NORDSTROM, INC. | Report on impact of use of concealment clauses at NORDSTROM, INC.

Status
Withdrawn
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Resolution details
Company ticker
JWN
Lead filer
Resolution ask
Report on or disclose
ESG theme
  • Social
ESG sub-theme
  • Decent work
  • Whistleblowing
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Consumer Discretionary
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
Shareholders of Nordstrom, Inc. (“Nordstrom”) ask the Board to prepare a public report assessing the potential risks to the company associated with its use of concealment clauses in the context of harassment, discrimination, and other unlawful acts. The report should be prepared at reasonable cost and omit confidential information
Whereas clause
Nordstrom appropriately uses concealment clauses in employment agreements to protect confidential corporate information. However, Nordstrom’s employment-related agreements may prohibit workers from speaking publicly about harassment, discrimination, or other unlawful acts, which may contribute to a toxic workplace.

It is not known to what extent Nordstrom uses non-disclosure or non-disparagement agreements. Nordstrom’s Dispute Resolution Program requires prospective and existing employees to agree to mandatory, binding arbitration; give up their rights to a judge or jury trial; and limits their ability to conduct discovery and participate in class actions. This explicitly includes claims related to working conditions, discrimination, harassment, and retaliation.[1]
Nordstrom has faced few public allegations of harassment and discrimination. With mandatory arbitration and possibly other concealment clauses in use, investors cannot know if this is a result of Nordstrom’s strong human capital management or a result of its use of manipulative legal tactics.
A healthy workplace culture is linked to strong returns. McKinsey found that companies in the top quartile for workplace culture post a return to shareholders that is 60 percent higher than those in the median and 200 percent higher than organizations rated in the bottom quartile for healthy workplace culture.[2] A study by the Wall Street Journal found that over a five-year period, the 20 most diverse companies in the S&P 500 had an average annual stock return almost six percentage points higher than the 20 least diverse companies. In contrast, a workplace that tolerates harassment invites legal, brand, financial, and human capital risk. Companies may experience reduced morale, lost productivity, absenteeism, and challenges in attracting and retaining talent.[4] Companies such as Alphabet,[5] Apple,[6] Microsoft,[7] and Salesforce,[8] among others, have ended their use of concealment clauses.

Nordstrom operates under a quickly changing patchwork of state and federal laws related to use of concealment clauses and will likely benefit from a consistent practice across all employees and contractors, no matter the law of a particular jurisdiction. As of November 2022, “The Speak Out Act,” which limits non-disclosure agreements when sexual harassment is claimed, is expected to be signed into federal law by the President.[9] It joins existing federal legislation which ended the use of forced arbitration in workplace sexual assault and harassment cases.[10] California, Maine, New York, Washington, and other states have also reduced employers’ abilities to use concealment clauses.
Supporting statement
Concealment clauses are defined as any employment or post-employment agreement, such as arbitration, non-disclosure, or non-disparagement
agreements that Nordstrom asks employees or contractors to sign to limit their ability to discuss unlawful acts in the workplace, including harassment and discrimination.

DISCLAIMER: By including a shareholder resolution or management proposal in this database, neither the PRI nor the sponsor of the resolution or proposal is seeking authority to act as proxy for any shareholder; shareholders should vote their proxies in accordance with their own policies and requirements.

Any voting recommendations set forth in the descriptions of the resolutions and management proposals included in this database are made by the sponsors of those resolutions and proposals, and do not represent the views of the PRI.

Information on the shareholder resolutions, management proposals and votes in this database have been obtained from sources that are believed to be reliable, but the PRI does not represent that it is accurate, complete, or up-to-date, including information relating to resolutions and management proposals, other signatories’ vote pre-declarations (including voting rationales), or the current status of a resolution or proposal. You should consult companies’ proxy statements for complete information on all matters to be voted on at a meeting.