Ben & Jerry’s, an ice cream company known for its progressive politics and social activism, has fired its CEO, David Stever, due to his efforts to advance the company’s social mission. The company, founded by Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield in the late 1970s, has a long-standing tradition of promoting progressive causes and maintaining a close tie to alternative culture. However, since being acquired by Unilever in 2000, there has been tension between Ben & Jerry’s and its parent company about the company’s values and commitment to social issues.
The issue at hand reflects a wider concern about whether smaller, independent companies can uphold their values after being purchased by larger corporations. Ben & Jerry’s has filed a breach of contract lawsuit against Unilever in Manhattan, claiming that Unilever has stopped them from issuing statements seen as progressive, pro-Palestinian, or anti-Trump. The lawsuit alleges that Unilever silenced Ben & Jerry’s CEO, David Stever, for his efforts to promote the company’s social mission, and blocked the company from releasing an anti-Trump statement or a Pecan Resist ice cream marketed to those who disliked Trump.
Unilever’s objection to the company making statements against Trump comes as a prominent board member, Nelson Peltz, publicly supported Trump. Ben & Jerry’s alleges that Unilever’s President of Ice Cream, Peter ter Kelve, blocked their anti-Trump statement and claimed that criticizing Trump was now considered taboo for the brand synonymous with “Peace, Love, and Ice Cream”. The lawsuit also accuses Unilever of threatening Ben & Jerry’s personnel, including CEO David Stever, to comply with efforts to silence the company’s social mission.
In response to the allegations, Unilever’s lawyer, David J. Lender, rejected the claims made by Ben & Jerry’s. He stated that Unilever was accused of refusing to approve the release of certain statements related to the Palestinian conflict and making partisan remarks about the Trump Administration. Lender also mentioned that Ben & Jerry’s accused Unilever of withholding consent for donations to organizations that have taken controversial positions on the Middle East conflict. The lawsuit raises questions about Unilever’s handling of Ben & Jerry’s social mission and commitment to progressive values.
The case is currently going through pre-trial hearings before New York federal judge, Kevin P. Castel, who will decide whether to accept Ben & Jerry’s proposed amended complaint. The company has requested the case be tried by a jury. The outcome of this lawsuit will have implications for the relationship between smaller, independent companies and their parent corporations, as well as the ability of companies to uphold their values and social missions in a corporate environment. The case highlights the challenges faced by socially conscious companies operating within larger corporate structures.
