Ben & Jerry’s has filed a legal complaint accusing its parent company, Unilever, of violating a merger agreement by attempting to suppress the ice cream maker’s commitment to its social mission, particularly around political issues. The filing, submitted in federal court in New York on Tuesday, claims that Unilever is actively “silencing” Ben & Jerry’s social stance, especially its vocal support for Palestinian refugees.
According to the filing, Unilever has threatened CEO David Stever and other employees over their advocacy, accusing the company of using threats to stifle Ben & Jerry’s involvement in social issues. The company alleges that Unilever’s efforts to suppress its message included blocking social media posts, including one in support of Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian refugee and Columbia graduate, who has been detained for his vocal criticism of Israeli actions in Gaza. Ben & Jerry’s had planned to post a message expressing support for Khalil’s case and linking to an ACLU petition, but the post was blocked without explanation by Unilever.
Ben & Jerry’s further accuses Unilever of blocking a post intended to celebrate Black History Month and alleges that the company has faced increasing restrictions on political speech in recent months. In one instance, Unilever reportedly blocked a post condemning President Trump, which had been planned to coincide with his inauguration in January 2017.
A significant part of the dispute stems from the role of Ben & Jerry’s independent board, which was established in 2000 following the company’s sale to Unilever. The board’s primary role is to safeguard the integrity of Ben & Jerry’s social mission and brand identity. Ben & Jerry’s claims that Unilever’s recent actions are a direct attack on that mission.
Unilever has pushed back against the allegations, with a spokesperson expressing disappointment that confidential information, including internal conversations about employee career matters, was made public. The spokesperson emphasized that the company had made repeated efforts to engage with the Ben & Jerry’s independent board but was dissatisfied with the board’s actions.
The tension between the two companies escalated further in a November filing, where Ben & Jerry’s accused Unilever of threatening to dismantle its independent board if the company issued a public statement in support of a Palestinian ceasefire. Ben & Jerry’s maintains that the effort to oust Stever was not related to his performance but rather his dedication to the company’s social mission, which has long focused on issues like peace, justice, and human rights.
As legal proceedings continue, the case highlights the ongoing friction between Ben & Jerry’s, a company known for its activism, and Unilever, a multinational corporation with a broader, more commercially driven focus.
You Might Be Interested In:
