Clean Harbors - 1792 Exchange

Rating Overview

Clean Harbors is Medium Risk.

Clean Harbors is Medium Risk. The company often yields to political activism in shaping corporate governance, potentially alienating consumers, dividing employees, and harming shareholders. Clean Harbors elevates merit, excellence, and integrity ahead of race and identity-based policies. The company occasionally embraces corporate initiatives that redirect its central focus from business goals to partisan policies and divisive issues at times. This approach fails to safeguard 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	Medium Risk

Corporate Weaponization ⓘ

Corporate Governance and Public Policy Risk Levels
Criteria	Risk Level
Advocacy Bias	High 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:

Clean Harbors integrates ESG into its business practices. From its Sustainability page: “Clean Harbors recognizes that sustainability stewardship is a core aspect of our brand and a key component of our long-term business success. Sustainability is our responsibility to the environment, society and the economy. This responsibility is commonly termed ESG, which stands for Environmental, Social, and Governance. ESG measures are used to evaluate a company’s activities and commitment to sustainable practices. Clean Harbors prioritizes ESG performance in our day-to-day activities, communities, and the products and services that we provide” (1). The company promotes divisive sex and gender policies. Its Vendor Code of Conduct and Business Ethics requires international vendors to include sexual orientation and gender identity in their nondiscrimination policy (2). However, Clean Harbors has not canceled customers, suppliers, or vendors based on political views or religious beliefs (3).

Criteria:

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

Risk Level:

Lower

Rationale:

Clean Harbors does not appear to discriminate against charitable organizations based on views or beliefs (1).

Criteria:

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

Risk Level:

Medium

Rationale:

Clean Harbors does not provide viewpoint protections for its employees (1)(2).

Corporate Governance and Public Policy

Criteria:

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

Risk Level:

High

Rationale:

Clean Harbors supports DEI within its business practices, employing a DEI Steering Committee (1). The company supports DEI within its business practices. From its Diversity and Inclusion page: “We are on a journey to build safe, talented and inclusive teams by embedding diversity in all that we do” (2). Clean Harbors supports ESG within its business practices. From its Sustainability page: “Our comprehensive Sustainability program demonstrates several of the Company’s objectives:… To continuously improve our ESG performance, based on ongoing evaluation of our impact areas” (3).

Criteria:

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

Risk Level:

Lower

Rationale:

Clean Harbors 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:

Clean Harbors does not operate a PAC at this time and has not used its lobbying for ideological purposes (1)(2)(3).