Human capital management and fair employment practices extend far beyond a company’s operational efficiency. Effective and fair management practices contribute to greater economic stability, community well being, and the resiliency of labor markets, which are significant public policy concerns. Inadequate attention to these factors contributes to challenges such as wage stagnation, unsafe working conditions, and workforce displacement, which in turn generate material risks for investors and the broader economy.

Retention rates in particular are a clear indicator of the success of a company’s human capital management practices and its potential for future growth. Frequent staffing disruption impairs operational efficiency, scheduling, safety, service consistency, team cohesion, and employee morale, among other harms.[1]

The Brink’s Company (“Brink’s”) depends heavily on the reliability and trustworthiness of its frontline employees to deliver on its core brand promise of security, including the safe transport of high-value assets. Low retention and high turnover affects reliability, route security, and customer confidence. Brink’s noted in its 2025 Annual Report that high employee turnover and labor shortages raise operating costs and weaken operating performance and growth.[2] Turnover among security and logistics personnel remains a persistent operational risk in the broader industry. Gallup estimates these costs at approximately 40% of an employee’s annual salary.[3]

Despite these well-documented risks, Brink’s provides insufficient transparency into how effectively it retains talent across key demographic groups and regions. Brink’s only discloses its workforce diversity and turnover data aggregated across all employees. This lack of visibility regarding specific groups can mask key weaknesses in its human capital management processes and contrasts with emerging disclosure norms among global companies.

Many leading employers where workforce stability is a key driver of operational performance disclose with greater clarity on retention metrics. For example, Microsoft, Visa, Procter & Gamble, Bank of America, and Pfizer disclose retention or attrition data by demographic group. The collection and assessment of retention rate data is possible in all major workforce management databases; it is a standard human resource practice.

Retention is a forward-looking signal of human capital and overall business health; it is far more valuable to investors than static head counts alone. While aggregate workforce representation data such as that provided in the EEO-1 form is important to show who is in the workforce at a moment in time, retention rate data by demographic group shows whether any group or geographic region of employees are exiting disproportionately.

[1] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/211392097_The_Cost_of_Employee_Turnover

[2] https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/0000078890/000007889025000059/bco-20241231.htm

[3] https://www.gallup.com/workplace/646538/employee-turnover-preventable-often-ignored.aspx