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

Railways Pension Trustee Company Limited

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.

We ensure that ISS applies our custom policy globally and we also oversee voting recommendations and intervene where appropriate to over-ride the recommendations made.

To enhance the overall service from ISS we supplement our research using local service providers in the UK, US and Australia: PIRC, Glass Lewis and ACSI. We may also look at other sources such as MSCI on resolutions to do with environmental and social topics.

12.3. Additional information.[Optional]

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

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.

15.3. Additional information. [Optional]

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.

16.2. Indicate the reasons why your organisation would communicate to companies, the rationale for abstaining or voting against management recommendations.

16.3. In cases where your organisation does communicate the rationale for abstaining or voting against management recommendations, indicate whether this rationale is made public.

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]

We attempt to vote all holdings in most markets and we review retrospectively the voting performance. As far as we are aware, our vote execution provider generally acts on our instructions and we are informed where votes have been rejected. We also have all power of attorney documentation in place for markets where it is necessary and have a system to ensure monitoring of this. However, as a matter of policy, we prefer not to vote stock in share blocking markets unless there is a major issue of principle at stake which justifies the risk of locking up a stock.

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
83 %
Against (opposing) management recommendations
16 %
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]

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.

19.2. Indicate the escalation strategies used at your organisation following abstentions and/or votes against management.

19.3. Additional information. [Optional]

There are four target lists in the public equities portfolio, which are:

  • Fundamental Equities – companies which are held in our active strategy
  • Top Holdings – companies which are typically held in our quantitative strategy
  • Governance and Conduct Laggards – problematic companies at risk of exclusion
  • Thematic – collective engagements, typically on climate or governance topics

Typically we will write to the company seeking either an in-person meeting or a phone call, either with management or the Board. Most of our dialogues begin in September when the voting policy for the following year is published. The letter will list any votes against management at the most recent company meeting and explain why.

LEA 20. Shareholder resolutions (Private)

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