Levi Strauss & Co. | Corporate financial sustainability report at Levi Strauss & Co.

Status
0.60% votes in favour
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Proposal number
4
Resolution details
Company ticker
LEVI:US
Lead filer
National Center for Public Policy
Resolution ask
Report on or disclose
ESG theme
  • Governance
ESG sub-theme
  • Lobbying / political engagement
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Consumer Discretionary
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
RESOLVED: Shareholders request that the Board of Directors create a board committee on corporate financial sustainability to oversee and review the impact of the Company’s policy positions, advocacy, partnerships and charitable giving on social and political matters, and the effect of those actions on the Company’s financial sustainability. The Company should issue a public report on the committee’s findings by the end of 2024.
Whereas clause
WHEREAS: The Company’s policy positions, advocacy, partnerships and charitable giving on significant social policy and political matters should not alienate consumers, decrease sales, or diminish shareholder value.



The Company takes public and politically divisive positions over issues of significant social policy concern, including advocating for anti-Second Amendment policies and decrying laws designed to increase integrity and confidence in elections as “racist.”(1)



The Company does not protect employees based on viewpoint and even forced out a top executive over her views regarding school closures during COVID-19, wearingly describing it, too, as racist.(2)



The Company partners with divisive organizations such as the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), which seeks to indoctrinate elementary school children as young as 5-years-old with radical gender ideology and instruction on sexual orientation by pushing books and lesson plans in schools. The Company also has a 100 percent rating on the HRC’s “Corporate Equality Index.” Earning that score requires spending shareholder assets to embrace highly partisan positions on hot-button issues.



The Company donates to divisive organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union and Planned Parenthood, and pledged $37 million to the Black Lives Matter movement and related causes proven to squander assets and support racism and antisemitism.(3)



The Company also supports a variety of other leftwing causes and organizations through the related Levi Strauss Foundation. For instance, 44 percent of the Foundation’s 2020 grants went to so-called “social justice” organizations that support partisan and unpopular objectives and undermine law enforcement.(4) The Company supports these law enforcement-undermining organizations despite its “urgent concern” over the impact of “smash and grab” retail crime on business.
Supporting statement
SUPPORTING STATEMENT: The Company supports divisive organizations and takes public stances on divisive issues that alienate current and prospective consumers despite declining sales and a 22 percent drop in its Americas market.(6)



Recent events have made clear that company bottom-lines, and therefore value to shareholders, drop when companies take overtly political and divisive positions that alienate consumers. Following Bud Light’s embrace of partisanship and disparagement of its customer base, its revenue fell $395 million in North America when compared to the same time a year ago.(7) This amounts to roughly 10 percent of its revenue in the months following its leap into contentious politics.(8) Target Corporation’s market cap fell over $15 billion amid backlash for similar actions.(9) And Disney stock fell 44 percent in 2022 –its worst performance in nearly 50 years – amid its decision to put extreme partisan agendas ahead of parents’ rights.(

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.