Back Litigation
Litigation
Back Resolutions
Resolutions
Back Current Initiatives
Current Initiatives
Back Donate
Donate
Default image for pages

Members of the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility announced they had filed 60 shareholder proposals for the 2025 proxy season calling for increased disclosures and strengthened oversight of corporate political activities at a diverse set of companies and sectors. These proposals included 32 resolutions on lobbying, 23 on political election spending, and five asking companies to assess if their lobbying on climate issues is consistent with their stated climate goals and objectives. You can read more about these proposals in ICCR’s 2025 Proxy Resolutions and Voting Guide.

The vast majority of companies engage in various forms of public policy advocacy to influence legislative and regulatory decisions, primarily through lobbying and campaign contributions. This advocacy takes place at all levels of government, ranging from municipal and state levels to federal legislative and regulatory processes. Open Secrets reported that total annual corporate lobbying expenditures surpassed $5.5 billion in 2024 and $6.2 billion in 2023, with the pharmaceutical, tech, financial services, and oil & gas sectors among the top spenders, either through direct lobbying or indirectly via third-party organizations like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (Chamber). Additionally, the Chamber alone invested $823 million in lobbying activities from 2015 to 2024.

Through their memberships in trade associations like the Chamber and the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), and their donations to Super PACs, 527 committees, “social welfare” organizations, and model legislation groups like the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), corporations wield considerable influence on many issues.

“Companies exercise considerable power in their direct lobbying and indirectly through trade associations,” said Matthew Illian, Director of Responsible Investing for the United Church Funds, which held successful dialogues with four companies leading to the withdrawal of their proposals. “Investors are urging full transparency as well as careful evaluation of whether corporate lobbying activities align with a company’s stated values and priorities, as any misalignment may create reputational risk. We are pleased to see a number of companies responding positively to these appeals, resulting in withdrawal agreements and improved corporate responsibility.”

One such company responding positively to investor engagement is AbbVie. “Over the years AbbVie has incrementally added to its lobbying spending disclosure and also did not renew membership in four trade associations. We believe these actions help to address some of the risks, which is our goal as investors, and this year we were pleased to come to a productive agreement and withdrew the resolution,” said Zevin’s Marcela Pinilla, Director of Sustainable Investing.

Said Tim Smith, ICCR’s Sr. Policy Advisor, “Some corporations have significant influence over public policy issues and must evaluate if this advocacy is truly in the public interest. This is particularly true for climate lobbying,” Smith added. “Companies that lobby against sensible climate policy are engaging in short-sighted behavior that delays urgently needed action. Any delay in enacting climate-forward policies will exacerbate its negative impacts and increase the cost to address them.”

“In this political environment where changes in climate policies are coming fast and furious, it’s critical for companies to clearly articulate their climate public policy priorities and harmonize their lobbying activities with protecting those priorities,” said Andrea Ranger, Director of Shareholder Advocacy for Trillium Asset Management. “If they are not doing so, they may be letting trade associations, for example, advocate against the progressive climate laws, regulations, and programs they need to meet their decarbonization goals.”   

ICCR members first filed proposals questioning corporate political activity in 1974, and since 2011, investors have submitted approximately 600 proposals seeking expanded lobbying reporting. These proposals generally receive strong shareholder support. This year, investors filed 32 lobbying proposals; however, early in the season, Air Products challenged its resolution at the SEC. Breaking from past practice, the SEC sided with the company and allowed the resolution to be omitted. This decision resulted in a surge of over 13 additional successful challenges by companies citing similar arguments.

However, many companies continued constructive lobbying discussions with shareholder proponents, which led to expanded disclosure and the successful withdrawal of resolutions at eight companies.  Moreover, the proposals will appear on the proxy ballots of six companies to be voted on at annual meetings this spring.

Investors have also engaged portfolio companies around their donations to political candidates, citing the danger of corporate capture of government policy- and regulation-making with the potential to favor corporate activities over the interests of the voting public. This year, investors filed 23 proposals seeking increased disclosures around corporate political donations.

“Companies need to pay attention to the impact and risks of their political spending,” said Bruce Freed, President of the Center for Political Accountability (CPA). “CPA has several resources to help guide companies and their investors including its Corporate Underwriters report which examines how company political spending has reshaped state politics and created serious risks for companies, shareholders, and our democracy, and our Guide to Corporate Political Spending and Guide to Becoming a Model Code Company which give management and directors a framework for approaching, governing and assessing political spending to safeguard companies.”

Added Smith, “ICCR members and other responsible investors have long petitioned companies to expand disclosure and oversight and to adopt standards guiding their corporate political activities to ensure they are responsible. As long as companies participate in lobbying and political spending activities, we expect shareholder proposals on these topics will continue to be filed.”

About the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility (ICCR)
The Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility (ICCR) is a broad coalition of more than 300 institutional investors collectively representing over $4 trillion in invested capital. ICCR members, a cross-section of faith-based investors, asset managers, pension funds, foundations, and other long-term institutional investors, have over 50 years of experience engaging with companies on environmental, social, and governance (“ESG”) issues that are critical to long-term value creation.  ICCR members engage hundreds of corporations annually in an effort to foster greater corporate accountability. Visit our website www.iccr.org and follow us on  LinkedIn, Bsky and X.

After firing 28 employees for protesting in favor of Palestine, Google’s CEO declared the company shouldn’t get distracted by politics because after all, “Google is a business.” This clear commitment to a company’s purpose has been praised, but it hides an uncomfortable reality—businesses are already deeply engaged in politics. So how does a company handle employees who want them to use their political influence for good?

