Resolution askConduct due diligence, audit or risk/impact assessment
ESG sub-theme- Diversity, equity & inclusion (DEI)
Type of voteShareholder proposal
Company sectorIndustrials
Company HQ countryUnited States
Resolved clauseShareholders of the United Parcel Service, Inc. ("the Company") request that the Board of Directors commission an audit analyzing the impacts of the Company's Equity, Diversity & Inclusion policies on civil rights, non-discrimination and returns to merit, and the impacts of those issues on the Company's business. The audit may, in the Board's discretion, be conducted by an independent and unbiased third party with input from civil rights organizations, public-interest litigation groups, employees and shareholders of a wide spectrum of viewpoints and perspectives. A report on the audit, prepared at reasonable cost and omitting confidential or proprietary information, should be publicly disclosed on the Company's website.
Supporting statementUnder the guise of ESG, corporations have allocated significant resources and attention towards implementing social justice into workplace practices and hiring. Across the political spectrum, all agree that employee success should be fostered and that no employees should face discrimination, but there is much disagreement about what non-discrimination means. Many companies — including Bank of America, American Express, Verizon, Pfizer, CVS and even UPS itself — have adopted Equity, Diversity & Inclusion programs, trainings and officers that seek to establish racial and social "equity." But in practice, what "equity" really means is the distribution of pay and authority on the basis of race, sex, orientation and ethnic categories rather than by merit. Where adopted, such programs have raised significant objections, including the concern that the programs and practices themselves are deeply racist, sexist, otherwise discriminatory, and potentially in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. And that by devaluing merit, corporations have sacrificed employee competence and moral — and therefore productivity — to the altar of "diversity."
These practices create massive reputational, legal and financial risk. If the Company is, in the name of so-called "equity," committing illegal or unconscionable discrimination against employees deemed "non-diverse," then the Company will suffer in myriad ways — all of them both unforgivable and avoidable. In developing the audit and report, the Company should consult civil-rights and public-interest law groups, but it must not compound error with bias by relying only on left-leaning organizations. It must consult groups across the spectrum of viewpoints, including right-leaning civil-rights groups representing people of color — such as the Woodson Center or Project 21 — and groups that defend the rights and liberties of all Americans. Similarly, when including employees in the audit, the Company must allow employees to speak freely and confidentially without fear of reprisal or disfavor. Too many employers have established company stances that themselves chill contributions from employees who disagree with the company's asserted positions, and then have pretended that the employees who have been empowered by the companies' partisan positioning represent the true and only voice of all employees. This by itself creates a deeply hostile workplace for some groups of employees, and is both immoral and likely illegal.