Proxy access - war war not jaw jaw

23 January 2015

Editor

Latest News

Australia narrows climate reporting scope mid‑rollout

Minerva Proxy Update

Follow This challenges Shell days before key vote

SRD III is Europe’s chance to fix proxy plumbing

SEC Steps Closer to Unwinding Climate Disclosure Rules

Minerva Proxy Update

Featured Briefings

Australia Proxy Season Review 2025

2026 Proxy Season Preview

Diversity Divergence: Shareholders Steadfast Amid Pervasive Political Posturing

The US proxy access debate took a fresh turn recently with the attempt by seasoned governance commentator James McRitchie (www.corpgov.net) to get a shareholder proposal on the ballot at US organic food retailer Wholefoods. He submitted a proposal under which one or more shareholders owning 3% or more of outstanding shares for at least three years could "account for 20% of directors through proxy access".

Wholefoods then came up with its own proposal and the SEC ruled that the two proposals conflicted. McRitchie’s proposal didn’t go forward and a preliminary agenda was posted by Wholefoods with a proxy access proposal. Despite a number of differences between the two, the SEC ruled that the two proposals conflicted and so McRitchie's proposal was rejected.

Concerns were brought to the SEC’s attention, not least by McRitchie and last week the SEC announced that it would review the basis for exclusion and would not be expressing any views on such exclusion requests for this upcoming US proxy season.

The reaction of shareholders is likely to be one of relief. SEC records (www.sec.gov) show that 51 resolutions had been subject to exclusion requests by companies at the date of the SEC’s announcement and these will not now be rejected by the SEC on the grounds of conflict.

The reaction of companies was "meaner than a junkyard dog". In a letter to ISS and Glass Lewis (other proxy agencies are available!) US issuer representative The Business Roundtable opines that it would be "inappropriate for ISS and Glass Lewis (read all proxy agencies) to apply their voting policies in a way that substitutes their own judgement as to the appropriate course of action in place of the Board’s judgement” and that “companies may have no choice but to consider litigation if they want to adjudicate their rights under Rule 14a-8”.

So the US anti-governance lobby continues on its trajectory of a) attempting to suppress open debate on a legitimate governance policy issue and b) shooting messengers rather than engaging with the owners.

==========================

Meaner than a junkyard dog? From the lyrics of the Jim Croce 1973 number one song "Bad, Bad, Leroy Brown"

Related Stories

SEC Steps Closer to Unwinding Climate Disclosure Rules

May 13, 2026
Read More
fiduciary squeeze

The fiduciary squeeze is timed for when trustees can’t look up

April 23, 2026
Read More

Proposal Exclusion Escalation: BP Issued “Legal Ultimatum” Over Rejected Resolution

March 27, 2026
Read More

Disney Defeat: Anti-ESG Proposal Pair Perform Poorly at 2026 AGM

March 27, 2026
Read More

Your Vote, Their Permission: Why Shareholder Proposal Rights in the US Are Under Existential Threat

March 20, 2026
Read More

Coca-Cola Caution: No ‘No Action’ Requests Filed for First Time Since 2020

March 18, 2026
Read More