CA

This company reached a settlement for charges of accounting fraud with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in 2004, agreeing to pay $225 million in restitution to shareholders and corporate governance reforms. [Listed under information due to age of offence]
Source: US SEC (2004)

As listed on the We Mean Business website, this company has committed to the following climate action initiatives: adopt a science-based emissions reduction target.
Source: We Mean Business (2017)

This company has Corporate Social Responsibility claims on its website, mainly in the area of philanthropy.
Source: company website (2014)

This company received a score of 58.1/100 in the Newsweek Green Rankings 2016, which ranks the world's largest publicly traded companies on eight indicators covering energy, greenhouse gases, water, waste, fines and penalties, linking executive pay to sustainability targets, board-level committee oversight of environmental issues and third-party audits. Ranking methodology by Corporate Knights and HIP Investor.
Source: Newsweek (2016)

This company is a member of the Responsible Minerals Initiative (formerly the Conflict-Free Sourcing Initiative), which helps companies address conflict minerals issues in their supply chains. The RMI provides information on conflict-free smelters and refiners, common tools to gather sourcing information, and forums for exchanging best practices on addressing conflict minerals. Membership is open to companies that use or transact in tantalum, tin, tungsten or gold (3TG). Founded in 2008 by members of the Electronic Industry Citizenship Coalition and the Global e-Sustainability Initiative.
Source: RMI (2019)

California, the UK and Australia have all enacted legislation requiring companies operating within their borders to disclose their efforts to eradicate modern slavery from their operations and supply chains. Follow the link to see this company's disclosure statement.
Source: Modern Slavery Registry (2016)

In 2019 the median pay for a worker at this company was US$354,119. The CEO was paid 7 times this amount. Exorbitant CEO pay is a major contributor to rising inequality. CEOs are getting more because of their power to set pay, not because they are increasing productivity or possess specific, high-demand skills. The economy would suffer no harm if CEOs were paid less (or taxed more). In contrast, the CEO-to-typical-worker compensation ratio was 20-to-1 in 1965 and 58-to-1 in 1989. A lower pay ratio could indicate a company is dedicated to creating high-wage jobs and investing in their employees for the company's long-term health.
Source: AFL-CIO (2020)

OpenSecrets.org tracks the influence of money on U.S. politics, and how that money affects policy and citizens' lives. Follow link to see this company's record of political donations, lobbying, outside spending and more.
Source: Open Secrets (2020)