Brambles - 1792 Exchange

Rating Overview

Brambles is Lower Risk.

Brambles is Lower Risk. The company does not yield to political activism in shaping corporate governance, preventing initiatives that potentially alienate consumers, divide employees, and harm shareholders. Brambles implements race and identity-based policies that replace merit, excellence, and integrity with preferential treatment and outcomes. Overall, the company does not embrace corporate initiatives that redirect its central focus from business goals to partisan policies and divisive issues. This approach protects free exercise, free speech, and free enterprise.

Rating Criteria

Corporate Weaponization Risk Levels
Criteria	Risk Level
Cancellations	Medium Risk
Discriminatory Philanthropy	Lower Risk
Employment Protection	High Risk

Corporate Weaponization ⓘ

Corporate Governance and Public Policy Risk Levels
Criteria	Risk Level
Advocacy Bias	Medium Risk
Funding	Lower Risk
Political Actions	Lower Risk

Corporate Governance and Public Policy ⓘ

Rating Criteria Detail

Criteria Risk Level Rationale

Corporate Weaponization

Criteria:

Has canceled customers, suppliers, or vendors due to their political views or religious beliefs OR corporately boycotts, divests, or sanctions regions, people groups, or industries.

Risk Level:

Medium

Rationale:

Brambles promotes divisive sex and gender policies. Its Code of Conduct Human Rights Policy requires international vendors to include sexual orientation and gender identity in their nondiscrimination policy (1). However, the company has not canceled customers, suppliers, or vendors based on political views or religious beliefs (2).

Criteria:

Charitable giving (including employee matching programs) policies or practices discriminate against charitable organizations based on views or religious beliefs.

Risk Level:

Lower

Rationale:

Brambles does not appear to discriminate against charitable organizations based on views or beliefs. The company’s charitable giving focus areas are “foodbanks” (1)(2)(3).

Criteria:

Employment policies fail to protect against viewpoint or other discrimination and/or are ideological in nature.

Risk Level:

High

Rationale:

Brambles appears to prioritize diversity over merit in its promotions, leadership composition, supply chain and mentorship program. From its Diversity Policy: The company’s Board measures “The proportion of women, men, and other categories of employees in the workforce at all levels; The proportion of women, men, other categories of employees, and professional backgrounds of Brambles’ executive population” (1). From its Diversity Policy: “Brambles will continue to design talent management programmes to assist in developing a broader and more diverse pool of employees. These programmes include: Mentoring programmes” (2). From CHEP’s Supplier Diversity Program page: “The people of CHEP thrive and grow by extending valued opportunities to the many groups of diverse suppliers across the globe” (3). The company offers DEI training to its employees (4). Brambles protects its employees against viewpoint discrimination (5).

Corporate Governance and Public Policy

Criteria:

Uses corporate reputation to support causes, organizations, or policies hostile to freedom of expression.

Risk Level:

Medium

Rationale:

Brambles is committed to net zero emissions by 2040 (1). The company supports DEI within its business practices. From its Sustainability Review: “Diversity is core to achieving Brambles’ purpose” (2). Otherwise, there are no publicly known cases of Brambles using its reputation to advance ideological causes or policies (3).

Criteria:

Uses corporate funds to advance ideological causes, organizations, or policies hostile to freedom of expression.

Risk Level:

Lower

Rationale:

Brambles has not used corporate funds to advance ideological causes, organizations, or policies (1).

Criteria:

Uses corporate political actions and/or financial contributions for ideological, non-business purposes.

Risk Level:

Lower

Rationale:

Brambles does not operate a PAC at this time and has not lobbied for ideological purposes (1)(2)(3).