Connect with us

Business

Companies Are Getting Back To Business And Backing Away From DEI

Published

5 minute read

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Devon Westhill

 

Classic American companies like John DeereHarley Davidson and Tractor Supply Co. are finally reevaluating Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives. They are realizing that their consumers, many from rural, midwestern and working-class communities, don’t care for the DEI practices of corporate elites. They just want good service, reliable tractors and badass motorcycles.

The about-face is especially timely as the Supreme Court’s 2023 affirmative action decision prohibiting race-based college admissions has increased scrutiny of private sector DEI practices. This new legal climate, combined with the discovery of problematic DEI programs at major American companies, means that corporations are at long last feeling significant pressure to prioritize excellence and efficiency over faddish diversity metrics.

Companies operating in the free market have one purpose: to provide quality goods and services to consumers in order to make a profit. For too long, much of corporate America has focused on virtue signaling to appease the left’s cultural mandates. Now, business incentives are forcing a return to the bottom line.

The change began in June when conservative commentator Robby Starbuck took to social media to expose companies masquerading as all-American brands with traditional values. He first exposed Tractor Supply’s DEI practices and announced that he would be investigating a list of other companies considered exemplars of Americana.

In response, Tractor Supply customers began boycotting the company, resulting in an 8% decrease in its stock price (a $2.8 billion market value loss) over five days. This led Tractor Supply to announce later that month the termination of its DEI programming. The company promised to stop submitting data for the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate Equality Index and withdrew sponsorship of LGBTQ+ pride events and voting campaigns, calling them “nonbusiness activities.”

Starbuck’s later exposure of John Deere’s DEI policies also caused the company to issue a statement announcing major cutbacks to their DEI programs. Harley DavidsonJack Daniels and Lowe’s followed suit, preemptively terminating their DEI programs and standards.

All of these companies should be commended for abandoning excessive DEI and getting back to business.

Now, instead of requiring costly, time-intensive programs to prove their liberal bona fides, they can focus on delivering results for their customers. Free from worry about optics and bureaucratic compliance, they can hire the most qualified employees and let them rise to the top.

But these decisions are not without their naysayers. DEI proponents have labeled these moves as bullying from far-right extremists and claim that terminating these policies will encourage gender and race discrimination in the workplace.

This hysteria is unwarranted and relies on the absurd claim that without DEI standards, there can be no equality, inclusion or respect in the workplace. Of course, it is crucial that businesses cultivate a culture of respect and dignity. Employees should be educated on their protections and duties regarding civil rights and basic civility in the workplace. All of the companies reversing on DEI have remained committed to fostering respectful, safe cultures for their employees.

In fact, too much corporate DEI can wreak havoc on a company’s morale. In many cases, it can result in scapegoating certain groups of people for grievous wrongs none of them had a hand in committing. It can also lead to damaging intellectual conformity and groupthink. DEI hiring quotas, in particular, can lead to serious legal risk. All of this results in the complete opposite of DEI’s purported goals. Instead, it increases workplace disunity and harms true diversity.

Ultimately, the DEI policies at these classic American companies have proven to only burden corporations, frustrate employees and confuse customers. Companies should prioritize producing better quality products, lowering prices, and offering attractive wages and benefits for all employees, instead of pouring time and money into ineffective policies that do not represent the American values of their customer base. So long, discrimination disguised as diversity.

Devon Westhill is the president and general counsel for the Center for Equal Opportunity.

 

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Business

Feds blow $2.7 million on global film festivals

Published on

From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

Author: Franco Terrazzano 

At the 2024 Cannes Film Festival in France, bureaucrats spent $9,930 on “umbrella stand coordinator services”

The Trudeau government blew more than $2.7 million on high-profile film and music festivals around the world, where they made taxpayer cash rain throwing expensive parties.

All that spending occurred for events that took place during a 16-month period, between January 2023 and May 2024, according to government records obtained by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation.

Bureaucrats attended the Oscars, the Cannes Film Festival in France, the Berlinale film festival in Germany, and the South by Southwest music and film festivals in Austin, Texas and Australia – all on the taxpayer dime.

“Government bureaucrats spent $175,000 a month partying it up at international film and music festivals,” said Franco Terrazzano, CTF Federal Director. “In what world does it make sense for bureaucrats to blow millions of taxpayer dollars on festivals when the government is more than a trillion dollars in debt and record numbers of Canadians are lining up at food banks?”

During South by Southwest festivals, bureaucrats spent $35,000 on plant and furniture rentals for a “Canada House” event, as well as $5,000 on “DJ services” and “animation services.”

