Workplace

Amazon will face 15 votes at its shareholder meeting — and likely win them all

The company’s annual shareholder meeting includes a record-high 15 proposals on issues like worker safety and human rights, but Amazon still holds most of the power in today’s votes.

SEATTLE, WASHINGTON - MARCH 10: The Amazon Spheres remains mostly closed to visitors on March 10, 2022 in Seattle, Washington. Most Amazon workers continue to work remotely, and the visitors center remains closed to the public. On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared the coronavirus outbreak a global pandemic, and Seattle was the first U.S. city with a major outbreak. Two years later Washington State is due to finally lift its indoor mask mandate this March 12. (Photo by John Moore/Getty Images)

Tech advocates and workers have embraced the shareholder proposal as a way to publicize their concerns.

Photo: John Moore/Getty Images

Amazon is facing a record-high 15 votes on proposals from activists who want to transform the company’s relationships to its workers and the broader world. The votes will take place at Amazon’s annual shareholder meeting today, but none are likely to succeed despite their popularity with shareholders.

Shareholder resolutions have become increasingly common for a range of specific issues at Amazon over the last few years, and their proponents believe they force the company to pay attention to worker concerns even when the resolutions don’t pass.

The proposals demand reports and changes on issues ranging from working conditions, gender pay differences, contracts with governments that could violate human rights and even the way directors are appointed to the board. Consistent with its historical pattern, Amazon opposes each one of the 15 proposals. The company will likely secure victory in every vote, given its historical success advocating against these proposals and Jeff Bezos’ approximate 10% stake in the company (which gives him about 10% of the vote).

While corporate change advocates have used shareholder proposals since South Africa divestment campaigns in the 1980s, until recent years activists have kept them as mostly supplemental tools. They rarely pass because classes of voting shares and stock ownership usually give boards of directors the power to kill them, even when the proposals are popular with other shareholders.

But over the last few years — largely since 2018 — advocates in the tech space and tech workers themselves have embraced the shareholder proposal as a way to publicize their specific concerns to investors. Most of the proposals still fail, but, for the first time, many of them garner more votes each year they are proposed and some have actually succeeded: Apple, Microsoft and even Amazon have all agreed to conduct different forms of racial equity and civil rights audits in response to shareholder pressure.

The growing popularity of the shareholder proposal has coincided with the rise of environmental, social and governance (ESG) funds and ESG investing, which has exploded in popularity over the last five years. Shareholders now feel empowered to ask for more transparency from companies about climate considerations, worker treatment, human rights and corporate social responsibility.

“There are a lot more people who are wanting to vote their conscience, they want to make money and maximize their investments. That’s driving a lot of it,” Michael Connor, the director of the corporate accountability advocacy group Open Mic, told Protocol.

In late 2021, the Securities and Exchange Commission made it much harder for companies to block social responsibility and climate-related proposals from the annual proxy statement that lists out shareholder votes. Companies will typically ask the SEC to throw out shareholder proposals that could be seen as “micromanagement” of the business, but the new guidance makes it more difficult for companies to successfully argue that social good-related proposals would inappropriately interfere with business decisions.

Amazon’s own proxy statements reflect this historical pattern. In 2018 and the years prior, the statements usually listed only a handful of proposals. These were generally broad in their demands, asking about issues like “sustainability” and “human rights risks” but lacking detailed company specificity. The company’s rebuttal to the proposal averaged anywhere from one sentence recommending against to about a page’s length of explanation.

But in 2019, the number of proposals skyrocketed to 12 and has remained above 10 in the years since, hitting the record-high 15 this year. While some of the proposals are still fairly broad like those commonly seen in earlier years, many of them now discuss specific company products and controversies. The rebuttals from Amazon are correspondingly much more specific, often spanning several pages and including significant amounts of data.

A floor resolution will also be introduced at the meeting by warehouse worker Daniel Olayiwola — who bought more Amazon stock when he realized he could participate in shareholder proposals — asking that Amazon end its use of productivity metrics and workplace surveillance. Olayiwola, who will be the first warehouse worker to present a his own resolution at an Amazon shareholder meeting, has long been angry with Amazon’s productivity expectations and believes the company doesn’t properly value its workforce. But he doesn’t want to quit — he wants the company to change. "A lot of people are like, ‘If you don’t like it, just quit,” he said. “But winners never quit, and quitters never win. I’ve been working at Amazon for years, and I’m still there."

In its three-page rebuttal to a different resolution calling for an independent audit of warehouse working conditions, Amazon urges shareholders to vote against the proposal because “safety is integral to everything we do at Amazon” and the company is transparent about its injury rates and workplace safety data. Olayiwola told Protocol that Amazon has never spoken to him about his particular issues or about this resolution.

Bathool Syed, a strategy manager at Amazon Prime Video, said the same about the resolution she helped introduce that demands a report on whether the company is selling technology to governments conducting human rights violations. The report cites the sale of AWS products to China, Israel and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement as among those particularly concerning because their “history of rights-violating behavior pose risks to the company.”

“I think it’s really unfortunate that Amazon won’t engage,” Syed said. “We brought these honestly with the hope that Amazon would respond. Of course, we may not have been super optimistic that we would receive a response, but we did go into it with the desire to be able to have conversations about this issue, and we would love to still have it.”

“Amazon is combative in a way that others are not. It generally does not respect the shareholder voice,” Connor said. “Amazon by and large does not engage with shareholders. All you have to do is look at their record with employees and all the rest — they are a tough company to do business with. I understand it, but I don’t respect it.”

Amazon pointed Protocol to its 2022 proxy statement when asked for comment. “In a typical year, we will engage with dozens of shareholders, including our largest shareholders, two to three times a year. This outreach is complementary to the hundreds of touchpoints our Investor Relations team has with shareholders each year. We find it beneficial to have ongoing dialogue with our shareholders throughout the year on a full range of investor priorities (instead of engaging with shareholders only prior to our annual meeting on issues to be voted on in the proxy statement),” the company wrote in the proxy statement.

