INSTITUTIONAL SHAREHOLDER SERVICES (ISS) AND GLASS LEWIS PROXY VOTING POLICIES AND OTHER DEVELOPMENTS FOR THE 2013 PROXY SEASON
|
|
- Marcia Kelley
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 January 29, 2013 INSTITUTIONAL SHAREHOLDER SERVICES (ISS) AND GLASS LEWIS PROXY VOTING POLICIES AND OTHER DEVELOPMENTS FOR THE 2013 PROXY SEASON To Our Clients and Friends: Institutional Shareholder Services ("ISS") and Glass, Lewis & Co., Inc. ("Glass Lewis"), the two major proxy advisory firms, recently released updates to their proxy voting policies for the 2013 proxy season. The ISS U.S. Corporate Governance Policy 2013 Updates (the "ISS Policy Updates"), which are available at apply to shareholder meetings held on or after February 1, ISS also has released updated Frequently Asked Questions (the "ISS FAQs"), available at the link above, relating to its 2013 policies. The Glass Lewis Proxy Paper Guidelines for the 2013 Proxy Season (the "Glass Lewis Guidelines") will be effective for annual meetings held on or after January 1, A summary of the updates to the Glass Lewis Guidelines is available here. This alert reviews the most significant ISS and Glass Lewis updates and suggested steps for companies to consider in light of these updated proxy voting policies. I. ISS Policy Updates A. Board Issues Board Response to Majority-Supported Shareholder Proposals. ISS currently recommends votes against the entire board (except new nominees, who are considered case-by-case) if the board failed to act on a proposal that (1) received the support of a majority of shares outstanding in the previous year, or (2) received the support of a majority of shares cast in the last year and one of the two years prior to that. As a result of the ISS Policy Updates, starting with results from 2013 annual meetings, ISS will recommend votes against individual directors, committee members, or the entire board, as it deems appropriate, if the board failed to act on a shareholder proposal that received the majority of shares cast in the previous year. For 2013 annual meetings, ISS will not apply this new standard but will make voting recommendations based on its current policy. Under the ISS Policy Updates, if the company's response to the shareholder proposal involves less than full implementation of the shareholder proposal, ISS will consider the response on a case-by-case basis, taking into account: the subject matter of the proposal; the level of support and opposition to the resolution in past meetings; disclosed outreach efforts by the board to shareholders in light of the vote; actions taken by the board in response to its engagement with shareholders;
2 whether the underlying issue appears as a voting item on the ballot (as either shareholder or management proposals); and other factors as appropriate. ISS applied these factors on a less formal basis in at least one instance in 2012 (for Amgen Inc.'s 2012 annual meeting), in evaluating company responses to majority-supported shareholder proposals. The ISS FAQs include additional guidance about how ISS will apply these factors to specific types of proposals. For example: in response to an independent chair proposal, a policy that a company will adopt an independent chair structure upon the resignation of its current CEO would be "highly responsive"; in response to a proposal requesting majority voting in director elections, adopting a director resignation policy instead of a true majority vote standard generally would not be a sufficient response; and in response to a written consent proposal, a company may implement the right with "reasonable restrictions," including: (1) an ownership threshold of 10 percent or less; (2) no restrictions on agenda items; (3) a total review and solicitation period of no more than 90 days; (4) limits on when written consent may be used of no more than 30 days after a meeting already held or 90 days before a scheduled meeting; and (5) a requirement that the soliciting shareholders use best efforts to solicit consents from all shareholders; ISS will evaluate other restrictions in light of the company's disclosure of its shareholder outreach to determine what shareholders consider reasonable and the company's equity structure, among other things. Board Accountability Significant Pledging of Company Stock. ISS currently recommends votes against individual directors, committee members, or the entire board in extraordinary circumstances, such as situations involving "material failures of governance, stewardship, risk oversight, or fiduciary responsibilities at the company." Under the ISS Policy Updates, ISS will now consider significant pledging of company stock to be a failure of risk oversight that may warrant voting recommendations against individual directors, committee members, or the entire board. According to the ISS FAQs, ISS will determine whether a level of pledging is "significant" on a case-by-case basis by assessing the aggregate pledged shares relative to shares outstanding, market value, or trading volume. In determining voting recommendations for the election of directors at companies that have executives or directors with pledged company stock, ISS will take a case-by-case approach, taking into account the following factors: proxy disclosure of an anti-pledging policy that prohibits future pledging; the magnitude of aggregate pledged shares relative to total common shares outstanding, market value or trading volume; 2
3 disclosure of progress or lack of progress in reducing the magnitude of aggregate pledged shares over time; proxy disclosure that shares subject to stock ownership and holding requirements do not include pledged company stock; and any other relevant factors. The ISS FAQs indicate that, in order to mitigate a negative vote recommendation, an executive or director who has pledged a significant amount of company stock should reduce the aggregate pledged shares over time, and the company should adopt (and disclose in the proxy statement) a policy prohibiting future pledging. The ISS Policy Updates also identify hedging as a failure of risk oversight, and "any" amount of hedging "will be considered a problematic practice warranting a negative voting recommendation." Director Attendance at Board and Committee Meetings. Under its current policy, ISS recommends votes against the entire board where the company's proxy disclosure indicates that not all directors attended at least 75% of the aggregate board and committee meetings without disclosing the directors involved. Under the ISS Policy Updates, ISS will recommend votes against the individual director or directors in question where it is unclear whether the director attended, or where the director did not attend, at least 75% of the aggregate of the board and committee meetings during the period for which the director served, unless the proxy or another SEC filing discloses "acceptable" reasons for the absences. Such reasons generally are limited to: (1) medical issues/illness; (2) family emergencies; and (3) missing only one meeting, when the total number of all meetings is three or fewer. ISS will consider new nominees case-by-case and will take into account any schedule conflicts due to commitments made prior to their appointment to the board, if disclosed in the proxy or another SEC filing. Overboarded Directors. ISS currently recommends votes against individual directors who sit on more than a total of six public company boards, or are public company CEOs who serve on more than two public company boards in addition to their own (in which case ISS will issue an against recommendation only at the CEO's outside boards). Under the ISS Policy Updates, ISS will count all subsidiaries with publicly traded stock as separate boards. (Subsidiaries that issue only debt will not count.) This is a change from the current policy, which includes subsidiary boards as part of the parent company board if a subsidiary is at least 20 percent-owned. However, for public company CEOs, ISS will count the boards of controlled (at least 50 percent-owned) subsidiaries and affiliates as part of the parent company board in calculating the number of the CEO's outside boards. Categorization of Directors. The ISS Policy Updates streamline ISS's definition of an "inside director," which is now defined as follows: Current employee or current officer of the company or one of its affiliates. Director named in the Summary Compensation Table (excluding former interim officers). 3
