<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance</title>
	<atom:link href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2011/07/24/inside-the-boardroom-responding-to-a-negative-say-on-pay-vote/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu</link>
	<description>The leading online blog in the fields of corporate governance and financial regulation.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 15:05:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.5.8</generator>

 
	<item>
		<title>Inside the Boardroom: Responding to a Negative Say on Pay Vote</title>
		<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2011/07/24/inside-the-boardroom-responding-to-a-negative-say-on-pay-vote/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=inside-the-boardroom-responding-to-a-negative-say-on-pay-vote</link>
		<comments>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2011/07/24/inside-the-boardroom-responding-to-a-negative-say-on-pay-vote/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 Jul 2011 13:00:26 +0000</pubDate>
<!-- 		<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator> -->
				<category><![CDATA[Executive Compensation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legislative & Regulatory Developments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Practitioner Publications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dodd-Frank Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fiduciary duties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Say on pay]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/corpgov/?p=18037?d=20150113161648EST</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When stockholders deliver a negative vote on say on pay, directors face the question whether to change corporate policy in response – even if their best business judgment tells them that existing compensation programs are well-designed and are working well. In fact, a negative vote on say on pay does not change the board’s fiduciary [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<hgroup><em>Posted by Paul Rowe, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, on Sunday, July 24, 2011 </em><div class='e_n' style='background:#F8F8F8;padding:10px;margin-top:5px;margin-bottom:10px;text-indent:2.5em;'><strong style='margin-left:-2.5em;'>Editor's Note: </strong> <p style="margin:0; display:inline;"><a href="http://www.wlrk.com/PKRowe" target="_blank">Paul Rowe</a> is a Partner in the Litigation Department at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen and Katz. This post is based on a Wachtell Lipton memorandum by Mr. Rowe and <a href="http://www.wlrk.com/MLipton" target="_blank">Martin Lipton</a>.</p>
</div></hgroup><p>When stockholders deliver a negative vote on say on pay, directors face the question whether to change corporate policy in response – even if their best business judgment tells them that existing compensation programs are well-designed and are working well. In fact, a negative vote on say on pay does not change the board’s fiduciary duty to implement compensation policies that the directors believe are the best way to attract, retain and incentivize top-quality managers:</p>
<ul>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The law is clear in all American jurisdictions that setting compensation policy and structuring compensation agreements are decisions reserved for directors and not shareholders. That is why say on pay resolutions are advisory and do not carry mandatory force.</li>
<li>Dodd-Frank does not affect this basic legal principle. It specifically provides that say on pay votes do not change the board’s fiduciary duties and traditional powers in this area.</li>
</ul>
<p> <a href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2011/07/24/inside-the-boardroom-responding-to-a-negative-say-on-pay-vote/#more-18037" class="more-link"><span aria-label="Continue reading Inside the Boardroom: Responding to a Negative Say on Pay Vote">(more&hellip;)</span></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2011/07/24/inside-the-boardroom-responding-to-a-negative-say-on-pay-vote/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
