American Airlines ESG Ruling: Investing & Corporate Sustainability Implications
Our Privacy Policy has been updated! The Conference Board uses cookies to improve our website, enhance your experience, and deliver relevant messages and offers about our products. Detailed information on the use of cookies on this site is provided in our cookie policy. For more information on how The Conference Board collects and uses personal data, please visit our privacy policy. By continuing to use this Site or by clicking "OK", you acknowledge our privacy policy and consent to the use of cookies. 

ESG Backlash

American Airlines ESG Ruling: Investing & Corporate Sustainability Implications

/ Essay

The recent federal court ruling against American Airlines over its inclusion of environmental, social & governance (ESG) considerations in its employee retirement plan marks a significant development in the evolving ESG landscape. Decided in the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas, this case highlights the growing legal and political scrutiny surrounding ESG investing in the US, raising critical questions about fiduciary duties, financial performance, and the future of corporate sustainability practices.

The recent federal court ruling against American Airlines over its inclusion of environmental, social & governance (ESG) considerations in its employee retirement plan marks a significant development in the evolving ESG landscape. Decided in the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas, this case highlights the growing legal and political scrutiny surrounding ESG investing in the US, raising critical questions about fiduciary duties, financial performance, and the future of corporate sustainability practices.

Case Overview

In 2023, Bryan Spence, a former American Airlines pilot, filed a lawsuit on behalf of over 100,000 participants in the company’s $26 billion 401(k) retirement plan. The suit alleged that American Airlines had violated its fiduciary duties under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) by allowing its asset managers, including BlackRock, to prioritize ESG measures over financial returns.

Key claims by the plaintiffs included:

  • ESG-focused investments underperformed relative to traditional, non-ESG options.
  • Insufficient oversight of asset managers’ proxy voting practices.
  • Investment decisions aligned with corporate ESG commitments rather

Author

This publication is available to you, but you need to sign in to myTCB® or create an account to access it.To learn more about becoming a Member click here. To check if your company is a Member, click here
 

Keep my computer signed in

 

By Clicking 'Create Account',
You Agree To Our Terms Of Use

Members of The Conference Board get exclusive access to Trusted Insights for What’s Ahead® through publications, Conferences and events, webcasts, podcasts, data & analysis, and Member Communities.

Other Related Resources