4 Beneficial owner of more than 50 percent of the company's voting power, which may be aggregated if voting power is distributed among more than one member of a group (which is not a change from the current "inside director" definition). B. Executive Compensation Pay-for-Performance Evaluation. ISS annually conducts a two-step pay-for-performance analysis. First, ISS performs a quantitative analysis that measures performance relative to an ISScreated peer group and incorporates an absolute performance component related to the company's total shareholder return ("TSR"). If the quantitative analysis demonstrates significant unsatisfactory longterm pay-for-performance alignment (or, in the case of non-russell 3000 index companies, otherwise suggests misaligned pay and performance), ISS analyzes qualitative factors to determine how various pay elements may encourage or undermine long-term value creation and alignment with shareholder interests. The ISS Policy Updates include updates to ISS's pay-for-performance methodology. The updated methodology is detailed in the ISS pay-for-performance white paper, available at which ISS published in December 2012 and updated in January Peer Groups Under the ISS Policy Updates, ISS is revising its methodology for determining the peer group used to perform its quantitative pay-for-performance evaluation. In determining a company's peer group, ISS's new methodology will incorporate information from the company's self-selected peer group used for pay benchmarking, as disclosed in the company's proxy statement. ISS will start by creating a "seed group" of peers that includes all companies within the company's 4- and 6-digit Global Industry Classification Standard ("GICS") groups. Once the seed group is formed, ISS will draw peers from the seed group based on a specified order of priority, focusing primarily on the company's own 8-digit GICS group, then on the "underrepresented" GICS groups from the company's self-selected peers (i.e., where the proportion of peers in that GICS group is less than 1.15 times the proportion in the company's self-selected peer group). ISS aims to generate a peer group of between 14 and 24 companies in which the subject company is within 15 percent of the median size of the ISS peer group. Thus, when selecting peers, ISS will prioritize peers that maintain the company size near the median of the peer group, are in the company's own peer group, and that have chosen the company as one of their own peers. The methodology will maintain its focus on identifying companies that are reasonably similar to a company in terms of industry profile, size, and market capitalization. Realizable Pay Under the ISS Policy Updates, ISS also will include in the research reports for S&P 500 companies a comparison of three-year realizable pay to three-year grant date pay. In addition, a discussion of realizable pay generally will be included in the qualitative analysis for S&P 500 companies where the initial quantitative analysis shows a high or medium concern regarding pay-for-performance. For these companies, if the total pay granted during a three-year measurement period is significantly higher or 4
5 lower than its realizable value at the end of that period, ISS will analyze and consider the cause of this disconnect as part of its qualitative pay-for-performance analysis. Realizable pay, under the ISS definition, will be calculated based on a specified measurement period (generally three fiscal years, as reported in the Company's Summary Compensation Table) and will consist of the sum of base salary, bonus, short-term (annual) awards, the earned value or target value of long-term awards (based on stock price as of the end of the measurement period for share-based awards, and depending on whether the applicable performance period is completed within the measurement period), the Black-Scholes value (or, with respect to exercised stock options, the net value realized) of stock options granted during the measurement period, change in pension value and nonqualified deferred compensation earnings, and all "other" reported compensation. ISS notes that the realizable pay consideration may mitigate or exacerbate pay-for-performance concerns and that realizable pay that demonstrates a pay-for-performance philosophy will be a positive consideration. During an ISS webcast on the global 2013 proxy voting policy updates held on December 6, 2012, ISS indicated that in the future it may expand the realizable pay analysis to cover a broader group of companies. Company Golden Parachutes. Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, companies must hold separate shareholder votes on potential golden parachute payments when they seek shareholder approval for mergers, sales, and certain other transactions. ISS currently recommends votes on a case-by-case basis on proposals to approve a company's golden parachute compensation, consistent with ISS's policies on problematic pay practices related to severance packages, considering a number of features that may lead to an against vote. Under the ISS Policy Updates, ISS will: (1) begin to consider existing change-in-control arrangements maintained with named executive officers, rather than focusing only on new or extended arrangements; and (2) place further scrutiny on "multiple legacy problematic features" in change-in-control agreements. This change in policy will likely result in ISS recommending against a greater number of company golden parachute proposals than in the past. With respect to the second prong above, ISS's new policy notes that recent amendments incorporating problematic pay features will carry more weight in ISS's overall analysis of golden parachute proposals, but that the presence of multiple legacy problematic features also will be closely scrutinized. Features that may result in a negative vote recommendation include: (1) single- or modified single-trigger cash severance; (2) single-trigger acceleration of unvested equity awards; (3) excessive cash severance (i.e., greater than three times base salary and bonus); (4) excise tax gross-ups triggered and payable (as opposed to a provision to provide excise tax gross-ups); (5) excessive golden parachute payments (on an absolute basis or as a percentage of transaction equity value); (6) recent amendments that incorporate any problematic features (such as those listed in (1) through (5)) or recent actions (such as extraordinary equity grants) that may make packages so attractive as to influence merger agreements that may not be in the best interests of shareholders; or (7) the company's assertion that a proposed transaction is conditioned on shareholder approval of the golden parachute advisory vote. 5