The need to reduce GHG emissions to limit warming and reach net zero by 2050 or sooner has never been more urgent yet climate progress has been hindered for decades by aggressive lobbying on the part of corporations (mainly in the oil & gas sector) and their trade associations. Because investors understand that corporate climate policy is a journey, not a destination, ICCR has developed new guidance “Leading Lobbying Practices to Drive 1.5°C Policy Action. “The authors researched the disclosures of over 70 companies across the globe (representing nine countries and over a dozen industries in total) looking for investor-friendly practices that drive company ambitions towards alignment with the Paris (climate) Agreement and a 1.5°C trajectory. We also looked for companies that fulfilled the 14 key indicators of the newly-launched Global Standard for Responsible Climate Lobbying, which became public in March 2022 after a two-year consultation involving investors, companies, and stakeholders from 19 countries in all. You can download your copy here.

NEW YORK, NY, THURSDAY, JULY 28TH, 2022 – Today, a group of investors representing U.S. $131B in assets under management announced they sent a letter to the Directors of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (U.S. Chamber) calling on them to advocate for the public policies needed to bring greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) emissions in line with Paris goals.

The investor signatories are members and partners of the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility (ICCR) who, for several years, have been requesting that their portfolio companies lobby responsibly on climate by bringing their concerns to individual companies through engagement, letters, and in some cases, shareholder resolutions on climate lobbying. These investors are now bringing their concerns directly to prominent trade associations, including the U.S. Chamber, due to their significant role in climate policy engagement.

The investors say strong support from the U.S. Chamber and the business community is critical to help stabilize our climate, reduce the local and regional impacts from severe weather, and facilitate the just transition to a more sustainable and resilient energy economy. At question is the disconnect between the U.S. Chamber’s public acknowledgment of the need for bi-partisan climate change policy, and its lobbying activities that are often seen as at odds with that goal.

While the investors recognize efforts like the Global Resource and Sustainability Task Force and the membership’s informal Climate Solutions Working Group, they say neither effort has led to the articulation of a workable bipartisan climate policy pathway that secures workforce investment and deals with climate impacts.

According to the letter: “For over two decades, public reporting and internal documents made public show that the Chamber has played a central role in both regional and national lobbying campaigns to thwart legislative efforts to address surging GHG emissions. The Chamber has also sought to downplay the impacts of climate change, most of which can be attributed to fossil fuel use.”

Said Frank Sherman, Executive Director of Seventh Generation Interfaith Coalition for Responsible Investment, “The Chamber has publicly acknowledged the risk to business and the economy that climate change represents. However, it has far too often opposed legislative and regulatory actions seeking to curb GHG emissions, mainly citing cost as the reason. Voicing opposition without offering alternatives will not get us the solutions we need to counter the climate crisis.”

The investors also note that many of the companies represented by the U.S. Chamber’s board have made commendable climate commitments, yet those commitments are being undercut by the U.S. Chamber’s anti-climate lobbying activities. To reconcile this conflict, the investors are also calling for the Chamber to disclose “how its positions on climate policy are determined and to what extent its board and members are consulted on its policy views before the Chamber takes a public position.”

“Investors see climate change as a systemic risk to the health of our portfolios and, more broadly, a risk to the stability of the economy,” said Lauren Compere of Boston Common Asset Management. “With this letter, we are trying to understand how many modern businesses—both large and small—are being represented by the Chamber on issues like climate policy. We believe the Chamber would benefit its reputation, its membership, and its internal governance by being transparent about its policy objectives, positions and spending, and how those positions are representative of the membership as a whole.” 

About the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility (ICCR)
Celebrating its 51st year, ICCR is the pioneer coalition of shareholder advocates who view the management of their investments as a catalyst for social change. Its 300-member organizations comprise faith communities, socially responsible asset managers, unions, pensions, NGOs, and other socially responsible investors with combined assets of over $4 trillion. ICCR members engage hundreds of corporations annually to foster greater corporate accountability. Visit our website www.iccr.org and follow us on Twitter, LinkedIn, and Facebook.

Proposals Currently Scheduled to Go to a Vote at Annual Meetings

Alphabet – Paris-Aligned Climate Lobbying. Lead Proponent: Zevin Asset Management

FedEx – Paris-Aligned Climate Lobbying. Lead Proponent: United Church Funds

Honeywell International* – Paris-Aligned Climate Lobbying. Lead Proponent: Proxy Impact (*Proposal failed at 4/25 AGM)

Tesla – Paris-Aligned Climate Lobbying. Lead Proponent: Nathan Cummings Foundation

United Parcel Service – Paris-Aligned Climate Lobbying. Lead Proponent: United Church Funds

Proposal Withdrawn by Proponent in Exchange for Commitment by Company to Comply with Proposal Request

