This invitation is addressed to Natascha Viljoen, Newmont’s President and Chief Executive Officer, for the company’s explanation of its operating rules and outcomes.
Atlas finding: Newmont has linked a target of 50% women in senior leadership by 2030 to the interest payable on a bond originally issued for US$1 billion. It also says employment decisions are based on qualifications and merit, not gender. Atlas asks Newmont to explain how those commitments operate together and what the target means for men’s opportunities.
Why it matters: Men considering a Newmont career need to know whether sex affects recruitment, development, promotion or succession before they invest years pursuing senior leadership.
What we want: Upfront disclosure of how the target operates, the financial exposure attached to it, the evidence showing its effects on men, and the legal basis for any sex-specific treatment. Where those practices produce unequal access or treatment, Atlas calls on Newmont to address them.
The figures at a glance
1. What Newmont claims
Newmont says employment decisions are based on qualifications and merit, not gender. Its People Policy sets out its approach to employment decisions, while its 2026 Proxy Statement describes Newmont as an equal-opportunity employer that does not make employment-related decisions on the basis of gender. The proxy makes that assurance in its discussion of an executive female-representation metric. People Policy; 2026 Proxy Statement.
Alongside that assurance, Newmont’s 2021 bond terms set a target of 50% women in senior leadership by 31 December 2030. For this measure, senior leadership runs from Senior Director through Chief Executive Officer, grades 109 to E1 or equivalent. Women are counted as a percentage of all employees in those roles. Fifth Supplemental Indenture.
These are two different commitments: one describes how people are treated; the other specifies the sex composition Newmont intends to achieve. Newmont should explain how its recruitment, development and promotion practices deliver the target while meeting its stated employment assurance.
The figures describe the group; Atlas seeks an entity-by-entity answer for Australia.
2. What the maths says
The leadership target
Newmont reports that women held 31.2% of senior leadership roles at the end of 2025. The difference between that reported share and the 50% target is 18.8 percentage points. 2025 Sustainability Report, Inclusion and diversity.
50.0% − 31.2% = 18.8 percentage points.
On a fixed 100-role illustration:
| Leadership composition | End-2025 reported share | Target share | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Women | 31.2 | 50.0 | +18.8 |
| People not reported as women | 68.8 | 50.0 | −18.8 |
| Total | 100.0 | 100.0 | 0.0 |
These are illustrative role equivalents, not actual headcounts. The arithmetic fixes the change in share; the operating mechanisms and actual headcount changes require explanation. Men are entitled to know whether their sex affects access, priority or prospects in the process used to deliver it.
The funding consequence
In December 2021, Newmont issued US$1 billion of 2.600% sustainability-linked senior notes, maturing on 15 July 2032. Its SEC filing specifies a 10-basis-point annual interest-rate increase from 15 July 2031 unless Newmont provides the required notice that the leadership target was achieved at the end of 2030 and externally verified. Newmont’s 20 December 2021 SEC filing.
10 basis points = 0.10 percentage points = 0.001 of principal per year.
US$1,000,000,000 × 0.001 = US$1,000,000 per year.
This illustrates the leadership-related increase on the original issue principal, not Newmont’s current exposure. Newmont disclosed US$795.37 million outstanding on 28 July 2025 and subsequently reported US$24 million of principal repurchases in the first half of 2026. These dated disclosures should not be combined into a current balance without reconciling intervening transactions. July 2025 principal disclosure; June 2026 quarterly filing, debt repurchases.
The leadership-linked increase is scheduled to apply for the final year, from 15 July 2031 to maturity on 15 July 2032. Actual exposure depends on the principal remaining outstanding during that period and any changes to the terms. Newmont should publish the reconciled remaining face principal and the resulting amount at stake. Bond terms, section 2.5.
The bond also has a separate emissions-related interest provision. The 10-basis-point calculation here concerns the leadership target. SEC filing.
The 2021 issue terms attach a borrowing-cost consequence to the target. Newmont should disclose the current financial exposure alongside its operating approach.
The numbers needed to measure men’s opportunity
Leadership composition is not a selection rate. To measure relative prospects, Newmont should publish, for comparable roles and periods:
- Men’s selection rate: men selected ÷ eligible male candidates assessed.
- Women’s selection rate: women selected ÷ eligible female candidates assessed.
The same comparison is needed for development programmes, sponsorship, talent pools and promotion. The data should identify the criteria used, comparable qualifications and experience, and time spent waiting for advancement. This would allow the effect on opportunity to be examined alongside the representation target.
3. What the law says and how Newmont explains compliance
For Australian employment, section 14 of the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) prohibits sex discrimination in recruitment and employment, including access to promotion and training, subject to the Act’s provisions. Section 7D provides for special measures intended to achieve substantive equality and limits their operation once that purpose has been achieved. Sex Discrimination Act, sections 7D and 14.
For Western Australian employment, the Equal Opportunity Act 1984 (WA) also addresses sex discrimination. Section 31 provides for measures meeting particular needs in order to afford equal opportunities. The WA Equal Opportunity Commission explains that an employer relying on that exception must establish its application to the positions concerned. WA Commission guidance.
Newmont should identify the employing entity, applicable jurisdiction and legal basis for any sex-specific practice used to pursue the target. If it relies on an exception, exemption or special measure, it should explain the practice covered, the evidence supporting its use and how that use is reviewed.
