisements. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Yahoo
a day ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Unilever sells Venezuela ice-cream arm
Unilever has sold its ice-cream business in Venezuela to Colombian automotive company Mack de Venezuela. The transaction, struck for an undisclosed sum, includes the Tio Rico brand and factory. In a statement, Unilever said Mack de Venezuela was chosen "after a careful process considering their capabilities, values, and vision for the future of the business". Mack de Venezuela, the Venezuelan subsidiary of Mack de Colombia, is a long-standing dealer for commercial vehicle brands such as Mack and Volvo. In a statement to Just Food, Unilever emphasised its portfolio of global and local brands will continue to serve Venezuelan consumers. The company said: 'In accordance with our focus on portfolio optimisation and value creation, the Unilever board determined this transaction delivers the best outcome for our shareholders as well as for the further development of the local business.' Unilever added Mack de Venezuela 'brings deep knowledge of the local market and a commitment to continuity and long-term development". It said: 'Mack was selected after a careful process considering their capabilities, values, and vision for the future of the business. 'We are working closely with Mack to ensure a smooth transition and to safeguard business continuity for employees, customers, and partners." Unilever is planning to spin off its ice-cream business later this year with the new company to be listed in Amsterdam, London and New York. In 2024, the group's ice-cream business generated a turnover of €8.3bn ($9.7bn), up 4.5% on a year earlier. The demerged business will be called The Magnum Ice Cream Company and based in the Netherlands. "Unilever sells Venezuela ice-cream arm" was originally created and published by Just Food, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Unilever names Jochanan Senf as new Ben & Jerry's CEO
Unilever has appointed Jochanan Senf as the CEO of Ben Jerry's following the exit of former Dave Stever as the head of the subsidiary in March. According to Ben & Jerry's independent board, Stever was ousted earlier this year for defending the company's social activism on issues like immigration, Black Lives Matter and pro-Palestinian protests. In March, Ben & Jerry's filed a case in New York accusing Unilever of removing Stever without the approval of the subsidiary's own board. The move, Ben & Jerry's contested, violated an agreement meant to protect its independence and social activism. Under the terms of its acquisition of Ben & Jerry's in 2000, Unilever agreed to retain an independent board of directors at the Vermont-based business who were focused on maintaining the brand's social mission. According to The Wall Street Journal, the Ben & Jerry's board was not given the chance to interview candidates to succeed Stever. Just Food has asked Unilever to comment. Disagreements between the businesses originated in 2021 when Ben & Jerry's announced it was halting sales in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, causing a backlash in Israel which threatened a boycott of Unilever products. In June 2022, Unilever sold its ice cream operation in the country in an attempt to draw a line under a damaging diplomatic row. Last November, Ben & Jerry's filed a lawsuit saying Unilever had tried to stop it from expressing support for Palestinian refugees. Unilever denied the claims. In February, in another court filing, Ben & Jerry's said its owner had tried to ban it from publicly criticising US President Donald Trump. Unilever is planning to spin off its ice-cream business later this year with the new company to be listed in Amsterdam, London and New York. In a statement from Unilever, the FMCG giant described Senf as an 'ice cream veteran' adding his career has been 'deeply entwined with Ben & Jerry's'. According to Senf's LinkedIn profile, he spent seven years at Ben & Jerry's as MD for its business in Europe. Senf has spent more than 20 years at Unilever included the role at Ben & Jerry's. Since 2022, he has been the general manager for Unilever's food business in the DACH markets. The statement said: 'This experience allowed him to learn first-hand the importance and power of Ben & Jerry's unique three-part mission – product, economic and social – and how this is instrumental to the success of the business and its impact on communities. In 2024, Unilever's ice-cream business generated a turnover of €8.3bn ($9.7bn), up 4.5% on a year earlier. The demerged business will be called The Magnum Ice Cream Company and based in the Netherlands. "Unilever names Jochanan Senf as new Ben & Jerry's CEO" was originally created and published by Just Food, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.
Business Recorder
2 days ago
- Business
- Business Recorder
CCP imposes Rs1 billion in penalties on cartels, deceptive advertisers during FY2024-25
The Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP) issued 12 major orders during FY 2024-25, imposing penalties worth Rs1.007 billion on businesses involved in anti-competitive practices across key sectors including fertilisers, poultry, automobiles, pharmaceuticals, real estate, food, hygiene products, paints, and education, a CCP statement said on Monday. 'The commission has strengthened its enforcement arm and streamlined hearings by curbing unnecessary delays. This fast-track approach is helping CCP resolve cases swiftly and enforce the law more effectively,' the statement read. Out of the 12 orders issued, eight were related to deceptive marketing, it added. As per the details, three orders involved cartelisation and price fixing. One order was issued on the direction of the Lahore High Court to address the issue of CCP's jurisdiction in a case involving the deceptive and fraudulent use of a trademark under Section 10(2) of the Competition Act. Notices issued to sugar mills for rehearing in cartelisation case Moreover, CCP fined six urea manufacturers and their trade group—Fertilizer Manufacturers of Pakistan Advisory Council (FMPAC)—a total of Rs375 million for price-fixing. Each company was fined Rs50 million; the association was fined Rs75 million. Another major penalty of Rs155 million was slapped on eight poultry hatcheries for fixing prices of day-old broiler chicks. In deceptive marketing cases, Kingdom Valley was fined Rs150 million for false claims about its housing project. Unilever and Friesland Campina Engro were fined Rs75 million each for marketing frozen desserts as ice cream. Unilever also faced an additional Rs60 million penalty for deceptive ads for Lifebuoy products, CCP said. Al-Ghazi Tractors was fined Rs40 million for false fuel efficiency claims. Hyundai Nishat Motors received a Rs25 million fine for misleading ads about the Hyundai Tucson SUV. Deceptive marketing practices: CAT upholds CCP findings against marketers of PREMA Milk 3N Lifemed Pharmaceuticals was fined Rs20 million for using fake certification for dialysis machines. The fine was later reduced to Rs2 million by the Competition Appellate Tribunal (CAT). British Lyceum and Diamond Paints were fined Rs5 million each for publishing misleading advertisements. 'Cartelisation is a serious offence and will not be tolerated,' warned CCP Chairman Dr Kabir Sidhu. 'Cartels harm economic growth, violate consumer rights, and deter new investment,' he was quoted as saying in the CCP statement. He further emphasised that association platforms must not be used for 'price collusion or to facilitate market abuse', which leads to the exploitation of the entire nation.
