In the absence of strong federal climate policy, states and corporations have been left to fill the gaps. There's a parallel to climate action here. (Walmart told employees last month that it was weighing its options.) As of June 30, a survey from the asset management firm Mercer found that only 5 percent of companies had adopted a formal policy to cover a portion of their employees' travel costs, although 23 percent said they were planning to implement one. Most companies - including Walmart, the U.S.'s largest employer - made no plans to expand health care benefits as it became clear that Roe would be overturned. "The people for whom money is a barrier" often don't work for the Fortune 500 companies that have offered employees up to $7,500 in abortion-related travel assistance, said Linda Hirshman, a lawyer and author who writes about social change. Corporate promises to ensure abortion access for their employees, for example, cover only a tiny fraction of the population and may leave out those who need the most help.
They create "islands of progressive activity," as Chris Wright, a professor of organizational studies at the University of Sydney Business School, put it. Wade have donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to the Republican Attorneys General Association, a group that has made it a foremost priority to erode reproductive rights even after the reversal of Roe.īeyond rank hypocrisy, there's another big problem with trusting corporations to address society's biggest problems: They can only deliver piecemeal social and environmental protections. Similarly, major corporations that have inveighed against the overturning of Roe v. Chamber of Commerce, which has lobbied aggressively to tank federal climate action. "They're going to look after their profits," he added, even if that means privately lobbying against the values they espouse.įor example, many tech and automobile companies vow climate action even as they support conservative trade groups like the U.S. "Companies don't do anything out of the goodness of their hearts," said David Levy, director of the Center for Sustainable Enterprise and Regional Competitiveness at the University of Massachusetts Boston.
Whether it's protecting the climate or the right to choose, they argue that businesses' profit-seeking nature makes them ill-suited to deliver broad and important social goals. Although the private sector can draw public attention to important issues, experts say corporate pledges are no substitute for strong federal action. But there are hard limits on what corporate action can accomplish.
With both issues - abortion access and climate change - companies have framed themselves as nimble, socially responsible protectors of the public good. "As a strong global franchise, we have an important role to play in the transition to a world where net-zero carbon emissions are a reality," an insurance executive said in a survey for a recent report on corporate sustainability. In the absence of strong federal policies, the private sector has insisted that it's stepping up with pledges to slash emissions and prevent catastrophic global warming. "Employers like us may be the last line of defense," one tech executive told the New York Times.Ĭompanies have spent years saying something similar about another big issue: climate change.
Fuel drilling plans undermine climate pledges drivers#
Later, Lyft and Uber said they would back drivers with legal support if they were sued for transporting passengers to get an abortion. PayPal, JPMorgan Chase, Microsoft and several other companies said they would expand their healthcare benefits for employees to cover travel to abortion clinics. Wade in late June, corporations were already announcing how they would come to the rescue. Grist is a nonprofit, independent media organization dedicated to telling stories of climate solutions and a just future.Įven before the Supreme Court officially struck down Roe v.
0 kommentar(er)
