October 26, 2011

NEW YORK – Shareholders of AT&T Inc. have filed a proposal calling for the company “to publicly commit to operate its wireless broadband network consistent with network neutrality principles” that would maintain open access to the Internet on wireless networks.

The filing comes only weeks before implementation of new Federal Communications Commission rules on network neutrality that provide a broad exemption for wireless broadband networks – the fastest growing segment of the Internet.

AT&T has sought in the past to block shareholders from voting on network neutrality issues. A similar shareholder proposal on wireless networks was excluded from AT&T’s 2011 proxy ballot following a Securities and Exchange Commission staff ruling that net neutrality was not a “significant public policy issue.”

The latest AT&T proposal has been filed by institutional investors including the Nathan Cummings Foundation as well as individual investors including Mike D of the Beastie Boys. Unless the proposal is blocked again, it’s expected to be voted on at the company’s annual meeting in April 2012.

“Net neutrality is clearly a material issue of import for AT&T and for the whole country, which is why it’s critical that shareholders be heard,” said Farnum Brown, Chief Investment Strategist for Trillium Asset Management, LLC, an independent investment firm with more than $900 million under management, which represents some of the filers.

According to Laura Campos, director of shareholder activities at the Nathan Cummings Foundation, “This issue has important implications for both social and economic justice and long-term shareholder value. As a shareholder, the Foundation is concerned that over the longer-term, a failure to operate its wireless broadband network in accordance with the principles of network neutrality could negatively impact AT&T’s market share and damage its reputation with consumers.”

The AT&T shareholder proposal cites research by the Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University which concluded that an open Internet accounts for billions of dollars of economic value for Americans.”This economic and social value is an important factor in the growth of our economy and widely diversified investment portfolios,” the proposal states.

The proposal also notes that open Internet policies on wireless networks have particular importance for minority and economically disadvantaged communities. People of color access the Internet via cell phones at a much greater rate than their white counterparts, according to a report by the Pew Internet & American Life Project. “The digital freedoms at stake are a 21st century civil rights issue,” says Colorofchange.org, an organization representing African-Americans, which is cited by the shareholders.

The shareholder proposal calls on AT&T to proactively ensure that its wireless networks remain open and provide equal access and non-discriminatory treatment for all content.“

Maintaining the existing system of net neutrality for our mobile networks is a win-win – its good for economic growth and good for the principles of free expression that underpin our democracy – the greatest platform the world has known for sustainable economic growth,” said Jonas Kron, Deputy Director for Shareholder Advocacy at Trillium.

The shareholder initiative at AT&T was organized by Open MIC – the Open Media and Information Companies Initiative – a nonprofit organization that seeks to inform corporations’ responsible media management practices. “Net neutrality is necessary to insure competition, entrepreneurship, innovation, and free expression in the digital economy,” said Michael Connor, Open MIC’s Executive Director. “That’s why it is so important that the investor voice be heard.”

The complete text of the AT&T wireless network neutrality proposal is available on the Open MIC web site and can be downloaded here (PDF).

For more information about recent net neutrality issues, visit www.openmic.org.

The Open Media and Information Companies Initiative – Open MIC – is a non-profit organization working to promote a vibrant, diverse media ecosystem through market-based solutions. Founded in late 2006, Open MIC is a project of the Tides Center, a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization.

For more information, contact:Michael ConnorExecutive Director212-537-9401mconnor@openmic.orgwww.openmic.org

Each summer, animal activists travel across the country to meet and discuss the latest topics of the animal rights movement. This year, animal agriculture was once again the focus. The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) hosted its annual Taking Action for Animals Conference in Washington, D.C. on July 15-18, and Farm Animal Rights Movement’s Animal Rights 2011 Conference (AR 2011) was held two weeks later on July 21-25 in Los Angeles. Both events claimed to have “record-breaking” attendance, attracting a combined total of more than 1,600 activists from around the world, ranging in age from 20-60 years old.

Securing rights for farm animals and the promotion of a vegetarian or vegan lifestyle to the mainstream public were hot topics at both meetings. Attendees were given tips on how to utilize social media, create “undercover” videos and craft effective messages to share their views with others. Speakers and exhibitors also encouraged aspiring activists to hold demonstrations, signature drives for ballot initiatives and leafleting campaigns.

The largest activist groups attended and sponsored both meetings, although messaging differed between audiences. Nathan Runkle, Executive Director of Mercy For Animals, Erica Meier, Executive Director of Compassion Over Killing, and Gene Baur, President of Farm Sanctuary, spoke at both meetings. They encouraged a more aggressive, physical approach to eliminating animal agriculture at AR 2011, which is seen as the more extremist meeting. For more information about the most active animal rights groups, access the Alliance’s updated activist profile report.