6 C. Social/Environmental Issues Non-Compensation-Related Social and Environmental Shareholder Proposals. ISS currently evaluates social and environmental shareholder proposals case-by-case, considering a variety of factors. Under the ISS Policy Updates, ISS provides overarching principles to be applied to these proposals in all global markets and streamlines the factors that it considers in evaluating such proposals. ISS generally will vote case-by-case on environmental and social shareholder proposals, taking into account whether implementation of the proposal is likely to enhance or protect shareholder value, as well as the following factors: whether the issues presented in the proposal are more appropriately or effectively dealt with through legislation or government regulation; whether the company has already responded in an appropriate and sufficient manner to the issues raised in the proposal; whether the proposal's request is unduly burdensome (in scope, timeframe, or cost) or overly prescriptive; the company's approach, in comparison to any industry standard practices for addressing the issues raised by the proposal; if the proposal requests increased disclosure or greater transparency, whether or not reasonable and sufficient information is currently available to shareholders from the company or from other publicly available sources; and if the proposal requests increased disclosure or greater transparency, whether or not implementation would reveal proprietary or confidential information that could place the company at a competitive disadvantage. Compensation-Related Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Shareholder Proposals. Under its current policy, ISS generally recommends votes against proposals to link, or requesting a report on linking, executive compensation to environmental and social criteria, such as corporate downsizings, customer or employee satisfaction, community involvement, human rights, environmental performance, or predatory lending. Under the ISS Policy Updates, ISS now will recommend votes on proposals to incorporate sustainability (environmental and social) criteria on a case-by-case basis, rather than generally recommending votes against. In this regard, ISS notes that companies in certain sectors, including the extractive industry sector, increasingly are incorporating sustainability metrics in executive compensation. In evaluating these proposals, ISS will continue to consider substantially similar factors to those it currently takes into account: whether the company has significant and/or persistent controversies or violations regarding social and/or environmental issues; 6
7 whether the company has management systems and oversight mechanisms in place regarding its social and environmental performance; the degree to which industry peers have incorporated similar non-financial performance criteria in their executive compensation practices; and the company's current level of disclosure regarding its environmental and social performance. Lobbying Shareholder Proposals. The ISS Policy Updates clarify that the ISS voting policy regarding lobbying proposals applies not only to proposals addressing lobbying activities, but also to proposals on lobbying policies and procedures, and on indirect and grassroots lobbying. ISS will continue to evaluate lobbying proposals on a case-by-case basis, taking into account: the company's current disclosure of relevant policies and oversight mechanisms; recent significant controversies, fines, or litigation regarding the company's lobbying-related activities; and the impact that any specific public policy issues addressed in the proposal may have on the company's business operations. D. Other ISS Developments: New Governance Risk Scoring Methodology ISS currently uses the Governance Risk Indicators ("GRId") methodology to evaluate and rate public companies' practices and governance-related risk levels across four categories of corporate governance: board of directors, executive compensation, audit, and shareholder rights. Companies' GRId scores are published in ISS proxy research reports and posted on companies' Yahoo! Finance profile websites. Starting in late February or early March 2013, ISS will replace GRId with the ISS Governance QuickScore, a new methodology to identify governance risks. According to ISS, QuickScore is similar to GRId but differs in the following respects: the new quantitatively-driven methodology focuses on "correlations between governance factors and key financial metrics" with a secondary policy-based focus on qualitative aspects of governance; QuickScore will continue to score companies based on the same four categories of governance practices, but, instead of GRId's color-coded levels of concern, QuickScore will report a company's governance risk score on a numeric scale and, later in the year, will also score companies relative to industry sector; and QuickScore initially will cover 4,100 companies in 25 markets, including the 3,000 largest U.S. companies based on market capitalization. The new QuickScore Technical Document is available at From now through February 15 (and also after QuickScore is launched in late February or early March), companies within the QuickScore universe will have access to ISS's data verification website to review 7
8 the data collected by ISS on the QuickScore factors. Covered companies' ISS proxy research reports will include the new QuickScore data when QuickScore is launched in late February or early March. II. Glass Lewis Guidelines Updates Board Responsiveness to a Significant Shareholder Vote. The Glass Lewis Guidelines add a new policy regarding board responsiveness to any proposal receiving a shareholder vote of 25% or more against the company's recommendation. Under this policy, when 25% or more of votes cast (excluding abstentions and broker non-votes) oppose the company's recommendation on any proposal, Glass Lewis will evaluate the board's responsiveness to the vote on a case-by-case basis. It will review the company's publicly available disclosures and take into account: at the board level, any changes in directorships, committee memberships, disclosure of related party transactions, meeting attendance or other responsibilities; any revisions made to the company's certificate of incorporation, bylaws, or other governance documents; any press or news releases indicating changes in, or the adoption of, new company policies, business practices or special reports; and any modifications made to the design and structure of the company's compensation program. If Glass Lewis determines that the board did not respond appropriately, Glass Lewis may recommend votes against director nominees or oppose the board's voting recommendation on related company proposals. Overboarded Directors. Glass Lewis generally recommends votes against a director nominee who serves as an executive officer of any public company while serving on more than two other public company boards. The Glass Lewis Guidelines clarify that Glass Lewis will recommend votes against the director only at the other public companies where the director serves on the board, and not at the company where the director serves as an executive officer. Exclusive Forum Provisions. Under the Glass Lewis Guidelines, Glass Lewis generally will continue to recommend votes against any proposal to amend the certificate or bylaws to adopt an exclusive forum provision limiting shareholders' rights to bring legal claims in a specific jurisdiction. However, the Guidelines indicate that Glass Lewis may support such a proposal in certain cases, if the company: (1) offers a compelling argument as to why the exclusive forum provision would directly benefit shareholders; (2) provides evidence of abuse of legal process in other, non-favored jurisdictions; and (3) maintains a strong record of "good corporate governance practices." Other Updates. The Glass Lewis Guidelines also include updates that address (1) the application of the Guidelines that call for Glass Lewis to recommend votes "against" a board committee chair when there is no committee chair or the committee chair is not up for election; (2) counting shares in equity compensation plans in ways that understate the potential dilution or cost to shareholders; and (3) the issuance of preferred stock at real estate investment trusts ("REITs"). 8