Amazon – Paris-Aligned Climate Lobbying. Lead Proponents: Newground Social Investment, Sisters of the Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, SD
American Airlines – Paris-Aligned Climate Lobbying. Lead Proponent: Presbyterian Church (USA)
American International Group – Paris-Aligned Climate Lobbying. Lead Proponent: Mercy Investment Services
Amgen – Paris-Aligned Climate Lobbying. Lead Proponent: Boston Trust Walden
Bank of Nova Scotia – Net-Zero Lobbying Consistency.Lead Proponent: 
Exxon Mobil – Paris-Aligned Climate Lobbying. Lead Proponent: BNP Paribas Asset Management
JPMorgan Chase –Paris-Aligned Climate Lobbying. Lead Proponent: Boston Trust Walden
Lockheed Martin – Paris-Aligned Climate Lobbying. Lead Proponent: Mercy Investment Services
Merck – Paris-Aligned Climate Lobbying. Lead Proponent: Boston Trust Walden
NextEra – Paris-Aligned Climate Lobbying. Lead Proponent: BNP Paribas Asset Management
NRG Energy – Paris-Aligned Climate Lobbying. Lead Proponent: Unitarian Universalist Association
Truist – Paris -Aligned Climate Lobbying. Lead Proponent: Friends Fiduciary Corporatoin
Uber – Paris-Aligned Climate Lobbying: Lead Proponent: Unitarian Universalist Association
Union Pacific – Paris-Aligned Climate Lobbying. Lead Proponent: Boston Trust Walden
UnitedHealth Group – Paris-Aligned Climate Lobbying. Lead Proponent: Boston Trust Walden
Walmart Stores – Paris-Aligned Climate Lobbying. Lead Proponent: School Sisters of Notre Dame Central Pacific Province

NEW YORK, NY, THURSDAY, APRIL 28TH, 2022 – In continuation of a successful multi-year initiative, investor members of the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility are announcing the preliminary outcomes of a group of 21 shareholder proposals filed during the 2022 proxy season requesting a report on how companies’ lobbying activities (direct and through trade associations) align with the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement.

Of the original group of 21 proposals, 16 proposals were withdrawn by proponents in exchange for corporate commitments that complied with the proposals’ requests. Currently, only five proposals are up for a vote at 2022 annual general meetings: $UPS (5/5); $GOOGL (6/1); $FDX (Fall TBD), and $TSLA (Fall TBD). A proposal at Honeywell ($HON) which went to a vote on April 25th did not pass.

And note that the proposals at FedEx and Tesla which are scheduled for votes in the fall may still be negotiated off the proxy.

The proposals were filed across a range of industries including energy, utilities, logistics and freight, retail, tech, and banking. These commitments reflect a growing acknowledgment by the corporate and investor communities of the systemic and material risks posed by climate change. Investors say business advocacy for robust climate policies is critically needed to lower emissions in line with the Paris Agreement goal of holding global temperature rise to 1.5°C, and achieving net-zero emissions by 2050 or sooner.

An April analysis by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) makes it clear that nations have fallen far short in achieving their goals of cutting greenhouse gasses to limit global warming to 1.5°C. Alarmingly, another study in the journal Nature notes that the chief goal of the Paris Agreement is now almost entirely out of reach unless the countries most responsible for driving GHG emissions dramatically and quickly change course.

Said Tracey Rembert, ICCR Associate Program Director for Climate Lobbying, “Society now has a meager 6 to 10% chance of reaching the 1.5 ℃  Paris goal. While much of the public is outraged over the rapid trajectory of the climate crisis, high-emitting companies have spent decades negatively intervening in public policy to delay and derail the needed policies that would bring global emissions under control. Companies often lobby via “dark money” funneled through their business and trade associations like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American Petroleum Institute, by funding misleading ad campaigns, or by mobilizing junk-science front groups. As companies are largely responsible for a lack of policy action, they must step in to fix it.” 

In recognition of the growing importance of climate-aligned lobbying practices to the investment community, in March ICCR joined a global group of investors and investor networks representing over 3,800 members and $130 trillion in assets under managementto launch the Global Standard on Responsible Climate Lobbying to help companies and investors assess and ensure that all climate lobbying efforts are directed towards the attainment of the Paris Agreement goals.

“Companies across sectors are finally understanding that lobbying in favor of climate forward policy is a core component of a holistic climate strategy,” said Laura Devenney of Boston Trust Walden. “The latest IPCC report reinforced how urgently the corporate community needs smart climate-related public policies to advance rather than be stymied by political influence groups. Companies are not waiting – soon we expect more will demonstrate how their lobbying priorities align with global climate goals and how they’re ensuring their trade associations do the same.” 

The proposals are part of a broader effort by global investors to make lobbying a central theme in their corporate engagements on the climate crisis. After investor pressure, more and more companies in the U.S., Canada, U.K., E.U., Australia, Japan, and elsewhere are agreeing to provide the requested climate lobbying report and to adopt consistent Paris-aligned policy positions, as they seek to better manage their risks and transition to a lower-carbon economy.

The success of this investor initiative in the U.S., which has largely been coordinated by ICCR and Ceres, has been noteworthy. Of a group of 13 similar proposals filed in 2021, proponents achieved majority votes at five – Norfolk Southern, Delta Airlines, Exxon Mobil, United Airlines, and Philipps 66 –  outcomes that could only have been achieved with the support of large asset managers.

“Investors have shown overwhelming support for proposals asking companies to report on how their lobbying activities align with the goals of the Paris Agreement, and companies ranging from General Motors to Delta have stepped up,”said Mary Minette of Mercy Investment Services who filed the proposal at UPS.  “This season, most of the proposals filed have been withdrawn as companies have agreed to issue climate lobbying reports, but among the last standing is a proposal at UPS.  Although UPS has strong emissions goals, it doesn’t acknowledge the strong link between achieving its ambitious climate targets and supportive public policies; in fact, the company supports trade associations and nonprofit organizations like the US Chamber of Commerce and the American Legislative Exchange Council that have negative records on climate action.”

Investors point to an agreement reached with Walmart as an example of how companies are beginning to make progress in aligning their lobbying activities with climate-forward goals.

