Restaurant Brands International Inc. | Annual glidepath ESG disclosure (animal welfare) at Restaurant Brands International Inc.

Status
3.10% votes in favour
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Proposal number
5
Resolution details
Company ticker
QSR
Resolution ask
Report on or disclose
ESG theme
  • Environment
  • Social
ESG sub-theme
  • Animal welfare
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Consumer Discretionary
Company HQ country
Canada
Resolved clause
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: Shareholders ask Restaurant Brands International to disclose any annual glidepath benchmarks it may have established for reaching its animal welfare goals. This should happen within six months of the 2023 annual meeting, at a reasonable cost, and omitting proprietary information.
Supporting statement
Supporting Statement:

This proposal simply seeks improved disclosure from RBI regarding its animal welfare commitments.
Corporate accountability for significant policy commitments, particularly those relating to ESG matters, is being subjected to increasing public and stakeholder scrutiny.

In 2022, for example, irregularities in what McDonald’s was publicly reporting (compared to what it was actually doing) on one of its longtime animal welfare commitments were thrust into the global spotlight. This controversy was featured in the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Washington Post, Bloomberg, Financial Times, BBC, and many other major news outlets. Two board members were challenged in a proxy contest by Carl Icahn, and when Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) evaluated the issue in detail, it concluded that only “cautionary support” was warranted for them, pointing out that it, “serves as a reminder to shareholders to demand greater specificity from corporate leaders seeking to address ESG concerns[.]” It is precisely that “greater specificity” which this proposal calls for. Here’s the background: For many years, Restaurant Brands International (RBI) has repeatedly touted to shareholders various animal welfare commitments.

For example, RBI has pledged to reach 100% cage-free eggs in North America, Western Europe, Latin America, Australia and New Zealand by 2025 and globally by 2030. But the company has never disclosed any kind of specific “glidepath” with annual benchmarks it may be working toward in service of reaching those goals. Meanwhile, other companies have done just that. A few examples of other animal welfare glidepaths include:
- Dine Brands says, “we are aiming to have at least 20% of our U.S. egg supply chain be cage-free by the end of 2022, 33% by the end of 2023, 66% by the end of 2024, 100% by the end of 2025.”
- Jack in the Box says, “Currently, approximately 80 to 85 percent of our egg supply is cage-free. By the end of 2024, approximately 87 to 89 percent of our egg-supply will be cage-free, and by the end of 2025, we will have reached our 100 percent goal.”
- Denny’s says it’s, “goal is to increase our cage-fee egg volume to 40% by 2023 and by 20 percentage points annually thereafter until we reach our goal” (of 100% cage-free eggs by 2026).
- target, Cracker Barrel, Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines, Norwegian Cruise Lines, Carnival Corporation, General Mills, Conagra Brands, Bloomin’ Brands and other companies have all disclosed similar animal welfare glidepaths to their shareholders.

But RBI’s shareholders are in the dark as to any annual glidepath benchmarks the company may have set for reaching its animal welfare goals, the significance of which is substantial in ensuring the company successfully implements these important policy issues.

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.