9 Executive Compensation. In July 2012, Glass Lewis updated its peer group selection methodology used to evaluate pay-for-performance for purposes of voting recommendations on company say-on-pay proposals. For annual meetings held on or after July 1, 2012, Glass Lewis will use a peer group approach developed by Equilar, which is based on market data and social analytics. Under this approach, the analysis starts with the company's own disclosed peers and examines the strength of the relationships between these companies to create a peer group of those companies with the strongest relationships. New Proxy Paper. Glass Lewis also recently announced that, beginning in early February, it will introduce updates to its "Proxy Paper" reports, including: (1) a new cover page that will highlight relevant information, including "issues of concern"; (2) an "ownership profile" section; (3) a "company profile" section that provides important company information; (4) a proposal summary at the beginning of every proposal analysis that summarizes historical voting results and key issues of concern; and (5) a streamlined presentation format for the proposal analysis that uses reader-friendly formats, such as charts and bullet points. What Companies Should Do Now Given ISS's influence, and Glass Lewis's growing influence, over voting results, companies should assess their practices and disclosures against the criteria and factors described in the voting policies. While companies need to be aware of these policies, boards of directors must act in a manner consistent with their fiduciary duty to act in the best interest of the company. In many cases, the extent to which a company recognizes an issue and proactively addresses the concern in its disclosures and discussions with its shareholders can make a significant difference in the content of ISS's and Glass Lewis's analysis and, at times, their voting recommendation. For example, in recent proxy seasons ISS proxy voting recommendations have had a significant impact on the level of support for independent chair shareholder proposals, and ISS's voting recommendations often depend on whether a company has a lead independent director that performs the duties specified in the ISS policy. In light of the policy updates, companies should begin to: For S&P 500 companies, consider whether to include "realizable" pay in the proxy statement and, if so, consider the extent to which the company should use the ISS definition. In addressing shareholder proposals for this proxy season, be mindful that the new ISS policy on majority-supported shareholder proposals will take effect starting in Consider enhanced shareholder engagement to ascertain shareholder views on company and shareholder proposals anticipated for this proxy season and disclose such efforts. Consider additional shareholder solicitation efforts as appropriate. Consider whether any directors will be "overboarded" under the ISS Policy Updates due to serving on the boards of publicly traded subsidiaries. 9
10 If any director or executive has pledged a significant amount of company stock, consider adopting and disclosing a policy prohibiting future pledging and suggesting that the director or executive reduces the aggregate pledged shares over time. Consider adopting a policy prohibiting the hedging of company stock. Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher's lawyers are available to assist in addressing any questions you may have regarding these issues. Please contact the Gibson Dunn lawyer with whom you work, or any of the following: John F. Olson - Washington, D.C. ( , jolson@gibsondunn.com) Brian J. Lane - Washington, D.C. ( , blane@gibsondunn.com) Ronald O. Mueller - Washington, D.C. ( , rmueller@gibsondunn.com) Amy L. Goodman - Washington, D.C. ( , agoodman@gibsondunn.com) Stephen W. Fackler - Palo Alto, CA ( , sfackler@gibsondunn.com) James J. Moloney - Orange County, CA ( , jmoloney@gibsondunn.com) Elizabeth Ising - Washington, D.C. ( , eising@gibsondunn.com) Sean C. Feller - Los Angeles, CA ( , sfeller@gibsondunn.com) Gillian McPhee - Washington, D.C. ( , gmcphee@gibsondunn.com) 2013 Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP Attorney Advertising: The enclosed materials have been prepared for general informational purposes only and are not intended as legal advice 10
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE PROVISIONS IN THE DODD-FRANK U.S. FINANCIAL REGULATORY REFORM BILL
June 30, 2010 EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE PROVISIONS IN THE DODD-FRANK U.S. FINANCIAL REGULATORY REFORM BILL To Our Clients and Friends: On June 30, 2010, the U.S. House of Representatives
More informationISS Issues Final 2013 Voting Policy Updates
CLIENT MEMORANDUM ISS Issues Final 2013 Voting Policy Updates November 20, 2012 On November 16, 2012, Institutional Shareholder Services issued its final updates to its proxy voting guidelines for the
More informationInstitutional Shareholder Services (ISS)
COMPENSATION COMMITTEE HANDBOOK Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) The Basics According to its Website, ISS is the leading provider of corporate governance research, covering more than 40,000 shareholder
More informationU.S. Compensation Policies
U.S. Compensation Policies Frequently Asked Questions Updated December 14, 2017 New and materially updated questions are highlighted in yellow This FAQ is intended to provide general guidance regarding
More informationTransparency. Inclusiveness. Global Expertise.
Frequently Asked Questions on U.S. Compensation Policies March 28, 2014 BE SURE TO CHECK OUR WEBSITE FOR THE LATEST VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. Copyright 2014 by ISS
More informationNavigating ISS in 2013: Compensation Voting Policy Updates, QuickScore, and New Burn Rates
Navigating ISS in 2013: Compensation Voting Policy Updates, QuickScore, and New Burn Rates The beginning of the year yielded a flurry of news from advisory firm Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS).
More informationU.S. Compensation Policies
U.S. Compensation Policies Frequently Asked Questions Updated December 20, 2018 New and materially updated questions are highlighted in yellow This FAQ is intended to provide general guidance regarding
More informationISS Releases QualityScore Updates and Opens Data Verification Period
November 2, 2016 SIDLEY UPDATE ISS Releases QualityScore Updates and Opens Data Verification Period ISS Publishes New Questions and Other Methodology Updates to Its QualityScore (Formerly QuickScore) Governance
More informationDispatches from the Proxy Front: A Preview of the 2013 Annual Meeting Season. Steven M. Pantina Managing Director January 18, 2013
Dispatches from the Proxy Front: A Preview of the 2013 Annual Meeting Season Steven M. Pantina Managing Director January 18, 2013 A Look Back at Say-on-Pay Votes in the 2012 Proxy Season Nearly 2,000 ballots
More informationHong Kong. Proxy Voting Guidelines Benchmark Policy Recommendations. Effective for Meetings on or after February 1, 2016
Hong Kong Proxy Voting Guidelines 2016 Benchmark Policy Recommendations Effective for Meetings on or after February 1, 2016 Published December 18, 2015 www.issgovernance.com 2015 ISS Institutional Shareholder
More informationI. Notable Updates to ISS s U.S. Proxy Voting Guidelines
Memorandum ISS and Glass Lewis Issue Updates to Their Proxy Voting Guidelines for the 2016 Season November 24, 2015 Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. ( ISS ) and Glass Lewis & Co. ( Glass Lewis )
More informationTransparency. Inclusiveness. Global Expertise.
2014 U.S. Proxy Voting Concise Guidelines January 13, 2014 Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. Copyright 2013 by ISS www.issgovernance.com ISS' 2014 U.S. Proxy Voting Concise Guidelines Updated: Jan.