“Walmart was an early leader in setting reduction targets and establishing a transition plan,” said Frank Sherman of Seventh Generation Interfaith Coalition for Responsible Investment. “The company improved its disclosure on lobbying in general and climate lobbying in particular in response to our shareholder proposal. Walmart’s direct climate engagement is limited but mostly positive and its support of the climate provisions in the Build Back Better bill last year and recent support of renewable energy policy in Maryland are good examples. Walmart admittedly has had a positive influence on trade association climate positions such as the Business Roundtable, but it has yet to publish a detailed public assessment of each trade association’s climate policy positions and how well it aligns with the Paris goals and the company’s position.”

About the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility (ICCR)
Celebrating its 51st year, ICCR is the pioneer coalition of shareholder advocates who view the management of their investments as a catalyst for social change. Its 300-member organizations comprise faith communities, socially responsible asset managers, unions, pensions, NGOs, and other socially responsible investors with combined assets of over $4 trillion. ICCR members engage hundreds of corporations annually in an effort to foster greater corporate accountability. Visit our website www.iccr.org and follow us on Twitter, LinkedIn, and Facebook.

46 shareholder resolutions for 2022 proxies call out corporations for public statements on climate action that don’t align with their lobbying activities

With the stakes posed by the climate crisis higher than ever and public policy solutions clearly needed, investors have filed a record 46 shareholder resolutions for 2022 corporate proxies seeking information about companies’ climate lobbying practices. And in a sign of the growing influence of resolutions after last year’s historically high number of majority votes on climate-related proxy items, companies have already negotiated agreements on a record 18 lobbying-focused resolutions, vowing to take the actions sought in exchange for shareholders withdrawing resolutions.

The lobbying resolutions filed so far this year—with two more expected—illustrate investors’ realization that effective policies aligned with the latest climate science are necessary if the world is to prevent global average temperature rise from exceeding 1.5 degrees Celsius and avert irreversible climate catastrophes. The resolutions also underscore a realization that corporate voices hold huge sway in Washington and state capitals. With the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warning that governments and civil society must act now to slash greenhouse gas emissions, and with Congress poised to reconsider climate and clean energy investments, investors say companies cannot ignore the importance of climate-forward policy.

“Companies are quickly grasping this new dimension of responsible business – to become more transparent and demonstrate how they’re overseeing climate-related lobbying activities both by their government affairs teams and their trade associations. Investors expect this will lead companies to take more consequential action to support smart climate policymaking,” said Laura Devenney, senior ESG analyst. Boston Trust Walden filed climate lobbying resolutions at Amgen, JPMorgan Chase & Co, Merck, Union Pacific, United Health and a general lobbying one at UPS. The firm subsequently withdrew all but the UPS resolution after negotiating agreements with the other five companies to provide the disclosure sought. For instance, JPMorgan agreed to provide a report on its own lobbying and that of its trade associations.

Investors consider climate-aligned lobbying practices so important that (today) a global group of 10 major investors and investor networks, including BNP Paribas Asset Management, and AP7, as well as Ceres and ICCR, are launching a Global Standard on Responsible Climate Lobbying. This Global Standard helps companies and investors to assess and ensure that all climate lobbying efforts are directed towards the attainment of the Paris Agreement goals. The 14 indicators within the Standard are the culmination of academic research, shareholder proponent learnings, and an extensive consultation, which attracted more than 220+ responses from 19 countries.

 This international effort builds on existing calls for companies in the U.S. and elsewhere to disclose climate lobbying and practice transparent and accountable policy advocacy.

Last year, Ceres published its Practicing Responsible Policy Engagement benchmark of climate lobbying practices by the largest US corporations (S&P 100) and found that while nearly all the companies have goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, more than half lobby against those interests or support trade associations that fight climate regulation.

Climate Action 100+, the largest investor initiative on climate in the world involving 615 investors responsible for $65 trillion in assets, issued a Net Zero Company Benchmark that includes recommendations on how companies should establish a reporting mechanism to ensure that investors know that both the company and all its trade associations are lobbying consistent with the goals of the Paris Agreement.

This year’s 46 lobbying resolutions, filed across a broad array of industries from oil & gas, utilities, consumer goods and tech, include 21 that seek proof that a corporation’s climate lobbying is aligned with the Paris Agreement. Almost all seek transparency about both a corporation’s own climate lobbying and that of the trade associations it supports. Four proposals call on companies to align their lobbying with their publicly stated values and include a focus on climate-related political spending.

Signatories to Climate Action 100+ filed nine climate lobbying resolutions at North American focus companies seeking Paris-aligned lobbying. On two, the filing investors and focus companies negotiated agreements and the filers withdrew the resolutions. Ceres is a co-founder of Climate Action 100+ and coordinates investor engagements with North American focus companies.

Members of The Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility (ICCR) filed many of the resolutions.

“The tenor of the engagements with U.S. companies this year has really been striking on this issue,” said Tracey Rembert, associate program director for climate at ICCR. “Companies seemed much more prone to asking what practices they should consider for aligning their policy influence with their stated climate commitments, as well as looking for feedback on the practices investors consider most critical and how shareholders are defining and assessing indirect lobbying activities—an issue becoming front and center regarding the roadblocks to passing many climate bills.”

While more companies are publicly committing to climate actions and setting net zero emissions goals, many also belong to and support organizations that lobby against policies for mitigating climate change, such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American Petroleum Institute.

According to a study by Climate Action 100+ and Influence Map, 81% of the 166 companies on Climate Action 100+ focus list belongs to one or more trade association that is lobbying against climate legislation. And only 10% of the focus companies engage in climate lobbying that aligns with the Paris Agreement goals.