Both conferences discussed a growing embrace of the vegetarian lifestyle in the mainstream media. Speakers used inflated statistics (often citing their own studies) to increase misconceptions about animal agriculture and its effects on the environment and one’s health. The sessions on farm animal rights were the most widely attended at both conferences, with five presentations devoted to the topic including, ”The Global Campaign Against Factory Farming,” “Advances in Farm Animal Protection,” and “Agriculture Campaigns.”

TAFA included a formal vegan banquet with keynote speakers HSUS President and CEO Wayne Pacelle and Congressman Jim Moran (D-Va.). Both speakers stressed the importance of lobbying and having a presence in Washington, D.C. to promote animal rights on Capitol Hill. TAFA and AR 2011 featured an exclusively vegan menu for all guests. It should be noted that, in contrast to the lifestyle choices advocated for by the conference speakers, 97 percent of Americans enjoy meat, milk, and egg products as part of their diet.

Throughout TAFA, HSUS shared examples of celebrities and mainstream media outlets that promote a vegetarian or vegan lifestyle. Though HSUS regularly attempts to portray itself as a mainstream organization, many of its conference speakers and attendees strongly advocate for animal rights. At AR 2011, the recommended tactics discussed were more extreme, including use of violence, sabotage to farms and other illegal actions.

Most people are not aware of these animal activist groups’ true motives to end all animal agriculture and rid the human diet of meat, eggs and dairy. For example, the “Meatless Monday” campaign is marketed as a mainstream idea to cut meat out of the diet for one day a week to improve one’s health and the environment. However, this well-funded campaign was founded by the husband of a wealthy, longtime animal rights activist and it actually pushes an extreme animal rights and environmental agenda by promoting false claims about animal agriculture.

“Meatless Monday” was discussed at both TAFA and AR 2011 by HSUS, Compassion Over Killing, and Mercy for Animals, all who referred to the campaign as a start to a vegetarian or vegan outreach lifestyle. Numerous celebrities, school systems, mainstream media and even cities were mentioned as having joined the campaign. Each presenter claimed that at least 51 percent of the American public is familiar with the “Meatless Monday” campaign, and that 18 percent actively participate, though a source for the statistic was not produced. Josh Balk of HSUS discussed the campaign as a way to not only get people to start eating vegetarian, but to “save 1.4 billion farm animals.”

The new agreement between HSUS and United Egg Producers to seek federal legislation for housing standards for egg laying hens was also discussed at both conferences. Audience members seemed upset about the agreement, noting HSUS “caved” by giving up its cage-free campaign. Others were frustrated because they had devoted time and energy to collecting signatures for the ballot. Kitty Jones, a 17-year-old student, was praised for her individual work of collecting more than 10,000 signatures for the proposed Washington state ballot initiative campaign. On the other hand, some of the activist groups viewed the agreement as a “monumental victory” for HSUS, although some attendees were wary of working with the agriculture industry. HSUS staff asserted that the biggest hurdle would be agricultural lawmakers in Congress.

Farmers and ranchers should educate themselves on the threat these groups represent. Unfortunately, most people are not aware of these extremists groups’ true agenda against animal agriculture. TAFA and AR 2011 showcased animal activists’ real beliefs that are often hidden behind emotionally appealing and celebrity funded public relations campaigns. It is critical that all stakeholders correct the misinformation presented by these activist groups, showcase the wonderful families and businesses involved in farming, ranching and food production and share with the public your commitment to your animals, the environment, food safety and continuous improvement. The Alliance will continue to work to bridge the gap between farmers and consumers to show that while today’s agriculture industry has evolved to meet the needs of society, the same core values remain.

The animal welfare community and the animal-food-producing industry have never been great friends. In fact, bitter enemies would be closer to the truth.

So it came as quite a shock when, on July 10, 2011, the Humane Society of the United States and the United Egg Producers (a voluntary federation of egg-producers in the United States) entered into a landmark agreement to begin to improve the lives of egg-producing chickens.

With Humane Society President and Chief Executive Officer Wayne Pacelle in the lead, the United Egg Producers agreed to some incremental and long ranging changes in the way egg-producing hens are treated.

Currently the least protected of farm animals, chickens are not covered by any Animal Welfare Acts and also are exempt from individual state laws prohibiting cruelty to animals and the federal Humane Methods of Slaughter Act.

As such, chickens are open “game” with regard to their treatment by the egg producing industry. More than 90-percent of egg-laying hens in the United States are housed for life in battery cages. These wire cages only allow approximately 67 square inches of space for several hens packed into the same space.

The failure to provide adequate space prohibits all instinctive or natural behaviors including roosting, dust bathing and, in particular, nesting. Hens instinctively search for private space to lay eggs often crawling under other hens in a valiant search for privacy.