Harvard Business Review
2 days ago
- Business
- Harvard Business Review
How AI Assessment Tools Affect Job Candidates' Behavior
According to the World Economic Forum, more than 90% of employers use automated systems to filter or rank job applications, and 88% of companies already employ some form of AI for initial candidate screening. Take Unilever, for example. The consumer goods giant uses AI-driven tools from HireVue to assess early-career applicants, saving 50,000 hours and more than $1 million in the process. Most companies, when considering AI assessment tools, focus on the gains the tools bring in terms of efficiency and quality. But what they don't factor in is how AI assessment may change candidates' behavior during the assessment. Our new research, examining over 13,000 participants across 12 studies, reveals that this is a crucial blind spot. We looked at simulation of a variety of assessment situations in both the laboratory and the field, and we collaborated with a startup platform offering game-based hiring solutions called Equalture. The results show that job candidates consistently emphasized analytical traits when they believed AI was evaluating them, while downplaying the very human qualities—empathy, creativity, intuition—that often distinguish outstanding employees from merely competent ones. This drove candidates to present a different and potentially more homogeneous version of themselves, in turn affecting who was likely to succeed in an AI-enabled hiring process, with implications for organizations using AI in hiring, promotions, or admission decisions. Why This Matters for Your Organization The implications of our findings extend beyond individual hiring decisions. When candidates systematically misrepresent themselves, organizations face several critical challenges: Talent pool distortion: While AI is sometimes blamed for making biased hiring decisions (for example, discriminating against women in the selection process), our research suggests that knowing that one is assessed by AI also biases candidates, making them believe that they should prioritize their analytical capabilities. As a result, companies may be screening out exactly the candidates they need simply by using AI: that innovative thinker or emotionally intelligent leader you're looking for might present themselves as a rule-following analyst because they believe that is what the AI wants to see. Validity compromise: Assessment tools are only as good as the data they collect. When candidates strategically alter their responses, the fundamental validity of the assessment process might be undermined. Organizations may no longer measure authentic capabilities—instead, they may measure what candidates think AI will value the most. Unintended homogenization: If most candidates believe AI favors analytical traits, the talent pipeline may become increasingly uniform, potentially undermining diversity initiatives and limiting the range of perspectives in organizations. Companies like IBM and Hilton, which integrate AI into both hiring and internal promotion systems, must now contend with whether such tools nudge employees toward formulaic self-presentation. New transparency regulations like the EU's AI Act, which require organizations to disclose AI use in high-stakes decisions, make these outcomes all the more likely. When candidates are aware that an AI is assessing them, they are more likely to change their behavior. What Leaders Can Do Based on our findings, organizations can take several concrete steps to address the AI assessment effect: Radical transparency: Do not just disclose AI assessment—be explicit about what it actually evaluates. Clearly communicate that your AI can and does value diverse traits, including creativity, emotional intelligence, and intuitive problem-solving. This might include providing examples of successful candidates who demonstrated strong intuitive or creative capabilities. Currently, few companies seem to be transparent about what exactly it is that AI assesses—at least this information is not easily accessible when clicking through career page information on the websites of many major companies. That said, applicants discuss and share their intuitions on blogs and videos, which may be counterproductive because it may or may not align with actual practices. We advise companies not to leave their candidates to speculate. Regular behavioral audits: Implement systematic reviews of your AI assessment outcomes. For instance, New York City has enacted Local Law 144, requiring employers to conduct annual bias audits of AI-based hiring. In response, one of the market leaders in AI-based hiring, HireVue reports their recent audits for race or gender bias across jobs and use cases. In addition to examining biases regarding demographics, we suggest using these audits to look for patterns indicating behavioral adaptation: Are candidates' responses becoming more homogeneous over time? Are you seeing a shift toward analytical presentations at the expense of other valuable traits? Hybrid assessment: Some organizations combine human and AI assessments. For example, Salesforce notes that besides technology, a human will review applications. Nvidia and Philip Morris International guarantee ultimate assessment and decision-making through a human. One of our studies shows that while this hybrid human assessment does reduce candidates' tendency to highlight analytical capabilities, it does not eliminate it. To close the gap, you need to train your human hirers to compensate for the AI effect. The Path Forward As AI becomes increasingly embedded in organizational decision-making, we must recognize that these tools do not just change processes—they change people. The efficiency gains from AI assessment may come at the cost of authentic candidate presentation and, ultimately, the human diversity that makes organizations innovative and resilient. The irony is striking: In our quest to remove human bias from hiring, we may have created a system where AI introduces a new form of bias. The solution is not to abandon AI, but to design assessment systems that account for and counteract these behavioral shifts. Only by keeping humans—not just metrics—at the heart of our assessment strategies can we build hiring systems that truly identify and nurture the diverse talent our organizations need.
