In brief
Anuradha Mittal, recently removed as chair of Ben & Jerry's independent board, claims Magnum threatened to publish defamatory allegations against her if she did not resign. The dispute arises from tensions regarding the brand's independence and its commitment to social causes. Magnum, which spun off from Unilever, argued Mittal no longer met board criteria, leading to her ousting and changes in board governance policies. Mittal described their actions as a 'public smear campaign.'
The ousted chair of Ben & Jerry's has accused the company that owns the brand of threatening to launch a public smear campaign against her.
Anuradha Mittal, who chaired Ben & Jerry's independent board for seven years, told the BBC that Magnum had threatened to publish defamatory statements about her if she did not step down from her role.
This situation is part of an escalating dispute between the Vermont-based ice cream maker and its owner over the independence of the board and its ability to pursue social missions.
Magnum stated they believed Mittal no longer met the criteria to serve on the board following an investigation they commissioned.
In a statement, Magnum outlined changes to the board's operations, including imposing a nine-year limit for members. Alongside Mittal, two other board members will also be required to leave.
Mittal, who has been vocal about maintaining the board's independence, noted that there had been increasing friction over the brand's mission and integrity. She expressed that their actions were part of an effort to "muzzle" them from advocating for human rights.
Magnum, now a leading ice cream maker, took over Ben & Jerry's after Unilever spun off its ice cream unit. This change has intensified ongoing tensions regarding Ben & Jerry's historical social mission and governance.
Magnum's spokesperson claimed their steps aimed to enhance corporate governance while preserving the brand's social mission.
Mittal said she rejected an offer from Magnum for a position in a nonprofit funded by Unilever, calling it inappropriate amidst the threats she faced.
This latest chapter reflects a broader conflict that has seen Ben & Jerry's resisting pressures to abandon its socially driven policy, a legacy founded in its origins back in 1978.
