Resource Library Say on Pay

Emerging themes from this year’s Say on Pay and proxy voting season suggests a fundamental shift in shareholder and proxy advisor perspectives on compensation.

A "First Question" starting point that explains how to understand the immediate key steps that can help turnaround a Say on Pay outcome.

This memorandum provides an overview of the say-on-pay evaluation processes of ISS and Glass Lewis.

We have learned many things with the data from seven years of Say on Pay voting. This article outlines what we consider to be the three most important impacts of Say on Pay.

The say-on-pay vote, mandatory since 2011, has become a spring ritual for most public company comp committees. The votes typically go without a hitch. However, exceptions are notable: of Russell 3000 companies reporting results this year through mid-July, 5% have earned between 50%-70%, and only 2.5% earned less than 50%. Just 2% of all companies have failed to receive majority approval since 2013.

Our weekly Say on Pay research consistently demonstrates that vote support is, on average, meaningfully lower (28%) when Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) recommends "against" an issuer's Say on Pay proposal. And, while ISS will conduct a thorough qualitative review before issuing an "against" recommendation, we know that ISS' three quantitative tests are used as a preliminary screen to determine the level of qualitative scrutiny applied.