Summary

Costco shareholders voted overwhelmingly (98%) against a proposal by a conservative think tank, the National Center for Public Policy Research, to assess risks linked to the company’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs.

Costco’s board supported DEI initiatives, dismissing the proposal as partisan and unnecessary.

This rejection contrasts with trends in other companies scaling back DEI efforts.

The vote comes amid new federal rules from Trump targeting DEI initiatives in federal agencies, potentially impacting private vendors working with the government.

  • grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    If anything, they are paying lots of attention, and get special treatment, since they own so much of the company

    Let’s be clear about this: the fund managers own nothing. They are employed to manage the mutual funds that other people – you and me and everybody else with a retirement account – actually own. They disenfranchise us, the actual owners.

    (Yes, technically, it’s true that the individual company shares are owned by the corporate entity of the mutual fund itself, and that what the mom & pop investors technically own shares in that fund. But that does not make it fair to say that anybody but the mom & pop investors deserve to vote the individual company shares, because it’s their money that’s being used for the whole thing!)

    And they are most definitely not bleeding-heart liberals. If they voted for this proposal it’s because they think it will lead to better outcomes for the company.

    If keeping DEI is better, why didn’t they demand it for all the other corporations whose boards didn’t propose keeping it? The answer is, again, the fund managers almost always just rubber-stamp the board. To claim that fund managers are actually forming their own opinion on the efficacy of DEI and influencing corporate governance accordingly is simply not true.

    In theory, mutual fund managers are acting on mutual fund share holders’ behalf. In practice, “shareholders” of most large corporations are effectively asleep at the wheel – the investment industry literally calls shares held in index funds “dumb money” – and boards of directors can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want. In the era of huge mutual funds, especially index funds where the even the choice of which companies to own shares in is no longer a feedback mechanism, the check & balance of shareholder control is basically broken.

    The fix is “pass-through voting,” by the way:

    https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2024/04/17/pass-through-voting-giving-individual-investors-a-voice-in-corporate-governance/

    https://www.morningstar.com/funds/new-proxy-voting-options-ivv-other-index-funds-blackrock-state-street-vanguard

    • dhork@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 days ago

      To claim that fund managers are actually forming their own opinion on the efficacy of DEI and influencing corporate governance accordingly is simply not true.

      That may a fair take, but take a moment to turn that around. The fact that fund managers are not forming their own opinion against the efficacy of DEI and influencing corporate governance accordingly is a sign that it’s simply not as harmful as Republicans let on, and may actually be helpful. Because they know how to wield that influence if they feel they need to in order to preserve their funds’ value.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        I didn’t say not forming their own opinion “against;” I said “on” – i.e., not forming their own opinion about the topic at all, in either direction. It is not an argument that can be “turned around” in the way you claim.

        When boards oppose DEI, fund managers support the board. When boards support DEI, fund managers support the board. My point this entire time has been that there is no influence being wielded here. The companies that are cancelling DEI policies are doing so on their own boards’/execs’ initiative with no meaningful shareholder control, and the companies that are keeping DEI policies are likewise doing so on their own boards’/execs’ initiative with no meaningful shareholder control.