Exxon Mobil earned a record breaking $45.2 billion in 2008, shattering the previous record annual profit for a U.S. company of $40.6 billion — which Exxon Mobil set the previous year. (Earnings in 2005 were $36 billion, also a record.) So how much of that fat wad did the oil giant spend on making sure gay and transgender employees were protected?
Exactly $0.
For the tenth year in a row, shareholders voted on whether to add sexual orientation and gender identity to its list of equal employment opportunity classes, right there next to race and sex. And for the tenth year in a row, they voted no.
Is it all bad news? Maybe not.
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
When the measure first came up for a vote in 1999, just 8.2 percent of shareholders voted for it; last week, 39.3 percent voted for it (down slightly from last year’s 39.6 percent). Every year for the past decade, the New York City Comptroller’s Office (on behalf of the New York City Pension Fund, a shareholder) introduces the equality measure. Perhaps stymieing the effort are the number of proposals shareholders must vote on every year; you can imagine how many things a company like Exxon Mobil must manage. (Though isn’t that the excuse Barack Obama supporters are foolishly using for his failing to move on equal rights? “He’s too busy!”)
Notes the Dallas Voice:
Ballots containing all the resolutions submitted for that year are mailed to stockholders in April, and the votes are taken at the annual stockholders meeting, generally held on the last Wednesday in May.
Robb Puckett of Dallas, co-chair of HRC’s National Business Council, attended this week’s stockholders meeting to speak in support of the resolution. He said no one spoke against the resolution, but both he and Luther agreed that the Exxon Mobile board’s continuing refusal to even consider the change is a huge obstacle to overcome.
“The number of resolutions considered at the Exxon Mobil shareholders meetings is probably more than a lot of other organizations have. The majority of them are tied to environmental issues or to governance issues, and our resolution kind of gets buried under all the others,” Puckett said.
“When it comes down to the average, everyday shareholder,” he continued, “you have to wonder if they actually take the time to read each resolution, or if they just vote on all of them the way the board recommends.”
And so far, Luther said, the Exxon Mobile board has steadfastly refused to even talk to LGBT advocates about the possibility of a change.
“We would welcome the opportunity to talk to them about this, but so far, that isn’t happening,” Luther said.
But the “too busy” excuse may not be entirely true, given Exxon’s history of permitting discrimination.
When Exxon merged with Mobil in 1999, the new company got rid of Mobil’s non-discrimination policy that included sexual orientation; it also got rid of Mobil’s domestic partnership benefits for new employees. Noted CNN in 2006: “Its actions have put ExxonMobil is out of step with the biggest public companies. All but two companies in the FORTUNE 100— Plains All American Pipeline (Research), an energy firm based in Houston, is the other exception—prohibit discrimination against gays.”
And make no mistake: Exxon Mobil is not about “powering the world” or “finding new, clean energy sources.” It is a company built on making money hand over fist, which explains why it did away with same-sex partner benefits during the merger, and enjoys a shareholder culture that refuses to do more for employees than the law requires.
Meanwhile, without a federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act to force companies like Exxon Mobil into protecting GLBTs, the Human Rights campaign has a list of other more queer-friendly places to fill up.
dgz
SHOCK: a big oil co. is evil.
John Thomas
NO Queers!
Mike
On 24 March 1989 the (at the time named Exxon Valdez) oil vessel spilled about 11 Million Gallons of oil into Prince William Sound (Alaska), causing untold ecological damage to an area of unparalled natural beauty
Nearly 20 YEARS LATER (25/Jun/08) Exxon (now Exxon Mobil) are still arguing in the courts to reduce the amount they have been fined.
Exxon still uses single hulled vessels for oil transport including the Exxon Valdez .. now called the SeaRiver Maritime.
/golfclap
Brian Davis
Exxon refuses to be sucked into this.
Cam
Thanks for letting me know. I’ll get my gas at another station until I find out something bad about that company too. 😉
Dabq
@Mike: Wow, that is interesting news, thanks.
Sam
@Mike / @Dabq
ExxonMobil and most other non-European oil companies still use single hulled ships from time to time – however the EU (wisely) banned heavy crude from being shipped in single hulled vessels in 2003 and fully banned any oil products from being shipped in them in 2005
The global ban has been a bit longer in coming with the worst fuels for spills being banned from being shipped in single hulled ships from 2005 and a global ban on using single hulled ships in 2010 (5 years earlier than planned)
that said, ExxonMobil’s atrocious human rights record is rather sterling compared to one of the US’s biggest oil suppliers – the Saudi Arabian state owned oil company…
dfrw
Not from me it didn’t. I refuse to buy any gas from any company, regardless of the name, that is knowingly Exxon-Mobil.
dfrw
…and it has been that way for years and I will never buy gas there until that policy is changed.
alex
Fill up at Shell. They have the best record. I always do.
Aaron
@Andre:
You must be kidding.
Samwise
Andre, go screw yourself you moronic piece of shit. Oh wait, thats your moms job.
PS
I am disappointed that this comes as news to some people. I haven’t bought gas at a Mobil station since the merger all those years ago, and I have been driving on vapors a few times as I passed them.
Ken
As a shareholder I applaud Exxon Mobile 100%. If you don’t like it shop or work somewhere else
Joanaroo
Some commenters on this topic are hateful and lust for money as shareholders, and to Hell with anyone else. How much you want to bet they are religious GOP members praying in the church of the Almighty Dollar
galefan2004
You fail to see the bigger picture. It has NOTHING to do at all with gay rights. It has EVERYTHING to do with pure hard cash. There is a reason this country makes record profits, and that is because its ran to be a cash cow. If you add OPTIONAL protected classes to your anti-discrimination/harassment wording then you CHOSE to open yourself up to lawsuits you would not legally be open to otherwise. If you add same sex partner benefits then you opened yourself up to having to pay for same sex partner benefits. No company that is focused on making a profit is going to chose to increase its expenditures until the law requires it to do so.
galefan2004
Andre,
When those sheep and children are capable of making an informed consent then I will completely agree with you. Until then, as long as what I choose to bang can give me informed consent I’ll bang it. If you have a problem with that then this probably isn’t the place to voice it unless you like being laughed at and ridiculed. The days when us lowly “sheep banging pedophile equals” (your words not mine) would roll over and take your form of stupidity are over.
David
A company is SUPPOSSED to make money. Get a Klue.
damon459
Well we could all just give up our cars,trucks, and SUV’s hahaha as if. The oil company’s can do what they want and we can’t do a damn thing about it because there is no way a boycott on oil is going to last long enough to be effective it’s like the whole email deal people sent out saying don’t buy gas on such day big deal your just end up buying the day before or the day after. The way to change this is federal protections and that will take a massive grass roots campaign.