It’s the start of a new year, which for many publicly-traded issuers means the start of preparing for the next Say on Pay season. We now know ISS and Glass Lewis did not make changes to their “pay for performance” evaluations, but they did release minor updates to their shareholder voting guidelines, with very limited changes to executive compensation topics:

Reviewing and understanding the voting guidelines of ISS and Glass Lewis is an important step in preparing for the Say on Pay season. Below we offer a “checklist” of other ways that public issuers can effectively prepare for Say on Pay.

Say on Pay Checklist

At Southlea Group we have developed in-house tools to simulate the proxy advisor evaluations and other ways to assess the relationship between compensation and performance outcomes. Please connect with a member of our team if we can offer support.

If you have any problematic practices, consider relevant disclosure to provide rationale for the design decision, or consider making a commitment that the problematic practice is under review and will be changed in advance of the next Annual General Meeting.

Commonly cited “problematic compensation practices”:

– Internal disparity, where CEO compensation exceeds 4x other active NEOs

– STIP performance targets not disclosed

– STIP performance targets set below prior year actuals (ISS)

– Same metrics used for both STIP and PSUs

– Lack of “performance-based” equity (PSUs)

– Short performance period (less than three years) for PSUs (Glass Lewis)

– For relative measures in a PSU plan, vesting for below-median performance (Glass Lewis)

– One-time incentive awards

– Excessive executive perquisites (ISS)

– Excessive severance payments

– Absence of minimum share ownership guidelines

– Upon a change in control, “single trigger” vesting of outstanding LTIP

– Upon a change in control, vesting of PSUs based on “target” results (ISS)

– Absence of a Clawback Policy (Glass Lewis)

– Lack of a response to shareholders where the prior year Say on Pay score was < 80%

ISS and Glass Lewis will review all equity plan proposals and provide a vote recommendation to shareholders. Southlea Group has also developed an in-house tool to simulate the ISS evaluation methodology. Details of the Glass Lewis methodology are not well disclosed.

Available resources include the most recent Globe & Mail “Board Games” evaluation and the most recent “disclosure best practices” from the Canadian Coalition for Good Governance (CCGG).

[1] Defined by ISS as: Aboriginal peoples (Indigenous, Inuit or Métis) and members of visible minorities (other than Aboriginal peoples, who are non-Caucasian in race or non-white in colour).

About This Author

Alex Pattillo, Partner

Alex is a founder and Partner of Southlea, a GECN Group company. For the past 15 years, Alex has advised boards and senior management teams on aligning pay programs with their business strategy and performance objectives. He has worked with many of the largest companies in Canada, with international and global operations. He is known for his expertise in executive compensation governance, including public disclosure requirements, and understanding the perspectives of institutional investors and proxy advisors (such as ISS and Glass Lewis) in Canada.

Prior to forming Southlea, Alex worked at Willis Towers Watson, a global human resources consulting firm, as the market leader for the Toronto Rewards Practice and the leader of the Canadian Executive Compensation Governance Team.