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

Comgest

PRI reporting framework 2018

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

Outputs and outcomes

LEA 21. Percentage of (proxy) votes cast

21.1. 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%)

99 %

Specify the basis on which this percentage is calculated

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

21.3. Additional information. [Optional]


LEA 22. Proportion of ballot items that were for/against/abstentions

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

22.2. 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
80.9 %
Against (opposing) management recommendations
19.1 %
Abstentions
0 %
100%

22.3. Describe the actions you take in relation to voting against management recommendations.

          Sometimes we inform the company of our votes and engage with it on related issues.
        

22.4. Additional information. [Optional]


LEA 23. Shareholder resolutions

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

23.1. Indicate if your organisation directly or via a service provider filed or co-filed any ESG shareholder resolutions during the reporting year.

23.6. Describe whether your organisation reviews ESG shareholder resolutions filed by other investors.

Yes, shareholder resolutions filed by other investors are reviewed carefully. Usually Comgest supports proposals that are deemed in the long-term interest of all shareholders.

23.7. Additional information. [Optional]


LEA 24. Examples of (proxy) voting activities

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

24.1. Provide examples of the (proxy) voting activities that your organisation and/or service provider carried out during the reporting year.

ESG Factors
ESG issue
          Remuneration practices
        
Conducted by
Objectives

Force change on remuneration policy and practices at one of our investee company based in Germany

Scope and Process

After having engaged with the company for years and having voted against its "say on pay" item at its AGM, we talked to the board, which listened to us. In 2017, the agenda of the AGM showed no item related to a "say on pay". Instead of moving forward, the company moved backward. Despite having long-standing and rather good relationships with the company, we decided to vote against the item of discharge of reponsibility to the Supervisory Board in a protest for such reluctance to change and to listen its shareholders.

Outcomes

The company faced an uproar at its 2017 AGM, on which we followed up with further engagement. In early 2018, company has started to fundamentally revise its compensation policy to increase transparency and improve readability. In addition, the company made amendments to the executive compensation. In particular, from the year 2018 the short-term variable remuneration no longer includes a discretionary component, and the maximum target threshold was lowered. Furthermore, claw back provisions and severance caps were introduced in compliance with the German Corporate Governance Code.

24.2. Additional information. [Optional]


Top