Box Turtle Bulletin

Box Turtle BulletinNews, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
This article can be found at:
Latest Posts

ExxonMobil Shareholders Vote Down Anti-Discrimination Policy

Jim Burroway

May 30th, 2012

By an 80% to 20% vote, ExxonMobil shareholders overwhelmingly voted against a resolution asking the company to amend its written employment policies to add protections against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

The proposal has been introduced each year since Exxon merged with Mobil in 1999. Mobil’s anti-discrimination policies and domestic partnership benefits, which were well ahead of their time, were dismantled after the merger.

Comments

POST COMMENT | COMMENT RSS 2.0

Hyhybt
May 30th, 2012 | LINK

Any idea *why* it was so strongly rejected, or for that matter why the company didn’t even want it up for consideration?

boatboy_srq
May 30th, 2012 | LINK

Aside from the fact that there’s a cost associated with extending benefits, and ExxonMobil is nothing if not greed incarnate, there’s the makeup of the major stakeholders.

Figure that every single major individual shareholder voted against it, plus Vanguard, Northern Trust, Black Rock, Spartan, State Street and FMR. BofA is a tossup: the old (SFO-based) BofA would have voted FOR it, but the post-NationsBank thing that BofA has become seems likely to screw anyone it can, so against seems a fair bet (add in the HQ in Charlotte and against seems more likely). Figure also that the largest bloc vote FOR probably came from CalPERS.

That’s a lot of companies and individuals we don’t need to support.

See http://finance.yahoo.com/q/mh?s=xom+Major+Holders for the breakdown of major shareholders and do your own math.

Mark F.
May 30th, 2012 | LINK

Perhaps someone needs to come up with a list of the companies we don’t want to do business with. Is there such a thing?

Mark F.
May 30th, 2012 | LINK

It’s false to say that offering domestic partner benefits will cost a company any significant amount of money. You can have your employees pay for the entire cost of the spouse/domestic partner benefits. Your shareholders don’t have to pay.

Mark F.
May 30th, 2012 | LINK

ExxonMobil is likely to lose some good employees because of this policy, and may find that many gay people will start to buy their gasoline elsewhere. Losing market share will not make these bigots happy, I can be sure. Most large companies see that gay friendly policies are just good business.

I suggest writing to the CEO of the company and telling him you won’t be buying his gas until the company changes their policy.

TonyJazz
June 1st, 2012 | LINK

I avoid both Exxon and Mobil gas stations as much as possible.

How odd that this company remains so far out of touch with the times…. I suspect they would also be opposed to racial equality as well……(if it weren’t as unfashionable as it is)…

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.