In a recent lawsuit filed in federal court in Manhattan, Ben & Jerry’s has accused its parent company, Unilever, of terminating its CEO, David Stever, due to his commitment to the ice cream maker's social mission. This claim highlights the ongoing tensions between corporate governance and social activism in the food industry. The complaint was lodged on Tuesday, shedding light on the internal conflicts that have arisen since Stever took the helm in 2023.
According to the court filing, Ben & Jerry’s asserts that David Stever was dismissed not because of inadequate job performance, but rather due to his advocacy for the company's social values. The ice cream brand has long been known for its political stances and social activism, which may have clashed with Unilever’s corporate strategy. The complaint states, “Unilever has repeatedly threatened Ben & Jerry’s personnel, including C.E.O. David Stever, should they fail to comply with Unilever’s efforts to silence the social mission.”
The filing reveals that Unilever informed the Ben & Jerry’s board on March 3 about its plans to replace Stever as CEO. This decision was made without the necessary approval from the advisory board, which Ben & Jerry’s claims violates the agreement established during their merger in 2000. The company emphasized that under Stever’s leadership, it outperformed Unilever’s other ice cream brands, including Magnum.
According to a presentation on Unilever’s financial performance, sales at Ben & Jerry’s grew at a faster rate than those of Magnum in 2024. This strong performance underscores the effectiveness of Stever’s leadership and raises questions about Unilever's motivations behind the termination. Critics argue that the dismissal reflects a broader issue of corporate censorship and the stifling of social activism within major corporations.
The merger agreement between Ben & Jerry’s and Unilever was designed to allow the ice cream maker to maintain an independent board, which would oversee its brand and safeguard its social activism. This setup aimed to provide “guardrails” around the company’s political initiatives while allowing its founders, Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, to retain control. The amended complaint is part of a broader lawsuit initiated by Ben & Jerry’s in November, accusing Unilever of trying to suppress its political expressions, particularly regarding support for Palestinian refugees.
Unilever has yet to provide a detailed response to the allegations but previously stated its intention to vigorously defend against the claims made in the lawsuit. Meanwhile, Ben & Jerry's has also refrained from commenting on the latest developments. The founders of the ice cream company have a history of advocating for social issues, which intensified in 2021 when Ben & Jerry’s announced it would halt sales in Israeli-occupied territories.
In a significant development, Unilever announced plans in March 2024 to spin off its ice cream unit, which includes Ben & Jerry’s. This strategic move, expected to be completed by the end of the year, could potentially alter the relationship between the two companies and bring an end to the 25-year alliance that has been marked by both collaboration and conflict.
As the situation unfolds, the implications of this lawsuit could resonate throughout the corporate world, particularly concerning how companies navigate the balance between profitability and social responsibility.