“The influence of trade associations on policymaking cannot be underestimated and deserves thoughtful scrutiny and action by their company members. For example, the U.S Chamber of Commerce and Business Roundtable together have spent over $2 billion on lobbying since 1998,” said Timothy Smith, senior ESG advisor at Boston Trust Walden. “Unfortunately, some major trade associations are still trying to undercut and block much-needed climate policies – but companies can’t afford to have their climate goals undermined by the very trade associations they fund and support. At this crucial moment, companies and trade associations alike should be actively supporting strong climate policies.”

Lobbying by some companies and powerful trade associations against U.S. policy proposals designed to mitigate climate change has hampered the United States’ ability to meet its Paris Agreement commitment of cutting greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2030 and to net-zero by 2050. The U.S. Congress continues to consider $550 billion in climate mitigation and clean energy investments in legislative provisions that many have described as the most significant climate legislation in a decade – and possibly the last chance to pass such legislation in several years.

Some corporations and trade associations cloak their anti-climate lobbying in political spending. According to a report by the Center for Political Accountability, 75 large companies that have announced climate goals are members of organizations that financially support state attorneys general challenging climate regulations.

About the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility (ICCR)

Celebrating its 51st year, ICCR is the pioneer coalition of shareholder advocates who view the management of their investments as a catalyst for social change. Its 300-member organizations comprise faith communities, socially responsible asset managers, unions, pensions, NGOs and other socially responsible investors with combined assets of over $4 trillion. ICCR members engage hundreds of corporations annually in an effort to foster greater corporate accountability. Visit our website www.iccr.org and follow us on Twitter, LinkedIn and Facebook.

About Ceres

Ceres is a nonprofit organization working with the most influential capital market leaders to solve the world’s greatest sustainability challenges. Through our powerful networks and global collaborations of investors, companies and nonprofits, we drive action and inspire equitable market-based and policy solutions throughout the economy to build a just and sustainable future. For more information, visit ceres.org and follow @CeresNews.

NEW YORK, NY, WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 2022 – Last Friday, ExxonMobil released a 2020 Lobbying Report detailing its lobbying oversight, philosophy, positions, and details on its lobbying activities and expenditures.

The report is in response to a shareholder proposal led by the United Steelworkers which received 55% support in 2021. The Steelworkers have led this engagement since 2013, filing nine consecutive proposals that received shareholder support ranging from 21% to 38%. In 2021, support for the proposal from BlackRock and Vanguard tipped it into a majority vote.

Apart from its direct lobbying activities, the company also disclosed details on its indirect lobbying activities and expenditures through the various industry associations, social welfare organizations, and coalitions it supports. The report includes details on state-level lobbying as well as grassroots lobbying expenditures through ExxonMobil’s online grassroots community Exxchange, comprised of supporters willing to engage lawmakers on specific legislation or policy.

Investors have been urging companies to expand lobbying disclosure for over a decade filing nearly 500 proposals since 2011. ICCR members’ shareholder engagements on lobbying are coordinated by Tim Smith of Boston Trust Walden and John Keenan of AFSCME. Numerous investors participated as co-filers of the lobbying resolution at ExxonMobil over the years and multiple dialogues were held between investors and management to discuss ways in which the company could strengthen its lobbying disclosure. This year’s more fulsome lobbying reporting was supported by the ExxonMobil board.

Said Frank Sherman of Seventh Generation Interfaith, whose member co-filed the proposal, “This report is certainly one of the most complete and comprehensive disclosures issued by a company and serves as a model for both investors and companies of what expanded lobbying disclosure should look like. The company responded to each element of the proposal including listing all U.S.-based trade associations and social welfare groups that reported a portion of ExxonMobil’s payments as a lobbying expense which totaled 120 organizations.” 

Investors say the disclosures also raise several new questions. For example, in some instances, the fact that federal lobbying activities occurred around specific matters such as plastics is disclosed, but the position the company took on the issue is not.  Also noteworthy is a lack of disclosure on how the company might seek to influence public policy through social media or advertising activities which, while not strictly described as “lobbying”, can have a profound impact.

Continued Sherman, “Hopefully,  this report will prompt deeper reflection by management and investors on the multiple ways companies can and do influence public policy debates. We look forward to reviewing ExxonMobil’s report on how its lobbying activities align with the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement, due to be published in the coming weeks, and are hopeful it will be equally comprehensive in its scope and detail.”

About the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility (ICCR)
Celebrating its 51st year, ICCR is the pioneer coalition of shareholder advocates who view the management of their investments as a catalyst for social change. Its 300-member organizations comprise faith communities, socially responsible asset managers, unions, pensions, NGOs and other socially responsible investors with combined assets of over $4 trillion. ICCR members engage hundreds of corporations annually in an effort to foster greater corporate accountability. Visit our website www.iccr.org and follow us on Twitter, LinkedIn and Facebook.

###

1. Proposal: Address Wealth Inequality through an Ownership Culture. Lead Proponent: Corporate Governance 

“Amazon.com should address inequality and democracy by helping establish an ownership culture within the firm and in the larger society,” said James McRitchie of CorpGov.net. “This proposal asks Amazon.com to include a simple matrix, ideally using EEO-1 classifications, to report the stock ownership and associated voting power awarded to each tier of employees.” 

2. Proposal: Amazon 401(k) Climate Alignment. Lead Proponent: As You Sow

“Amazon does a great job on climate in their operations with 100,000 new electric vehicles and data centers powered by renewables. Why is it that Amazon employees who are invested in their company retirement plan are profiting from companies burning down the Amazon?” said Andrew Behar, As You Sow CEO. “We are asking that the company deliver a report to investors about the material impact of investing out of alignment with their own sustainability goals and how this creates cognitive dissonance for employees and investors.”

