In the case of Roe v. Wade, big companies already have a precedent for action

With the leakage of a draft Supreme Court ruling increasing the likelihood of Roe v. Wade’s death, companies are under pressure to adopt more employee-friendly policies regarding women’s reproductive rights.

In recent months, many companies including Apple, Citigroup, Salesforce, Yelp They have spoken or announced shifts in their benefit policies amid several state-led efforts aimed at restricting or banning abortion. last week, Amazon announced new features, while some companies, including JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Goldman Sachs and Bank of America, it’s Review current policies Following the news that the country’s highest court may exist On the verge of canceling the historic issue of abortion rights.

As the abortion debate rages, some corporate activists are urging companies to take immediate action to adopt policies more favorable to reproductive rights before any action by the Supreme Court. “Right now, it’s a ripple, but it’s going to turn into a wave, and once Roe capsizes, it’s a tsunami,” said Andrew Behar, CEO of As You Sow, a non-profit organization for shareholders.

The corporate world is under scrutiny for what you say – or don’t say in public. within Corporate giants who dealt with this issue silentlySome may be concerned about stepping into a political landmine, or upsetting certain groups of voters. But experts in corporate social responsibility say that despite these concerns, it is important for companies to address the issue of reproductive rights head on.

“Public companies, whether you like it or not, are in the spotlight in this debate,” said Carla Bivens, assistant teaching professor of business communications at Carnegie Mellon University’s Tepper School of Business. “They will continue to set an example for other companies,” she said.

Some companies have publicly urged other companies to take a stand. “Given what’s at stake, business leaders need to make their voices heard and act to protect the health and well-being of our employees. This means protecting reproductive rights,” Levi Strauss & Co.. He said in a May 4 statement.

Taking a stand on a polarizing issue like abortion certainly presents challenges for companies that approach multiple components with different opinions. However, the message companies are sending doesn’t have to be “overtly political,” said Martin Whitaker, CEO of Just Capital, a nonprofit research organization that measures and seeks to improve companies’ performance on environmental, social and governance factors. “If you’re focusing on it as a matter of health benefits, that’s probably the safest ground,” he said.

And that’s what City Group He did, for example, and the CEO explained the company’s position in response to a question posed at the April 26 annual shareholder meeting about its policy for paying employee travel costs related to seeking abortion. “We know this is a topic that people are passionate about. I want to make it clear that this feature is not intended to be a statement about a very sensitive issue,” said Jane Fraser, CEO at the time.

Shelley Alpern, director of corporate engagement at Rhea Ventures, which invests in reproductive health care solutions that empower women, said for years companies have believed in abortion, and changing their policies now goes along with that. “They should take action now to mitigate what is to come,” she said.

Yelp, in a statement provided to CNBC, called on Congress to legalize women’s rights to make decisions about their bodies. Yelp also said companies should “strengthen the protection of their employees and provide equal access to the health services they need, no matter where they live.”

Furthermore, the company’s policies that pay for travel when it is required to receive health care are not limited to abortion, with Amazon citing travel coverage related to many conditions, from cancer care to mental health and substance abuse, in cases where there is no choice. Medically within a 100-mile radius of the employee’s home.

For many years, Citi has offered a travel benefit that typically enables employees to access specific health care services, such as transplants, bariatric surgery, or orthopedic surgery, outside of their local area.

“What we’ve done here is follow our previous practices,” Fraser told shareholders. “We have covered reproductive health care benefits for more than 20 years. Our practice has also been to ensure that our employees have the same health coverage, no matter where they live in the United States. So, to that end, we have had the travel indemnity practice for years,” she said. many. We respect everyone’s opinions on this matter.”

This approach has been used in employee health benefits by Wal-Mart for years, which entered into a partnership With “Centers of Excellence” across the country to provide healthcare services, travel and accommodation expenses, to employees for conditions including bariatric surgery, spine and heart health, cancer care, and other conditions.

It would be naive to think that any response to the Supreme Court’s decision, even if it focused on the employees of the company itself, would be entirely able to avoid political discord. Republican Senator Marco Rubio of Florida introduced legislation last week to use the tax code to penalize companies that offer health and additional travel coverage.

Meanwhile, companies that withhold their plans from stakeholders, including employees, investors and customers, risk making a mistake, according to corporate responsibility experts. Prolonged company silence can easily backfire and cause a loss of credibility with employees, consumers, and shareholders.

Whitaker referred to the latter Disney’s cautionary tale. The media giant faced intense scrutiny from employees and the public for its initial reluctance to speak out against the Florida “Don’t Say Like Me” legislation.

The company’s leadership said it thought it best to work behind the scenes, but later promised to support efforts to repeal the controversial law.

“What we’ve seen with Disney is that if you’ve been behind the scenes a lot, it actually feels like a betrayal,” said Kate Lamberton, Alberto I Duran Distinguished Presidential Professor of Marketing at The Wharton School.

Companies that don’t act quickly may ultimately have trouble attracting and retaining the best talent. If you are at the top of your class at Harvard, and you get two offers from prominent companies, and one has a favorable policy and the other does not, employees are more likely to choose the preferred policy, Behar said.

Moreover, as extended benefits become the norm, companies that are slow to act may face ripple effects. “If an employee who works for a company that doesn’t offer benefits ends up being billed $2.3 million after having those experiences, that would be a very powerful story and would continue to draw attention to the company’s decisions,” Lamberton said.

Taking a stand may be particularly important for companies that routinely promote the ideals of health, such as wellness, and the broader goals of equality and independence as part of their public character.

“You can’t label yourself as a brand that supports certain outcomes in the community and stay silent on an issue like this,” Lamberton said. “It just doesn’t make sense.”

–By Cheryl Winokur Munk, Special for CNBC.com