More informationComp Talks Proxy Season Rundown Scrutinizing 2017 to Improve 2018
Comp Talks Proxy Season Rundown Scrutinizing 2017 to Improve 2018 Reid Pearson, Alliance Advisors Megan Arthur Schilling, Cooley Moderated by Amy Wood, Cooley attorney advertisement Copyright Cooley LLP,
More informationISS RELEASES FINAL FAQS FOR THE 2018 PROXY SEASON
NEW YORK CHICAGO LOS ANGELES SAN FRANCISCO ATLANTA HOUSTON BOSTON ALERT December 19, 2017 ISS RELEASES FINAL FAQS FOR THE 2018 PROXY SEASON On December 14, ISS published (1) U.S. Compensation Policy Frequently
More informationDodd-Frank Corporate Governance
Dodd-Frank Corporate Governance 1 The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act: Executive Compensation and Corporate Governance Reforms, SEC Disclosure and Proxy Access Implications for
More informationCorporate Governance and Responsible Investment Policy North America 2018
Corporate Governance and Responsible Investment Policy North America 2018 Contents Company board...3 Structure and operation...3 Board effectiveness...3 Compensation...4 Shareholder rights...6 This policy
More informationPROXY ADVISORY FIRMS RELEASE 2017 POLICY UPDATES
NEW YORK CHICAGO LOS ANGELES SAN FRANCISCO ATLANTA HOUSTON BOSTON ALERT November 28, 2016 PROXY ADVISORY FIRMS RELEASE 2017 POLICY UPDATES Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. ( ISS ) and Glass, Lewis
More informationGOVERNANCE AND PROXY VOTING GUIDELINES
GOVERNANCE AND PROXY VOTING GUIDELINES NOVEMBER 2017 ABOUT NEUBERGER BERMAN Founded in 1939, Neuberger Berman is a private, 100% independent, employee-owned investment manager. From offices in 30 cities
More informationUpdated: Say-on-Golden Parachute Votes
TRENDS & ISSUES Updated: Say-on-Golden Parachute Votes Including Vote Results for Meetings as of 6/30/2016 AUTHORS Margaret Black Managing Director This white paper discusses our observations among 731
More informationPROXY VOTING GUIDELINES
PROXY VOTING GUIDELINES T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc. and its affiliated investment advisers ( T. Rowe Price ) recognize and adhere to the principle that one of the privileges of owning stock in a company
More informationUpdated ISS Policies for 2014: Compensation Voting Policy FAQs, Data Verification Dates in QuickScore 2.0 and New Burn Rates
Updated ISS Policies for 2014: Compensation Voting Policy FAQs, Data Verification Dates in QuickScore 2.0 and New Burn Rates Two new pieces of guidance have already emerged in 2014 from advisory firm Institutional
More informationINSTITUTIONAL SHAREHOLDER SERVICES REBRANDS AND RELEASES UPDATED GOVERNANCE QUALITYSCORE MODEL
November 8, 2016 NEW YORK CHICAGO LOS ANGELES SAN FRANCISCO ATLANTA HOUSTON BOSTON ALERT INSTITUTIONAL SHAREHOLDER SERVICES REBRANDS AND RELEASES UPDATED GOVERNANCE QUALITYSCORE MODEL Institutional Shareholder
More informationPROXY SEASON AND FORM 10-K FILINGS: A look back at 2015 and what to expect in 2016
PROXY SEASON AND FORM 10-K FILINGS: A look back at 2015 and what to expect in 2016 DECEMBER 2015 OVERVIEW This overview summarizes new disclosure requirements and other developments that will generally
More informationHot Topics in Corporate Governance. November 14, 2017
Hot Topics in Corporate Governance November 14, 2017 Changes at the SEC New Chair: Jay Clayton New Director of the Division of Corporation Finance: Bill Hinman Two open Commission seats remain, with two
More informationNew ISS Policy Update: Tougher Standards for 2011
CLIENT MEMORANDUM November 22, 2010 New ISS Policy Update: Tougher Standards for 2011 On Friday, November 19, ISS Corporate Governance Services released its U.S. Corporate Governance Policy Updates on
More informationHeads Up for the 2017 Proxy Season: Tackle Director Vulnerabilities for Re-Election
a From the Public Company Advisory Group of Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP March 1, 2017 Heads Up for the 2017 Proxy Season: Tackle Vulnerabilities for Re-Election By Lyuba Goltser and Reid Powell Taking stock
More informationResponsible Ownership: 2016 Proxy and Engagement Report
June 2017 Responsible Ownership: 2016 Proxy and Engagement Report INTRODUCTION We at Russell Investments believe active ownership is not just an obligation it is part of the value creation process. Enhancing
More information2018 Americas Proxy Voting Guidelines Updates
2018 Americas Proxy Voting Guidelines Updates Benchmark Policy Changes for U.S., Canada, and Brazil Effective for Meetings on or after February 1, 2018 Published November 16, 2017 www.issgovernance.com
More informationEven before the five-year EGC limit expires, a company can lose EGC treatment by tripping any one of the following triggers, including:
June 2017 Once a company exits the JOBS Act, it must hold Say-on-Pay votes and disclose a host of new governance and compensation information planning early makes for a much easier transition. The JOBS
More informationISS and Glass Lewis Policy Updates for the 2018 Proxy Season
November 29, 2017 SIDLEY UPDATE and Policy Updates for the 2018 Proxy Season Institutional Shareholder Services () and & Co. () have updated their proxy voting policies for shareholder meetings held on
More informationSay On Pay Best Practices For 2012
Say On Pay Best Practices For 2012 by John K. Wilson and Joshua A. Agen Most public U.S. corporations faced their first shareholder say on pay vote last proxy season, and the results were mixed. While
More information2013 Hong Kong Proxy Voting Guidelines
2013 Hong Kong Proxy Voting Guidelines December 19, 2012 Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. Copyright 2012 by ISS ISS' 2013 Hong Kong Proxy Voting Guidelines Effective for Meetings on or after Feb.
More informationIRS ISSUES INITIAL SELECTIVE GUIDANCE ON NEW SECTION 162(M) PROVISIONS, INCLUDING TRANSITION RULES
August 30, 2018 IRS ISSUES INITIAL SELECTIVE GUIDANCE ON NEW SECTION 162(M) PROVISIONS, INCLUDING TRANSITION RULES To Our Clients and Friends: On August 21, 2018, the IRS released Notice 2018-68, which
More informationCLIENT ALERT. ISS Publishes Evaluating Pay for Performance Alignment White Paper
December 28, 2011 CLIENT ALERT Last week, ISS published a white paper detailing its new pay-for-performance methodology. As in the past, a significant misalignment between pay and company performance may
More informationProxy Paper Guidelines
Proxy Paper Guidelines 2012 Proxy Season AN OVERVIEW OF THE GLASS LEWIS APPROACH TO PROXY ADVICE Summary United States 1 Contents I. Election of Directors I. Election of Directors... 3 Board of Directors...
More informationSEC Proposes Say-on-Pay Rules
Securities Alert NOVEMBER 23 2010 SEC Proposes Say-on-Pay Rules Advisory Votes on Executive Compensation and Golden Parachute Compensation, and Frequency of the Executive Compensation Vote BY MEGAN N.