3. Proposal: Customer Due Diligence. Lead Proponent:  Sisters of St. Joseph of Brentwood (an Affiliate of Investor Advocates for Social Justice) 

“Providing government agencies with technologies that may enable mass surveillance puts Amazon at risk of contributing to severe violations of international human rights and humanitarian law,” said Sr. Pat Mahoney of the Sisters of St. Joseph of Brentwood, the lead filer of the Customer Due Diligence proposal. “To prevent further harm to impacted stakeholders and mitigate risks to the company, Amazon must strengthen its processes for vetting government customers and contracting opportunities.”

4. Proposal: Employee Turnover. Lead Proponent: AFL-CIO

“Workforce turnover rates are an important indicator of whether a company offers good jobs,” said Brandon Rees, Deputy Director, Corporations and Capital Markets of the AFL-CIO. “The AFL-CIO’s shareholder proposal will give investors material information on workforce turnover that they need to assess Amazon’s progress towards its goal of becoming the ‘Earth’s Best Employer’.” 

5. Proposal: Facial Recognition. Lead Proponent: Harrington Investments

“Amazon and its surveillance technology incorporating facial recognition has evolved into a perfect public/private partnership,” said John Harrington of Harrington Investments. “Authoritarian government can now utilize the technology to control populations while private sector corporations can manage the data to exploit facial identification for commercial advantage. The harm will be to civil liberties and competitive business practices.” 

6. Proposal: Freedom of Association: Lead Proponent: SHARE 

“The recent tragedies that led to the deaths of Amazon warehouse workers indicate the need for higher human rights commitments and better workforce practices at the e-commerce giant. Amazon should take greater responsibility for its workforce and allow them to use their freedom of association and rights to collective bargaining in the most effective way,” said Sarah Couturier-Tanoh, Manager of Corporate Engagement & Advocacy at SHARE. 

7. Proposal: Hourly Employees on the Board of Directors. Lead Proponent: Oxfam America   

“Amazon continues to rake in billions of dollars in profits, while workers suffer some of the highest warehouse injury rates in the nation,” said Robbie Silverman, Senior Corporate Advocacy Manager for Oxfam America. “Placing an hourly associate on Amazon’s board of directors would be transformational, signaling an authentic interest in hearing the voice of workers at the highest level of corporate governance and demonstrating a commitment to investors that the company is taking workers’ concerns seriously.” 

8. Proposal. Independent Chair. Lead Proponent: Zevin Asset Management 

“We need a change,” said Marcela Pinilla. Director, Sustainable Investing at Zevin Asset Management. “The company needs a refresh from the top. Leadership to date has not shown that it is capable of being accountable. The “Earth’s Best Employer” is treating employees as expendable in return for growth and expansion. Amazon is facing numerous challenges that have only grown more serious in the past year. This calls for an independent board chair to help confront the company’s many challenges and provide oversight of executives’ risk-taking behavior. We are filing this proposal for the second year because we see a stagnant mind-set in how Amazon executives consider and define business risks. This behavior has come at the expense of key relationships including its workers and communities. An independent board chair should be separate from the CEO. They should have no material relationship or affiliation with the company, and they should not be a former executive officer of the company. One key obligation of the Board is to understand the limits of untenable business practices.”

9. Proposal: Lobbying Expenditures Disclosure. Lead Proponent: The International Brotherhood of Teamsters

“Wanting to be the world’s best employer while funding organizations that lobby against workers’ rights is but one example of the misalignment between Amazon’s politics and public relations,” said Ken Hall, General Secretary-Treasurer of the Teamsters Union. “Without full disclosure of the company’s lobbying expenditures, shareholders don’t know if Amazon puts its money where its mouth is.”

10. Proposal. Paid Sick Leave.  Lead Proponent: United Church Funds

Matthew Illian, UCF’s Director of Responsible Investing said: “One of the world’s largest and most profitable companies can afford to offer paid sick leave to all of its employees, and this would create a more loyal and adaptable workforce.”

11. Proposal: Paris-Aligned Lobbying. Lead Proponents: Newground Social Investment, Sisters of the Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary of Aberdeen, SD

“For years Newground has engaged Amazon on sorely-needed transparency, and oversight of its lobbying efforts,” said Bruce Herbert, AIF, Chief Executive, Newground Social Investment.  “Though the company has certainly stepped up in particular ways regarding climate change and reducing emissions, the largest impact it may have is supporting trade associations and other initiatives whose work blocks climate progress.  Amazon could be a real force and its lobbying dollars are vast – it has significantly outspent all of its tech peers in 2021.  But it buys naming rights for the Climate Pledge Arena (in Seattle) while being part of the very trade associations that work to kill any major policy advances on climate. This gross misalignment cannot continue, and we ask investors to put an end to it by voting FOR this shareholder proposal.”

“We are a community of religious women and partners in mission who commit ourselves to steward our resources responsibly in an effort to care for all of creation,” said Sr. Pegge Boehm.  “We literally take stock in Amazon to do the right thing for its people and the planet, as we have committed ourselves.   We believe in Amazon’s potential to align their values with those who lobby and advocate on their behalf.  We believe Amazon has a responsibility to steward their abundant resources for good.  “To whom much is given, much is required,” Luke 12:48.  So, in this time of climate crisis, we expect that you hold yourselves up to a high standard.  At a minimum, we expect you to align your lobbying activities with the Paris Agreement’s ultimate goal of limiting average global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.” 

