DEI isn't dead: See the companies standing behind inclusion
DEI isn't dead: See the companies standing behind inclusion
At a time when companies are abandoning diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, WinMark Concepts President Andrew Isen said DEI was never meant to be a political statement-it's a smart move for business and company culture.
"It fosters an environment and a camaraderie of teamwork that will lead to a company's positive bottom line, period," Isen said. "It's the complete opposite of what is being sold to America through a system of lies and distortions."
Though this distortion is what led to many companies leaving DEI in the dust, many businesses aren't caving to political pressure and are standing behind their inclusive initiatives, News Is Out says.
DEI was once the standard. Now it's a polarizing statement.
The prominent fight against DEI can be traced to as recently as June 2023, when the Supreme Court ended race-based affirmative action in higher education. But DEI is more than just affirmative action, and many prominent conservative figures took notice.
One year after the Supreme Court's decision, music video producer Robby Starbuck uploaded a video bashing Tractor Supply, a company that sells farm equipment, for its DEI policies.
In the video, Starbuck said the company offered equal health care for trans employees and sponsored Pride events. He called on customers to boycott the company until they changed these practices. It did.
Tractor Supply announced it would pull out of its DEI initiatives shortly after the video was published. Starbuck took credit for the takedown, and called on other companies-like Lowe's, Harley-Davidson and John Deere-to follow suit.
As President Donald Trump took office earlier this year, the DEI debate burst into the mainstream political scene.
He banned transgender people from serving in the military, and slashed multiple federal programs that supported marginalized communities.
Isen said many companies caved to this political pressure and were afraid of being caught in the crossfire of "culture wars."
Just because some companies are backing out doesn't mean DEI is dead.
Numerous prominent businesses have stood up in the face of political and consumer pressure and sustained, if not expanded, their inclusive initiatives.
Apple has kept up its inclusion and diversity page, continued an initiative that creates pathways to engineering for students at historically Black colleges and most recently announced its Pride collection for this year.
Costco has stood firmly behind its DEI initiatives, such as inclusive hiring practices and fair wages. Almost all of the company's shareholders voted against an anti-DEI proposal that would have made Costco review its inclusive practices and the company is thriving.
Here are some of the other major companies that remain committed to DEI:
Ben and Jerry'sCoca-ColaLevi Strauss & Co.Marriott InternationalNFLPinterestSephoraUltae.l.f. BeautyPatagoniaProcter and GambleSouthwest AirlinesDelta AirlinesT.J. MaxxMicrosoftKroger
The list goes on, but the corporate commitment to DEI isn't quite as dead as some may want you to believe.
Isen said DEI is both a smart workplace and economic decision.
"When you become an inclusive company, and you promote fairness and inclusivity and equity within an organization or company, you're fostering an environment where people work closer together," Isen said. "You're creating a professional camaraderie that produces quantifiable business results."
In a 2023 study, consulting firm McKinsey and Company found that companies with greater representation on executive teams were 39% more likely to financially outperform companies with less ethnic and gender representation.
Isen said companies that stray from DEI initiatives, like PepsiCo, Walmart and McDonalds, will face "horrific" consequences. He pointed to Target, which saw a decline in foot traffic during the first quarter of this year after it abandoned its commitment to DEI policies.
Target CEO Brian Cornell said the decline could have been attributed to the combination of consumer fears of Trump's tariffs and boycotts following the company's DEI abandonment.
The fate of DEI isn't predictable.
Isen said the economic state of the country "unfortunately creates a powerless consumer." This is because many people can't afford to boycott brands that abandon DEI, because shopping at certain stores is the only affordable or accessible way to provide essentials for their family.
"Traditionally, the only way to really show their unhappiness was not to patronize the brand or the company or anything associated with it," Isen said. "But many people can't do that."
Though Isen said there are other ways consumers can advocate for DEI-such as contacting their representatives or company management-it's ultimately up to the companies themselves to understand the value inclusion provides to their culture and profitability.
This story was produced by News Is Out and reviewed and distributed by Stacker.
© Stacker Media, LLC.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
43 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Who is to blame for Andrew Cuomo's loss in New York City? It may be Andrew Cuomo himself.
