Ben & Jerry’s Claims Unilever Targets CEO Over Social Mission Clash

Unilever’s Move Sparks Legal Dispute with Ice Cream Subsidiary

Ben & Jerry’s has accused its parent company, Unilever, of attempting to oust Chief Executive Dave Stever due to his steadfast commitment to the ice cream maker’s social mission and brand integrity, reigniting a long-standing battle over the subsidiary’s independence in pursuing social justice initiatives. In a recent filing in Manhattan federal court, Ben & Jerry’s revealed that Unilever informed them on March 3, 2025, of plans to remove Stever without consulting the company’s directors, a decision they claim stems not from performance issues but from his refusal to abandon the brand’s socially conscious ethos. The filing, part of a proposed amended complaint requiring court approval, escalates an ongoing lawsuit aimed at halting Unilever’s alleged efforts to dismantle Ben & Jerry’s independent board and suppress its activism on issues like racial equity and global human rights.

The Vermont-based ice cream company, renowned for its progressive stances since its founding in 1978 by Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, detailed several instances of Unilever’s interference. According to the filing, Unilever criticized Stever in a January 2025 performance review for “repeatedly acquiescing” to Ben & Jerry’s promotion of social goals, warning personnel against defying attempts to “silence the social mission.” Specific examples include Unilever blocking the company from honoring Black History Month in February 2025 and preventing support for Mahmoud Khalil, a U.S. legal permanent resident and pro-Palestinian activist facing deportation under the Trump administration. Ben & Jerry’s described these actions as “new levels of oppressiveness,” alleging Unilever seeks to strip away the subsidiary’s ability to engage in social advocacy, a core element of its identity that has fueled its popularity among socially conscious consumers.

This clash is not a sudden development but part of a broader tension that has simmered since Unilever acquired Ben & Jerry’s in 2000 for $326 million, an agreement that preserved the ice cream maker’s independent board to oversee its social mission. Past disputes, such as the 2021 decision to halt sales in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, have underscored the fragile balance between corporate oversight and subsidiary autonomy. That earlier conflict led to legal action and a settlement in 2022, yet the current situation suggests Unilever is doubling down on its control as it prepares to spin off its ice cream division, including Ben & Jerry’s, Breyers, and Magnum, by the end of 2025. This strategic move, aimed at streamlining Unilever’s portfolio of brands like Dove, Hellmann’s, and Vaseline, may be driving efforts to align Ben & Jerry’s operations with broader corporate priorities, even at the cost of its activist legacy.

Dave Stever, who assumed the CEO role in May 2023 after a 34-year career with Ben & Jerry’s starting as a tour guide in 1988, embodies the company’s values. His tenure as Chief Marketing Officer for over a decade saw collaborations with figures like Colin Kaepernick and Ava DuVernay, reinforcing Ben & Jerry’s reputation for bold social stands. The filing does not clarify Stever’s current job status, and neither Unilever nor Ben & Jerry’s responded to immediate requests for comment outside business hours, leaving uncertainty about whether his removal has been finalized. This ambiguity heightens the stakes of the lawsuit, filed under case number 24-08641 in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, where Ben & Jerry’s seeks to protect its governance structure and activism rights.

The legal battle coincides with a shifting corporate landscape, as many companies retreat from progressive social policies amid pressure from conservative figures like President Donald Trump, who has vowed to reshape federal and corporate spheres. Ben & Jerry’s previously accused Unilever in February 2025 of banning public criticism of Trump, citing a “new dynamic” that stifled their voice. This pattern of alleged censorship, including restrictions on Gaza-related statements in November 2024, paints a picture of Unilever tightening its grip as it navigates shareholder demands and a CEO transition, with Hein Schumacher stepping down in February 2025, succeeded by CFO Fernando Fernandez. Meanwhile, Ben & Jerry’s founders have explored a potential buyback, signaling their determination to reclaim control amid this corporate tug-of-war.

Unilever’s silence on the latest allegations contrasts with Ben & Jerry’s vocal resistance, a dynamic that underscores their divergent visions. The spin-off plan adds complexity, raising questions about whether Unilever aims to offload a subsidiary it struggles to manage or reposition it for a less contentious future. For Ben & Jerry’s, losing Stever could weaken its ability to maintain the social mission that distinguishes it in a competitive market, potentially alienating loyal customers who value its advocacy on issues like climate change, racial justice, and human rights. As the court weighs the amended complaint and Unilever’s looming deadline to seek dismissal of the original filing, the outcome will likely shape not only the ice cream maker’s future but also broader debates about corporate social responsibility within multinational conglomerates.

This unfolding saga reflects deeper tensions between profit-driven corporate strategies and the preservation of brand identities rooted in social good. With Unilever’s restructuring on the horizon and Ben & Jerry’s fighting to retain its soul, the resolution of this conflict could set a precedent for how subsidiaries navigate autonomy under powerful parent companies, especially in an era where social activism increasingly intersects with business interests. For now, the spotlight remains on Dave Stever’s fate and the independent board’s survival, pivotal elements in Ben & Jerry’s enduring legacy as a pioneer of purpose-driven commerce.