Home

Posts Tagged ‘Shareholder Resolutions’

Jesuit Success on Human Rights at O-M Group

Wednesday, December 28th, 2011 by Dan Apfel, Executive Director

O-M group recently announced a new human right’s policy after dialogue with Jesuits from around the country, including Loyola University of Chicago. Special thanks to Fr. Kafarhire who is a member of the Shareholder Advocacy Committee at Loyola.

(Dec-20) The Jesuit Conference of the United States said it was encouraged by today’s announcement that OM Group (NYSE: OMG) approved a corporate human rights policy on November 15. Jesuits have been engaged with the company since October 2007 on issues related to safety concerns of artisanal (hand) miners around the company’s cobalt smelter in Lubumbashi, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Jesuits and other religious investors asserted the need for a comprehensive human rights policy and operational guidance to identify, prevent, mitigate and account for adverse human rights impacts.

“We appreciate the commitment OM Group has put forth in recognizing the risks that their cobalt operations pose in the DRC,” said John Sealey, provincial assistant for international ministries and socially responsible investing representative for the Chicago-Detroit Province. “And in turn, the adoption of a human rights policy reflects their commitment to mitigate safety concerns for the people of the DRC and protect shareholder value.”

“We believe that this is a good beginning but there is much work to be done to make this human rights policy comprehensive,” said John Kleiderer, policy director for the Jesuit Conference of the United States. “We look forward to the opportunity to work closely with OM Group on its implementation and to have an ongoing dialogue around their human rights performance.”

Sealey noted, “OM Group is a good corporate citizen in the DRC with the smelter operating according to high technical and safety standards. Additionally, the company provides good wages and regularly contributes to local charities. However, global expectations of businesses to respect human rights also confer a responsibility on the company to have its joint venture partners remediate human rights risks like the unsafe conditions around the Lubumbashi smelter where artisanal miners are routinely injured.”

A significant source of OM Group’s cobalt is from the DRC. Jesuit representatives from the United States and Europe visited Lubumbashi multiple times and were concerned to learn of the safety hazards posed by the company’s adjacent property belonging to the OM Group’s joint venture partner. In 2007, three children were killed when a large mound of material collapsed on them.

The Chicago-Detroit Province of the Society of Jesus was the lead filer of a 2011 shareholder proposal petitioning the company to create a human rights policy that conforms to standards set forth by the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. The proposal received 43% support of the shares voted at the OM Group annual meeting held May 10, 2011. Endorsed by the United Nations Human Rights Council this summer after six years of development, the Guiding Principles now set the authoritative framework to respect human rights for all business enterprises, both transnational and others, regardless of their size, sector, location and operational context, ownership and structure.

The Jesuit-led shareholder proposal was co-filed by nine other Jesuit provinces in the United States and Canada, Loyola University Chicago, Regis High School (New York), Creighton Prep, Catholic Health East, Mercy Investment Services, Inc. and the Ursuline Sisters of Tildonk. Additionally, this engagement received assistance from the Jesuit-run Center for Social Action (CEPAS) in Kinshasa and the Jesuit European Office (OCIPE).

Anna Bradley, Jesuit Conference consultant on socially responsible investing, noted “the shareholder coalition particularly benefited from the participation of Jesuit Father Murhula Kafarhire of the Central Africa Province and a citizen of the DRC. At the 2009 annual shareholders meeting, Fr. Kafarhire stated shareholders’ concerns maintaining that mitigation of human rights risks will benefit all stakeholders and serve to create a competitive advantage for the company.”

OM Group, headquartered in Cleveland, Ohio, is the world’s leading producer of cobalt-based specialty chemicals. Cobalt is a small but essential component of many electronic devices. In August, the company completed its acquisition of Vacuumschmelze GmbH & Co. KG of Hanau, Germany. The combined companies will have approximately 6400 employees and operate manufacturing facilities in the Americas, Europe, Asia and Africa.

In addition to the work with OM Group, the Jesuits were the lead shareholder proponents in the engagements that led to corporate human rights policies by Chevron, Occidental Petroleum and Monsanto.

Links:
Original press release here.

National Jesuit Committee on Investment Responsibility: www.njcir.org

OM Group’s Human Rights Policy: http://www.omgi.com/ir-cg-human-rights.html

Share and Enjoy:
  • Facebook
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • del.icio.us
  • TwitThis
  • Google
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • Print this article!

