Can Levi’s promote diversity while ensuring everyone is treated fairly? That’s the question swirling around the iconic denim brand as it doubles down on its Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) policies. In April 2025, Levi Strauss & Co. made headlines when 99% of its shareholders voted to keep DEI programs, rejecting a proposal to scrap them. This overwhelming support shows Levi’s DEI commitment, but it also sparks debate. Are these policies truly fair, or do they prioritize identity over talent? While Levi’s DEI efforts aim to create a welcoming workplace and appeal to diverse customers, some worry they could undermine merit and divide employees. Let’s explore Levi’s DEI journey, examine why shareholders backed it, raise concerns about fairness, and suggest a balanced path forward.
Levi’s DEI Initiatives and the Shareholder Vote
Levi’s has long been a leader in the fashion world, and its DEI programs are a big part of its modern identity. DEI stands for Diversity (hiring people from different backgrounds), Equity (ensuring fair outcomes), and Inclusion (making everyone feel welcome). Levi’s has set clear goals: hire more women and minorities for leadership roles, create inclusive marketing campaigns, and partner with groups that champion social justice. For example, their ads feature models of all races, sizes, and cultures, and they’ve supported causes like Pride and racial equality.
In April 2025, Levi’s DEI policies faced a major test. At the company’s annual shareholder meeting on April 23, the National Center for Public Policy Research (NCPPR), a group critical of corporate DEI, proposed abolishing all DEI programs, policies, and goals. They argued that DEI could lead to unfair hiring practices. Levi’s board urged shareholders to vote against the proposal, saying a diverse workforce is good for business. The result? Less than 1% of shareholders supported ending DEI.
Levi’s leadership celebrated the outcome. CEO Michelle Gass said, “Diversity and inclusion are core to who we are. Our commitment remains unchanged.” The company’s 2021 and 2022 DEI Impact Reports highlight efforts like #thepledge, a global training program to foster inclusion. With 99% shareholder support, Levi’s seems set to keep pushing DEI. But why is the company so invested, and what’s driving this overwhelming backing?
Why Levi’s Champions DEI
Levi’s doesn’t just make jeans—it sells a lifestyle to people of all ages, races, and cultures worldwide. That’s a big reason why DEI matters to them. A diverse workforce helps Levi’s understand and connect with its global customers. For example, ads featuring models from different backgrounds can attract buyers who see themselves in the brand. DEI also helps Levi’s compete for talent. Young workers, especially Gen Z, often want to work for companies that value inclusion. A 2022 Levi’s survey found 81% of employees felt respected, which boosts morale and retention.
There’s a business case for DEI, too. Studies, like those from McKinsey, show that diverse teams can spark more creativity and better decisions, leading to higher profits. Levi’s inclusive campaigns, like those promoting plus-size jeans or multicultural models, may drive sales among minority groups. Shareholders see this as a win. The 2025 vote reflects confidence that DEI strengthens Levi’s brand and bottom line. The company’s history of social advocacy—supporting same-sex marriage, paid family leave, and gun control—also aligns with DEI’s focus on social progress.
CEO Michelle Gass sums it up: “Building a diverse and inclusive workplace helps us deliver stronger results.” For shareholders, DEI isn’t just about doing good—it’s about staying competitive in a diverse, fast-changing world. But not everyone agrees that Levi’s DEI approach is flawless. Let’s look at some concerns.
Concerns About Levi’s DEI Policies
While Levi’s DEI efforts have strong support, they’ve also drawn criticism. Some worry that focusing on diversity could mean prioritizing race, gender, or other identities over skills and hard work. The NCPPR, which proposed scrapping DEI, argued that these programs risk “illegal discrimination” by favoring certain groups. For example, if Levi’s sets goals to hire more women or minorities, could it overlook qualified candidates who don’t fit those categories? Imagine two workers applying for a manager role—one with more experience but from a “less diverse” group, and another chosen to meet a diversity target. That could feel unfair.
Another concern is divisiveness. NCPPR’s Stefan Padfield said DEI can “set individuals up for failure and stigma” by making people question whether they were hired for their talent or their identity. Employees might worry that promotions are tied to diversity goals, not performance. Levi’s Senior Vice President David Jedrzejek insists the company doesn’t use quotas, but critics argue that aggressive diversity targets can still create pressure to prioritize identity over merit.
There’s also the question of accountability. How does Levi’s measure DEI success? Is it just about hitting diversity numbers, or does it improve actual performance? Some fear “tokenism”—where companies showcase diversity for good PR without making real changes. For instance, featuring diverse models in ads is great, but if the workplace culture doesn’t truly value all employees, it’s just surface-level.
Finally, not all customers and employees are on board. Some shoppers want Levi’s to focus on making quality jeans, not pushing social agendas. Others feel DEI divides workers by emphasizing differences rather than shared goals. Padfield put it this way: Companies should “raise the floor for all” through things like better education, not divide people by race or gender. These concerns suggest Levi’s could refine its approach to keep everyone on board.
A Balanced Approach to Inclusion
Levi’s doesn’t have to choose between diversity and fairness—there’s a way to balance both. Instead of focusing on demographic targets, Levi’s could emphasize equal opportunity. For example, they could recruit widely to attract diverse applicants but hire based on skills and fit. Offering training programs open to all employees, regardless of background, could build a diverse pipeline without favoring any group. This rewards hard work and ensures everyone has a fair shot.
Transparency is key, too. Levi’s should share clear data on how DEI improves performance, like sales or innovation. Vague goals, like “more diverse leadership,” can fuel skepticism. Instead, they could show how diverse teams lead to better products or happier customers. Being open about their process—like proving they don’t use quotas—would build trust.
Promotions should also prioritize merit. Employees want to know they’re rewarded for results, not their identity. Levi’s could set up clear criteria for raises and promotions, focusing on measurable achievements. This keeps morale high and avoids resentment.
Finally, Levi’s could unite workers around shared goals. Instead of DEI programs that highlight differences, they could focus on team-building that celebrates what everyone brings to the table. For example, workshops on collaboration or innovation could foster inclusion without dividing people by race or gender. This approach keeps Levi’s inclusive while respecting fairness and accountability.
Conclusion
Levi’s DEI journey is a bold one, backed by 99% of shareholders in April 2025. From diverse hiring to inclusive ads, the company sees DEI as key to connecting with customers and staying competitive. CEO Michelle Gass calls it “core to who we are,” and the numbers suggest it’s paying off—diverse teams can boost creativity and sales. Yet, concerns linger. Critics argue that DEI risks sidelining merit, creating unfairness, or dividing workers. Some customers and employees just want Levi’s to focus on great jeans and equal treatment.
