To all,

I have prepared this letter to Mrs Bernot but I will keep it on hold in the
folder Concepts  for a few months yet. If she receives too many letters
now, she may get irritated.

Han



Dear Mrs. Bernot,

Last autumn I wrote to you about the labels that Estee Lauder uses on the
products sold in the EU. I quote this from one of your letters:

"TABD has called on the European Union to demonstrate similar regulatory
flexibility so that manufacturers have the option to use either metric only,
or metric plus a supplemental unit of measurement depending on the needs of
the end user."

Apart from everything else, this is proof that the TABD wants metric
countries to put up with ifp for all eternity

The French or French Canadian end-user does not need the once liquide in
the first place.
.
Secondly:  EL labels are still ifp English, ifp French, metric supplemental.
Still 5 FL.OZ/OZ.LIQ/150 mL
Labels like that which flaunt USC as the international system of units which
it is absolutely not, are so offensive to me that I do not buy anything from
such companies, no matter from what country that company originates.
EL labeling conflicts with the quote above: metric + supplemental.

1. Canada does not require ifp labelling anymore, it ist just allowed. Her
requirements only cover language issues. Metric units and symbols are the
same in all languages.
2. The 'Franco/American' unit once liquide is illegal in France and in
Canada; the latter country only recognizes the Imperial fluid ounce which
*may*, not *must* be placed on labels.
4. The French authorities might decide sooner or later to ban the oz.liq.
on anything imported in France. It is their right to take that action.
3. Knowing that until 2010 'supplemental' units are allowed in the EU I
asked in my last message to you that Estee Lauder just does that, meaning
labelling its products like: 150 mL/5 fl.oz.

So, please, have Estee Lauder change its labels to the format
metric/ifp.

** To some members of the list. This is achievable. Going for metric only at
present is not. I want the offensive labels out now and ifp out in 2010.

Yours sincerely,

Han Maenen, The Netherlands

[EMAIL PROTECTED]



Reply via email to