Join REC at PowerShift 2011: Register Now!

Friday, March 25th, 2011 by Martin Bourqui, National Organizer

by Brett Vetterlein, Community Investment Campaign Organizer

This Sunday is the final day to register for PowerShift 2011, a conference sponsored by the Energy Action Coalition (a partner group of REC), dedicated to furthering the youth climate movement. The conference has taken place every other year since 2007. At the inaugural PowerShift, political leaders like Nancy Pelosi and Van Jones addressed the crowd of over 6,000 promoting economic and environmental justice with the creation of millions of “green jobs.” Students left the conference and began organizing politically around green-collar jobs and clean energy, looking toward the 2008 elections. However, the momentum did not stop there. In 2009, a group of 12,000 members of the movement got together in Washington, DC to discuss, learn, and create campaigns to bring back to their communities. Here, thousands of students engaged in the Capitol Climate Action, successfully shutting down Washington DC’s coal-fired power plant.

This year students, organizers, entrepreneurs, workers, youth from all walks of life reconvene once again. This time the goal is to create a comprehensive strategy that will be able to be implemented by attendees across the country. The focus will be much more centered on movement building than ever before, working on three main campaigns: “Catalyzing the Clean Energy Economy,” “Campus Climate Challenge 2.0,” and “Beyond Dirty Energy.” Attendees will attend workshops to gain the skills necessary for launching these campaigns on their campuses and in their communities.

The Responsible Endowments Coalition is just one of 50 partner organizations involved with the Energy Action Coalition (EAC), promoting social, economic, and environmental justice. However, most of these organizations are more traditional environmental groups, organizing campaigns around clean energy on campus or creation of green jobs, REC has a slightly different and complimentary approach. While the work of the EAC on the ground is vastly important to the success of the youth climate movement, REC likes to hit people where it hurts: their wallets. REC campaigns on university campuses have the potential to shift large millions of dollars away from destructive environmental practices and towards alternative energy. Institutional investors have successfully filed resolutions to work towards a cleaner future with banks and companies including JP Morgan Chase, XTO Energy, ExxonMobil, and ConocoPhillips. Universities are institutional investors and can have the same power when filing a resolution to promote alternative energy. Most notably, in 2010 Loyola University of Chicago filed a resolution with JP Morgan Chase concerning financing of mountain top removal, an extremely environmentally hazardous form of coal mining in Appalachia.

Climate change is a real problem that can only be stopped by us. We need people on the ground demanding for green jobs, reduced carbon emissions, and clean air and water for all. But we also need people on campuses pressuring their universities to take a stand with their money, using their considerable wealth to say to the corporations practicing mountain top removal and offshore drilling, pumping our air full of dangerous carbon emissions that they need to give us something better. So join REC and the EAC at PowerShift 2011, This could very well be the 11th hour.

For more information and to register for PowerShift 2011 visit http://www.powershift2011.org.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Facebook
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • del.icio.us
  • TwitThis
  • Google
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • Print this article!

The decline of publicly traded companies – and what it means for us

Tuesday, February 15th, 2011 by Martin Bourqui, National Organizer

Today’s #1 most-emailed op-ed on the New York Times explores the decline of the stock market as a common investment, and what it means for the way we influence our own investments.

Only the biggest and oldest companies are happy being listed on public markets today. As a result, the stock market as a whole increasingly fails to reflect the vibrancy and heterogeneity of the broader economy. To invest in younger, smaller companies, you increasingly need to be a member of the ultra-rich elite.

At risk, then, is the shareholder democracy that America forged, slowly, over the past 50 years. Civilians, rather than plutocrats, controlled corporate America, and that relationship improved standards of living and usually kept the worst of corporate abuses in check. With America Inc. owned by its citizens, the success of American business translated into large gains in the stock portfolios of anybody who put his savings in the market over most of the postwar period.

Today, however, stock markets, once the bedrock of American capitalism, are slowly becoming a noisy sideshow that churns out increasingly meager returns. The show still gets lots of attention, but the real business of the global economy is inexorably leaving the stock market — and the vast majority of us — behind.

