Why corporations won't let Pride die
Still, hopeful as all this is, it seems that for some corporations, Pride still refuses to die. Whilst shopping I recently saw a jar of Marmite. Its label urged me to 'Stand with Pride.' The flag accompanying the statement included the transgender stripes, naturally.
Meanwhile, Marks and Spencer's social media profile pictures were changed to the alphabet flag, not forgetting the intersex circle. Throughout Pride month, M&S matched customer donations to the homeless charity 'akt'. We can argue the merits of corporate philanthropy, and few would object to helping the homeless. But akt doesn't appear to support all homeless individuals, only those who happen to not be heterosexual. It's preferential charitable giving based on sexuality.
Other brands go further. Shake Shack, the popular milkshake shop, has launched their 'Pride Shake'. Don't panic if you missed it: it is available until 7 July. For every milkshake sold, they will donate £1 to LGBTQ+ charities. Such charities include Not A Phase, whose mission is 'uplifting and improving the lives of trans+ adults.' Their attempts to achieve this mission have involved 'growing the UK trans+ economy', and condemning those who want to protect males from competing in female sports.
Why are brands still throwing money at charities promoting an ideology that the public rejects but which they are ultimately being forced to pay for?
The answer is ESG: Environmental, Social, and Governance, a set of standards supposedly measuring the ethical impact of businesses, but which usually just serves to keep the money flowing to questionable yet fashionable causes. This is what is keeping Pride month alive.
Whilst the 'E' does much damage to returns as companies are coerced into spending money on unprofitable windmills and solar farms, the 'S' gives us rainbow logos and compulsory trans donations.
Increasingly, to access investment, companies must prioritise ESG. This is because most institutional investors in Britain have launched ESG funds and increasingly invest savers' money into these funds by default. They claim this is because of the good that ESG achieves. A cynic might suggest it is because of the higher management fees that ESG justifies.
Therefore, to access investment, companies prostrate themselves in front of the ESG ratings agencies, who have largely unchecked power.
To receive top points from these agencies, companies must excel in the 'social' category. Obviously social factors are subjective and not easily quantifiable. As such, it is not enough to simply be a thoughtful employer who pays equal work equally. Rather, firms must brandish their commitment publicly, ensuring that when the ratings agencies seek proof of companies' social commitment, it is easy to find. It is no coincidence that the firms which top Stonewall's equality index tend to receive top points in the ESG rankings.
The ESG and DEI reports of big brands make this plain. Unilever, the parent company of Marmite, have an entire section of their DEI report dedicated to explaining, 'how our brands are confronting bias and discrimination' – as if Vaseline is the next Martin Luther King. Unilever are also recipients of Stonewall's gold status award for being a leading LGBTQ+ employer and have an AA sustainability rating, one of the highest scores available from ratings agency MSCI.
Shake Shack's donation to a transgenderism charity, meanwhile, is not a humble humanitarian mission which they modestly pursue. In their ESG reports they boast that their Pride Shake is part of 'a strong history of supporting the LGBTQ+ community and rolling out national Pride'. This has clearly had the desired effect as they have received the Equality 100 award in LGBTQ+ workplace equality. There are a number of criteria for receiving this award. One which stands out is the requirement for 'Philanthropic support of at least one LGBTQ+ organisation.'
Are the executives of these companies true believers in Pride? Some surely are and would fly the flag regardless. Many, however, play along simply because otherwise they would lose access to vital capital. But companies should not be manipulated into pushing an agenda that is increasingly rejected by the public and underlying shareholders.