An additional $15,000 was spent on a “social media champion” for the Canada House. Food and drink catering costs for a reception, as well as an “opening party” came to $11,700.

The 2023 South by Southwest festival in Australia also had a “Canada House,” with costs totalling at least $97,000. Bureaucrats also expensed $17,000 for an “event coordinator.”

At the 2024 Cannes Film Festival in France, bureaucrats spent $9,930 on “umbrella stand coordinator services.”

During the Berlinale festival, the rental fee for a “Canada Pavilion” came to $74,000.

Additional expenses at the festivals included professional photographers and hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on decoration services.

“Maybe government bureaucrats should figure out how to do basic things, like answering taxpayers’ phone calls, before trying to DJ international parties,” Terrazzano said. “Taxpayers are giving this international film festival party junket two big thumbs down.”

The spending happened at the ministries of Global Affairs Canada and Canadian Heritage, with money also spent by the National Film Board.

All told, the cost to taxpayers came in at $2,798,719, according to the records. The events all occurred during a 16-month period. That means the average spending on the festivals was $174,919 per month.

The government has already earmarked spending for future film and music festivals, with bureaucrats indicating the “plan is to continue to support Canadian talent at these world-class markets,” according to the records.

The details were released in response to an order paper question submitted by Conservative MP Michelle Rempel Garner (Calgary Nose Hill).

Continue Reading

Automotive

Ford Files Patent to Surveil Drivers

Published on

News release from Armstrong Economics

By Martin Armstrong

Governments are pushing the public to switch to smart vehicles to reduce fossil fuel consumption, but there is also a second motive – surveillance.

This September, Ford filed a new patent to eavesdrop on riders. They plan to share this information with third-parties to personalize the advertisements riders hear. Ford will also take the driver’s destination into consideration to determine location-specific advertisements and suggestions. The technology will factor in the weather, traffic, and all external sensors to fine tune when and what to market to passengers.

Advertisements are perhaps the least ominous use of voice data based on the plans that these car manufacturers have. Car insurance rates in the United States spiked 26% in the past year, which is partly due to car manufacturers sharing ride data with insurance companies. Even older cars with basic features like OnStar have tracking devices that report your driving behavior to the manufacturers who share your data with insurance companies and, ultimately, the government. LexisNexis, which tracks drivers’ behaviors and compiles risk profiles, has been sharing individual data with General Motors, who passes that information along to the insurance companies. General Motors.

One driver demanded that LexisNexis send him his personal report, which was a 258-page document containing every trip he or his wife took in his vehicle over a six-month period. LexisNexis said that this data will be used “for insurers to use as one factor of many to create more personalized insurance coverage.” They even reported small issues such as hard breaking and rapid acceleration, according to the report. “I don’t know the definition of hard brake. My passenger’s head isn’t hitting the dash,” an unnamed Cadillac driver enrolled in the OnStar Smart Driver subscription service told reporters.

“Cars have microphones and people have all kinds of sensitive conversations in them. Cars have cameras that face inward and outward,” a researcher with Mozilla Foundation told the Los Angeles Times. In fact, 19 automakers in 2023 admitted that they have the ability to sell your personal data without notice. Law enforcement may subpoena these records as well.

Ford claims that the patent was submitted, but they do not necessarily plan to use the technology. “Submitting patent applications is a normal part of any strong business as the process protects new ideas and helps us build a robust portfolio of intellectual property. The ideas described within a patent application should not be viewed as an indication of our business or product plans. No matter what the patent application outlines, we will always put the customer first in the decision-making behind the development and marketing of new products and services,” Ford said in a statement released to MotorTrend.

Now, the US Department of Transportation is permitted to mandate that certain manufacturers provide them with vehicle data. Sens. Ron Wyden of Oregon and Edward Markey of Massachusetts testified that all vehicles in the United States with a GPS or emergency call system are collecting travel data that car manufacturers have remote access to via the computer chips. The computer chips are compiling data on vehicle speed, movement, travel, and even using exterior sensors and cameras to record the vehicle’s location.

All of this violates the Fourth Amendment which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures without probable cause. These car manufacturers are surpassing what anyone would consider a reasonable expectation of privacy. Governments, third-party advertisement companies, and insurance companies all have warrantless access to personal data, and drivers are largely unaware they are being spied on. Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act permits the government to have backdoor access to this data.

The aforementioned senators’ concerns fell on deaf ears at the Federal Trade Commission. The Department of Transportation clearly is not listed within the US Constitution. People are already experiencing stiff consequences from autos sharing data with the sharp uptick in insurance rates.

Continue Reading

Trending

X