Ben & Jerry’s CEO David Stever was ousted by Unilever, sparking a legal fight over the brand’s activism and corporate control. Read the full story.


Newsletter

wave

Ben & Jerry’s chief executive, David Stever, has been removed by parent company Unilever, intensifying tensions over the ice cream brand’s political activism. The company claims Unilever is attempting to suppress its long-standing "social mission," leading to a legal battle in a U.S. court.

Ben & Jerry’s Says Unilever Broke Their Deal

In a lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, Ben & Jerry’s argues that Unilever violated the terms of their 2000 merger agreement. The agreement, which allowed Ben & Jerry’s to retain an independent board, was designed to protect the brand’s values and activism. However, the ice cream company alleges Unilever has repeatedly pressured its leadership to refrain from taking public stances on political issues.

One of the key points of contention is Unilever’s alleged threats against Ben & Jerry’s executives, including CEO David Stever. The lawsuit states that Unilever sought to force the brand into silence, particularly on controversial topics like the Israel-Palestine conflict and U.S. politics.

Unilever Responds to Allegations

Unilever has expressed disappointment over the public disclosure of what it calls a confidential employee discussion. The company maintains that decisions regarding Ben & Jerry’s leadership fall under its authority, as per the acquisition agreement. However, it insists that such decisions should involve consultation with Ben & Jerry’s independent board.

A Unilever spokesperson stated, "We have made repeated attempts to engage the Ben & Jerry’s board and follow the correct process. We hope they will engage as per the original, agreed process."

Ongoing Conflict Over Social and Political Views

Ben & Jerry’s has a long history of supporting social justice movements, including LGBTQ+ rights and climate change initiatives. The company’s activism has led to friction with Unilever, particularly after its decision in 2021 to stop selling products in the West Bank. The dispute escalated in November 2023 when Ben & Jerry’s filed a lawsuit accusing Unilever of trying to silence its support for Palestinian refugees.

More recently, the ice cream maker alleged that Unilever attempted to prevent it from publicly criticizing former U.S. President Donald Trump. The situation reached a boiling point with the decision to remove CEO David Stever, who has been with Ben & Jerry’s since 1988 and became CEO in 2023.

Ben & Jerry’s claims that Stever’s removal was carried out without consulting its independent board, in violation of the merger agreement. The lawsuit further accuses Unilever of pressuring the board to approve the decision without proper discussion.

What’s Next for Ben & Jerry’s?

The ongoing legal battle highlights the broader challenge of corporate ownership over socially conscious brands. As the dispute unfolds, Ben & Jerry’s faces an uncertain future regarding its leadership and ability to maintain its activist stance. The outcome of this case could set a precedent for how corporations balance business interests with social responsibility.

FAQ

David Stever was removed by Unilever, Ben & Jerry’s parent company, amid ongoing tensions over the ice cream brand’s political activism. The company alleges that Unilever is trying to suppress its long-standing “social mission.”

Ben & Jerry’s has filed a lawsuit claiming that Unilever violated their 2000 merger agreement by attempting to silence the brand’s activism. The ice cream company argues that Unilever has pressured its leadership to avoid public stances on political issues.

Unilever has stated that it is disappointed by the public disclosure of what it considers a confidential employee discussion. The company asserts that decisions regarding Ben & Jerry’s leadership are under its authority but should involve consultation with the independent board.

The primary points of contention include Ben & Jerry’s support for Palestinian refugees, its call for a ceasefire in Gaza, and its criticism of former U.S. President Donald Trump. The company’s decision to halt sales in the West Bank in 2021 also contributed to tensions.

The outcome of the lawsuit could set a precedent for how corporate-owned brands balance business interests with social activism. If Ben & Jerry’s wins, it may reaffirm its independence in making political statements. If Unilever prevails, it could gain more control over the brand’s messaging and leadership decisions.

Search Anything...!