Glad Merchandise sued over its ‘recycling’ baggage

Glad Merchandise sued over its ‘recycling’ baggage
Court gavel resting on a desk.

The California lawsuit alleges that as a result of Glad’s baggage will not be recyclable and most assortment applications don’t settle for bagged recyclables, it’s deceptive to promote them as recycling baggage. | BCFC/Shutterstock

One other client merchandise model proprietor has been hauled into court docket over its advertising of plastic baggage to be used in recyclables assortment. 

This time, San Francisco resident Patrick Peterson on Feb. 2 filed a criticism towards The Glad Merchandise Co. and its guardian firm, Clorox, in U.S. District Court docket for the Northern District of California. His lawsuit says the recycling-related advertising claims for the luggage are misleading and violate California and federal legal guidelines. 

In an announcement to Useful resource Recycling, the corporate mentioned “the lawsuit is meritless.” 

In 2022, Peterson purchased the Glad model recycling baggage at a retailer in San Francisco, in response to the criticism, which seeks to symbolize each nationwide and California-specific lessons of customers.  

The criticism factors to the truth that the luggage are marketed to be used with recyclables, with a photograph on the bundle exhibiting a blue polyethylene bag holding recyclables and the textual content “Recycling” and “Designed for municipal use” on the entrance. In a smaller font, the bundle additionally consists of the wording “Please verify your native amenities.” 

Peterson’s lawsuit notes that Glad, which is predicated in Oakland, Calif., failed to notice that the LDPE baggage themselves will not be recyclable, or that almost all curbside recycling applications don’t settle for bagged recyclables. Distinguished exceptions exist, in fact, equivalent to New York Metropolis’s bagged recyclables program

“The false Product title and label tips customers into believing they’ll bag recyclables outdoors of those restricted applications; when that occurs, the whole bag of recyclables is diverted to landfills or incinerators as common trash,” in response to Peterson’s criticism. “Customers who care in regards to the atmosphere are unknowingly contributing to creating air pollution worse – and paying Glad a premium to take action.”

Many jurisdictions actively work to influence residents to not bag their recyclables, as a result of the luggage may cause issues at MRFs. In actual fact, officers in Washington state are kicking off a public info marketing campaign on that very matter.

The criticism seeks an injunction blocking the corporate from utilizing the promoting and advertising language, in addition to compensation for customers who purchased the recycling baggage.

In an announcement to Useful resource Recycling, Chris Nielsen, director of Glad model innovation and sustainability, shot again on the criticism.  

“Glad recycling baggage had been developed in partnership with municipal recycling applications, for use in bag-based applications and make it simpler to move and type recyclables,” he said. “Some municipalities direct that recyclables be positioned in translucent baggage, however since municipality tips range from place to position and alter infrequently, our packaging clearly and explicitly encourages customers to verify with their native amenities concerning their recycling program necessities.”

The lawsuit is simply the newest to focus on model homeowners over recycling-related claims, and it’s the third current authorized motion concerning assortment baggage, particularly. 

The Connecticut legal professional normal in June 2022 filed a lawsuit with comparable claims towards Reynolds Client Merchandise over advertising language on the corporate’s Hefty model recycling baggage. That case is ongoing; nevertheless, Peterson’s lawsuit famous that Hefty modified its advertising language after the lawsuit was filed to make it clear that the luggage themselves will not be recyclable.

Individually, a non-public citizen who lives in Oakland, Calif. had additionally sued Reynolds Client Merchandise over the recycling baggage, however she dropped her criticism late final 12 months.

Different lawsuits have taken intention at different plastic merchandise in recent times. Actions have been filed towards PET water bottle producer Niagara Bottling, espresso pod firm Keurig Inexperienced Mountain, retailer and model proprietor 7-Eleven, mail-in recycling service supplier TerraCycle, world retailer Walmart, California-based grocery chains Gelson’s Markets and Stater Brother Markets, Walgreens and others. 

Outcomes have been blended. In some circumstances, the businesses received outright, however in a pair, they agreed to settlements, with Keurig agreeing to pay $10 million and alter its advertising claims. Most of the circumstances are ongoing. 

A number of the circumstances cite the Federal Commerce Fee (FTC) Inexperienced Guides, which cowl environmental and health-friendly promoting language and that are referenced by California statutes. The FTC is at the moment working to revise the Inexperienced Guides, which had been final up to date over a decade in the past. 


Extra tales about courts/lawsuits