Now, according to a press release from the HSUS, the HSUS and the United Egg Producers will “work together toward the enactment of comprehensive new federal legislation for all 280 million hens involved in U.S. egg production.”

For instance, the proposed legislation will:

· require battery cages be replaced through an ample phase-in period, with new, enriched housing systems that will provide each hen nearly double the amount of space they’re currently allotted. Egg producers will invest an additional $4 billion over the next 15 years to effect this industry-wide make-over;

· require that all egg-laying hens be provided, through the new enriched housing system, with environments that will allow hens to express natural behaviors, such as perches, nesting boxes, and scratching areas;

· mandate labeling on all egg cartons nationwide to inform consumers of the method used to produce the eggs, such as “eggs from caged hens,” “eggs from hens in enriched cages,” “eggs from cage-free hens,” and “eggs from free-range hens”;

· prohibit feed or water-withholding molting to extend the laying cycle, a practice already prohibited by the United Egg Producers Certified program adhered to by a majority of egg farmers;

Although the new agreement may not provide chickens with the ultimate in much-needed expanded space, it “could set a precedent for the cattle/pig/lamb/calf, etc. farmers to follow suit and improve the quality of life of their livestock," according to Newtown resident Susan Kososka, owner of a small chicken flock. "It also helps to elevate the status of food animals and that's good for the general public to see in that they may start to see animals in general in a different light. All my chickens are pets. Around here, if I have my own way, they will all die of old age.”

This agreement also will give consumers a clearer understanding of the confusing labeling now found on commercially packaged eggs. Currently, there are so many different labels on packaged egg cartons it’s almost impossible to determine what they mean.

Here’s where it stands right now:

Certified Humane: The Humane Farm Animal Care (HFAC) is a non-profit organization that certifies the humane treatment of animals raised by meat, poultry, egg or dairy producers. There are only a few egg producers (about 1-percent) who are certified to carry their label.

The label indicates “no cages” and with hens having at least 1.5 square feet of floor space with outside access. Doors to the outside "must allow more than one hen at a time to exit". Forced molting, where hens nearly at the end of their laying are deprived to food, water, and light for days to weeks to produce one more bout of egg-laying is prohibited.

Cage free: This doesn’t necessarily mean that the quality of life for hens is perfect. They can be packed into massive sheds with only a tiny opening to the outdoors. There are no regulations about space requirements inside or out.

Organic certified: Usually means that the hens have access to the outdoors, are fed organic feed with no antibiotics.

Free-range: This means the chickens are allowed to roam outdoors. However, detractors point out that in many instances the doors to the hen sheds are kept closed until the chicks reach an age where they would not choose to go out on their own.

Organic eggs: There are federal regulations governing organic labels. The chickens must be fed organic feed (grown without commercial fertilizers or pesticides), and are not given hormones or antibiotics. However, this label has nothing to do with how the animals are kept.

Confused? So am I. But we live in area where we can do something about this. You can buy a flock of chickens or, easier still, stop on the side of the road in any of several spots in town and buy eggs direct from the local farms.

Not only are they fresh, but you’ll be supporting the local farmers, who treat their chickens well, like Kokoska says, they are “living, breathing beings and as such, deserve as good a quality of life as we can give them.”

Read more here.

United Egg Producers (UEP) and the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) came to an agreement to work together toward the enactment of comprehensive new federal legislation for all 280 million hens involved in U.S. egg production.

The proposed standards advocated by UEP and HSUS, if enacted, would be the first federal law addressing the treatment of animals on farms.

The proposed legislation would:

• require conventional cages (currently used by more than 90 percent of the egg industry) to be replaced, through an ample phase-in period, with new, enriched housing systems that provide each hen nearly double the amount of space they’re currently allotted. Egg producers will invest an additional $4 billion over the next decade and a half to effect this industry-wide make-over;

• require that all egg-laying hens be provided, through the new enriched housing system, with environments that will allow hens to express natural behaviors, such as perches, nesting boxes, and scratching areas;

• mandate labeling on all egg cartons nationwide to inform consumers of the method used to produce the eggs, such as “eggs from caged hens,” “eggs from hens in enriched cages,” “eggs from cage-free hens,” and “eggs from free-range hens”;

• prohibit feed- or water-withholding molting to extend the laying cycle, a practice already prohibited by the United Egg Producers Certified program adhered to by a majority of egg farmers;

• require standards approved by the American Veterinary Medical Association for euthanasia for egg laying hens;

• prohibit excessive ammonia levels in henhouses;

• prohibit the sale of eggs and egg products nationwide that don’t meet these requirements.

