Ask an expert
![Briyin](themes/aaAle/images/interface/profile-pic-placeholder.47cf740a.png)
Dear Mr. Gibbons,
You wrote in your recent editorial for your “Summer 2011” publication that BP was responding to our (customer) feedback that you considered “broadening your fuel company alignment”. For this, you detailed that BP has expanded its fuel participation scheme to both non-members and members alike and now includes Caltex as a partner. A few comments in response, please:
First off, Caltex. Who? I don’t think you could you have partnered with a more obscure fuel company? From looking at their locations online, they are only an Auckland-based offering. But, even living in Auckland, I can’t even tell you where one is located. And, the one Caltex I did come across when travelling north of Auckland informed me that they don’t participate in your fuel rebate program. So, really, this benefit not only means nothing to me, but also means nothing to your customers not based in Auckland.
Second, your choice in partners in aligning with BP. Even before the Gulf of Mexico spill helped illuminate the continued, wilful, and egregious safety and environmental violations from BP, I knew their record was abysmal. But, since then, I can no longer turn a blind eye and have since then voted with my wallet to show my dissatisfaction with BP by choosing other fuel providers whenever possible. It’s a commonly known sentiment that “we are who we associate with”. Is this seriously with whom you choose to “hang out”? Are the safety and environmental records of BP one with which you choose to ally? Even as you’d surely proffer that you in no way think their performance to be suitable, you demonstrate to us customers that you tacitly agree with them by partnering.
The first page of a Google search provided me with a great infographic to help illustrate just how bad BP’s record is http://www.fastcompany.com/1658137/infographic-of-the-day-bps-horrifying-safety-record:
“Between June 2007 and February 2010, the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) checked 55 oil refineries operating in the U.S. Two are owned by BP, and those racked up 760 citations for "egregiously wilful" safety violations--defined as committed with plain indifference to or intentional disregard for employee safety and health. The other 53 refineries--put together--only received one such violation.
As you can see, BP accounted for just 4% of the refineries inspected by OSHA. And yet they accounted for 54% of all violations.”
Though I’m a relative newcomer to New Zealand, AA has always purportedly stood for the nation’s best interest. Surely you could use your organisation’s size and influence to do better for us all by encouraging more responsible (and forward-thinking) behaviour through your partnerships? I do thank you for your efforts to provide a fuel rebate program as a benefit of membership, but perhaps you’d not feel it necessary to water down one this benefit by opening it non-members by choosing a fuel partner that is responsible and proves its commitment to the environment through real action? Do that, sir, and I submit to you that you’d get closer to the member participation levels in your program that you seek. Am I incorrect in my assumption?
![ABayliss](themes/aaAle/images/interface/profile-pic-placeholder.47cf740a.png)
Your message was forwarded to the General Manager of AA Smartfuel. The following is his reply;
"BP has been a long-standing partner who have contributed over $50mil in rewards to AA members and a lot of members are loyal customers of BP.
We respect that it is an individual’s choice as to where they purchase their fuel. Member feedback over the years asked us to increase the choice of oil company –– to that end we have done this.
Caltex have 154 sites on the programme which are owned and operated by New Zealanders, so between BP and Caltex, it is more convenient to both earn and redeem rewards than it was under the previous programme of AA Rewards.
Through the AA Smartfuel programme, AA members are entitled to increased rewards compared to non-members –– and discounts that are earned through longevity are still applied to appropriate products only for AA Members.
We appreciate your feedback, respect your views and understand that this programme and our choice of partners won’t necessarily appeal to every stakeholder.
Our goal is to reduce the cost of fuel for New Zealand motorists and after 5 months over $9million in fuel discounts have been earned through the AA Smartfuel programme."
![Briyin](themes/aaAle/images/interface/profile-pic-placeholder.47cf740a.png)
Thanks very much for coordinating a response to my query.
So, if I read this correctly, he is saying that AA is willing to overlook BP's horrendous safety and environmental record because they give enough money back to AA customers. (In some circles, this is called a bribe and is looked down upon.)
I would submit that the AA's goal to reduce the cost of fuel is admirable, but that it should also add a goal to use its considerable membership sway to encourage more responsible behaviour from its partners. We no longer live in a world in which we can only view it with short-term goals.
![Ianthesaint](themes/aaAle/images/interface/profile-pic-placeholder.47cf740a.png)
To support the AA I can see why they chose BP and Caltex as there are so many of their garages in NZ. However I never ever use BP as they are always more expensive, even with the AA discount, than Gull which takes supermarket coupons.Like the original poster I also dislike how the company operates so I feel unable to buy anything from their shop either.
![tjhull](themes/aaAle/images/interface/profile-pic-placeholder.47cf740a.png)
I agree with the above.I will not purchase BP fuel at any cost.
![Briyin](themes/aaAle/images/interface/profile-pic-placeholder.47cf740a.png)
Thank you both for your reply posts. I had a hard time believing the Smartfuel's General Manager sentiment that AA members are perfectly happy patronising BP even in light of its completely irresponsible behavior. Maybe if enough of us sign on to this post and express our disapproval, they'll be forced to pause and potentially reconsider their position with which they seem to think us in perfect agreement?
![Briyin](themes/aaAle/images/interface/profile-pic-placeholder.47cf740a.png)
![malachi456](themes/aaAle/images/interface/profile-pic-placeholder.47cf740a.png)
I think you might need to read the reply again. It said "We appreciate your feedback, respect your views and understand that this programme and our choice of partners won’t necessarily appeal to every stakeholder." So I think they realise that not everyone is in perfect agreement.