Committees on investor responsibility and responsible investment activists must recognize that our schools are among the ‘ultra rich elite’ who have the ability to invest outside of the stock market, and we must adapt our strategies accordingly. We must employ new strategies and tools – such as fund manager engagement, new comprehensive responsible investment policies, and community investment – to deal with the changing landscape. The strategies that REC has advocated in for institutions’ stocks, such as proxy voting and shareholder resolutions, will still be important for a long time, but there is much more out there that we can – and will – be doing in the future.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Facebook
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • del.icio.us
  • TwitThis
  • Google
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • Print this article!

Colleges and Universities Should Join Major Institutional Investors in Voting for Annual Say on Pay

Tuesday, February 1st, 2011 by Dan Apfel, Executive Director

The Dodd-Frank financial reform bill requires a mandatory vote on whether advisory say on pay votes, which allow shareholders to approve or disapprove of executive compensation decisions, should occur every one, two or three years. Major institutional investors representing over $800 million in assets are calling for voters to vote for an annual referendum.

Colleges and universities, which promote open and informed dialogue in society, should vote alongside these investors in favor of an annual vote. Multi-stakeholder committees on investor responsibility often vote only environmental and social resolutions but say on pay is a matter that has social and governance implications, and one institutions of higher education should take seriously, and refer to their committees.

According to the release from AFSCME and Walden Asset Management, supporters of the annual votes include CalPERS, the New York State Common Retirement Fund, NYCERS, F&C Asset Management (U.K.), Hermes (U.K.), the General Board of Pension and Health Benefits of the United Methodist Church, Calvert Asset Management, Pax World and Amalgamated Bank. Mutual fund companies State Street, Vanguard, Fidelity and Putnam all have announced they will support these votes as well.

According to the release and statement:

“Unchecked and unapproved CEO pay directly contributed to the financial crisis,” said Gerald W. McEntee, President of AFSCME, which was the first sponsor of a shareholder resolution promoting an advisory vote on pay. “Companies with problematic pay practices or a history of ignoring shareholders will be seeking fewer votes. That’s why shareowners need to vote for annual say on executive pay.”

Timothy Smith, Senior Vice President of Walden Asset Management stated, “This will be a unique proxy season on executive compensation. Addressing excesses and problems with executive compensation requires a vote each and every year rather than occasional accountability every three years. Say on Pay votes have already stimulated re-thinking by Board Compensation Committees on various perks and controversial pay formulas. The discipline of an annual vote will encourage Boards to be more responsive and accountable on compensation.”

Read the full statement.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Facebook
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • del.icio.us
  • TwitThis
  • Google
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • Print this article!

Investors Take on Oil and Gas Companies’ Fracking Practices

Friday, January 21st, 2011 by admin

Investors led by the Investor Environmental Health Network and CERES filed resolutions on improving hydraulic fracturing practices. The risks of fracking are still being discovered, and while many believe that the practice shouldn’t move forward until then, it already is. Investors are standing up to say companies should at least be be worried about the environmental risks of the practice.

According to the release:

“High profile water contamination incidents, new litigation, and public protests that include calls for moratoria on natural gas permitting all suggest sizeable and rising business risks to companies and attendant threats to shareholder value,” said Richard Liroff, executive director of the Investor Environmental Health Network (IEHN), which helped coordinate the resolutions. “Shareholders need assurance that companies are candidly disclosing these risks and are adopting best management practices to minimize them.”

Investors filing the resolutions include the New York State Comptroller (Cabot Oil & Gas, Carrizo Oil & Gas), Domini Social Investments (Southwestern Energy), As You Sow (ExxonMobil and Ultra Petroleum), Trillium Asset Management (Anadarko), Miller/Howard Investments (El Paso and Energen), and The Sisters of St. Francis of Philadelphia (Chevron). Cabot Oil & Gas, Carrizo Oil & Gas, El Paso, Southwestern and Ultra Petroleum are headquartered in Houston; Energen is based in Birmingham, Alabama; Anadarko in The Woodlands, Texas; Exxon Mobil in Irving Texas, and Chevron in San Ramon, California.

Read the whole release at IEHN .

Share and Enjoy:
  • Facebook
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • del.icio.us
  • TwitThis
  • Google
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • Print this article!

