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

Pensioenfonds Vervoer

PRI reporting framework 2020

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

(Proxy) voting and shareholder resolutions

LEA 12. Typical approach to (proxy) voting decisions

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


Based on

12.2. Provide an overview of how you ensure that your agreed-upon voting policy is adhered to, giving details of your approach when exceptions to the policy are made.

Pensoenfonds Vervoer usesthe services of Glass Lewis to get advise on upcoming votes and uses their systems to vote. PF Vervoer has a custom made matrix based on the PF Vervoer voting policy. This matrix is used to determine how PF Vervoer votes on the agenda items at hand. If the matris fails to adres an issue, the agenda items is flaged to Pensoenfonds Vervoer and the item is voted manually by the pensioenfond itself in the system. Pensoenfonds Vervoer gets quarterly reports by Glass Lewis on how the fund has voted. Pensoenfonds Vervoer can check per AGM how the votes where cast and if it corresponds to the funds voting policy.

12.3. Additional information.[Optional]

For manual votes (see LEA 12.2) Hermes EOS provides Pensoenfonds Vervoer with voting recommendations based on our voting policy which are input on the voting platform prior to the vote deadline. The voting recommendations are then cast as voting instructions if there is no further intervention, except in the case of shareblocking votes.

LEA 13. Percentage of voting recommendations reviewed

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

Percentage of voting recommendations your organisation reviewed

Reasons for review

13.2. Additional information. [Optional]

LEA 14. Securities lending programme (Private)

LEA 15. Informing companies of the rationale of abstaining/voting against management

15.1. Indicate the proportion of votes participated in within the reporting year in which where you or the service providers acting on your behalf raised concerns with companies ahead of voting.

15.2. Indicate the reasons for raising your concerns with these companies ahead of voting.


          In order to help engagement progress (driving change), as well as to help clarify matters at hand to inform better voting decisions

15.3. Additional information. [Optional]

Our voting recommendation and engagement provider Hermes EOS usually interacts ahead of meetings as a result of concerns around the vote or an anticipated vote against management.

LEA 16. Informing companies of the rationale of abstaining/voting against management

16.1. Indicate the proportion of votes where you, and/or the service provider(s) acting on your behalf, communicated the rationale to companies for abstaining or voting against management recommendations. Indicate this as a percentage out of all eligible votes.

16.4. Additional information. [Optional]

LEA 17. Percentage of (proxy) votes cast

17.1. For listed equities in which you 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

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

17.3. Additional information. [Optional]

In 2019, we did not vote for 48 out of 6,496 ballot items.

LEA 18. Proportion of ballot items that were for/against/abstentions

18.1. Indicate whether you track the voting instructions that you or your service provider on your behalf have issued.

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

Voting instructions
Breakdown as percentage of votes cast
For (supporting) management recommendations
90 %
Against (opposing) management recommendations
9 %
1 %

18.3. In cases where your organisation voted against management recommendations, indicate the percentage of companies which you have engaged.


18.4. Additional information. [Optional]

Pensioenfonds Vervoer has outscourced voting to Glass Lewis. In terms of Issuer Engagement, Glass Lewis do not engage directly on behalf of Vervoer. However, as part of its issuer engagement policy, Glass Lewis directly engages with issuers on an annual basis. Starting from the end of 2019, Pensioenfonds Vervoer has appointed Achmea Investment Management as its voting provider. For voting, Achmea Investment Management works closely with ISS. 

Pensioenfonds Vervoer has outscourced engagement to Hermes EOS until the end of 2019. Starting from the end of 2019, Pensioenfonds Vervoer has appointed Achmea Investment Management as its engagement provider. For normative engagement, Achmea Investment Management works closely with ISS ESG. 


LEA 19. Proportion of ballot items that were for/against/abstentions

19.1. Indicate whether your organisation has a formal escalation strategy following unsuccessful voting.

19.3. Additional information. [Optional]

Glass Lewis delivers vote decisions, as instructed by Pensieonfonds Vervoer, to the appropriate recipient (e.g. distributor, custodian, tabulator or issuer). In the case where Glass Lewis delivers the vote instruction and follows this they are advised that a vote has been rejected, Glass Lewis will notify Pensioenfonds Vervoer of the vote rejection accordingly.

LEA 20. Shareholder resolutions (Private)

LEA 21. Examples of (proxy) voting activities (Private)