The shifting public mood and consistent financial underperformance means that ESG will not remain viable for long. In the meantime, individuals who are pleased to see the decline of Pride Month should ensure their money is kept away from funds engaged in ESG.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
7 hours ago
- The Guardian
Chancellor's attempt to intervene in car finance scandal branded ‘disgraceful'
Rachel Reeves' efforts to intervene in the supreme court case on the car finance scandal were 'unprecedented and disgraceful' and send a 'really bad message' to consumers that the government is willing to defend wrongdoing by banks, Treasury committee member and Lib Dem MP Bobby Dean has said. While the supreme court largely sided with finance companies on Friday – helping lenders avoid a £44bn compensation bill – Dean said the chancellor had gone too far to show she was on the side of business. That included a controversial bid to intervene in the supreme court hearing in January, in which she urged judges to avoid handing 'windfall' compensation to borrowers. That attempt was ultimately rejected. 'I thought it was pretty unprecedented and pretty disgraceful,' said Dean, who sits on an influential parliamentary committee which scrutinises City firms, regulators and the Treasury. The chancellor had also been considering overruling the supreme court's decision with retrospective legislation, to help save lenders billions of pounds, in the event that it upheld the entirety of October's court of appeal ruling, the Guardian revealed last week. 'What message does it send to consumers that the industry can do wrong, the courts can support the claim that they've done something wrong, but the government is ready to intervene and defend the industry that's done wrong, instead of defending the consumer? I think that's a really bad message to put out,' Dean said. 'I feel like this government sometimes is too keen to demonstrate it is on the side of business, and is sometimes not understanding the rights of consumer,' he added. Reeves intervention efforts followed intensive lobbying by the car loan industry, which feared that the supreme court would uphold last October's shock ruling by the appeal court. That October ruling suggested commission payments paid by lenders to car dealers were unlawful, unless explicitly disclosed to borrowers. It could have opened the door to billions of pounds of compensation claims against companies including Lloyds Banking Group, Santander UK, Barclays and Close Brothers, and result in a redress scheme that rivalled the £50bn payment protection insurance saga. Lobby group the Financing and Leasing Association (FLA) – which represents car lenders – had warned the government that a big compensation bill could push some lenders into failure, while others would offer fewer or more expensive loans to claw back their losses. That could restrict options for borrowers who relied on credit. City bosses were also warning the Treasury that ongoing uncertainty over the scandal was deterring international investment in the finance industry, and was therefore putting the UK's economic growth at risk The FLA's head of motor finance Adrian Dally said that the lobby group was 'pleased' with the supreme court's ruling, and felt its concerns had been heard by Treasury and regulators. He confirmed the FLA had been speaking with the Treasury nearly every week in the wake of the court of appeal ruling in October, including about its concerns on the car finance case. However, he rejected suggestions the Treasury had prioritised the industry over consumers. 'We absolutely disagree with that because, ultimately, this [car finance] industry is a vital part of the nation's infrastructure, and enables millions of people to get to work, to get to school, and that was put at risk by these court cases. And ultimately, we believe the industry's interests and the consumers' interests are aligned on this.' Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning after newsletter promotion But Dean said government interventions set a 'really bad precedent if you're going to intervene on cases of consumer redress on the basis that it might damage industry, because then almost every consumer redress case would fall,' Dean said. Dean added that compensation schemes can give consumers confidence to borrow and invest, knowing will be protected when companies take advantage of customers. 'Obviously, the best industry is one where these redress systems are not needed in the first place, because people play by the rules.' The Financial Conduct Authority is due to confirm whether or not it will press ahead with a compensation scheme before the stock markets open on Monday morning. A Treasury spokesperson said: 'It is vital that consumers have access to motor finance to enable them to spread the cost of a vehicle in a way that is manageable and affordable. 'We respect this judgment from the supreme court, and we are working with regulators and industry to understand the impact for both firms and consumers. 'We recognise the issues this court case has highlighted, and we are already taking forward significant changes to the Financial Ombudsman Service and the Consumer Credit Act.'
The Sun
8 hours ago
- The Sun
Marks & Spencer announces exact date it will close 100-year-old flagship store after ‘never recovering from Covid'
Another M&S store is soon to reopen after an exciting revamp END OF AN ERA Marks & Spencer announces exact date it will close 100-year-old flagship store after 'never recovering from Covid' MARKS & Spencer has confirmed its historic flagship store will close in a matter of weeks, after failing to recover from Covid. The popular supermarket has been serving Wolverhampton shoppers since 1929, however it will soon be closing its doors for good. Advertisement 2 M&S has announced the closing date of one of its flagship stores Credit: Google Maps The store is located on Dudley Street, Wolverhampton and will stop trading on September 27. M&S regional manager, Calum Telford, said: "I would like to say a massive thanks to all our customers who have shopped with us over the years and our colleagues, past and present, who have contributed to the store. "We have a proud history in Wolverhampton and are working with the city council to find a suitable alternative food location. "This is part of our wider investment into the Black Country, including modernising our Merry Hill store, and we will keep the local community updated." Advertisement