University of California Violating Own Proxy Voting Rules

Monday, September 27th, 2010 by Dan Apfel, Executive Director

About a week ago, the New York Times published an article U.C. Proxy Voting Skirts Guidelines, Documents Show explaining how the University of California investment office has been voting against social and environmental resolutions. The article explains how the university “prides itself as a leader on social and environmental issues,” yet acts in a highly contradictory way. It’s exciting and highly encouraging news that even the Times recognizes the importance of proxy voting and the U.C. system’s paradoxical behavior, but unfortunate that an environmental leader in so many ways is such a laggard in this crucial aspect.

REC has been supporting the University of California Responsible Investment Coalition (UCRIC) to change the university’s proxy voting and investment policies for four years. According the UC system policy, the university should be reviewing each vote case-by-case, which they aren’t doing. They need to be, rather than paying a proxy voting service.

Of equivalent significance in the article, though, was the university investment office response to the criticism. According to the Times “Melvin Stanton, the university’s associate chief investment officer, said in an e-mail that U.C. focused primarily on growing its investments,” and quoted him saying that their was no evidence of improved value to companies, implying that there is no reason to be proxy voting.

While Stanton and the U.C. investment office believe they are doing the best for shareholder value, pension funds and other institutional investors are leaving them behind on proxy voting and their positions on environmental and social issues in general.

Long-term investors who aren’t environmental leaders in other areas, like pension funds and managers CalPERS and NYCERS in the US, and Norges Bank and ABP in Europe, have started taking environmental, social and governance factors into their investment decisions, including proxy voting, realizing the long-term potential benefits to their entire portfolios and beneficiaries, as well as society at large.

At the same time, Associate C.I.O. Melvin Stanton would rather not engage on these issues, even in the forum of proxy voting. It is a shame for the University of California to be such a leader on one front, to be such an outspoken laggard on another.

Our message to Mr. Stanton; you can hope that your 5,000 company holdings do well once they destroy the resources that they collectively depend on, or you can become a leader on these issues, and really teach the rest of the world that you can make money while being concerned about your impacts!

If you’re reading this, please feel free to reach out to us at the Responsible Endowments Coalition for some help.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Facebook
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • del.icio.us
  • TwitThis
  • Google
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • Print this article!

Meeting America’s “Most Respected Bankers”

Friday, May 21st, 2010 by Dan Apfel, Executive Director

Loyola University Chicago, REC, and allies take on JPMorgan on Mountaintop Removal Coal Mining

At 10:15 AM on Tuesday, May 18th, I entered One Chase Plaza, JP Morgan Chase’s world headquarters with representatives from Loyola University Chicago, Swarthmore College, Rainforest Action Network, and Waterkeeper Alliance, for the annual shareholder meeting.

Outside, Reverend Billy and the Stop Shopping Gospel Choir marched in green robes, calling on the bank to stop financing mountaintop removal coal mining.  Inside, people waited to hear from Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan’s CEO, and one of the most “respected” bankers in the US, and to say their piece about what JPMorgan is and should be doing.

For the last few years, JPMorgan Chase has been one of the largest financers of mountaintop removal coal mining in America. Mountaintop removal mining is a horrible practice that levels mountains, pollutes water supplies, and tears apart the fabric and resources of communities in central Appalachia in West Virginia and Kentucky. Even the coal mining companies have said that it can’t be done without violating the regulations and permitting of the EPA and other government agencies.

So how did we get here, to the center of corporate America?

Loyola University Chicago, a Jesuit university, set up a shareholder advocacy committee three years ago to engage with the companies that their endowment has stock in around issues of sustainability and social responsibility.

Last fall, Loyola filed a resolution with support from the Responsible Endowments Coalition, the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility, and other allies asking for JPMorgan to report on their financing of mountaintop removal and to implement a policy stopping it. Though omitted by the SEC Loyola continued the dialogue, engaging JPMorgan’s senior management and encouraging them to change.  In our dialogue, the company agreed to publish a statement, but then backed away. It seemed like they were thinking, “Why should the most profitable bank in the country listen to these people?”

But on the Monday before the meeting, JPMorgan published its first statement on mountaintop removal, both a big victory for Loyola, REC, and our allies, and a step forward for JPMorgan. In the policy, the company said that they no longer financed the practice, but didn’t commit to a verifiable practice.

JPMorgan Chase needs a transparent and verifiable way to completely stop financing companies that are engaged in mountaintop removal coal mining.