He made no further public appearances that day last month, even with primary day weeks away. Cuomo, who dominated New York for a decade as governor, entered the crowded field of Democrats back in March with the force of a steamroller and a commanding lead in the polls. He wore down the Democratic establishment until it lined up behind him, strong-armed unions and seeded a record-shattering super political action committee that would eventually spend $25 million. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up But even some of his allies said that up close, the campaign sometimes looked more like a listing ship, steered by an aging candidate who never really seemed to want to be there and showed little interest in reacquainting himself with the city he hoped to lead. Advertisement New Yorkers took note. And on Tuesday, a campaign that Cuomo, 67, had hoped would deliver retribution four years after his humiliating resignation as governor ended in another thumping rebuke instead. Voters preferred Zohran Mamdani, a 33-year-old state lawmaker whom Cuomo dismissed as woefully unqualified, by a comfortable margin. Advertisement Mamdani, a democratic socialist whose relentless focus on affordability and infectious campaign presence electrified younger voters especially, certainly deserves a great deal of credit for his victory. But a dozen allies and even some of Cuomo's own campaign advisers agreed in interviews that if he was looking to assess blame for a loss that could end his political career, he needed to look at himself. 'It was a creaky 1970s political machine versus a generational talent,' said Howard Glaser, a former Cuomo lieutenant who has since fallen out with Cuomo. 'He just couldn't see it.' 'He tried to force redemption on an unreceptive public,' Glaser added. The assessment now hangs over Cuomo as he deliberates whether to renew his campaign in the fall against Mamdani on a third-party ballot line. Some wealthy New Yorkers alarmed by Mamdani's left-wing views and others are urging Cuomo to keep running. But many of his allies said there would be no real point in carrying on if Cuomo treated the general election like the primary. People who worked on his campaign, who insisted on anonymity for fear of retribution, used words like 'entitled,' 'arrogant' and 'aloof' to describe the former governor's attitude. Another called the campaign 'astonishingly incompetent.' Mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani campaigned outside Rockfeller Center in New York, on June 4. SHURAN HUANG/NYT Cuomo and his spokesperson disputed that his campaign choices -- good, bad or otherwise -- would have changed the outcome. Spokesperson Rich Azzopardi said that the campaign met its turnout goals in key districts and voting groups, particularly among Black and older voters who had a yearslong connection with the former governor. The problem, he said, was that Mamdani 'ran a campaign that managed to expand the electorate in such a way that no turnout model or poll was able to capture, while the rest of the field collapsed.' Advertisement In an interview, Cuomo dismissed the complaints of allies or advisers who said he should have shown up more around the city. 'None of these things explain the election outcome,' he said. 'They are either untrue or petty incidents that are of no consequence.' The contrast on the campaign trail between Cuomo and all the other candidates was stark. Under the rationale of protecting his polling lead, Cuomo skipped candidate forums and dodged the press as his rivals threw themselves into the city's maw with dizzying schedules. The former governor, who was born in Queens but lived most of his adult life in Albany and Westchester County, traveled in his Charger with an advance team putting out a buffer to prevent unwanted encounters with New Yorkers. Cuomo hired a platoon of consultants, but still leaned heavily on his longtime confidante, Melissa DeRosa, who had never run a city race. Mamdani built an enthusiastic volunteer army to spread his message; Cuomo largely outsourced his get-out-the-vote operation to labor unions and $25-an-hour canvassers. And in the end, Cuomo's message to an electorate hungry for change boiled down to: trust me, I've done this before. Some allies said it all contributed to an unhelpful image. 'All of us have a blind spot,' said former Gov. David Paterson, who endorsed Cuomo. 'His blind spot is that he doesn't really connect particularly well with, just, people.' For a time, it seemed Cuomo's return to power was a certainty. He began plotting a path back almost as soon as he resigned in August 2021 after sexual harassment allegations. He spent tens of millions of dollars in taxpayer funds fighting to clear his name in court, as he hungrily waited for an opening for public office. Advertisement New York Mayor Eric Adams arrived at his campaign launch rally a City Hall in New York on Thursday. Yuki Iwamura/Associated Press It arrived when Mayor Eric Adams was indicted on federal corruption charges and then persuaded the Trump administration to drop them. Cuomo, a master backroom deal-maker, exploited the opening deftly, nudging the mayor out of the primary while convincing business leaders, labor bosses and other Democrats that they should back him -- if not out of excitement than out of a sense of inevitability. 'I feel like people misunderstood my $250,000 for Cuomo for real enthusiasm,' said Mark Gorton, an investor who gave $250,000 to a pro-Cuomo super PAC. 