Caterpillar Inc. | Civil rights, non-discrimination and returns to merit audit at Caterpillar Inc.

Status
1.73% votes in favour
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Proposal number
9
Resolution details
Company ticker
CAT
Lead filer
National Center for Public Policy
Resolution ask
Conduct due diligence, audit or risk/impact assessment
ESG theme
  • Social
ESG sub-theme
  • Diversity, equity & inclusion (DEI)
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Industrials
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
RESOLVED: Shareholders of Caterpillar Inc. (“the Company”) request that the Board of Directors commission an audit analyzing the impacts of the Company’s Diversity, Equity & 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 statement
"SUPPORTING STATEMENT
Under 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 Caterpillar itself(1) — have adopted “Diversity, Equity & Inclusion” (DEI) 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 ethnicity rather than by merit.(2)

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.(3) And that by devaluing merit, corporations have sacrificed employee competence, moral and productivity to the altar of “diversity.”"

How other organisations have declared their voting intentions

Organisation name Declared voting intentions Rationale
Rothschild & co Asset Management Against

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.