Updated Glass Lewis Proxy Voting Guidelines

I previously blogged about certain compensation related updates to ISS’ proxy voting guidelines for 2020.  With proxy season in full swing, I wanted to highlight some important compensation related changes to the Glass Lewis 2020 voting guidelines, a full copy of which can be found here.

  • Contractual Payments and Arrangements. In their 2020 guidelines, Glass Lewis clarifies its policy for say-on-pay proposals with respect to the analysis of both ongoing and new contractual payments and executive entitlements. In particular, Glass Lewis has provided a list of certain executive employment terms that may result in a negative say-on-pay vote recommendation, which includes, but is not limited to: (i) excessively broad change in control triggers; (ii) inappropriate severance entitlements; (iii) inadequately explained or excessive sign-on arrangements; (iv) guaranteed bonuses (especially multi-year guarantees); and (v) the failure to address any concerning practices in amended employment agreements. 
Read More ›
Posted in Executive Compensation | Tagged , , , , , , ,

Share this Article:

Settlement of Solak v. Barrett May Provide Additional Guidance on Setting Director Pay

I’ve stressed how important it is for public company executives and directors to stay apprised of developments in the director pay area, including developments/settlements of director pay lawsuits.  Earlier this summer, the Delaware Chancery court approved a settlement of Solak v. Barrett, a case in which the plaintiffs alleged that the directors of Clovis Oncology breached their fiduciary duties by adopting a compensation plan that overcompensated themselves, in relation to companies of comparable market capitalization and size. In their complaint, the plaintiffs cited as evidence, the fact that the non-employee directors of Clovis each had been paid an average of $429,163 annually between 2012 and 2016, while Fortune 50 companies pay their directors a median total of $281,667 a year and S&P 500 companies pay an average $277,237 a year.  Read More ›

Posted in Employee Benefits, Executive Compensation | Tagged , , , , ,

Share this Article:

Public Companies Should Consider Shareholder Reapproval of Section 162(m) Performance Compensation Plans Approved in 2012

As public companies continue to prepare for the 2017 proxy season, we wanted to provide a final reminder of an executive compensation related item that might require shareholder approval in 2017.  As reported in Part 1 of our End of Year Plan Sponsor “To Do” Lists, Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code limits the deduction a public company may take for compensation payable to “covered employees” to $1,000,000 per year. “Performance-based compensation” that meets the requirements of Section 162(m) is not subject to this limitation. The Section 162(m) regulations require that, if the Compensation Committee has the discretion to select among a variety of performance goals, those goals must be reapproved by shareholders every five years.  Read More ›

Posted in Executive Compensation | Tagged , , , , , , ,

Share this Article: