Ben & Jerry’s sues parent company for censoring its support for Palestine

Ben & Jerry’s is suing its London-based parent company Unilever, saying it interfered with the brand’s efforts to express support for Palestinian refugees. The ice cream brand attempted to publicly speak out “in support of peace and human rights” four times. Unilever silenced each of these efforts,” the lawsuit states.

In a statement to Reuters, Unilever said: “Our hearts go out to all the victims of the tragic events in the Middle East. We reject the B&J Social Mission Board’s claims and will vigorously defend our position.”

This is not the first time Ben & Jerry’s has clashed with Unilever over its political activism, which has been at the core of the brand’s DNA since its founding in 1978. Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield founded an international ice cream company in Burlington, Vermont, with the mission of “promoting human rights and dignity.” From the beginning, they committed to using locally produced, hormone-free milk to make their ice cream and opened their first store in a renovated gas station. The brand has grown to nearly 600 stores worldwide.

Ben & Jerry’s has a long history of supporting progressive social causes and has gained attention for its outspokenness on social and economic injustices affecting systemically marginalized communities. The brand’s website says, “We love making ice cream, but using our business to make the world a better place gives our work meaning.”

Back in 2011 KSR announced the brand’s support for the Occupy Wall Street protests against corporate greed and the influence of money in politics. Company executives including former CEO Jostein Solheim and Chairman Jeff Fuhrman called for an end to corporate individuality. In particular, the company supported the overturn of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision in 2010, which allowed companies to financially support political campaigns. In its decision, the court ruled that the government cannot censor political election broadcasts that are financed by corporations. This has opened the door for super PACs, or dark money groups, to spend billions of dollars to influence politicians and therefore influence US elections. “We have to get money from politics,” Fuhrman said. “We choose democracy.”

Ben & Jerry’s went public in 1984, but became a private company again when Unilever—one of the world’s largest consumer goods companies with more than 400 brands and a net worth of more than $140 billion—acquired the business in 2000. Co-founder Greenfield was reportedly unhappy with the takeover by the global giant. However, the deal was that Ben & Jerry’s would be autonomously governed by an independent board of directors, allowing it to continue to be committed to social issues.

Digging into the details

In a recent lawsuit, the ice cream brand said Unilever exceeded and violated the terms of a 2022 settlement that required the parent company to “respect and acknowledge the primary responsibility of Ben & Jerry’s Independent Board of Directors for Ben & Jerry’s social mission and critical brand integrity.” and “work in good faith with the Independent Council to ensure that both are protected and facilitated.”

In July 2020, the Independent Brand Council unanimously passed a resolution directing the company’s management to develop a plan to stop all distribution of Ben & Jerry’s products to “only Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory” in the West Bank because it is inconsistent with its values. . A year later, the company announced this decision publicly, and Unilever simultaneously issued a press release in which it stated that it “has always recognized the right of a brand and its independent board to make decisions regarding its social mission.”

However, in June 2022, Unilever announced that it had sold Ben & Jerry’s intellectual property in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory to its Israeli licensee, which will sell Ben & Jerry’s products with labels in Hebrew and Arabic and allow continued sales in settlements. The independent board said it was not informed or consulted about the sale and responded within days by filing a lawsuit alleging that Unilever’s actions violated the terms of the previous merger agreement and undermined their responsibility to protect Ben & Jerry’s values ​​and mission. Ben & Jerry’s request to block the sale was rejected by a federal judge.

In the new lawsuit, Ben & Jerry’s said that just months after reaching a settlement in December 2022, “Unilever had already begun its efforts to undermine it.” In particular, during the ongoing humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip, which has claimed the lives of more than 18,000 innocent Palestinian children, Ben & Jerry’s has attempted to publicly speak out in support of peace and human rights on four occasions. Despite its contractual obligation to ‘respect and recognize’ the Independent Board of Directors’ primary responsibility for Ben & Jerry’s social mission and critical brand integrity, Unilever is silent on each of these efforts.”

Here are the posts listed in the lawsuit:

December 2023: Call for peace and ceasefire

Ben & Jerry’s claims that the company told Unilever in December 2023 that the company planned to publicly call for a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip. “Ben and Jerry calls for peace and a permanent and immediate ceasefire,” the statement said.

