Walgreens Boots Alliance | Stockholder proposal requesting a report on risks of reproductive healthcare legislation

Status
7.82% votes in favour
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Proposal number
9
Resolution details
Company ticker
WBA
Lead filer
Presbyterian Church U.S.A. Foundation
Resolution ask
Report on or disclose
ESG theme
  • Social
ESG sub-theme
  • Public health
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Consumer Staples
Company HQ country
United States
Supporting materials
Resolved clause
Shareholders request that Walgreens issue a public report prior to December 31, 2024, omitting confidential and privileged information and at a reasonable expense, detailing any known and any potential risks and costs to the company caused by enacted or proposed state and federal laws regarding mifepristone and other reproductive health medications, and detailing any strategies beyond litigation and legal compliance that the company may deploy to minimize or mitigate these risks.
Whereas clause
In January of 2023, the Food and Drug Administration enacted a regulatory change allowing retail pharmacies such as Walgreens to apply for certification to sell and dispense mifepristone, a medication prescribed for miscarriage management or to induce abortion in combination with the drug misoprostol. After this change, Walgreens received letters from both Republican and Democratic state attorneys general regarding the highly debated legality of dispensing abortion medications through the mail.

Walgreens’ response to the Republican attorneys general stated that it would not dispense this medication in any of their respective states. This included Kansas, where it is legal to do so.11 At the same time, a statement released by Walgreens also maintains that once certified by the FDA, it “will dispense this medication consistent with federal and state laws” in “any jurisdiction where it is legally permissible to do so.”12 Walgreens’ policy regarding mifepristone is confusing and unclear to customers, the medical community, shareholders, and other stakeholders.

Given the anticipated heavy demand for this product (medication abortion accounts for more than 50% of abortions in the
United States13) and how closely its availability is being monitored by observers, clarity is warranted.

Walgreens’ letters to the attorneys general resulted in significant negative media attention and reputation damage. For instance,
see articles in Vanity Fair titled “Walgreens Caves to Antiabortion Republicans”14 and in the LA Times titled “A spineless
Walgreens bows down to anti abortion crusaders.”15

Walgreens’ inconsistent statements on this issue also risked a $54 million contract with the State of California. Governor Gavin
Newsom attempted but failed to revoke the contract. Future institutional boycotts may find ways to be successful.

This ongoing lack of clarity on this important and high-visibility issue continues to threaten Walgreens’ reputation and may
ultimately hinder customers’ ability to access this medication.
Supporting statement
Because federal and state laws on this issue may conflict or have contested application, shareholders recommend that such a report include the Company's policy on reconciling federal and state law and/or how political factors or litigation threats may influence determinations on where the Company can legally dispense medications.

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.