Preparing for proxy season: The changing face of directors and the challenges they face
Corporate governance has taken on a much more powerful meaning, issues which are of particular importance to financial institutions.
December 17, 2013 at 07:50 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
As many public companies ready themselves for their annual shareholders' meetings for the upcoming proxy season, boards of directors are evaluating many heavy governance issues of importance to their respective firms.
In the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, corporate governance has taken on a much more powerful meaning, issues which are of particular importance to financial institutions.
Patrick McGurn, special counsel to ISS, recently discussed some of the key issues as they relate to proxy season, including the changing face of director liabilities, avoiding enforcement actions against directors, and directors and officers insurance considerations.
“Prior to 2007 and 2008, governance was merely an after thought. Banks were in a different category when it came to governance practices. Things evolved over time,” McGurn said during a webinar held by Winston & Strawn. “Today, directors are more accountable, elections are more meaningful, and there's greater independence of board chairs and rising support for pay practices.”
Additionally, there is “greater emphasis on how competent directors are at financial institutions,” McGurn said.
The 90-minute discussion, which was moderated by Christine Edwards and Jerry Loeser, focused on the questions most asked by directors. One of the key issues board face is whether to separate the roles of chairman and CEO.
“Our policy is to make sure there is a counterbalance,” McGurn said.
Also becoming of great important is the lead director position. “A key ingredient is the presence of a very strong lead director position,” McGurn added.
While some shareholders believe that directors should have strict term limits, McGurn believes that decision-making becomes more crystallized over a longer tenure.
“Judgment ages like wine, it gets better with each passing year,” he said.
As many of today's CEOs and other senior-level executives are aging into their 60s, succession planning is another area boards need to focus on in the New Year.
“It is setting things up for disaster unless boards are preparing for succession planning…. Tenure is going to be a much bigger discussion in the boardroom,” McGurn said.
The session also focused on new compensation committee advisor independence rules, an update on the various forms of litigation being brought in connection with proxy statement disclosure, CEO pay ratio disclosure rules, and the uptick in shareholder proposals on executive compensation.
Winston's third part of the series, “How Do Directors Prepare for the Worst?” will be held on Jan. 15.
As proxy battles become more commonplace in corporate America, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) recently deliberated whether proxy advisers have grown so powerful in corporate elections that regulators need to impose rules to make their business more transparent.
SEC Commissioner Daniel Gallagher has warned that the SEC had created a regulatory environment that has allowed investment advisers to adopt a mindset in which they “blindly vote” in line with proxy adviser recommendations, Reuters reported.
For other corporate governance stories, check out InsideCounsel's coverage below:
SEC weighs influence of proxy advisers
Regulatory: Why the SEC's proposed pay-ratio rule will increase compliance costs
Preparing for conflict in the boardroom: Thoughts and strategies for general counsel
More CEOs receiving 'golden hellos' upon company arrival
Directors, investors in alignment on executive compensation, board performance
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBig Tech Is Cozying Up to President Trump. Here's Why Their Lawyers Are Cautiously Optimistic
Starbucks Hands New CLO Hefty Raise, Says He Fosters 'Environment of Courage and Joy'
Internal Whistleblowing Surged Globally in 2024, So Why Were US Numbers Flat?
6 minute readMeta Workers Aren't of One Mind on Company's Retreat From DEI, Fact-Checking
Trending Stories
- 1The Week in Data Feb. 3: A Look at Legal Industry Trends by the Numbers
- 2Mass Tort Cases: Challenges for Plaintiff’s and Defense Counsel
- 3Litigator of the Week Runners-Up and Shout-Outs: Davis Wright Tremaine, Wilmer and More
- 4Forum Clause Axes $844M Case Against Reinsurer Over Deadly Plane Crash, Judge Rules
- 5Latham Adds Former Treasury Department Lawyer for Cross-Border Deal Guidance
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250