'It was basically, 'Oh, looks like Cuomo is coming back. We don't want to be shut out. Let's try and get on his good side.'' At the time, polls showed Mamdani in second place, trailing by 20 points or more. Cuomo's allies openly pined for a two-man showdown. They figured Mamdani's socialist views and harsh criticism of Israel would act as a ceiling on his support. It turned out to be a fundamental miscalculation. In a race where a large majority of voters said the city was headed in the wrong direction and where many Democrats were looking for a change, Cuomo struggled. Cuomo launched his campaign with a 17-minute video, lecturing New Yorkers on how and why the city was spiraling to dark places. Mamdani's videos showed him spiraling across the city, riding the subways, embracing working New Yorkers and running into the icy waters off Coney Island to dramatize his call to freeze rents. Advertisement Stuart Appelbaum, the head of the retail workers union that formally endorsed Cuomo at the minimum wage rally, credited Mamdani for running a campaign about the future. 'Cuomo's campaign reflected the reality of New York from decades ago,' he said. Cuomo had another real problem. The same polls that showed him leading showed that he was also widely disliked by a large swath of Democratic primary voters who were put off by his moderate policies, domineering style or past scandals. By all appearances, Cuomo made little effort to reach them. Though it has been just four years since he resigned after 11 women accused him of sexual harassment, he offered no real contrition. He was not sorry, he said, because he had done nothing wrong. When he did venture to share a regret, he said he wished most that he had never resigned at all. Some of the governor's supporters and some of his own advisers had concerns about his low-key campaigning in real time, and pushed him to take up a more active public schedule. But Cuomo rarely strayed from his comfort zone in the pulpits of Black churches or at senior centers. Rodneyse Bichotte Hermelyn, the head of the Brooklyn Democratic Party, said she pleaded with the campaign to have Cuomo visit a mosque to build ties to Muslim New Yorkers. 'That was a very big thing,' she said. " They told me he was scheduled to go to the mosque, and then I found out he didn't. I was not too happy." Last Sunday, on the last day of early voting, Cuomo did show up at the Christian Cultural Center, a Black Brooklyn megachurch. But the Rev. A.R. Bernard, its pastor, said that after the former governor spoke 'brilliantly' for five minutes, he left rather than mingling with congregants. Advertisement 'He was not on the streets, where the people are,' he said. 'Maybe we have to be careful when we assume that we've got enough reputation, history and gravitas to float through an election like this.' Paterson described a different problem. 'Once I endorsed him, some of his campaign workers called me like I was an employee of his,' he said, demanding he show up in the spin-room of the final debate to promote Cuomo even though the candidate would not be there himself. 'I said, 'this is not my role,'' Paterson said. ''Thank you. Good night.'' This article originally appeared in
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Around 100,000 march in Budapest Pride in open defiance of Hungary's ban
One marcher, Blanka Molnár, said it was 'a fantastic feeling' that more people had attended the Pride march than ever before despite it being outlawed. She said it was 'increasingly important' for Hungarians, 'even those who have never been to Pride before,' to push back against the government's policies. 'This isn't just about LGBQT+ rights, it's also about the right to assemble and about standing up for each other and not allowing (the government) to oppress us,' she said. Advertisement The massive size of the march, which the government for months had insisted would no longer be permitted in Hungary, was seen as a major blow to Orbán's prestige, as the European Union's longest-serving leader's popularity slumps in the polls where a new opposition force has taken the lead. Orbán and his party have insisted that Pride, a celebration of LGBTQ+ visibility and struggle for equal rights, was a violation of children's rights to moral and spiritual development — rights that a recent constitutional amendment declared took precedence over other fundamental protections including the right to peacefully assemble. Advertisement The law fast-tracked through parliament in March made it an offense to hold or attend events that 'depict or promote' homosexuality to minors underage 18. Orbán earlier made clear that Budapest Pride was the explicit target of the law. Authorities installed additional cameras throughout the city center before the march, and were expected to use facial recognition tools to identify individuals who attend the banned event. According to the new law, being caught attending Pride could result in fines of up to 200,000 Hungarian forints ($586). Marcher András Faludy said the 'hysteria' that has emerged in Hungary over the Pride march in recent months was 'damn pathetic. It's nonsense.' 'I could use an uglier word because I'm extremely angry, but I won't,' he added. The ban was the latest crackdown on LGBTQ+ rights by Orbán's government, which has already effectively banned both same-sex adoption and same-sex marriage and disallowed transgender individuals from changing their sex in official documents. Police rejected several requests by organizers in recent weeks to register the Pride march, citing the recent law. But Budapest Mayor Gergely Karácsony joined with organizers and declared it would be held as a separate municipal event — something he said doesn't require police approval. But Hungary's government remained firm, insisting that holding the Pride march, even if it's sponsored by the city, would be unlawful. Hungary's justice minister this week warned Karácsony that organizing Pride or encouraging people to attend would be punishable by up to a year in prison. Advertisement Many marchers expressed their belief that the Pride march represented a struggle not just for the protections of the rights of sexual minorities, but for the democratic future of their country. Participant Zsófia Szekér said the number of attendees showed that a major part of society desired a new direction for Hungary. 'I think we can only achieve change if so many people take to the streets,' she said.