Mr Telford added: "In the meantime, conversations are continuing with our store colleagues and we will offer them alternative roles at M&S wherever possible." Staff at the Dudley store have also been informed that it has been confirmed by bosses that the business hopes to find a suitable alternative city location to open a new dedicated food store. M&S first announced the store's closure last month after sharing that it had been performing "less well for a long period of time." According to bosses, this is a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, from which the shop "never fully recovered." Advertisement In a statement made at the time, Mr Telford said: ""Our UK-wide store rotation programme is all about reshaping for growth and making sure every M&S store delivers the best possible shopping experience for our customers. "That's why we have made the tough decision to propose the closure of our Dudley Street store. M&S launches first-of-its-kind store "Sadly, the store has been performing less well for a long period of time and has never fully recovered from the Covid pandemic." This comes after M&S announced in 2022 than it intended to reduce its number of traditional department store openings from 247 to 180, while also opening an additional 100 new food halls by April 2026. Advertisement Also, earlier this summer company chairman Archie Norman said the firm was looking to exit "struggling town centres" as part of a £500 million plan to update its retail store portfolio nationwide. Meanwhile, Wolverhampton Council has stressed that it has been working alongside M&S to try and find a new location for a food hall in the city. A council spokesperson said: 'It will be sad to see M&S leave the Dudley Street store at the end of September - but they remain committed to Wolverhampton and we are working with them to identify suitable locations that fit their new business model. 'We appreciate how unsettling this is for staff, and the council's Wolves at Work employment support team is connected with M&S to support workers and their families. Advertisement "We are also keen to see the privately-owned Dudley Street site brought back into use quickly. 'As everyone knows town and city centres across the country are changing and we fully understand M&S's difficult decision was driven by wider, changing market conditions and customer behaviour." In brighter news, M&S is set to launch its revamped food hall at Merry Hill shopping centre this Friday. Advertisement Wolverhampton Council have said despite the sad news about the department store closure, there are lots of regeneration projects set to create new homes and jobs to look forward to. A spokesperson added: ""The transformation of the city centre includes thousands of new city centre homes at Smithgate and Canalside; better connectivity and safer public spaces; a world-class entertainment venue at the University of Wolverhampton at The Halls; a new independent cinema at the Chubb Building; a growing commercial district at the Interchange and a new £61million City Learning Quarter which opens this autumn and will bring thousands of new visitors to our city centre every week.' Why are retailers closing stores? RETAILERS have been feeling the squeeze since the pandemic, while shoppers are cutting back on spending due to the soaring cost of living crisis. High energy costs and a move to shopping online after the pandemic are also taking a toll, and many high street shops have struggled to keep going. However, additional costs have added further pain to an already struggling sector. The British Retail Consortium has predicted that the Treasury's hike to employer NICs from April will cost the retail sector £2.3billion. At the same time, the minimum wage will rise to £12.21 an hour from April, and the minimum wage for people aged 18-20 will rise to £10 an hour, an increase of £1.40. The Centre for Retail Research (CRR) has also warned that around 17,350 retail sites are expected to shut down this year. It comes on the back of a tough 2024 when 13,000 shops closed their doors for good, already a 28% increase on the previous year. Professor Joshua Bamfield, director of the CRR said: "The results for 2024 show that although the outcomes for store closures overall were not as poor as in either 2020 or 2022, they are still disconcerting, with worse set to come in 2025." It comes after almost 170,000 retail workers lost their jobs in 2024. End-of-year figures compiled by the Centre for Retail Research showed the number of job losses spiked amid the collapse of major chains such as Homebase and Ted Baker. It said its latest analysis showed that a total of 169,395 retail jobs were lost in the 2024 calendar year to date. This was up 49,990 – an increase of 41.9% – compared with 2023. It is the highest annual reading since more than 200,000 jobs were lost in 2020 in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, which forced retailers to shut their stores during lockdowns. The centre said 38 major retailers went into administration in 2024, including household names such as Lloyds Pharmacy, Homebase, The Body Shop, Carpetright and Ted Baker. Around a third of all retail job losses in 2024, 33% or 55,914 in total, resulted from administrations. Experts have said small high street shops could face a particularly challenging 2025 because of Budget tax and wage changes. Professor Bamfield has warned of a bleak outlook for 2025, predicting that as many as 202,000 jobs could be lost in the sector. "By increasing both the costs of running stores and the costs on each consumer's household it is highly likely that we will see retail job losses eclipse the height of the pandemic in 2020.
The Independent
9 hours ago
- The Independent
Martin Lewis advises patience after Supreme Court car finance ruling
Millions of drivers may be due compensation for hidden commission payments in car finance schemes. Money expert Martin Lewis advises patience, suggesting an automatic redress scheme could be implemented by the Financial Conduct Authority by the end of the year. The Supreme Court recently ruled that car finance lenders are only liable for hidden commission payments in the most "unfair" cases. While the Supreme Court allowed appeals from two lenders, it upheld one driver's claim, finding his case unfair and awarding him compensation. Lewis cautioned against engaging claims firms currently, as an automatic scheme would negate the need for their services and prevent unnecessary fees.
