It may be required by law that way.  This may also be the reason for the 4 
liter milk container.  It is required in Canada and thus to save money Costco 
uses one size container for both markets.  It gives the Canadians the full 
amount and cheats Americans out of 6 %.

Jerry




________________________________
From: John Frewen-Lord <j...@frewston.plus.com>
To: U.S. Metric Association <usma@colostate.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 3:06:54 AM
Subject: [USMA:43624] Re: USC units spread to the UK - and no-one notices!


When I lived in Canada, we used to do some of our shopping at a large Costco in 
Mississauga, Ont, where most products seemed to be packaged in larger sizes 
suitable for, and directed towards, the non-retail hospitality and instutional 
industries (hotels, restaurants, hospitals, etc).  What surprised me was that 
all this packaging was in hard metric sizes - 2 kg tins of coffee, 1 kg packs 
of bacon (Canadian of course!), 4 L jugs of milk (although that is also a 
Canadian retail size sold in normal supermarkets and convenience stores), 10 kg 
bags of potatoes, etc, etc.

It strikes me it would not be beyond the realms of possibility for Costco to 
simply switch their US packaging operations to the same as their Canadian 
ones?  (I know, I am on dangerous ground here, but just pointing out some 
logical - commercially sensible - moves to help metrication in the US).


----- Original Message ----- From: "John M. Steele" <jmsteele9...@sbcglobal.net>
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <usma@colostate.edu>
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 10:57 PM
Subject: [USMA:43612] Re: USC units spread to the UK - and no-one notices!


> 
> 
> I made a point of checking my supermarket milk (in the frig) and the milk at 
> Costco while I shopped today.  Here in Michigan both are labeled 1 GAL / 3.78 
> L and have a nutrition label exactly like any other food regulated under FPLA 
> and the nutrition label requirements.  However, I suppose it could be under 
> UPLR or even similar State requirements.  If State requirements, then there 
> is a "50 States = 50 Ways" problem.
> 
> On the Costco milk, the net contents is printed on the label.  On the 
> supermarket milk it is stamped into the plastic container and a little hard 
> to read unless you turn the bottle correctly.
> 
> I still believe they could fill to 4 L if they wanted too.
> 
> 
> --- On Mon, 3/9/09, STANLEY DOORE <stan.do...@verizon.net> wrote:
> 
>> From: STANLEY DOORE <stan.do...@verizon.net>
>> Subject: Re: [USMA:43487] Re: USC units spread to the UK - and no-one 
>> notices!
>> To: jmsteele9...@sbcglobal.net, "U.S. Metric Association" 
>> <usma@colostate.edu>
>> Date: Monday, March 9, 2009, 1:37 AM
>> I can't cite a specific law about dual labeling milk and
>> other dairy products, however they are not dual labeled now.
>>  Milk comes under special state laws for farm products.
>>    Stan Doore
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John M.
>> Steele" <jmsteele9...@sbcglobal.net>
>> To: "U.S. Metric Association"
>> <usma@colostate.edu>
>> Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2009 9:13 AM
>> Subject: [USMA:43487] Re: USC units spread to the UK - and
>> no-one notices!
>> 
>> 
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Are you sure about that? Can you cite a law?
>> >
>> > I can't see an exception for milk in the FPLA, and
>> sectio 1461 seems to be pretty clear that it supercedes
>> state law, requiring less or different information..
>> >
>> > I believe it must be dual labelled and could be sold
>> in either a round Customary or metric quantity.
>> Specifically, I believe a 4 L fill would be legal, but it
>> would also have to be properly labeled in Customary.
>> >
>> > --- On Sun, 3/8/09, STANLEY DOORE
>> <stan.do...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> From: STANLEY DOORE <stan.do...@verizon.net>
>> >> Subject: [USMA:43486] Re: USC units spread to the
>> UK - and no-one notices!
>> >> To: "U.S. Metric Association"
>> <usma@colostate.edu>
>> >> Date: Sunday, March 8, 2009, 8:58 AM
>> >> milk which must be
>> >> sold by the gallon
>> >> due to government laws and regulations.
>> >>
>> >> Stan Doore
>> >
> 


      

Reply via email to