Target 8.b: Global strategy for youth employment
By 2020, develop and operationalize a global strategy for youth employment and implement the Global Jobs Pact of the International Labour Organization
This moves without owners. Other levers carry it.
Why shareholder democracy is independent
The target is about adopting and operationalizing an ILO global strategy and the Global Jobs Pact. These are intergovernmental instruments implemented by member states and the ILO. The Global Initiative on Decent Jobs for Youth lists businesses among its partners alongside governments and UN agencies. Participation is voluntary, however, and does not depend on the conduct or political influence of listed companies. We found no shareholder resolution addressing this strategy, so there is no evident corporate or lobbying lever.
How this was scoredIndependent
Independent. This moves without owners. Other levers carry it.
We have not yet written down the two answers behind this rating. Recording them on every item, so a reader can check the reasoning and not only the conclusion, is work in progress.
Every rating is the higher of two answers, one for what companies do and one for what they spend to stop the outcome, because the same vote reaches both. See the full method.
Sources
No shareholder advocacy found yet
We looked and found nothing that met our standard, which is a source we opened and confirmed. The entry names no organizations. Searches returned ILO primary documents on the Global Jobs Pact and the Decent Jobs for Youth initiative, plus general Rule 14a-8 procedural guidance, none of it shareholder advocacy. Proxy Preview's 2024 Decent Work chapter was fetched and confirmed to cover fair pay, working conditions and benefits proposals only; it contains no youth employment or Global Jobs Pact proposal, and its single ILO reference is to a labor standards proposal at Chipotle on a different subject. No proposal, investor letter or voting policy asking a company to implement the ILO global youth employment strategy was located.
How this rating was made
Every item on every one of our maps is read against one question: how far does this depend on the people who own companies voting their values? We answer it twice, once for what companies do and once for what they spend to stop the outcome, and take whichever answer is higher, since the same vote reaches both. The score carries its reasoning and its sources so that a reader can check it rather than take it.
- Pivotal. Owners voting their values can deliver most of the outcome.
- Necessary. Owners remove an obstacle nothing else removes, and others must also act.
- Helpful. Owners voting their values help, and others carry most of it.
- Independent. This moves without owners. Other levers carry it.
The advocacy record on this page holds only what a source we opened says happened. Where we searched and found nothing, the page says so rather than leaving a silence. Where a campaign names a filer the source does not name, it says that too. Ratings are ours; the list of subjects is UN Sustainable Development Goals's, and we link to their original.
How we score dependency, in full.