12. Proposal: Plastic Pollution.  Lead Proponent: Sara Sackner and supported by As You Sow

“Amazon is believed to be one of the largest corporate users of flexible plastic packaging, used for its blue and white e-commerce mailers, which cannot be effectively recycled,” said Conrad MacKerron, Senior Vice President, As You Sow, who is representing proponent Sara Sackner. “The company generates an estimated 465 million pounds of plastic packaging waste annually, much of which ends up in landfills or leaking into the environment. Unlike peers like Walmart and Target, the company has not set plastic use reduction goals. The proposal challenges the company to set such goals to help stem the global tide of plastic pollution, which poses threats to wildlife and human health.” 

13. Proposal: Racial and Gender Pay Gaps. Lead Proponent: Arjuna Capital   

“Amazon’s board has fought investors on racial and gender pay equity for the last 3 years, despite strong, consistent support for Arjuna Capital’s proposal,” said Natasha Lamb, Managing Partner at Arjuna Capital, which filed a proposal citing Amazon’s lack of best practice pay equity reporting.  “Given the pay divides that have been exacerbated by the pandemic, protests to uphold Black lives, and Amazon’s own statements of solidarity, it’s inexcusable and hypocritical that the company continues to fight this simple and reasonable investor request.  Now is the time for Amazon to address the structural racism and sexism that relegates minorities and women into low-paying jobs, so we can create a more diverse, innovative, and accountable organization.” 

14. Proposal: Racial Equity Audit. Lead Proponent: New York State Common Retirement Fund

“Amazon continues to face controversies that raise questions whether the impact of its policies, practices and products uphold the company’s rhetoric opposing systemic racism and injustice,” said New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli. “Following last year’s unprecedented vote by shareholders, it’s beyond time for Amazon to independently review whether it has the policies and plans in place to address the risks that come with a failure to safeguard against discrimination, racism, and inequalities.”  

15. Proposal: Risks Associated with Use of Concealment Clauses. Lead Proponent: Whistle Stop Capital, as part of the Transparency in Employment Agreements Coalition led by Earthseed, Whistle Stop Capital, Open MIC and Frontier Technology

Said Meredith Benton, Principal/Founder of Whistle Stop Capital, “If a company uses employment clauses to conceal from the public its true workplace conditions investors cannot have confidence in either the diversity and inclusion promises made or the reporting shared.”

“This shareholder resolution is based on a simple premise: Companies benefit from knowing when sexual harassment, discrimination and unlawful behavior are happening in the workplace, which is why employees should be encouraged to speak out about such conduct. It’s simply good business,” said Michael Connor, Executive Director, Open MIC. “Amazon would be well-advised to weigh the resolution carefully and look to a future where employees are encouraged to help build a more equitable and productive work environment.”  

16. Proposal: Tax Transparency. Lead Proponent: Missionary Oblates of Mary Immaculate / OIP Investment Trust -U.S Province 

“Responsible taxation is a vital sustainability issue for investors,” said Rev. Séamus P. Finn OMI, OIP Trust. “Aggressive corporate tax avoidance cost hundreds of billions in lost revenues each year from government budgets. It exacerbates existing inequalities, undermines broad-based economic growth, and creates unnecessary asset level and systemic risks for investors. Public country-by-country reporting will allow investors to better understand Amazon’s business model and tax planning strategy and ensure that it’s growth fairly contributes to the communities in which it earns its profits and doesn’t unfairly undercut those companies taking a responsible approach to tax planning.”  

 17. Proposal: Worker Health & Safety Audit. Lead Proponent: Domini Impact Investments

“The COVID-19 Pandemic and the recent tragedy in Edwardsville, Illinois, have raised serious questions around workplace health and safety at Amazon’s facilities,” said Mary Beth Gallagher, Director of Engagement, Domini Impact Investments LLC. “The company’s high injury rates and turnover have also drawn scrutiny from legislators, regulators, and the public, while contributing to recent labor shortages and calls for change from workers. In light of this, Domini Impact Investments LLC is signaling to Amazon that investors want the company to listen to essential workers and support their right to a safe and healthy workplace.” 

“At Amazon, machines get better treatment than people. Amazon associates are breaking their backs and working nonstop for the sake of same day delivery — our every move is watched and timed and if we slow down or mess up in any way, we are punished. Amazon’s inhumane, exploitative business model is a threat to working people and our economy as America’s workers are left injured, exhausted, and mentally battered each day. We must put an end to the high-tech sweatshops Amazon is running and the exploitative business model they are perpetuating across the country.” – Courtenay Brown (Amazon Associate at Avenel, NJ Fulfillment Center and Leader with United For Respect in Newark, New Jersey)

NEW YORK, NY – THURSDAY, JUNE 17TH, 2021 – Today’s vote by a majority of Delta Air Lines shareholders to seek information on how Delta’s climate lobbying aligns with the goals of the Paris Agreement caps a winning streak of five climate lobbying proposals garnering majority votes this season, underscoring the importance of climate policy alignment.

“Corporations have a significant impact on climate policy, directly and through their trade associations. This string of majority votes is strong recognition by investors that these efforts must be fully aligned with the “well below 2 degrees” goal of the Paris Agreement,” said Adam Kanzer, head of stewardship at BNP Paribas Asset Management, which filed the Delta proposal.

As the imperative to transition to a net zero emissions economy becomes clearer every day, investors need federal and state climate policies to set the framework that will help them to invest and companies to act in bringing about this transition.

