Who Owns Ajax?

Ajax products are subject to Colgate-Palmolive's group-level sustainability commitments. Colgate-Palmolive has committed to achieving net-zero carbon emissions across its value chain by 2040 and using 100 percent renewable electricity across global operations by 2030. The company targets 42 percent greenhouse gas emission reduction by 2030 against a 2019 baseline, a target approved by the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) in 2022. Colgate-Palmolive was the first multinational in its sector to receive SBTi approval for its near-term climate targets.

On packaging, Colgate-Palmolive has committed to making 100 percent of its packaging recyclable, reusable, or compostable by 2025 and to reducing virgin plastic by 25 percent by 2025. Ajax's powdered cleanser container has been lightweighted over successive redesigns. Progress on these packaging commitments has been inconsistent across brands and markets; Greenpeace has criticized Colgate-Palmolive for continued contributions to plastic pollution despite stated targets.

Colgate-Palmolive holds membership in the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO). As of 2024, the company reported 70.89 percent RSPO certification on its palm oil volume, short of its 100 percent goal. Palm oil derivatives are used in some Ajax surfactant formulations. Greenpeace has separately criticized Colgate-Palmolive for sourcing from suppliers linked to rainforest destruction, though Colgate-Palmolive disputes those characterizations.

Ajax formulations are phosphate-free in the United States and EU markets, aligned with regulatory requirements for water quality protection. The product range does not hold independent cruelty-free certification from Leaping Bunny. Colgate-Palmolive is listed on PETA's Companies Working for Regulatory Change list, indicating the company supports eliminating mandatory animal testing for cleaning product safety but has not achieved a full no-animal-testing status. Colgate-Palmolive is not a certified B Corporation.

Ajax has no independently verified awards of its own. Recognition for the brand flows through Colgate-Palmolive's corporate-level achievements:

• ENERGY STAR Partner of the Year for Sustained Excellence (2011-2024): Colgate-Palmolive has received this U.S. EPA and Department of Energy award for 14 consecutive years, recognizing the company's energy efficiency programs across its global manufacturing facilities, which include plants producing Ajax products.
• Science Based Targets Initiative (SBTi) Approval (2022): Colgate-Palmolive became the first multinational in its segment to receive SBTi approval for near-term Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions reduction targets. Ajax operations are included in these targets.

Ajax has faced several controversies throughout its history, primarily related to product formulation changes, environmental concerns, and broader challenges affecting Colgate-Palmolive's household cleaning portfolio.

Fabuloso Recall Impact: While Ajax products were not directly involved, Colgate-Palmolive's 2023 recall of approximately 4.9 million Fabuloso multi-purpose cleaners due to bacterial contamination (Pseudomonas species) affected consumer confidence in the company's home care portfolio. The recall involved products that could contain environmental bacteria posing serious infection risks to people with weakened immune systems, requiring extensive consumer outreach and replacement programs.

Phosphate Removal Controversy: Ajax faced significant consumer backlash when Colgate-Palmolive removed phosphates from Ajax powdered cleanser formulations in response to environmental regulations and consumer concerns. While the change was necessary for regulatory compliance and environmental protection, some consumers complained about reduced cleaning effectiveness, leading to market share challenges and brand loyalty issues in certain regions.

Environmental Impact of Powdered Products: Ajax has faced criticism from environmental groups regarding the environmental impact of powdered cleaning products, particularly concerns about particulate matter release and water system effects. Environmental advocates have questioned the sustainability of powdered cleanser formats compared to liquid alternatives, leading to ongoing debates about product format environmental footprints.

Parent Company Environmental Criticism: Ajax is affected by controversies surrounding Colgate-Palmolive's environmental practices. The company has received the worst possible rating from Ethical Consumer for climate change, plastic use, and palm oil/deforestation. Criticism includes the company's role in driving global demand for single-use plastic and insufficient progress on sustainable packaging goals.

Palm Oil Sourcing Controversies: Despite being an RSPO member, Colgate-Palmolive has been criticized for using palm oil from producers that destroy rainforests. The company's current palm oil certification level of 70.89% falls short of best practices, and its 2025 goal for 100% physically certified palm oil has been criticized as too slow by environmental advocates.

Animal Testing Concerns: Colgate-Palmolive receives poor ratings for animal testing policies, which affects Ajax's positioning among ethically conscious consumers. While the company works toward regulatory change to eliminate animal testing, its commitment doesn't apply across all product categories, leading to ongoing criticism from animal welfare organizations.

Formulation Changes and Consumer Acceptance: Ajax has experienced challenges with consumer acceptance when reformulating products to meet regulatory requirements or sustainability goals. Some formulation changes aimed at improving environmental performance have resulted in consumer complaints about reduced cleaning power or different product characteristics, requiring extensive consumer education and marketing efforts.

Supply Chain Labor Practices: Colgate-Palmolive has faced criticism regarding labor practices in its supply chain, including operations in countries with oppressive regimes. The company publishes modern slavery statements and codes of conduct but has been criticized for lack of transparency about audit outcomes and insufficient mechanisms for workers to make anonymous complaints.