More informationU.S. PROXY VOTING CONCISE GUIDELINES. Effective for Meetings on or after February 1, 2017
PROXY VOTING GUIDELINES U.S. PROXY VOTING CONCISE GUIDELINES Effective for Meetings on or after February 1, 2017 Vert Asset Management, LLC has delegated the authority to vote proxies for the portfolio
More informationDodd-Frank Update Overview of Remaining Open Items
Dodd-Frank Update Overview of Remaining Open Items Pay Ratio Companies required to disclose the ratio of the CEO pay to that of the median employee wherever summary compensation table data is disclosed,
More informationAssociation of Corporate Counsel 2017 Shareholder Proxy Season: Governance Decision Making in a Maelstrom of Change
Association of Corporate Counsel 2017 Shareholder Proxy Season: March 22, 2017 Speakers: Christine Edwards Jerry Loeser Michael Melbinger Speakers: Christine Edwards Chair of Winston & Strawn LLP s Bank
More informationFREDERIC W. COOK & CO., INC.
FREDERIC W. COOK & CO., INC. NEW YORK CHICAGO LOS ANGELES SAN FRANCISCO ATLANTA HOUSTON BOSTON April 17, 2015 Shareholder Engagement on Executive Compensation A Primer on the Why, When, Who and How? As
More informationLessons from the 2018 Proxy Season
SC1: 4706990 Lessons from the 2018 Proxy Season S&C Client Webinar September 13, 2018 Janet Geldzahler Melissa Sawyer Marc Trevino Overview of Presentation Environmental/social/political proposals more
More informationBlackRock Investment Stewardship
BlackRock Investment Stewardship Global Corporate Governance & Engagement Principles October 2017 Contents Introduction to BlackRock... 2 Philosophy on corporate governance... 2 Corporate governance, engagement
More informationISS Issues Policy Updates for 2011 Proxy Season Institutional Shareholder Services, the prominent
December 1, 2010 compensia.com ISS Issues Policy Updates for 2011 Proxy Season Institutional Shareholder Services, the prominent corporate governance advisory services firm, has updated its U.S. corporate
More informationISS RELEASES PRELIMINARY FAQS FOR 2018 PROXY SEASON
NEW YORK CHICAGO LOS ANGELES SAN FRANCISCO ATLANTA HOUSTON BOSTON ALERT November 28, 2017 ISS RELEASES PRELIMINARY FAQS FOR 2018 PROXY SEASON On November 21, ISS published U.S. compensation policy preliminary
More informationU.S. Equity Compensation Plans
U.S. Equity Compensation Plans Frequently Asked Questions Updated December 16, 2016 New and materially updated questions are highlighted in yellow www.issgovernance.com 2016 ISS Institutional Shareholder
More informationFREDERIC W. COOK & CO., INC.
FREDERIC W. COOK & CO., INC. NEW YORK CHICAGO LOS ANGELES SAN FRANCISCO ATLANTA HOUSTON BOSTON December 9, 2014 Proxy Advisory Firms Release 2015 Policy Updates In November, Institutional Shareholder Services
More informationRESPONSIBLE INVESTMENT POLICY. Columbia Management Investment Advisers, LLC
POLICY Columbia Management Investment Advisers, LLC APPROACH TO RESPONSIBLE INVESTMENT COLUMBIA THREADNEEDLE INVESTMENTS This brochure provides a broad outline of the approach to responsible investment
More informationUnited States. Concise Proxy Voting Guidelines. Benchmark Policy Recommendations. Effective for Meetings on or after February 1, 2018
United States Concise Proxy Voting Guidelines Benchmark Policy Recommendations Effective for Meetings on or after February 1, 2018 Published January 9, 2018 www.issgovernance.com 2018 ISS Institutional
More informationFMR Co. ( FMR ) Proxy Voting Guidelines
January 2017 I. General Principles A. Voting of shares will be conducted in a manner consistent with the best interests of clients. In other words, securities of a portfolio company will generally be voted
More informationCo r p o r at e a n d
Co r p o r at e a n d Securities Law Update July 2010 Analysis of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act Executive Compensation, Corporate Governance and Enforcement Provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act Affecting
More informationWSGR ALERT PRESIDENT TO SIGN FINANCIAL OVERHAUL BILL. Corporate Governance and Executive Compensation Update. I. Corporate Governance
WSGR ALERT JULY 2010 PRESIDENT TO SIGN FINANCIAL OVERHAUL BILL Corporate Governance and Executive Compensation Update On July 15, 2010, after months of deliberation, Congress passed a comprehensive financial
More informationProxy voting and engagement
SPRING 2017 Proxy voting and engagement AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE EQUITY INVESTING PROCESS 2 Mellon Capital INTRODUCTION This paper provides an overview of BNY Mellon s proxy voting and engagement philosophy
More informationISS FAQ: Say-on-Pay Remuneration Changes France
ISS FAQ: Say-on-Pay Remuneration Changes France 2014 Report Author Eva Chauvet eva.chauvet@issgovernance.com Introduction This report provides information on the new recommendations in France relating
More informationCorporate Governance & Proxy Voting
Asset management Professional clients only Corporate Governance & Proxy Voting Policy & Procedures 1 Our approach to governance and stewardship UBS Asset Management's stewardship policy is our commitment
More informationISS Issues Policy Updates and FAQs for 2011 Proxy Season
December 21, 2010 ISS Issues Policy Updates and FAQs for 2011 Proxy Season Significant Changes to Problematic Pay Practices, Burn Rate Policies and Forward-Looking Commitments Important compensation-related
More informationISS and Glass Lewis Policy Updates for the 2019 Proxy Season
SIDLEY UPDATE and Policy Updates for the 2019 Proxy Season November 27, 2018 Institutional Shareholder Services () and & Co. () have updated their proxy voting policies for shareholder meetings held on
More informationPay-for-Performance Mechanics
` Pay-for-Performance Mechanics ISS Quantitative and Qualitative Approach (U.S.) (Updated with regard to shareholder meetings held on or after Feb. 1, 2018) Published: December 2017 www.issgovernance.com
More informationEXECUTIVE REMUNERATION PERSPECTIVE
EXECUTIVE REMUNERATION PERSPECTIVE US ISSUE 99 JANUARY 2013 TEN TIPS FOR A TROUBLE-FREE 2013 PROXY SEASON This Perspective was adapted from a more in-depth article from Mercer Select. Mercer Select is
