Allstate Pulls CEO's Social Media Post

According to Breitbart News,

Allstate, the sponsor of Thursday’s Sugar Bowl contest between Notre Dame and Georgia, appears to have deleted CEO Tom Wilson’s post-terror attack message, which aired before the game and ignited a firestorm of controversy online.

As I noted Friday, Allstate had already issued a mushy statement sorta-kinda walking back wilson's original wording:

On Thursday, Allstate issued a statement to Fox News Digital condemning the terrorist attack and attempting to clarify its CEO’s message.

“To be clear, Allstate CEO Tom Wilson unequivocally condemns this heinous act of terrorism and violence in all forms,” the statement read. “We stand with the families of the victims, their loved ones, and the community of New Orleans. The reference to overcoming divisiveness and negativity reflects a broader commitment to fostering trust and positivity in communities across the nation.”

This need to clarify had me wondering where the pressure came from. Let's recall that Bud Light initially didn't much care that it had insulted its customer base of working straight guys by doing a sponsorship deal with Dylan Mulvaney. It was only when Bud Light distributors, not the company itself, began to feel the pinch from the boycott that the people responsible for the deal were publicly placed on leave and the company began to change course.

There was at least a flurry of X posts from people saying they were dropping their Allstate policies after Wilson's statement, and my surmise is it was Allstate agents, not the company itself, that began to get nervous and put pressure on the company. So I did some searching, and lo and behold, Allstate is already being sued by some of its agents:

Many of the individuals selling insurance through this system are hired by Allstate as “exclusive agents.” The company classifies them as independent contractors and requires them to sell exclusively for Allstate.

As a result of the independent contractor designation, these exclusive agents are expected to bear all or most of the business expenses of the agency locations that they operate. These expenses often include renting office space, advertising and marketing costs, hiring and paying staff, setting up phone lines and internet, buying required Allstate-approved computers and Allstate software, and other costs associated with operating an agency.

Plaintiffs in the pending class action lawsuit against Allstate allege that the insurance corporation is abusing the independent contractor designation by requiring exclusive agents to pay business expenses.

Independent contractors are common in the insurance industry. These individuals typically own their own agencies and client lists, sell insurance for multiple competing insurance companies, and retain their client information and intellectual property if they stop working for a given insurance provider. In fact, Allstate also sells its products through these types of agents—which they refer to as “Independent Agents” (as opposed to the “exclusive agents” at issue in this case).

Unlike Allstate’s Independent Agents, the exclusive agents hired by Allstate operate like at-will sales employees while bearing the costs of independent contractors.

. . . Allstate recently cut the commissions on auto policies sold by exclusive agents by 84 percent while restricting the variety of products they could sell. But there was no change in the expenses that agents were expected to bear. As a result, many agents—including the plaintiffs involved in our lawsuit—suffered significant losses. Many have had to close their agencies, but still have unpaid debts due to expenses they incurred working for Allstate, including paying for office leases.

In addition, throughout 2024, Allstate has imposed massive rate increases on homeowners and auto insurance policies. It turns out that Allstate has had an overall bad reputation for some time:

The National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) publishes a “complaint index” that ranks insurance companies in terms of the frequency of consumer complaints against them.

According to the NAIC, Allstate receives 2.71 times the number of complaints than you would expect based on its market share.

. . . Allstate’s complaint index of 2.71 places it among the worst insurance companies in the US.

. . . The American Association for Justice, a trial lawyer’s advocacy group, agrees with Allstate’s dubious “No. 1” distinction. Its ranking of the 11 worst insurance companies, as reported by the National Law Review, lists Allstate as the number one worst insurance company in the United States.

. . . If you’re going to suffer such poor service, at least Allstate should be the cheaper option. After all, you get what you pay for, right? No. CNET ranks Allstate as one of the nation’s most expensive car insurance companies despite its poor customer service record.

So nothing new here. A corporate prettyboy screwing the agents, screwing the customers, but saying all the right things and powergliding through life. All I can think, though, is that if somebody was told to pull Wilson's Sugar Bowl message, things may change.