Companies Are Getting Back To Business And Backing Away From DEI

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

Classic American companies like John Deere, Harley 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 Davidson, Jack 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.

Related Topics:#DailyCaller #DEI #ESG DevonWesthill

Up Next

Elon Musk slams woke Los Angeles Times for questioning ‘morality’ of having children

Don't Miss

Despite Billions In Backing, Studies Show Diversity Trainings Just Aren’t Working

Todayville

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

US LNG uncertainty is a reminder of lost Canadian opportunities

Automotive / 4 hours ago

Ford Files Patent to Surveil Drivers

espionage / 6 hours ago

Chronic Counter-terrorism Lapses at the Border

Automotive

Ford Files Patent to Surveil Drivers

Published on September 18, 2024

Todayville

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.

Alberta

Alberta government can soften blow of Ottawa’s capital gains tax hike

Published on September 14, 2024

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill

Several wealthy and successful industrialized countries (Switzerland, New Zealand, Singapore) and several U.S. states (including Texas, Alaska, South Dakota, Wyoming) impose no capital gains taxes. Of course, Alberta competes with these U.S. states for investment.

Earlier this year, the Trudeau government increased the inclusion rate on capital gains over $250,000 for individuals and on all capital gains realized by corporations and trusts. This tax hike will almost surely have a negative impact on investment and entrepreneurship, but the Smith government can lessen the blow in Alberta.

In simple terms, capital is money invested in an asset—e.g. a business, factory, intellectual property, stock or bond—to create economic benefit. A capital gain occurs when that investment is sold for more than its original purchase price.

Prior to the tax hike, half the value of a capital gain (50 per cent) was taxed by the government. Trudeau increased this “inclusion rate” to 66 per cent—and that has real economic consequences.

Why? Because capital gains taxes impose comparatively large costs on the economy by reducing the reward from productive activities such as savings, investment, risk-taking and entrepreneurship, which are essential for strong economic growth. Capital taxes are among the most economically damaging forms of taxation for this very reason—they reduce the incentive to innovate and invest.

Take an entrepreneur, for example, who’s deciding whether or not to risk their own capital to provide (and profit from) a new technology, product or service. The higher the capital gains tax, the lower the potential reward from this investment, which means they will be less inclined to make the investment or perhaps undertake the investment elsewhere (another country, for example) in a more tax-friendly environment. Less investment means less innovation, job creation, wage growth and ultimately lower living standards. In other words, Trudeau’s capital gains tax hike will not only hurt Canadians with capital gains but other Canadians who benefit from the knockoff effects of investment.

Largely due to this problem, several wealthy and successful industrialized countries (Switzerland, New Zealand, Singapore) and several U.S. states (including Texas, Alaska, South Dakota, Wyoming) impose no capital gains taxes. Of course, Alberta competes with these U.S. states for investment.

Previous federal governments also understood the disincentive that comes with capital gains taxes. In 2000, the Liberal government of Jean Chretien meaningfully reduced the tax rate applied to capital gains stating that we must “introduce tax measures that encourage entrepreneurship and risk taking.”

Today, fortunately, the Smith government can take action.

When governments tax your capital gain, they include a share of the gain in your personal income and it is taxed at your personal income tax rate. The Alberta government could simply add a step in the tax return process for Albertans to remove capital gains from the provincial income tax calculation. As a result, the capital gains tax would only apply to the federal portion of your income taxes.

The Alberta government doesn’t have to sit back and accept Trudeau’s capital gains tax hike. Eliminating capital gains taxes from the provincial income tax in Alberta would send a powerful message to potential entrepreneurs, investors and businessowners that the province is open for business—and that benefits all Albertans.