More informationRecent Developments in Say-on-Pay in the US and UK
Recent Developments in Say-on-Pay in the US and UK By Thomas Asmar and Sarah Gadd Latham & Watkins attorneys from the US and UK provide updates on the recent developments in Say-on-Pay from each of their
More informationISS: THE GLOBAL LEADER IN GOVERNANCE
ISS: THE GLOBAL LEADER IN GOVERNANCE Santa Barbara County Employees Retirement System January 24, 2018 Now more than ever, Matters www.issgovernance.com AGENDA Corporate Evolution Proxy Voting Policy Options
More informationU.S. Equity Compensation Plans
U.S. Equity Compensation Plans Frequently Asked Questions Updated December 19, 2018 New and materially updated questions are highlighted in yellow This FAQ is intended to provide general guidance regarding
More informationGovernance Round-Up. In this Issue: Increasing Director Responsibilities and Scrutiny of Overboarding. Investor Focus on Share Buybacks
Governance Round-Up 1 Governance Round-Up In this Issue: Increasing Director Responsibilities and Scrutiny of Overboarding Investor Focus on Share Buybacks Delaware Supreme Court Affirms Narrow Rural/Metro
More informationCurrent Issues in Executive Compensation
Current Issues in Executive Compensation Carol Bowie, Head of ISS Americas Research Group Evan Farber, General Counsel, The Advisory Board Company Michael Collins, Partner, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher Your
More informationInternational. Taft-Hartley Proxy Voting Guidelines Updates Policy Recommendations. Published January 25, 2017
International Taft-Hartley Proxy Voting Guidelines Updates 2017 Policy Recommendations Published January 25, 2017 www.issgovernance.com 2017 ISS Institutional Shareholder Services TABLE OF CONTENTS BOARD
More informationWestfield Capital Management Company, L.P. Proxy Voting Policy Revised March 2012
Westfield Capital Management Company, L.P. Proxy Voting Policy Revised March 2012 Introduction Westfield Capital Management Company, L.P. ( Westfield ) will offer to vote proxies for all client accounts.
More informationResponsible Ownership: Proxy and Engagement Report
Responsible Ownership: 2017 Proxy and Engagement Report March 2018 Introduction Russell Investments believes that being an active owner is an important component of its investment responsibilities. Through
More informationSEC Adopts Say-on-Pay Rules
News Bulletin January 31, 2011 SEC Adopts Say-on-Pay Rules On January 25, 2011, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC ) adopted rule changes to implement the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall
More informationLessons from the 2017 Proxy Season
Lessons from the 2017 Proxy Season S&C Client Webinar September 18, 2017 Janet Geldzahler Glen Schleyer Overview of Presentation Summary of proxy access proposals for 2017; further confirmation of market
More informationLooking Back: 2010 Proxy Season in Review
Cynthia M. Krus, Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP Lisa A. Morgan, Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP Reid Pearson, The Altman Group Francis H. Byrd, The Altman Group June 30, 2010 Looking Back: 2010 Proxy
More informationRECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN FEDERAL SECURITIES REGULATION
Sarbanes-Oxley Institute: Corporate Governance, Financial Disclosure, Auditing, and Other Issues ALI-ABA October 6-7, 2005 Washington, D.C. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN FEDERAL SECURITIES REGULATION OF CORPORATE
More informationInternational. Proxy Voting Guidelines Updates Sustainability Policy Recommendations. Published January 25, 2017
International Proxy Voting Guidelines Updates 2017 Sustainability Policy Recommendations Published January 25, 2017 www.issgovernance.com 2017 ISS Institutional Shareholder Services TABLE OF CONTENTS ELECTION
More informationUnited States. Proxy Voting Guideline Updates Benchmark Policy Recommendations. Effective for Meetings on or after Feb.
United States Proxy Voting Guideline Updates 2015 Benchmark Policy Recommendations Effective for Meetings on or after Feb. 1, 2015 Published Nov. 6, 2014 www.issgovernance.com 2014 ISS Institutional Shareholder
More informationALI-ABA Postgraduate Course in Federal Securities Law July 24-25, 2008 San Francisco, California
1 ALI-ABA Postgraduate Course in Federal Securities Law July 24-25, 2008 San Francisco, California Selected Recent Developments in U.S. Securities Laws and Corporate Finance By John F. Olson Jonathan C.
More informationPRI (PRINCIPLES FOR RESPONSIBLE INVESTMENT) PROXY VOTING POLICY
PRI (PRINCIPLES FOR RESPONSIBLE INVESTMENT) PROXY VOTING POLICY February 2016 PREAMBLE The following is a summary of the PRI Proxy Voting Policy applied by our supplier, Institutional Shareholder Services
More informationApril 2017 April 2016 (Last Amended April 2017) April 2016 (Last Amended April 2017) April 2016 (Last Amended April 2017)
April 2017 : : : : : : : : : : : : : : About the Teachers Retirement System Statement of Purpose and Principles Core Principles Active Ownership Commitment and Legacy Approach to Active Ownership Proxy
More informationPerspectives Paper NACD. Pay for Performance and Supplemental Pay Definitions
NACD Perspectives Paper Pay for Performance and Supplemental Pay Definitions December 2013 Published by National Association of Corporate Directors NACD Perspectives Paper: Pay for Performance and Supplemental
More informationViewpoint on Executive Compensation
Viewpoint on Executive Compensation Opinion Research Alert Direct Shareholder Engagement on Say on Pay: By: Jon Weinstein, Chris Brindisi, and Blaine Martin Partners Aubrey Bout Chris Carstens John R.
More informationU.S. Proxy Voting Research Procedures & Policies (Excluding Compensation-Related)
U.S. Proxy Voting Research Procedures & Policies (Excluding Compensation-Related) Frequently Asked Questions Updated: April 9, 2018 New or materially-updated questions highlighted in yellow www.issgovernance.com
More informationAsia-Pacific. Proxy Voting Guideline Updates Benchmark Policy Recommendations. Effective for Meetings on or after Feb.
