Is this a false dichotomy or something else?

I’m wondering whether the final sentence/quote in this article constitutes a false dichotomy. In some respects it resembles an ‘if you’re not with us, you’re against us’ or ‘if you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem’, but it’s denying the existence of a second option. Or, at least, the denial of another option is merely a rhetorical trick. Can anyone fathom what’s going on in this sentence, and whether it’s an informal fallacy?

Well strictly speaking, of course. I wouldn’t think Mrs Hargreaves though meant it so literally, I would take it as a rhetorical persuasive technique. Of course, Mrs Hargreaves realizes that companies do have a choice to not join IWF. Of course, the companies may not like the way IWF operates, etc.