If sex affects access to an opportunity, explain how that is consistent with Newmont’s equal-opportunity claim. If Newmont relies on a legal exception or special measure, identify it and explain how it applies. A general assurance of legal compliance does not answer either question.
A borrowing-cost incentive does not itself supply a legal basis for sex-specific treatment. Legal permission also does not settle Atlas’s fairness concern: men still need to know which rules apply and how those rules affect their opportunities.
4. What we believe
Equal opportunity cannot be a label without disclosure.
Atlas’s assessment is that the bond terms make leadership sex composition a commercial consideration. Newmont’s explanation should therefore connect the financial incentive, the practices used to pursue the target and its assurance that employment decisions are not based on gender.
A finance-linked sex target describes the intended composition of senior leadership. It does not tell a man whether sex can reduce his relative prospects of access, development, promotion or succession.
Until Newmont discloses how the target operates, men cannot know whether being male affects their relative access to development, promotion, succession or senior leadership.
A diverted opportunity can compound over time
The issue is not confined to one appointment. If sex affects access to development, sponsorship, talent pools, succession, promotion or leadership roles, the effect can accumulate through remuneration, seniority, experience and competitiveness in later rounds.
Men need the operating information to assess that risk before committing years to a Newmont career path.
5. What we want: upfront disclosure
Atlas asks Newmont to stop presenting affected opportunities as unqualified equal opportunity without disclosing whether sex affects access, priority, selection or career progression.
Newmont should explain whether sex or progress towards the target affects eligibility, access, priority, assessment or selection at any stage of a career pathway. Where it does, identify the affected opportunities, the rules applied, the legal basis and the evidence about their effects.
This information belongs in recruitment material and relevant development, promotion and succession policies, before people apply or commit to a career pathway.
The disclosure and evidence Atlas asks Newmont to provide:
Newmont has a target of 50% women in senior leadership by 2030, linked to the borrowing terms of its 2032 sustainability-linked notes.
Explain how recruitment, development, promotion and succession operate under the target. If Newmont maintains that sex does not affect access, priority or selection, publish the rules and outcome data supporting that position.
Identify any legal provision relied upon for sex-specific treatment, explain how it applies and link to the relevant policy and outcome data.
Ask for the target’s effect in writing
Before relying on equal-opportunity language when applying for a role or considering a career path, ask for the answer and the relevant policy in writing:
Let’s discuss how Newmont’s finance-linked 50% women-in-senior-leadership target operates in recruitment, development, promotion and succession, and whether progress towards it can affect the relative prospects of an eligible male candidate.
6. Changes Atlas demands from Newmont
Atlas calls on Newmont to ensure that pursuit of the target does not reduce men’s access to opportunities or subject them to different assessment standards because they are male.
In particular, we call on Newmont to:
- Apply consistent, published selection and promotion criteria to comparable candidates.
- Provide equal access to development, sponsorship and leadership experience, and address any sex-based restrictions that create unequal opportunity.
- Examine whether pressure to meet the finance-linked target influences shortlisting, succession or advancement, and correct practices that disadvantage men.
- Monitor access, selection outcomes and waiting times across the full career pathway, rather than reporting representation alone.
- Review any financing or management arrangements that encourage unequal treatment and explain what changes it is willing to make.
Disclosure is necessary because people should understand the system.
Disclosure alone does not make unequal treatment fair.
Where the evidence identifies unequal opportunity, Atlas calls on Newmont to change the practice and explain its proposed process and timetable.
7. What numbers and evidence we ask Newmont to publish
Atlas asks Newmont to publish:
- The target’s scope: current numerator, denominator, reporting date, role definitions and coverage of each Australian employing entity and operation.
- The financial exposure: outstanding principal of the 2032 notes, any amendments to the leadership condition, verification arrangements and the borrowing-cost consequence of missing it.
- The operating rules: how the target affects candidate pools, shortlists, recommendations, development, sponsorship, talent pools, promotion and succession, including any instructions or incentives given to decision-makers.
- The outcomes: eligible candidates, applicants, shortlisted candidates and selections by sex for comparable opportunities, with the relevant criteria and denominators.
- The career effects: progression rates, waiting times and access to experience that qualifies people for later appointments.
- The compliance explanation: provisions relied upon for any sex-specific treatment, supporting evidence and review arrangements.
- The disclosure record: what candidates and employees are told, where it appears and when they receive it.
Newmont should confirm what information it holds or can measure. Evidence of consistent criteria, equal access and comparable outcomes across the affected pathways would allow Atlas to test and, where warranted, revise its assessment.
Newmont can answer this case with evidence.
If Newmont maintains that its finance-linked target and the practices used to pursue it do not disadvantage men, it should publish the relevant candidate, selection, promotion and progression data and explain how those practices operate.
A statement of good intentions, a commitment to equality or an assurance of legal compliance does not answer the practical question.
The question is whether being male affects access to opportunity.
If the answer is no, the data should demonstrate that.
If the answer is yes, candidates and employees should be told clearly, and Atlas calls on Newmont to address the unequal treatment and explain what changes it is willing to make.
8. An invitation to meaningful dialogue
Atlas welcomes constructive, evidence-based communication about these findings, the disclosure we seek and the changes we encourage.
We invite Newmont to provide relevant information, identify factual or analytical errors with supporting evidence, and discuss practical improvements.
Substantive responses will be published alongside the case where publication is permitted. Atlas will assess new evidence, correct factual errors and update its findings where warranted.
Engagement status: Transparency clarification is being prepared. No correspondence has yet been sent to Newmont and no response has been received.