Big tech companies like Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta and Microsoft are coming under increased pressure from investors to address the ethical risks tied to artificial intelligence (AI), according to the latest research from Morningstar Sustainalytics.
The research shows, on average, shareholder support for resolutions on AI has exceeded support for proposals on other environmental and social (E&S) themes. Average adjusted support for the 15 resolutions on AI is 30%, almost double the support for the 400 E&S resolutions in the 2024 proxy year (16%).
Some of the biggest concerns surrounding AI are privacy issues, data bias and discrimination, and transparency, according to the UK Cyber Security Council.
Over the last three proxy years, no company has fielded more shareholder resolutions than Amazon. The company has added 40 shareholder resolutions to its proxy card in the three years ending 30 June 2025. However, this year the number of shareholder resolutions at Amazon is down to eight, from 14 last year and 18 the year before, reflecting a broader reduction in the number of shareholder proposals after changes in the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) guidance on permissible resolutions.
Lindsey Stewart (pictured), director of stewardship research and policy at Morningstar Sustainalytics, shared his thoughts ahead of Amazon’s AGM, which takes place on 21 May: “Broadly, we expect shareholder support for environmental and social shareholder resolutions to continue to fall this year, and this will likely be reflected in proxy voting results at Amazon.
“AI features prominently on the Amazon proxy card this year. There are requests for reporting on data usage oversight – with a similar resolution also filed at Meta this year – and an assessment of board structure for oversight of AI. A similar resolution last year by the same proponent requesting specific changes to the board structure was supported by only 11% of Amazon’s shareholders – it’s possible that the more flexible language used in this year’s resolution could bolster its support.
“A third resolution requesting additional reporting on the impact of data centres on the company’s climate commitments also references the company’s growth in AI-related energy use and emissions.
Meanwhile, resolutions on warehouse working conditions and Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions reporting have returned to the proxy ballot this year.
“The resolution on working conditions was supported by over one-third (37%) of the company’s independent shareholders in 2024, so the result this year will be an important indicator of shareholder sentiment on labour issues,” Stewart continued.
“Shareholders’ generally low appetite to require Scope 3 reporting from US companies is unlikely to have increased this year, particularly with the SEC no longer seeking to defend its Climate Rule.”
CCLA votes against leadership committee chair re-election
Elsewhere, CCLA, the UK’s largest charity investment manager, announced it would vote against the re-election of Edith Cooper, chair of Amazon’s Leadership Development and Compensation Committee.
The decision is based on Amazon’s “persistent failure to live up to its own human rights standards”, particularly regarding freedom of association and collective bargaining, CCLA said. This comes after high-profile controversies surrounding Amazon’s treatment of workers in both the UK and Canada, reflecting broader investor concerns about how Amazon is managing its workforce.
“For the past three years, CCLA has supported a coalition of concerned investors, calling for the board of directors to commission an independent, third-party assessment of Amazon’s adherence to its stated commitment to workers’ freedom of association and collective bargaining rights, as outlined in Amazon’s Global Human Rights Principles, which explicitly reference the Core Conventions of the International Labour Organization and the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work”, CCLA stated.
“The proposal, grounded in Amazon’s own stated policies, has received growing support from shareholders. However, this year the company has successfully applied to the SEC to ‘No Action’ the proposal. We regard this as a troubling attempt to limit shareholder input on a topic that is salient and material to Amazon and goes to the heart of its long-term corporate sustainability.”
