JOHNSON & JOHNSON | Civil Rights Audit at JNJ

Status
33.90% votes in favour
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Proposal number
6
Resolution details
Company ticker
JNJ
Resolution ask
Other ask
ESG theme
  • Social
ESG sub-theme
  • Diversity, equity & inclusion (DEI)
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Health Care
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
RESOLVED, shareholders request the company conduct and publish a third-party audit (within a reasonable time, at a reasonable cost, and excluding confidential/proprietary information) to review its corporate policies, practices, products, and services, above and beyond legal and regulatory matters; to assess the racial impact of the company's policies, practices, products and services; and to provide recommendations for improving the company's racial impact.
Whereas clause
The Black Lives Matter protests of 2020 brought the significant policy issue of systemic racism to the forefront of a widespread public discussion and reckoning in America.

It is clear that business as usual in the healthcare sector can result in disparate outcomes for Black Americans. For example, a recent Eli Lilly op-ed notes "Minorities make up nearly 40 percent of the U.S. population but less than 20 percent of participants in the key clinical trials.... [t]his low participation is itself a health disparity."[1] Further, the mortality rate for black women diagnosed with breast cancer is 42 percent higher than the comparable rate for white women.[2]

In June 2020, JNJ made commitments to address underrepresentation in clinical trials, to strengthen existing community medical systems, and to discontinue skin lightening products. While these commitments are positive steps taken during a time of acute reflection on racism in America, we believe a third-party civil rights audit would demonstrate an even deeper commitment, provide rigorous independent insights, and may reveal additional ways in which JNJ can have even more impact on systemic racism.

We are concerned about the ongoing controversies our company faces related to its decision in May 2020 to discontinue sales of talcum-based powder in North America, but continue sales across the globe. Claims of aggressively marketing these products to Black and Brown women after its talc supplier included the WHO's "possibly carcinogenic" label on shipments are troubling,[3] as are the more than 19,000 lawsuits pending related to its use. In August, more than 200 health and environmental justice organizations from 50 countries called on the company to "walk its talk on racial equity and valuing Black lives" by ending global sales of talcum-based baby powder.[4]

Companies such as Facebook, Airbnb, and Starbucks, when seeking to understand and address their role in contributing to systemic racism, have commissioned third-party audits. For example, in 2019 Starbucks retained former United States Attorney General Eric Holder to evaluate Starbucks' policies and practices. The report noted strengths and offered recommendations "to promote civil rights, equity, diversity, and inclusion - both within the Company and the communities it serves."[5]

The audits commissioned by these companies provide a potential template for our company's own civil rights audit.

How other organisations have declared their voting intentions

Organisation name Declared voting intentions Rationale
Aktia Bank p.l.c. For Shareholders would benefit from additional information allowing them to better measure the progress of the company's existing diversity and inclusion initiatives.
Boston Trust Walden For

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.