In response, Ben & Jerry’s reported that Unilever threatened to dissolve the Independent Board of Directors and sue board members individually if they made the above statement. “These threats were accompanied by personal calls from Peter ter Kulwe and Jeff Eglash (Unilever’s president of ice cream and global head of litigation) who attempted to intimidate Ben & Jerry’s staff with professional reprisals if the company issued a ceasefire statement,” the report said. claim

May 2024: Safe passage for Palestinian refugees

In May, Ben & Jerry’s social managers in Europe attempted to release the following statement in support of the safe passage of Palestinians fleeing Gaza:

“People fleeing war need safe routes, but there is currently no safe route for Palestinians affected by war to find refuge in the UK. So, just as the UK has done for the Ukrainians, we are asking the Government to urgently create a visa scheme to allow Palestinians to SAFELY reunite with their loved ones in the UK.”

The lawsuit alleges that Unilever blocked the publication of a statement to social performance managers without the knowledge or consent of the Independent Board. Ben & Jerry’s also detailed its long history of supporting the safe passage of refugees from many countries, including Rwanda, Afghanistan and Ukraine, among others.

June 2024: Support for campus protests

As students on college campuses across the country protested the civilian deaths and humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip, Ben & Jerry’s management and the Independent Council agreed to issue a public statement in support of the protesters’ First Amendment rights. (The exact text of the statement was not included in the lawsuit.) When Ben & Jerry’s told Unilever that it would release a statement supporting the rights of protesters in June, Jeffrey Eglash, Unilever’s global head of litigation, blocked its publication, according to the lawsuit.

September 2024: Blocking arms sales to Israel

In September, Ben & Jerry’s attempted to support a resolution by Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders calling for legislation to block $20 billion in arms sales to Israel. “Sending more weapons to the extremist Netanyahu government is immoral and illegal: American weapons are causing too many civilian casualties in the Gaza Strip. We must end our complicity in this atrocity,” Sanders said in a Sept. 25 social media post.

In a statement, Ben & Jerry said: “We support Sanders’ resolution. As the anniversary of October 7 approaches, with tens of thousands of innocent Palestinian civilians killed and dozens of Israeli hostages still being held, we believe in providing critical humanitarian assistance rather than sending more weapons. We urge you to join us in calling on the Senate to pass Sanders’ resolution and end the additional $20 billion in military aid to Israel.”

The next day, Ben & Jerry’s was informed that Pieter ter Kulwe, Unilever’s president of ice cream, “unilaterally vetoed this statement, marking Unilever’s fourth act of censorship of Ben & Jerry’s social mission in less than six months.” . according to the lawsuit.

Blocking donations to humanitarian organizations

Ben & Jerry’s also said Unilever failed to meet a key provision of the 2022 settlement, which required the parent company to provide the Independent Board of Directors, in partnership with Unilever, with $5 million to distribute to human rights and humanitarian organizations of their choice.

Unilever blocked Ben & Jerry’s ability to donate to Jewish Voice for Peace, saying “the group was too critical of the Israeli government,” the lawsuit says, and also blocked the brand’s donation to the San Bay Area chapter of the American Law Council. -Francisco. Islamic relations. Ben & Jerry’s said Unilever’s objections were “riddled with inconsistency” and “came down to the same issue: the organizations were defending human rights called Palestinian human rights… The pretext for blocking Unilever’s donations was that it purportedly wanted to remain ‘neutral’ ” on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.”

“Unilever has repeatedly failed to recognize and respect the Independent Board of Directors’ primary responsibility for Ben & Jerry’s social mission and brand integrity, including threatening Ben & Jerry’s staff if the company spoke out on issues that Unilever chooses to censor,” the ice cream maker said in a statement. in your statement. claim “The Independent Board is bringing this litigation to protect Ben & Jerry’s three-pronged mission from Unilever’s unilateral destruction and to protect the company from Unilever’s repeated abuses.”

While some companies may strive to remain neutral and harmless to everyone, Ben & Jerry’s is comfortable getting involved in issues, even if it alienates some consumers. On the other hand, the brand’s values ​​resonate with other consumers, who are deeply loyal as a result. KSR wrote in a 2019 article. Ben & Jerry’s was one of the first major companies to support marriage equality in 2009, and in 2015 it joined other businesses (including candy company Mars) in calling for a carbon tax at the United Nations Climate Change Conference.

Ben & Jerry’s filed the lawsuit on November 14 in the Southern District of New York.

In March, Unilever announced it was cutting 7,500 jobs and spinning off its ice cream business to cut costs and boost profits.