Roots - 1792 Exchange

Rating Overview

Roots is Medium Risk.

Roots is Medium Risk. The company often yields to political activism in shaping corporate governance, potentially alienating consumers, dividing employees, and harming shareholders. The company implements race and identity-based policies that replace merit, excellence, and integrity with preferential treatment and outcomes. Roots 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	Lower Risk
Discriminatory Philanthropy	Lower Risk
Employment Protection	High Risk

Corporate Weaponization ⓘ

Corporate Governance and Public Policy Risk Levels
Criteria	Risk Level
Advocacy Bias	High Risk
Funding	High Risk
Political Actions	No Data

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:

Lower

Rationale:

Roots has not publicly canceled customers, suppliers, or vendors based on political views or religious beliefs (1).

Criteria:

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

Risk Level:

Lower

Rationale:

Roots 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:

High

Rationale:

Roots appears to prioritize diversity over merit in its leadership composition. From its diversity policy: “In assessing qualified candidates for nomination to the board, Roots’ Governance, Compensation and Nominating Committee will give due consideration to candidates’… diversity of board and the candidate pool. Diversity, in this context, includes…characteristics such as gender, age, ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation and geographic representation”. Roots appears to prioritize diversity over merit in its business structure through the establishment of gender targets for its leadership composition. Roots is seeking a 50% women candidate pool in its director candidacy (1). The company does not publish a nondiscrimination policy (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:

Roots signed the BlackNorth Initiative’s CEO pledge, which includes a commitment to foster diversity in its workplaces, implement unconscious bias training, and employ a diversity leadership council (1)(2)(3). The company supports DEI within its business practices, employing both a cross-functional and employee-driven DEEI council, and a DEEI specialist (4). In 2021, Roots launched its One Collection, a gender free collection to shop from (5). Otherwise, there are no publicly known cases of Roots using its reputation to advance ideological causes or policies (6).

Criteria:

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

Risk Level:

High

Rationale:

Roots is a partner of Rainbow Road, an organization that helps LGBTQ people to relocate (1)(2). The company is also a partner of BlackNorth, an initiative that works to end “anti-Black systemic racism” (3)(4). Otherwise, there are no publicly known cases of Roots using corporate funds to advance ideological causes, organizations, or policies (5).

Criteria:

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

Risk Level:

N/A

Rationale:

Roots does not operate a PAC or engage in lobbying at this time (1)(2)(3).