• Login
  • Register
  • PRO
    • PRO Compliance plan
    • PRO Compliance
    • PRO subscription plans
    • Curated articles
    • In-depth
    • Market intelligence
    • Practice guides
    • PRO Reports New
    • Lexology GTDT
    • Ask Lexy
  • PRO
  • Latest
  • GTDT
  • Research
  • Learn
  • Experts
  • Store
  • Blog
  • Events
  • Popular
  • Influencers
  • About
  • Explore
  • Legal Research
  • Primary SourcesBeta
  • PRO Compliance

Introducing PRO Compliance
The essential resource for in-house professionals

  • Compare
  • Topics
  • Interviews
  • Guides
Getting The Deal Through joins Lexology
GTDT and Lexology Navigator have merged

CONTENT DEVELOPMENT

Become your target audience’s go-to resource for today’s hottest topics.

  • Trending Topics New
  • Discover Content
  • Horizons Beta
  • Ideation

CLIENT INTELLIGENCE

Understand your clients’ strategies and the most pressing issues they are facing.

  • Track Sectors
  • Track Clients
  • Mandates New
  • Discover Companies
  • Reports Centre New

COMPETITOR INTELLIGENCE

Keep a step ahead of your key competitors and benchmark against them.

  • Benchmarking
  • Competitor Mandates New

Lexology PRO

Power up your legal research with modern workflow tools, AI conceptual search and premium content sets that leverage Lexology's archive of 900,000+ articles contributed by the world's leading law firms. 

PRO Compliance plan
PRO subscription plans

Premium content

  • Curated articles
  • In-depth
  • Market intelligence
  • Practice guides
  • PRO Reports New

Analysis tools

  • Lexology GTDT
  • Ask Lexy
Explore all PRO content PRO Compliance
  • Find experts
  • About
  • Firms
Introducing Instruct Counsel
The next generation search tool for finding the right lawyer for you.
Back Forward
  • Save & file
  • View original
  • Forward
  • Share
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Linked In
  • Follow
    Please login to follow content.
  • Like
  • Instruct

add to folder:

  • My saved (default)
  • Read later
Folders shared with you

Register now for your free, tailored, daily legal newsfeed service.

Questions? Please contact [email protected]

Register

Summary of Changes in ISS and Glass Lewis Voting Policies for the 2020 Proxy Season

Fried Frank Harris Shriver & Jacobson LLP

To view this article you need a PDF viewer such as Adobe Reader. Download Adobe Acrobat Reader

If you can't read this PDF, you can view its text here. Go back to the PDF .

USA November 18 2019

Proxy advisory firms Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. (ISS) and Glass Lewis recently released updates to their respective proxy voting policies and guidelines. The ISS changes generally will apply to shareholder meetings held on or after February 1, 2020; and the Glass Lewis changes generally will apply to shareholder meetings on or after January 1, 2020. We describe the key changes below. 

Key Points. Of particular note: 

  • Board gender diversity. ISS will now generally recommend voting against or withholding votes from the chair of the nominating committee (or other directors on a case-by-case basis) at companies with no women on the board. 
  • Multi-class structures. ISS will now generally recommend voting against or withholding votes from the entire board if prior to or in connection with a public offering the company has implemented a multi-class structure with unequal voting rights without a sunset provision that ISS considers reasonable.
  • Shareholder proposals. Glass Lewis’s update reflects the firm’s continuing efforts to promote shareholder opportunities to vote on shareholder proposals relating to material matters (particularly relating to “responsible and financially sustainable business practices”) even when the shareholder proposal is properly excludable under Rule 14a-8 of the Exchange Act. In response to the SEC’s recent announcement that it may decline to take a view or may respond orally to no-action requests for shareholder proposals under Rule 14a-8, Glass Lewis now will generally recommend voting against members of the governance committee if the company omits a shareholder proposal from its proxy statement without having received written no-action relief from the SEC. 
Fried Frank Harris Shriver & Jacobson LLP - Amber Meek, Lee T. Barnum, Amy L. Blackman, Daniel J. Bursky, Mark S. Hayek, Matthew V. Soran and Gail Weinstein
Back Forward
  • Save & file
  • View original
  • Forward
  • Share
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Linked In
  • Follow
    Please login to follow content.
  • Like
  • Instruct

add to folder:

  • My saved (default)
  • Read later
Folders shared with you

Filed under

  • USA
  • Capital Markets
  • Company & Commercial
  • Fried Frank Harris Shriver & Jacobson LLP

Tagged with

  • SEC
  • Shareholder
  • Board of directors

Popular articles from this firm

  1. SEC Adopts Revised Investment Adviser Marketing Rule *
  2. UPDATE: USD LIBOR Transition Timeline Likely to be Extended to June 30, 2023 *
  3. Treasury Releases Final Carried Interest Regulations *
  4. IRS Delays in Processing EIN Applications for Non-U.S. Entities *
  5. The State of Eviction Proceedings in New York *

If you would like to learn how Lexology can drive your content marketing strategy forward, please email [email protected].

Powered by Lexology
loading...

Related topic hubs

  1. Shareholder
  2. SEC
  3. USA
  4. Company & Commercial
  5. Capital Markets

Related USA articles

  1. ISS and Glass Lewis Update Voting Guidelines for 2020 Proxy Season *
  2. ISS and Glass Lewis Update Their Proxy Voting Guidelines for the 2020 Proxy Season *
  3. Considerations for the 2020 proxy season *

Related international articles

  1. 2020 Proxy Season: Glass Lewis and ISS Updates * - Canada
  2. 2020 Proxy Advisory Firm Voting Guidelines: Canadian Highlights * - Canada
  3. ISS and Glass Lewis release 2015 Canadian Proxy Voting Guidelines * - Canada
Edwin Yee
Senior Vice-President and Regional Counsel
Sony BMG Music Entertainment (Asia) Inc
What our clients say

"I am a regular reader of Lexology – the content of which is extremely useful to me."

Back to Top
  • Terms of use
  • Cookies
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy policy
  • GDPR compliance
  • RSS feeds
  • Contact
  • Submissions
  • About
  • Login
  • Register
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Search
Law Business Research

© Copyright 2006 - 2021 Law Business Research