This report shows public data only. Is this your organisation? If so, login here to view your full report.

Longview Partners

PRI reporting framework 2017

You are in Direct - Listed Equity Active Ownership » (Proxy) voting and shareholder resolutions

(Proxy) voting and shareholder resolutions

Overview

LEA 17. Voting policy & approach

New selection options have been added to this indicator. Please review your prefilled responses carefully.

17.1. Indicate whether your organisation has a formal voting policy.

17.2. Indicate what your voting policy covers:

other description

          Class actions
        

17.3. Attach or provide a URL to your voting policy. [Optional]

17.4. Provide a brief overview of your organization’s approach to (proxy) voting.

We carry out proxy voting for all Institutional clients who request Longview Partners to be responsible for the implementation of their voting rights.  In order to effectively meet these requirements, Longview engages Glass Lewis to vote on our clients’ behalf at all relevant company meetings.  We believe Glass Lewis’ expert and independent analysis on governance complements Longview’s stock selection process.  However, Longview Partners would advocate the exercising of votes, and where necessary, objective and informed intervention in line with our Shareholder Activism Policy.

17.5. Provide an overview of how you ensure your voting policy is adhered to, giving details of your approach when exceptions to the policy are made (if applicable).

All voting decisions are made on a case-by-case basis by Glass Lewis’s specialist research analysts, in line with their detailed regional policies, which are approved by Longview on an annual basis.  However, Longview would advocate the exercising of votes, contrary to Glass Lewis policy, where necessary.

 

The decision to vote contrary to Glass Lewis’s recommendation is made collectively by the Research team and CIO and will often follow engagement between our Research team and the company.  Where Longview becomes aware of a governance issue, or has concerns that the company’s management is not acting in shareholders’ interests, we are willing to challenge management in an attempt to protect and enhance the interests of our clients and will exercise our right to vote against management, where appropriate.  

 

The Glass Lewis ViewPoint voting system employs a rigorous ballot reconciliation process to ensure that all ballots which a client is entitled to vote are indeed voted. Reconciliation is a rigorous audit process performed on a daily basis. This process compares a comprehensive list of meeting notices and agendas for shareholder meetings against the holdings data delivered to Glass Lewis by the client, custodian or client representative. This reconciliation process enables Glass Lewis to determine if ballots are missing.

 

For policy implementation, Glass Lewis performs a regular audit post-proxy season to determine whether any irregularities arose in applying vote recommendations. In addition, on an annual basis Longview’s Operations team conduct a review of votes cast to ensure that their rationale adheres to Glass Lewis’s policy. 

 

Reporting & oversight

Longview’s Operations team receives a quarterly report for each participating client account from Glass Lewis, detailing all items on the agenda and votes cast for each company where there was a meeting that quarter. Reports can be accessed on a more regular basis if required. The Operations team ensures that Glass Lewis votes all proxies according to any specific client instructions and Longview’s general guidance, and retains all required documentation associated with proxy voting.

 

Additionally, the Operations team have regular service level calls with Glass Lewis and conduct due diligence on an annual basis to ensure Glass Lewis’s policy and procedures are up to date and functioning as expected.


Process

LEA 18. Typical approach to (proxy) voting decisions

18.1. Indicate how you typically make your (proxy) voting decisions.

Approach

Based on

18.2. Additional information.[Optional]


LEA 19. Percentage of voting recommendations reviewed

New selection options have been added to this indicator. Please review your prefilled responses carefully.

19.1. Of the voting recommendations that your service provider made in the reporting year, indicate the percentage reviewed by your organisation, giving reasons.

Percentage of voting recommendations your organisation reviewed

Reasons for review

19.2. Additional information [Optional]


LEA 20. Confirmation of votes (Private)


LEA 21. Securities lending programme (Private)


LEA 22. Informing companies of the rationale of abstaining/voting against management

New selection options have been added to this indicator. Please review your prefilled responses carefully.

22.1. Indicate whether you or the service providers acting on your behalf raise any concerns with companies ahead of voting

22.2. Indicate whether you and/or the service provider(s) acting on your behalf, communicate the rationale to companies, when , you abstain or vote against management recommendations.

22.3. Additional information. [Optional]


Outputs and outcomes

LEA 23. Percentage of (proxy) votes cast

23.1. For listed equities where you and/or your service provider have the mandate to issue (proxy) voting instructions, indicate the percentage of votes cast during the reporting year.

Votes cast (to the nearest 1%)

100 %

Specify the basis on which this percentage is calculated

23.2. Explain your reason(s) for not voting certain holdings

          We voted 100% of the ballot items on which we could issue instructions.
        

23.3. Additional information. [Optional]


LEA 24. Proportion of ballot items that were for/against/abstentions

24.1. Indicate if you track the voting instructions that you and/or your service provider on your behalf have issued.

24.2. Of the voting instructions that you and/or third parties on your behalf issued, indicate the proportion of ballot items that were:

Voting instructions
Breakdown as percentage of votes cast
For (supporting) management recommendations
93 %
Against (opposing) management recommendations
7 %
Abstentions
0 %
100%

24.3. Describe the actions you take after voting against management recommendations.

          At management's request, Longview will discuss any votes cast against management.

Where Longview becomes aware of a governance issue, or has concerns that the company’s management is not acting in shareholders’ interests, we are willing to challenge management in an attempt to protect and enhance the interests of our clients and will exercise our right to vote against management, where appropriate.  Furthermore, if after lengthy discussions we believed that management was failing to act in shareholders’ interests, we would reduce our Quality rating to Q3 and sell our holding in order to minimise the loss of shareholder value.
        

24.4. Additional information. [Optional]


LEA 25. Shareholder resolutions (Private)


LEA 26. Examples of (proxy) voting activities (Private)


Communication

LEA 27. Disclosing voting activities

27.1. Indicate if your organisation proactively discloses information on your voting activities.

27.5. Indicate the voting information your organisation proactively discloses to clients/beneficiaries.

Indicate how much of your voting record you disclose

Indicate what level of explanation you provide

27.6. Indicate how frequently you report voting information.

27.8. Additional information. [Optional]


Top