“Investors and companies will not be able to sufficiently manage climate risk if we don’t see the advancement of more ambitious policy measures soon—from federal infrastructure legislation to state-based electrification policies,” stated Laura Devenney, Senior ESG Research Analyst at Boston Trust Walden, which co-filed a lobbying resolution at ExxonMobil with BNP Paribas Asset Management. “Investors need assurance that companies are using their influence to further meaningful action on climate now.”

Shareholder proposals seeking stronger disclosure of how a company’s climate lobbying aligns with the Paris Agreement goals won majority votes at:

  • Phillips66 with a 64.4% vote on a proposal filed by California State Teachers Retirement System;
  • Norfolk Southern Corp with a 76.4% vote on a proposal filed by Friends Fiduciary Corp.;
  • ExxonMobil with a 63.8% vote on a proposal filed by BNP Paribas Asset Management;
  • United Airlines with a 65.4% vote on a proposal filed by Presbyterian Church USA, and;
  • Delta with a majority vote on a proposal filed by BNP Paribas Asset Management. Delta has not yet reported the percentage.

Notably, similar lobbying proposals filed at CSX, Duke Energy, Entergy, First Energy Corp, General Motors and Valero Energy led to companies agreeing to improve disclosure of their climate lobbying and the resolutions were withdrawn by the filers. Kanzer said that investor expectations of Paris aligned corporate lobbying is becoming the norm “after groundbreaking reports from Shell and BP, and majority votes at Chevron in 2020 and, this year, at ExxonMobil, United Airlines, Norfolk Southern, Phillips 66 and now Delta.”

The majority votes — one as high as 76.4% — and the string of corporate commitments are an indication of how serious the investment community is about tackling what they view as the ever-increasing systemic risk of climate change. Investors want strong climate policies to protect the economy and their portfolios and so they can make investment choices with greater certainty.

“Policy is a critical piece of addressing the climate crisis, so lobbying has become a link to changes in the real economy,” said Kirsten Snow Spalding, senior director of the Ceres Investor Network. “Investors need solid policy frameworks to be able to deal with the systemic risk of climate change. Policymakers, in turn, can support rapid industry transition to a clean energy future or they can delay and send mixed signals to investors.” 

Spalding noted that Ceres issued a Blueprint for Responsible Policy Engagement on Climate Change that offers concrete recommendations on how companies can establish systems that address climate change as a systemic risk and integrate this understanding into their direct and indirect lobbying on climate policies.

The strong votes also coincide with discussions last weekend among G7 heads of state about their collective commitment to rein in global emissions to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement.

“Investors recognize that we need science-based climate policy in order to deliver a stable climate that will, in turn, support a healthy economy. As essential as they are, individual commitments by companies to reduce GHG emissions are not enough,” said Christina Herman, program director for climate & environmental justice at the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility (ICCR). “The signals sent by effective climate policy to the global economy to reign in emissions are vital.”

Climate Action 100+, an initiative of 575 investors with a combined $54 trillion in assets under management, flagged several of these climate lobbying proposals in its process of highlighting resolutions shareholders should consider. Ceres, a founding partner of Climate Action 100+ and ICCR helped coordinate support among North American investors. ICCR launched a concerted initiative in 2020 to spur companies to disclose and align their lobbying activities and their trade association memberships with the goals of the Paris Agreement.

The winning climate lobbying resolutions all ask for transparency on lobbying by companies as well as by the trade associations they support financially. For instance, the resolution at Delta filed by BNP Paribas Asset Management asked that its board of directors conduct an evaluation and issue a report describing how Delta’s lobbying activities, both direct and indirect through trade associations, align with the Paris Agreement goal of limiting global warming.

In some industries, a few companies have publicly stated support for policies to mitigate global warming and yet those companies continue to support trade associations that lobby against such policies. At Norfolk Southern, a similar proposal asked for a report on both direct and indirect climate lobbying.

Jeff Perkins, executive director of the resolution’s filer, Friends Fiduciary Corp., explained, “As investors, we’re asking Norfolk Southern to align its strategies, capital allocation plans, and direct and indirect public policy advocacy with the goal of the Paris Climate Agreement to limit average global warming to well below 2 degrees Celsius,” Perkins said. “While railroads are a very efficient form of transportation, Norfolk Southern Company’s coal cargo business has led it to lobby against climate-forward measures. ‘Business as usual’ scenarios of 3-4 degrees Celsius warming or more will depress global GDP, present significant risk to our company’s operations and impact investors’ returns.” 

Investor engagement with companies they own either through dialogue or shareholder resolutions are among the key strategies outlined by Climate Action 100+ to influence change, including bringing about reductions in corporate greenhouse gas emissions and improvement in corporate climate governance and corporate climate risk disclosure.

####

About Ceres
Ceres is a nonprofit organization working with the most influential capital market leaders to solve the world’s greatest sustainability challenges. Through our powerful networks and global collaborations of investors, companies and nonprofits, we drive action and inspire equitable market-based and policy solutions throughout the economy to build a just and sustainable future. For more information, visit ceres.org and follow @CeresNews.

About the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility (ICCR)

Celebrating its 50th year, ICCR is the pioneer coalition of shareholder advocates who view the management of their investments as a catalyst for social change. Its 300-member organizations comprise faith communities, socially responsible asset managers, unions, pensions, NGOs and other socially responsible investors with combined assets of over $4 trillion. ICCR members engage hundreds of corporations annually in an effort to foster greater corporate accountability. Visit our website www.iccr.org and follow us on Twitter, LinkedIn and Facebook