British pharmaceutical firm halts diversity initiatives due to Trump directives.
The British pharmaceutical company GSK has decided to pause its diversity initiatives for employees in the UK, stating that it feels compelled to do so due to directives from former US President Donald Trump. GSK has also removed mentions of “diversity” from its website. The company is led by Emma Walmsley, one of the few women in charge of a FTSE 100 company.
When Donald Trump began his second term, he targeted efforts aimed at increasing the representation of minority groups in workplaces. His executive orders attempted to prevent federal agencies and contractors from setting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) goals. These orders have faced legal challenges in US courts, but many American companies, such as Goldman Sachs, Walmart, McDonald’s, Ford, Amazon, and Meta, have rushed to eliminate their diversity policies. Recently, BlackRock, the largest investment firm in the world, announced it would also stop having specific goals for increasing minority representation in its workforce.
Despite being a British company listed on the London Stock Exchange and based in London, GSK chose to align its policies with these US executive orders. Internal communications within GSK indicated that because the US is its largest market and main customer, the company felt it necessary to make these changes. GSK argued that complying with these orders could even allow for larger pay packages for executives, with Walmsley potentially earning nearly £22 million in three years to stay competitive with US companies.
GSK’s decision to pause diversity efforts stands in contrast to its British competitor AstraZeneca, which has not modified its diversity policies despite also having a significant employee presence in the US. Currently, GSK is reviewing all its diversity and inclusion policies, which has led to a halt in various related activities. However, it seems that efforts to enhance diversity in clinical trials, which are important for understanding how drugs affect different populations, will continue.
Prior references to “diversity, equity, and inclusion” on GSK’s website have now been simplified to just “inclusion.” Programs such as mentoring groups for women and initiatives aimed at helping students from less advantaged backgrounds in the UK are reportedly on hold, and charitable activities that focus on diversity are under review.
A spokesperson for GSK emphasized the company’s commitment to being an inclusive workplace where employees’ diverse perspectives and experiences are valued. However, they also stated the necessity of complying with laws in the countries where they operate, particularly in the US, explaining the pause on certain activities as a way to review and potentially adjust them.
This decision has sparked concern among some employees at GSK in the UK. Catherine Howarth, the chief executive of ShareAction, a campaign group, expressed disappointment over the company’s actions, stating that this decision may annoy long-term investors and clients. She emphasized that companies that abandon equal opportunity efforts might struggle to attract and retain the best talent in the long run and warned that such a short-sighted approach carries significant risks.
In response to the concerns raised, GSK publicly rejected the negative interpretation of their actions. Legal expert Sarah Tahamtani noted that it is unlikely for a UK employer to be bound by US executive orders. However, she suggested that Trump’s directives might still influence attitudes towards diversity and discrimination, potentially affecting operations in UK companies in the future.
