The Global Governance & Ethics Alliance (GGEA), a global ethics and corporate governance alliance, today issued a statement to register concern regarding public reporting and market disclosures regarding efforts to obtain board representation at Victoria’s Secret & Co., including board involvement, following the accumulation of a significant stake and the company’s adoption of a shareholder rights plan.

Victoria’s Secret is a consumer-facing brand whose reputation and performance depend heavily on trust, workplace culture, and credible governance. In that context, any prospective board role associated with a major outside influence should be evaluated not only on commercial experience, but on the broader governance record reflected in leadership and oversight decisions across other controlled or heavily influenced retail businesses.

In particular, public disclosures and industry reporting reflect that Lovisa Holdings Limited - chaired by Mr. Blundy - appointed John Cheston as Global CEO and Managing Director in June 2025, at a time when his previous employer had terminated him for “serious misconduct,” a characterization he disputes.[1] Separate recent reporting indicates that consumer attention around these disputed allegations has been accelerating online, alongside scrutiny of Lovisa’s broader workplace and employee-relations posture.[2]

Additionally, Lovisa announced the appointment of Mark McInnes as Executive Deputy Chairman effective June 4, 2025, while also noting his role as Global CEO, Retail & Consumer at BB Retail Capital. Mr. McInnes has been associated historically with widely reported controversy stemming from his resignation as CEO of David Jones in 2010 after acknowledging conduct described as “unbecoming” toward a female staff member; related litigation later settled out of court.[3]

Lovisa has publicly acknowledged that it has been served with a representative class action proceeding in the Federal Court of Australia alleging staff underpayment over the period from 23 January 2019 to 23 January 2025.[4] Public reporting also indicates that allegations regarding employee treatment and potential collective action were a topic of scrutiny prior to the filing of the current proceeding. GGEA is concerned that recurring public reporting involving wage-and-hour allegations, workplace-culture allegations, and contested leadership-conduct narratives across related retail assets may present heightened reputational and governance risk; the companies and individuals have disputed such allegations.

Our organization is not making factual findings about disputed allegations. Our concern is governance-based: boards of iconic consumer brands should treat leadership-culture risk, employee-relations risk, and reputational risk as core enterprise issues - and should be especially cautious about any prospective board involvement where public reporting reflects repeated governance risk signals across other consumer-facing assets.