Indianapolis Star
an hour ago
- Indianapolis Star
Trump's refusal to enforce TikTok ban is his most lawless presidential act
The first several months of Donald Trump's second presidential term have been marked by controversy and charges that he's a lawless president. However, the most brazen example of Trump's lawlessness is his refusal to enforce the TikTok ban, which has been passed by Congress and upheld by the Supreme Court. On June 19, Trump extended the deadline for TikTok to shut down by another 90 days, marking the third time he has done so. The TikTok ban is the law of the land, and Trump's refusal to enforce it is a dereliction of his duties as president. Those who are silent on it should put aside their own personal motives and bring more attention to this fact. Many forget that a TikTok ban was originally Trump's idea, and that many Democrats wrote the idea off as just another piece of his anti-China agenda. However, things have changed. Trump seemingly developed a soft spot for TikTok because he believes it helped him win reelection. Still, in the time between Trump's original stance and his change of heart on the issue, a law banning TikTok passed the House and Senate and was signed in 2024 by then-President Joe Biden. The Supreme Court even upheld the ban, against the arguments of TikTok's lawyers. The law banning TikTok does have a provision that allows for the president to delay the deadline for TikTok to cease operations or agree to a sale. Still, the criteria allowing for such an extension are nowhere close to being fulfilled. Briggs: Jim Banks would let Trump commit any crime you can imagine The text of the ban allows for the president to extend the deadline a single time for 90 days, so long as TikTok is close to reaching a deal with an American company to sell. There is no indication that's the case, and Trump's arbitrary executive orders are flagrantly illegal. Even Trump's guise in refusing to enforce the law – the idea that he is attempting to give TikTok time to broker a deal − doesn't make sense. Nothing would be more compelling for TikTok to sell the app to an American company than the ban going into effect. An app that cannot run is useless to its owners, and their best course of action would be to sell. The president does not have discretion over which laws he would like to enforce and which he would like to ignore. Trump's decision to arbitrarily extend TikTok's lifespan does exactly that. The president, along with the rest of the executive branch, has an obligation to enforce the laws of the nation that have been passed by Congress and signed into law. A president's job is to enforce the law, whereas Congress' job is to decide what the law is. When a president can choose which laws he is to enforce, he is deciding what the law is, in a sense. Hicks: The middle class isn't disappearing. It's just spending money differently That's why Trump's refusal to enforce the ban is his most lawless action as president. Sure, there's the constitutionality of his deportation schemes and his reinterpretation of birthright citizenship, but those instances had judicial checks. In no other area is Trump as actively derelict in his duties as president without repercussions as he is in relation to the TikTok ban. For all the talk about Trump being a lawless president, Democrats and Republicans have both been relatively quiet about this single worst example of Trump acting as such. Republicans should be wary about the next administration of Democrats that comes along refusing to enforce a certain law because they disagree with it, or they simply don't feel like it. If Democrats were the ones refusing to enforce the ban on TikTok, it would be the only thing Republicans talked about. I'm sure that the outrage would be far louder if Trump were refusing to enforce other statutes, such as parts of the National Firearms Act, the tax code, or any other number of statutes that Democrats are sympathetic to. However, because it concerns a popular social media platform remaining in service, the complaints are rather quiet. Refusal to enforce laws is not a path Americans want our presidents to travel. That slippery slope can take us to some very dangerous places.