The two groups will jointly ask Congress for federal legislation which would require egg producers to increase space per bird in a tiered phase in, with the amount of space birds are given increasing, in intervals, over the next 15 to 18 years. Currently, the majority of birds are each provided 67 square inches of space, with roughly 50 million receiving 48 square inches. The proposed phase-in would culminate with hens nationwide being provided a minimum of 124 - 144 square inches of space, along with the other improvements noted.

“America’s egg producers have continually worked to improve animal welfare, and we strongly believe our commitment to a national standard for hen welfare is in the best interest of our animals, customers and consumers,” said Bob Krouse, chairman of UEP and an Indiana egg farmer. “We are committed to working together for the good of the hens in our care and believe a national standard is far superior than a patchwork of state laws and regulations that would be cumbersome for our customers and confusing to consumers.”

“Passing this bill would be an historic improvement for hundreds of millions of animals per year,” stated Wayne Pacelle, president and CEO of The Humane Society of the United States. “It is always our greatest hope to find common ground and to forge solutions, even with traditional adversaries. We are excited about a new and better pathway forward, and hope the Congress seizes the opportunity to embrace this sort of collaboration and mutual understanding. We extend our thanks to the producers within the industry for agreeing to make the needed investments to upgrade their housing and to improve animal welfare in a meaningful way.”

If passed by Congress, the legislation would supersede state laws including those that have been passed in Arizona, California, Michigan and Ohio. In recognition of ballot Proposition 2 passed by voters in that California in 2008, UEP and HSUS will ask Congress to require California egg producers – with nearly 20 million laying hens – to eliminate conventional cages by 2015 (the date Prop 2 is scheduled to go into effect), and provide all hens with the space and environmental enrichments that the rest of the egg industry will be phasing in over the next 15 to 18 years. These requirements will also apply to the sale of all eggs and egg products in California under the proposed federal legislation.

This agreement to pass comprehensive federal legislation for standards of egg production puts a hold on planned ballot measures related to egg-laying hens in both Washington and Oregon.

Related websites:

United Egg Producers
Humane Society of the United States

April 07, 2011|By Lisa Wangsness, Globe Staff

Two orders of Boston-area nuns are among a small group of investors taking Goldman Sachs to task on executive compensation.

The Sisters of St. Joseph of Boston and the Boston province of the Sisters of Notre Dame de Namur are two of four orders nationally that have signed onto a shareholder proposal asking the investment banking and securities titan to review the salaries of top executives and consider whether they are excessive and should be modified.

Sister Joanne Gallagher of the Sisters of St. Joseph said the filing comports with the order’s policy of promoting “justice, peace, and systemic change’’ in its investment activities.

The 2008 financial crisis provoked considerable public outrage about the compensation of top Wall Street executives and raised questions about their companies’ roles in creating the financial conditions that led to the meltdown. Last year, Goldman’s top five executives received compensation worth a total of almost $70 million.

The proposal, which will be considered at Goldman’s annual shareholders’ meeting on May 6, also asks the company to consider how layoffs and salary levels of low-wage workers affect the salaries of executives and how fluctuations in revenue affect the compensation pool, top-paid workers, and shareholders.

Shareholders overwhelmingly rejected a similar proposal last year.

Goldman opposes the filing. In its proxy statement, the company said shareholders “already have access to the information necessary to understand and assess the compensation decisions made with respect to our senior executives.’’ It added that generating the reports the filers seek would be a distraction to the firm’s compensation board.

Two other orders of Catholic nuns and Daniel Altschuler, an independent investor who is a fellow at Amherst College, have also joined the proposal. The effort was led by the Nathan Cummings Foundation, a New York-based nonprofit with a $400 million endowment that funds arts, culture, environmentalism, Jewish life, and other programs and uses its position as an institutional investor to encourage responsible corporate behavior.

All are associated with the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility, whose 300 or so members use their status as investors to promote environmental responsibility, social justice, and sound corporate governance, including ending what it deems excessive executive pay.

Shareholder pressure can be effective. Goldman was among 100 or so companies asked by pension funds, trade unions, investment managers, and faith-based investors to give shareholders an opportunity to vote on the compensation of top executives. Goldman ultimately agreed; later, the so-called “say on pay’’ provision became part of the financial overhaul package passed by Congress.

Timothy Smith, senior vice president of Walden Asset Management, oversees the investment portfolios of the Sisters of St. Joseph and Notre Dame de Namur, as well as Altschuler. He said both orders own fewer than 100 shares of Goldman stock.

He said that even if the proposal does not pass, it has gotten Goldman’s attention. “The votes may not be large, but we believe this resolution and others are pushing the executive compensation committee to take those issues seriously,’’ he said.

Lisa Wangsness can be reached at lwangsness@globe.com.