Ben & Jerry’s said its parent, Unilever (ULVR.L), decided to oust the ice cream maker’s chief executive, Dave Stever, escalating a battle over the subsidiary’s independence on social policy issues.

In a Tuesday night filing in Manhattan federal court, Ben & Jerry’s said Unilever advised on March 3 it was removing Stever without consulting directors because of his commitment to the ice cream maker’s social mission and brand integrity, not because of concerns about his job performance.

It said Unilever chastised Stever in a January performance review for “repeatedly acquiescing” to Ben & Jerry’s promotion of social goals, and has repeatedly warned personnel not to defy its efforts to “silence the social mission.”

Ben & Jerry’s also said Unilever’s attacks on its social mission have reached “new levels of oppressiveness.”

  • Grimtuck@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    15 hours ago

    It would be nice to understand what these social policies are otherwise this means nothing.

    • Akip@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      10 hours ago

      if you read the article

      It said Unilever blocked it in February from honoring Black History Month, and more recently from supporting the release from detention of Mahmoud Khalil, a U.S. legal permanent resident active in pro-Palestinian demonstrations at Columbia University and who the Trump administration wants to deport.

    • pdxfed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Well you’re supposed to just know that it means diversity, anti-war, societal health…anything that isn’t pushing towards total wealth concentration and power of the elite just be eliminated. It’s literally the machine from fern gully

      • doingthestuff@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        If they’re against wealth consolidation, why did they willingly come under a larger corporation? Hypocrites and sellouts.

        • pdxfed@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Tale as old as time. Money, lots of money, and promises about people not being affected, the company not changing, etc. 99% of the time it’s bs.

    • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      14 hours ago

      The one I know is their pro-Palestinian position. They tried to divest from Israeli settlements and in return Unilever created another subsidiary to handle sales in Israel IIRC.