SWEETGREEN INC
SG
Consumer Discretionary
5
exclusion reasons
4 themes
This page is part of our public exclusion list — a transparency tool that shows which companies we screen out and why. It is not investment advice, and it is not an accusation. But it is subject to change as our understanding of the facts evolves.
Sweetgreen faces a systemic race and sex discrimination lawsuit filed by ten employees across seven New York City locations (Alvarado et al. v. Sweetgreen, Case No. 804089/2023E, Bronx County Supreme Court). The complaint alleges that managers regularly used the N-word toward Black employees, that a supervisor rejected a Black female applicant because she "looked like she had an attitude problem," and that Hispanic workers received promotions, favorable shifts, and early departures over more qualified Black colleagues. The lawsuit also alleges sexual harassment of female employees by managers, including unwanted physical contact and sexual comments. Workers reported complaints to corporate leadership that went unaddressed. The case was filed in March 2023 and amended in September 2023 to add additional plaintiffs and defendants.
Sweetgreen publicly pledged to become carbon neutral by 2027 while simultaneously taking actions that contradict that commitment. In 2024 the company added steak to its menu, directly increasing the carbon intensity of its operations. According to Sweetgreen's own reporting, total carbon emissions increased roughly 26% between 2021 and 2022, with food-related Scope 3 emissions jumping approximately 35%, even as the company was marketing its carbon neutrality pledge. Mercy for Animals and environmental critics have labeled this greenwashing. Sweetgreen claims regenerative farming practices and carbon offsets will mitigate the impact of adding beef, but has not published hard data comparing the carbon footprint of its "regenerative" beef to conventional beef. The executive director of Project Drawdown publicly criticized offset schemes as "really problematic." The gap between Sweetgreen's sustainability branding and its business decisions constitutes material misinformation to consumers.
Only approximately 40% of chicken sourced at GAP Step 2 as of 2024. Better Chicken Commitment (BCC) alignment pushed to 2027-2029. Majority of animal products sourced from conventional factory farming operations.
Sweetgreen paid $750,000 to settle Richardson v. Sweetgreen (New York County, filed February 2022) for violations of the New York Labor Law including wage theft affecting hourly restaurant workers. The settlement resolved claims on behalf of a class of authorized claimants. This wage theft case is part of a documented pattern of labor law non-compliance at Sweetgreen: the company simultaneously faces the Alvarado discrimination lawsuit alleging systemic race and sex discrimination across seven New York City locations. Together these cases reveal a company culture in which front-line hourly workers bear the cost of management failures, from unpaid wages to discriminatory treatment. The wage theft settlement amount and the breadth of the labor law claims suggest the violations were not isolated incidents but reflected systemic payroll and compliance deficiencies.
Sweetgreen operates a fast-casual restaurant chain featuring chicken, steak, and fish as central menu items alongside salads and bowls. The commercial sale of animal-based proteins is a core revenue driver.
Research Sources
13 organizations
Related Exclusions
Wondering what we do invest in?
The Naughty List
A digest of changes to our exclusion list — new additions, removals, and the evidence behind them. We review the list continuously as new evidence surfaces.
Companies appear on our exclusion list based on our investment judgment — not because they've done anything illegal. This is a difference of values and opinion, not an accusation of wrongdoing. Exclusion does not constitute a recommendation against investing in any company, and absence from the list does not constitute a recommendation to invest.
This information is provided for educational and transparency purposes only and should not be relied upon as investment advice. Data is drawn from independent watchdogs, NGOs, government registries, and Ethical Capital's ongoing research — see Research Sources for the full list.
Ethical Capital LLC is a state-registered investment adviser in Utah (CRD #316032). Registration does not imply a certain level of skill or training.