Google Inc. (Alphabet Inc.) | Report on charitable partnerships at Google Inc. (Alphabet Inc.)

Status
0.38% votes in favour
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Proposal number
5
Resolution details
Company ticker
GOOGL
Lead filer
Resolution ask
Report on or disclose
ESG theme
  • Social
ESG sub-theme
  • Diversity, equity & inclusion (DEI)
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Technology
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
Shareholders request that the Board of Directors of Alphabet Inc. report to shareholders annually, at reasonable expense and excluding confidential information, an analysis of how Alphabet’s charitable partnerships impact its risks related to discrimination against individuals based on their speech or religious exercise.
Supporting statement
Corporations routinely use their platforms to voice support for humanitarian causes and human rights. Some of the most fundamental are the rights to free speech and religion, which are recognized by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and the UN Declaration of Human Rights1. Unfortunately, many companies are supporting organizations that are undermining these freedoms.



The 2024 edition of the Viewpoint Diversity Score Business found that 62% of some of the largest companies in America support non-profits that are influencing public policy by actively attacking free speech and religious freedom.



Groups like the Human Rights Campaign have led coalitions calling on major social media platforms to censor “hate speech and harassment” that includes many mainstream views on parental rights and human sexuality.2 The HRC in particular has advocated for legislation like the Equality Act, which would pose serious threats to religious freedom, free speech, and the progress women have made toward equality in law and culture.3 And its Corporate Equality Index requires companies to provide “puberty blockers for youth” in their healthcare plans4 even though nearly 70% of Americans oppose the practice, and has induced corporations like Anheuser-Busch5 and Target6 into marketing decisions that have severely and permanently harmed their brand value.



Many companies, including John Deere, Jack Daniels, Harley Davidson, Lowes, Home Depot, Ford, and Coors, have already taken affirmative steps to refocus their charitable giving to serve their diverse customers.7 Many have also explicitly cut ties with the Human Rights Campaign as a part of this effort.



But Alphabet still partners with the HRC, with Google listed as a Platinum-level sponsor for the organization and receiving a perfect score on the Corporate Equality index.8 In Google’s 2024 diversity report9, the company touts its objective of “mak[ing] more space for diverse perspectives and experiences in our workplace.” Yet, when it comes to diverse political and religious perspectives, Alphabet’s corporate partnerships simply don’t meaningfully align with the company’s aims.



Alphabet needs to assure its shareholders that it is following through on these promises of equality for employees of diverse backgrounds, including diversity of political beliefs and religious practice, and that it is promoting fundamental freedoms that benefit every American.

How other organisations have declared their voting intentions

Organisation nameDeclared voting intentionsRationale
Anima SgrAgainstThe company has already established governance structures to oversee these matters, adopted a dedicated policy, and currently discloses data and information regarding its charitable contributions.
THEMATICS Asset ManagementAgainst

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.