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

New York State Common Retirement Fund

PRI reporting framework 2020

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

(委任状による)議決権行使および株主決議

LEA 12. Typical approach to (proxy) voting decisions

12.1. (委任状による)議決権行使を通常どのように決定しているかを明示して下さい。

アプローチ

以下に基づいて行う

12.2. 合意された議決権ポリシーがどのように遵守されているかを概観し、ポリシーの例外が適用された場合(該当する場合)のアプローチの詳細を示してください。

The Fund’s ESG Principles and Proxy Voting Guidelines (Guidelines) are not intended to anticipate every proposal that will appear on portfolio companies’ proxy statements. These Guidelines are not binding and the Comptroller will vote proxies consistent with his fiduciary duty. These Guidelines are subject to change at any time by approval of the Chief Investment Officer and the Comptroller.

Since 2011, the Fund has used a proxy voting platform to facilitate its proxy voting function. In using the electronic platform, all of Fund’s ballots are “prepopulated” in accordance with our own Guidelines. In advance of each proxy season, the Fund’s Bureau of Corporate Governance staff performs a review to ensure that the prepopulated voting instructions match the Fund’s Guidelines.

During the proxy season, the Fund’s Bureau of Corporate Governance conducts regular reviews the Fund’s votes to ensure that its voting positions remain aligned with the Guidelines.

12.3. 補足情報[任意]

...

The Fund’s Guidelines have been adopted, not only to provide guidance on voting practices to the Fund, its managers and portfolio companies, but also to guide other corporate engagements and policy initiatives that enhance long term value, and to articulate to the capital markets the Fund’s view on what constitutes best practices in corporate governance and ESG issues. Prior to adoption of these guidelines, the Fund’s Bureau of Corporate Governance conducts a review of the adequacy of the prior version of the Guidelines. This included reviewing a sample of the Fund’s 2018 and 2019 proxy votes; reviewing voting guidelines of its public fund peers; conducting a gap analysis comparing prior adopted Guidelines and ballot items topics from 2018-2019; reviewing the Fund’s voting trends on various ballot item topics; and reviewing relevant trends related to corporate governance, proxy statement disclosures, and shareholder proposals.

The Fund independently votes the proxies of domestic companies in which it holds public equity securities. Voting provides a direct means of influencing a company’s governance, risk management, and is an integral part of the Comptroller’s fiduciary duty to invest prudently and for the exclusive benefit of the System’s members, retirees, and beneficiaries. In the 2019 Proxy Season, the Fund cast 28,322 votes on ballot items at 3,273 domestic company meetings.

Proxy voting decisions are based on these Guidelines and reviews of available information relating to items on the ballot at each portfolio company’s annual and special meetings. The Fund analyzes a variety of materials from publicly available sources, including but not limited to U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filings, analyst reports, relevant studies and materials from proponents and opponents of shareholder proposals, third-party independent perspectives and studies, and analyses from several corporate governance and ESG service providers. The Fund utilizes a vote management platform to vote its proxies. In accordance with the terms of its asset lending program, the Fund seeks to recall loaned domestic securities in order to facilitate the Fund’s ability to exercise its voting rights.


LEA 13. Percentage of voting recommendations reviewed (Not Applicable)


LEA 14. Securities lending programme

14.1. 貴社では、セキュリティーズレンディングを設定していますか?

14.3. 貴社の証券貸付プログラムで投票の問題にどのように対処しているか示してください。

14.4. 補足情報 [任意]

... 


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

15.1. 報告年度内に関与した議決権行使のうち、貴社、または貴社の代理を務めるサービスプロバイダーが議決権行使に先立って企業に懸念を表明したものの割合を示してください。

15.2. これらの企業に対し、議決権行使に先立って懸念を表明した理由を示してください。

15.3. 補足情報 [任意]


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

16.1. 貴社または貴社の代理を務めるサービスプロバイダーが、議決権行使を棄権する場合、または経営陣の提案に反対票を投じる場合に、当該企業にその根拠を伝えた議決権の割合を示してください。これは行使可能な全議決権の中で占める割合とします。

16.2. 貴社が議決権行使を棄権する場合、または経営陣の提案に反対票を投じる場合に、企業にその根拠を伝える理由を示してください。

16.3. 貴社が議決権行使を棄権するまたは経営陣の提案に反対票を投じる根拠を伝える場合、この根拠を公表しているか示してください。

16.4. 補足情報[任意]


LEA 17. Percentage of (proxy) votes cast

17.1. 貴社やサービスプロバイダーが(代理)投票の指示を発行するマンデートを有している上場株式について、報告年度中に行った投票の割合を記載してください。

1%単位の投票率

100 %

この投票率の計算基準を明記してください

17.3. 補足情報[任意]

...


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

18.1. 貴社または貴社の代理を務めるサービスプロバイダーが出した議決権行使に係る指示を追跡しているか示してください。

18.2. 貴社または貴社の代理を務める第三者が出した議決権行使に係る指示のうち、各投票項目の占める割合を示してください。

議決権行使に係る指示の対象
投票の内訳(%)
経営陣の提案に対する賛成票
72 %
経営陣の提案に対する反対票
28 %
棄権
0 %
100%

18.3. 貴社が経営陣の提案に対する反対票を投じたケースにおいて、貴社がエンゲージメントを行った企業の占める割合を示してください。

18.4. 補足情報 [任意]

...


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

19.1. 不首尾に終わった議決権行使後の正式なエスカレーション戦略が貴社にあるか示してください。

19.2. 棄権後、または経営陣に反対する票を投じた後に貴社が用いるエスカレーション戦略を示してください。

19.3. 補足情報 [任意]

...


LEA 20. Shareholder resolutions (Not Completed)


LEA 21. Examples of (proxy) voting activities (Not Completed)


Top