abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb
Article

2 May 2007

Author:
Bill Baue, SocialFunds

Yes and No: Newmont Recommends Voting For One Resolution, Petitions SEC to Omit Another

Newmont Mining…recommend[ed] voting for a human rights shareowner resolution...…[requesting] a report by a committee of independent board members reviewing the company's global policies and practices addressing "existing and potential opposition from local communities,”...This is the first social resolution supported by a US mining company…The company not only recommended voting against [another] resolution, which addresses environmental and human rights impacts of waste disposal from its Indonesian mines into Buyat Bay, but also had petitioned the SEC for permission to exclude it from its proxy statement…The juxtaposition of a yes recommendation alongside an attempt to suppress a resolution illustrates opposite ends of the spectrum on how companies respond to shareowner resolutions…On the other end of the spectrum, companies continue attempts to block human rights resolutions. For example, Yahoo lobbied to block a resolution…calling for the creation of a Board Committee on Human Rights…[also refers to Boeing, Halliburton, Chevron]