At the shareholder meeting,, we confronted Jamie Dimon, demanding a stronger policy in front of fellow shareholders of JPMorgan, and received cheers from the audience for our comments and questions. Even at a meeting of many loyal shareholders, attendees knew which way the wind was blowing.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Facebook
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • del.icio.us
  • TwitThis
  • Google
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • Print this article!

Big Banks Finance Mountaintop Removal; Devastate Communities and the Environment

Tuesday, April 6th, 2010 by Mary Schellentrager, Mid-Atlantic Student Organizer

I have dreamed on this mountain
Since first I was my mother’s daughter
And you can’t just take my dreams away – not with me watching.
You may drive a big machine
But I was born a great big woman
And you can’t just take my dreams away – not with me fighting!
–Holly Near, Mountain Song

Mountaintop removal (MTR) is an incredibly destructive process that clearcuts forests, decimates mountains, and ruins ecosystems. Communities around MTR sites have experienced severe health consequences from the processes’ waste materials – toxic metals and chemicals that coal companies dump into surrounding streambeds. People in these areas experience high flood risks, have lost access to clean and safe drinking water, and have astonishingly high rates of lung cancer, chronic heart, lung, and kidney diseases, and even death. For more information on how companies extract coal from thin seams in the mountains, and how MTR destroys communities and ecosystems, check out Mountain Justice’s explanation of the process.

There’s no question that mountaintop removal is bad for the environment, contributing 25-30% of greenhouse gas emissions each year despite providing only 7% of the United States’ coal. Surface mining has leveled 7% of all Appalachian forests since 1992. Proponents of mountaintop removal will argue that it creates jobs and generates revenue for low-income communities. This claim is true, as investigated in a 2009 report by West Virginia University. The researchers found that the coal industry generates $8 billion per year for Appalachia. However, the estimated cost of deaths attributed to MTR mining totals $42 billion per year, which outweighs the economic benefit five times over. And this is only the cost of deaths, not accounting for cancers and other diseases caused by the process.

This is a mountaintop removal site in WV that sits next to Marsh Fork Elementary.  Coal dust contaminates the school and endangers the students' and overall community's health.

The Role of the US Government in MTR

President Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency has the power to end this destructive process but refuses to take a tough stand against mountaintop removal, preferring to try to make the process more environmentally friendly. On April 1, the EPA announced it would strengthen environmental permitting requirements for MTR, clarify how the agency uses the Clean Water Act to reduce water pollution and the resultant human health impacts, and increase transparency in the process of granting mining permits. This is a step in the right direction, but the EPA’s focus on making surface mining safer is problematic in its impossibility. The MTR process inherently violates the Clean Water Act and will continue to be devastating to people and communities even if some aspects of it are changed. The Obama Administration must start caring about Appalachian communities more than corporate campaign donations. This priority shift would surely motivate the EPA to bring an end to the practice of mountaintop removal altogether.

The Corporate Offenders Who Engage in MTR

Massey Energy is the largest producer of coal in Appalachia, having extracted more than 21 million tons from mountains in 2008. They violated the Clean Water Act over 4,500 times (environmental activists estimate closer to 12,000) between 2000 and 2006 by dumping toxic sediment from their 12 surface mines into rivers. The EPA filed suit against Massey and they were ultimately fined $20 million. This case calls attention to the process of mountaintop removal and how its impossible not to violate provisions of the Clean Water Act as surface mining is currently practiced.

Peabody Coal is the world’s largest coal mining company, operating in Arizona, Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, New Mexico, Tennessee and Wyoming. For four decades the US Government has assisted Peabody in attempts to force Navajo families off their ancestral homelands on Big Mountain and the surrounding communities around Black Mesa in Arizona. The communities continue to resist the forced relocation and construction of the Kayenta Mine.

Arch Coal is the second largest supplier of coal in the US and owner of the controversial Spruce Mine, the largest permitted site yet for MTR, in West Virginia. The mine was originally proposed in 1998 as a 3,100 acre expansion of another site that would have buried 10 miles of streams. Arch’s revised proposal from 2007 scaled the project back to encompassing 2,300 acres and 7 miles of streams. The company did obtain a permit from the US Army Corps of Engineers three years ago, which environmental groups have been fighting since. The EPA is considering shutting down the entire mine for “unacceptable adverse impact,” which it has the power to do under the Clean Water Act but has only done 12 times since 1970 and never when the mine has had a permit. In response, Arch Coal is suing the EPA .