Despite Amazon’s refusal, Connor believes that these resolutions have power because they force investors and the board to consider these issues and evaluate whether they could pose financial risks for the company. For example, in 2021, the New York State Common Retirement Fund proposed a racial equity audit in its shareholder proposal, and the vote earned about 44% in favor. The New York Pension fund then proposed a similar audit for 2022’s vote, but was pre-empted because Amazon announced in April of this year that it would indeed conduct an audit and had hired former New York Attorney General Loretta Lynch to lead the effort.

“That’s not something that can be easily ignored, that’s a big deal,” Connor said. “That’s an example of a shareholder proposal that was filed and has achieved something.”

“If you get 20[%]-30% of a vote, the board of directors knows who you are and they are familiar with that issue,” he said.

Correction: This story was updated May 25, 2022, to include the correct proposal from Daniel Olayiwola.

Every day, millions of us press the “order” button on our favorite coffee mobile application. When we arrive at the coffee shop, we expect that our chosen brew will be on the counter a few minutes later. It’s a personalized, seamless experience that we have all come to expect. What we don’t know is what’s happening behind the scenes. The mobile application is sourcing data from a database that stores information about each customer and what their favorite coffee drinks are. It is also leveraging event-streaming data in real time to ensure the ingredients for your personal coffee are in supply at your local store.

Applications like this power our daily lives, and if they can’t access massive amounts of data stored in a database as well as streaming data “in motion” instantaneously, you, and millions of customers, won’t have the in-the-moment experiences we all expect.

Keep Reading Show less
Jennifer Goforth Gregory
Jennifer Goforth Gregory has worked in the B2B technology industry for over 20 years. As a freelance writer she writes for top technology brands, including IBM, HPE, Adobe, AT&T, Verizon, Epson, Oracle, Intel and Square. She specializes in a wide range of technology, such as AI, IoT, cloud, cybersecurity, and CX. Jennifer also wrote a bestselling book The Freelance Content Marketing Writer to help other writers launch a high earning freelance business.
Policy

How the internet got privatized and how the government could fix it

Author Ben Tarnoff discusses municipal broadband, Web3 and why closing the “digital divide” isn’t enough.

The Biden administration’s Internet for All initiative, which kicked off in May, will roll out grant programs to expand and improve broadband infrastructure, teach digital skills and improve internet access for “everyone in America by the end of the decade.”

Decisions about who is eligible for these grants will be made based on the Federal Communications Commission’s broken, outdated and incorrect broadband maps — maps the FCC plans to update only after funding has been allocated. Inaccurate broadband maps are just one of many barriers to getting everyone in the country successfully online. Internet service providers that use government funds to connect rural and low-income areas have historically provided those regions with slow speeds and poor service, forcing community residents to find reliable internet outside of their homes.

Keep Reading Show less
Aditi Mukund
Aditi Mukund is Protocol’s Data Analyst. Prior to joining Protocol, she was an analyst at The Daily Beast and NPR where she wrangled data into actionable insights for editorial, audience, commerce, subscription, and product teams. She holds a B.S in Cognitive Science, Human Computer Interaction from The University of California, San Diego.
Fintech

How I decided to exit my startup’s original business

Bluevine got its start in factoring invoices for small businesses. CEO Eyal Lifshitz explains why it dropped that business in favor of “end-to-end banking.”

"[I]t was a realization that we can't be successful at both at the same time: You've got to choose."

Photo: Bluevine

Click banner image for more How I decided series

Bluevine got its start in fintech by offering a modern version of invoice factoring, the centuries-old practice where businesses sell off their accounts receivable for up-front cash. It’s raised $767 million in venture capital since its founding in 2013 by serving small businesses. But along the way, it realized it was better to focus on the checking accounts and lines of credit it provided customers than its original product. It now manages some $500 million in checking-account deposits.

Keep Reading Show less
Ryan Deffenbaugh
Ryan Deffenbaugh is a reporter at Protocol focused on fintech. Before joining Protocol, he reported on New York's technology industry for Crain's New York Business. He is based in New York and can be reached at rdeffenbaugh@protocol.com.
Enterprise

The Roe decision could change how advertisers use location data

Over the years, the digital ad industry has been resistant to restricting use of location data. But that may be changing.

Over the years, the digital ad industry has been resistant to restrictions on the use of location data. But that may be changing.

Illustration: Christopher T. Fong/Protocol

When the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade on Friday, the likelihood for location data to be used against people suddenly shifted from a mostly hypothetical scenario to a realistic threat. Although location data has a variety of purposes — from helping municipalities assess how people move around cities to giving reliable driving directions — it’s the voracious appetite of digital advertisers for location information that has fueled the creation and growth of a sector selling data showing who visited specific points on the map, when, what places they came from and where they went afterwards.

Over the years, the digital ad industry has been resistant to restrictions on the use of location data. But that may be changing. The overturning of Roe not only puts the wide availability of location data for advertising in the spotlight, it could serve as a turning point compelling the digital ad industry to take action to limit data associated with sensitive places before the government does.

Keep Reading Show less
Kate Kaye

Kate Kaye is an award-winning multimedia reporter digging deep and telling print, digital and audio stories. She covers AI and data for Protocol. Her reporting on AI and tech ethics issues has been published in OneZero, Fast Company, MIT Technology Review, CityLab, Ad Age and Digiday and heard on NPR. Kate is the creator of RedTailMedia.org and is the author of "Campaign '08: A Turning Point for Digital Media," a book about how the 2008 presidential campaigns used digital media and data.

Latest Stories
Bulletins