Asia-Pacific Proxy Voting Guideline Updates 2015 Benchmark Policy Recommendations Effective for Meetings on or after Feb. 1, 2015 Published Nov. 6, 2014 www.issgovernance.com 2014 ISS Institutional Shareholder
More informationThere are a number of
October 2015 Share Authorization Requestss in Canada: What s Required and What s Recommended There are a number of parties that have influence overr a company s share plan design as well as obtaining investor
More informationSouth Africa. Proxy Voting Guidelines. Benchmark Policy Recommendations. Effective for Meetings on or after April 1, Published February 19, 2018
South Africa Proxy Voting Guidelines Benchmark Policy Recommendations Effective for Meetings on or after April 1, 2018 Published February 19, 2018 www.issgovernance.com 2018 ISS Institutional Shareholder
More informationUnited States. Concise Proxy Voting Guidelines Benchmark Policy Recommendations. Effective for Meetings on or after February 1, 2015
United States Concise Proxy Voting Guidelines 2015 Benchmark Policy Recommendations Effective for Meetings on or after February 1, 2015 Published January 7, 2015 Updated February 26, 2015 www.issgovernance.com
More information2010 Fall Meeting Washington, DC November 19-20, Practical Guidance on Executive Compensation in the Dodd-Frank Era
2010 Fall Meeting Washington, DC November 19-20, 2010 Practical Guidance on Executive Compensation in the Dodd-Frank Era Preparing for the 2011 Proxy Season ABA Subcommittee on Executive Benefits, Executive
More informationExecutive Compensation Alert
Executive Compensation Alert Inside RiskMetrics Group 2010 Compensation Policy Updates Introduction Key Changes in Overall Evaluation Approach Executive Compensation Evaluation Policy Executive Compensation
More informationKey Compensation Items for the 2019 Proxy Season and Beyond
Latham & Watkins Benefits, Compensation & Employment Practice January 16, 2019 Number 2434 Key Compensation Items for the 2019 Proxy Season and Beyond Public companies should consider a number of items
More informationAustralia and New Zealand Proxy Voting Guidelines Updates
2018-2019 Australia and New Zealand Proxy Voting Guidelines Updates Benchmark Policy Changes Effective for Meetings on or after October 1, 2018 Published September 28, 2018 www.issgovernance.com 2018 ISS
More informationCanada. Equity Plan Scorecard. Frequently Asked Questions. Effective for Meetings on or after February 1, Published January 4, 2016
Canada Equity Plan Scorecard Frequently Asked Questions Effective for Meetings on or after February 1, 2016 Published January 4, 2016 Updated January 20, 2016 www.issgovernance.com 2016 ISS Institutional
More informationKiltearn Partners LLP FCA Ref: Stewardship Code Statement
Kiltearn Partners LLP FCA Ref: 540470 This document describes how Kiltearn Partners LLP ( Kiltearn ) has applied the principles of the Financial Reporting Council s ( FRC s ) Stewardship Code (the Stewardship
More informationGlobal Proxy Voting Guidelines
Global Proxy Voting Guidelines Upon a client s written request, Wellington Management Company llp ( Wellington Management ) votes securities that are held in the client s account in response to proxies
More informationTaiwan. Proxy Voting Guidelines. Benchmark Policy Recommendations. Effective for Meetings on or after February 1, Published January 10, 2018
Taiwan Proxy Voting Guidelines Benchmark Policy Recommendations Effective for Meetings on or after February 1, 2018 Published January 10, 2018 www.issgovernance.com 2018 ISS Institutional Shareholder Services
More information2018 Corporate Governance & Incentive Design Survey Fall 2018
2018 Corporate Governance & Incentive Design Survey Fall 2018 Contents Executive Summary 2 Corporate Governance Practices 3 Proxy Disclosure 12 Company Policies 19 Annual Incentive Plan Design Practices
More informationExecutive Compensation and Governance-Related Reforms Propose Extensive Changes to Procedure and Disclosure
Executive Compensation & Employee Benefits July 27, 2009 Executive Compensation and Governance-Related Reforms Propose Extensive Changes to Procedure and Disclosure While April may be the cruelest month,
More informationPOLICY ON THE PRINCIPLES GOVERNING THE EXERCISE OF VOTING RIGHTS OF PUBLIC COMPANIES
POLICY ON THE PRINCIPLES GOVERNING THE EXERCISE OF VOTING RIGHTS OF PUBLIC COMPANIES Objectives The objective of this policy is to advise companies of the governance and corporate responsibility practices
More informationFREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT PERIODIC REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR U.S. ISSUERS PRINCIPAL EXCHANGE ACT REPORTS
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT PERIODIC REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR U.S. ISSUERS PRINCIPAL EXCHANGE ACT REPORTS These Frequently Asked Questions should be read together with our Frequently Asked Questions
More informationComp Talks. Practical Implementation Tips for Dodd Frank Act Pay Ratio Disclosure, Pay Versus Performance Disclosure and Clawback Policies
Comp Talks Practical Implementation Tips for Dodd Frank Act Pay Ratio Disclosure, Pay Versus Performance Disclosure and Clawback Policies Barbara Mirza, Cooley Nathan O Connor, Equity Methods Moderated
More information2016 Proxy Season Preparations
2016 Proxy Season Preparations March 11, 2016 Guest Speaker Patrick McGurn, Institutional Shareholder Services, Inc. Christine Edwards, Winston & Strawn LLP Karen Weber, Winston & Strawn LLP Jerry Loeser,
More informationDodd-Frank Act Provisions
Corporate and Securities Alert: The Dodd-Frank Act: Provisions Affecting Corporate Governance And Executive Compensation Disclosures For All Public Companies JULY 21, 2010 On July 21, 2010, President Barack
More informationFRANKLIN ADVISERS, INC. Proxy Voting Policies & Procedures An SEC Compliance Rule Policy and Procedures*
FRANKLIN ADVISERS, INC. Proxy Voting Policies & Procedures An SEC Compliance Rule Policy and Procedures* March 2018 RESPONSIBILITY OF THE INVESTMENT MANAGER TO VOTE PROXIES Franklin Advisers, Inc. (hereinafter
More informationISS Publishes Guidance on Pay-for- Performance Assessments and Updates to Governance Ratings System
ISS Publishes Guidance on Pay-for- Performance Assessments and Updates to Governance Ratings System Provides Additional Detail on Measuring Relative and Absolute Alignment Between CEO Pay and Total Shareholder
More informationProposed Revisions to the Volcker Rule s Implementing Rules Select Proposals and Open Questions
STROOCK & STROOCK & LAVAN LLP Proposed Revisions to the Volcker Rule s Implementing Rules Select Proposals and Open Questions July 2, 2018 On May 30, 2018, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
More information