Ben & Jerry’s has filed one more authorized grievance in opposition to its father or mother firm, the patron items large Unilever, claiming that it sacked Ben & Jerry’s CEO after a standoff on political points.
In its newest grievance, filed late Tuesday in a New York federal court docket, Ben & Jerry’s alleges that Unilever has threatened employees who oppose its efforts to “silence the social mission.”
David Stever had been with Ben & Jerry’s for 34 years—as a tour information, as CMO, after which as CEO. The Vermont-based ice cream model claimed that Stever was not fired for efficiency causes however as a result of he didn’t adjust to Unilever’s requirements on not talking out about political points.
Unilever then “informed the Independent Board” that Stever would get replaced as Ben & Jerry’s CEO on Mar. 3, 2025.
The transfer hindered “the CEO’s duties, purposely undermining Ben & Jerry’s Social Mission and Brand Integrity,” the submitting stated.
Ben & Jerry’s added that Unilever’s management over its social mission had hit “new ranges of oppressiveness.”
A Unilever spokesperson stated the corporate adopted due processes within the removing of Ben & Jerry’s CEO.
“Regrettably, despite repeated attempts to engage the Board and follow the correct process, we are disappointed that the confidentiality of an employee career conversation has been made public,” the spokesperson stated.
Representatives at Ben & Jerry’s didn’t instantly reply to Fortune’s request for remark.
A posh authorized internet
The ice cream model and its a lot bigger father or mother firm have repeatedly sparred over points in current occasions. Ben & Jerry’s was based in 1978 with social causes at its coronary heart.
Even after Unilever purchased Ben & Jerry’s in 2000, the model didn’t draw back from having progressive viewpoints that drifted away from its father or mother firm’s stance. It has spoken out in opposition to GMO substances in its ice cream pints and supported the Black Lives Matter motion, amongst others.
The current clashes started in 2021 when Ben & Jerry’s stated it wouldn’t promote its merchandise within the Israel-occupied West Financial institution. That resulted in buyer anger in opposition to Unilever, which was accused of being anti-Semitic in permitting such a transfer.
The FTSE100 firm, which had a turnover of €61 billion in 2024 and operates in 190 nations, immediately discovered itself in a bind managing the “purpose-led” Ben & Jerry’s social and political takes.
A yr later, Ben & Jerry’s sued Unilever as a result of its father or mother firm deliberate to promote the Israeli operations of Ben & Jerry’s to an area licensee, permitting its ice lotions to proceed to be marketed within the war-torn area. The lawsuit additionally stated Unilever’s transfer would breach its 2000 acquisition deal, which let Ben & Jerry’s proceed with its social mission. The buyer large bought its Israeli Ben & Jerry’s arm in 2022, and Unilever and Ben & Jerry’s settled.
However the friction didn’t finish there. In 2024, Ben & Jerry’s filed a contemporary lawsuit in opposition to Unilever claiming “inappropriate muzzling” when it needed to help Palestinian refugees amid the conflict in Gaza. The submitting stated that Unilever even threatened to dismantle the Ben & Jerry’s board and sue particular person members if Ben & Jerry’s advocated for a cease-fire.
Unilever rejected this declare, arguing it “will defend our case very strongly,” in response to Bloomberg.
In January, Ben & Jerry’s accused Unilever of suppressing its launch of a social coverage assertion as a result of it talked about President Donald Trump. Claims in regards to the model’s CEO being ousted are simply the newest in a stream of authorized complaints.
This complicated David-and-Goliath tussle is unfolding simply as Unilever introduced plans final month to spin off its whole ice cream enterprise, together with Magnum and Ben & Jerry’s, by a triple itemizing.
Ben & Jerry’s founders are reportedly contemplating shopping for the ice cream model again, Bloomberg reported final month. However Unilever stated it “wasn’t for sale” and can be a part of its soon-to-be ice cream entity.
Replace, March 19, 2025: This text has been up to date with a remark from Unilever.
This story was initially featured on Fortune.com
