A video circulating on Facebook appears to show one Coca-Cola truck overtaking another Coca-Cola truck on a blind rising — a manoeuvre that raises obvious questions about road safety and the standards expected of commercial vehicle drivers.
The Cape Chronicle has approached Coca-Cola for comment on the incident and has sought an explanation from the company. At the time of publication, no response had been received.
That silence is disappointing.
This is not simply a question of two trucks moving along a public road. A branded commercial vehicle represents the company whose name is displayed prominently on its bodywork. When members of the public see a Coca-Cola truck being driven in a manner that appears potentially dangerous, they are entitled to ask whether the company is aware of the incident, whether the driver has been identified and whether the matter is being investigated.
The video itself should be treated carefully. A short social-media recording cannot establish everything that happened before or after the footage was captured, nor can it independently establish the driver’s intentions. But what can be seen is sufficiently concerning to warrant questions.
And those questions have been put to Coca-Cola.
The company talks about road safety
Coca-Cola’s own published material makes the issue particularly significant. The Coca-Cola Company has previously described “route-to-market safety” as covering the distribution of its products and the movement of employees along public roads. Its published safety programme also says bottling partners assess route hazards and work with drivers to navigate distribution routes safely. (Coca-Cola)
In other words, road safety is not an issue external to Coca-Cola’s business. Getting its products from distribution facilities to customers necessarily involves trucks, drivers and public roads.
The company’s published material also describes safety workshops, training and distribution-risk assessments as part of its approach to route-to-market safety. (Coca-Cola)
That makes the absence of a response to a specific road-safety question all the more difficult to understand.
What should Coca-Cola be asked?
The Cape Chronicle believes the public deserves straightforward answers.
Was the truck shown in the video operated by Coca-Cola or one of its bottling or distribution partners?
Has the company identified the vehicle and driver?
Has the footage been reviewed by the company’s fleet or safety management?
Does Coca-Cola consider the manoeuvre shown in the video to be consistent with its driver-safety standards?
And, if the driver is found to have breached company policy, will disciplinary or corrective action be taken?
These are reasonable questions, particularly when a company’s branding is clearly visible on the vehicles involved.
Coca-Cola Africa’s South African website identifies Coca-Cola Africa as a South African registered company and provides public contact channels for the company. (Coca-Cola)
There is therefore little reason for the public to be left wondering whether anyone inside the organisation is taking the footage seriously.
Silence is also a response
Companies are not obliged to comment on every video that appears on social media. A responsible company may quite reasonably want to establish the facts before making a statement.
But there is a considerable difference between saying “we are investigating” and saying nothing at all.
Even a brief response confirming that the footage has been received and referred to the appropriate safety department would demonstrate that the concern had reached someone capable of addressing it.
Instead, the Cape Chronicle is left reporting that questions were submitted and no response was received.
That does not establish that Coca-Cola condones the driving seen in the video. It does not establish that the driver violated company policy. Nor does it establish that Coca-Cola itself was directly responsible for the manoeuvre.
What it does establish is that, when presented with an apparent road-safety incident involving prominently branded Coca-Cola vehicles, the company has so far chosen not to provide its side of the story.
The bigger issue
Every day, thousands of South Africans share the roads with heavy commercial vehicles. The consequences of a serious mistake involving a truck can be catastrophic.
That is why commercial fleet safety cannot simply be reduced to internal company policy. It is a public-road issue.
Coca-Cola has built one of the world’s most recognisable brands around its promise of refreshment, happiness and togetherness. Its trucks are moving advertisements for that brand wherever they travel.
With that visibility comes responsibility.
If the footage is misleading, Coca-Cola has an opportunity to explain why.
If the manoeuvre was unacceptable, the company has an opportunity to say so.
If the vehicle was not under its operational control, the company can explain the relationship.
And if an investigation is already under way, the company can simply say that.
The Cape Chronicle has left the door open for Coca-Cola to respond. Should the company provide comment, that response will be published.
Editor’s note: The Cape Chronicle has not independently established the identity of the driver, the precise location or circumstances surrounding the video. The article therefore does not allege criminal or unlawful conduct. It reports what is visible in the circulating footage and Coca-Cola’s failure to respond to requests for comment at the time of publication.