Alpha Natural Resources recently merged with US mining company Foundation Coal to become the third-largest coal producer in the US. They now operate 40 surface mines and 14 coal preparation plants in Colorado, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

The Banks that Finance Coal Companies & Make MTR Possible

Citibank has lent billions to companies seeking to build new coal-fired power plants and companies that engage in mountaintop removal, such as Massey Energy, Foundation Coal, and Alpha Natural Resources. They recently released a policy for environmental due diligence regarding MTR. Other banks have less extensive ties, such as Wells Fargo who recently stopped investing in Massey Energy.

Bank of America used to be the biggest bank funder of mountaintop removal, helping finance $6 billion for Peabody Coal and $175 million for Massey Energy in 2006. They single-handedly invested $835 million in Foundation Coal in 2006, $700 million in Arch Coal over five years starting in 2006, and over $500 million in Alpha Natural Resources in 2005. Bank of America has since changed their coal policy to “phase out financing of companies whose predominant method of extracting coal is through mountain top removal.” Their use of “predominant” means their policy only applies to companies that engage in surface mine extraction as at least 50% of their overall operations. It has led them to decline deals with an estimated three companies so far, information about which has not been publicly released by the bank. Many claim that Bank of America has stopped financing MTR, which is false. They still falsely believe that the process “can be conducted in a way that minimizes environmental impacts.”

Activists protest Bank of America's funding of mountaintop removal, eventually pressuring them to stop investing in companies whose primarily business is MTR.

JP Morgan Chase has recently become the largest financier of mountaintop removal. Over the past 17 years they have helped underwrite nearly 20 bond or loan deals worth a combined $8.5 trillion. In 2009 they invested $600 million in Arch Coal, which mined 4.7 million tons of coal from mountaintops that year. In 2008 they acted as the lead manager on a $690 million bond offering to Massey Energy. They are the only mega bank that has not scaled down its investment in MTR in the past few years.

Activist zombies (because coal kills!) protest JP Morgan Chase for it's financing of huge coal companies' MTR projects.

None of these banks have changed their policies willingly. Every victory for mountain communities and ecosystems represents years of struggle by social justice, environmental, and community groups. Shareholder resolutions have been a successful tactic to change coal companies’ policies. The Shareholder Advocacy Committee at Loyola University in Chicago filed a resolution with JP Morgan Chase after students traveled to Appalachia and witnessed the devastation of mountaintop removal firsthand. The resolution asks the bank to publicly report on the impact of MTR mining by clients and the financial impact on the bank if it were to ban MTR financing. Boston Common Asset Management has filed another resolution that demands that Chase adhere to their signature on the 2008 Carbon Principles Agreement, which would improve environmental impact disclosure and ultimately shift more funding into sustainable energy projects. If your school is invested in JP Morgan Chase you could get them to file a resolution to increase public pressure on the company. If you’d like to find out if you are invested, or for more information on filing a resolution, REC can help! Email us at info@endowmentethics.org. If you’re not part of an institution, think about where you keep your money and how you might be supporting MTR through your bank account. If you have an account with JP Morgan Chase, or another of the big banks who finance MTR, consider moving your money to a local credit union or community development bank and tell your old bank you switched because of their investments in mountaintop removal.

In addition to utilizing shareholder resolutions, justice groups have put pressure on JP Morgan Chase and other banks that invest in MTR through protests and direct actions. Coal River Mountain Watch is a grassroots Appalachian group that works to end MTR and rebuild sustainable communities, the Rainforest Action Network is running a campaign against Chase, the Sierra Club is running a Beyond Coal campaign, and Mountain Justice brings young activists to Appalachia during the spring and summer to engage in direct actions such as sit-ins in the West Virginia Governor’s office and pickets at Massey Energy headquarters. Recently the Church of Life After Shopping dumped toxic dirt from MTR sites in West Virginia outside JP Morgan Chase’s New York headquarters and other branches throughout the city. You could plan a similar action against Chase (or another financier) in your community by handing our fliers to customers, holding a sit-in inside a branch, or organizing a speaker or a rally to educate those around you about the devastation caused by mountaintop removal.

The Church of Life After Shopping dumps toxic dirt from a WV mountaintop removal site outside Chase's New York headquarters.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Facebook
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • del.icio.us
  • TwitThis
  • Google
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • Print this article!