close

For more than four decades, Fenwick & West LLP has helped some of the world’s most recognized companies become, and remain, market leaders. From emerging enterprises to large public corporations, our clients are leaders in the technology, life sciences and cleantech sectors and are fundamentally changing the world through rapid innovation.  MORE >

Fenwick & West was founded in 1972 in the heart of Silicon Valley—before “Silicon Valley” existed—by four visionary lawyers who left a top-tier New York law firm to pursue their shared belief that technology would revolutionize the business world and to pioneer the legal work for those technological innovations. In order to be most effective, they decided they needed to move to a location close to primary research and technology development. These four attorneys opened their first office in downtown Palo Alto, and Fenwick became one of the first technology law firms in the world.  MORE >

From our founding in 1972, Fenwick has been committed to promoting diversity and inclusion both within our firm and throughout the legal profession. For almost four decades, the firm has actively promoted an open and inclusive work environment and committed significant resources towards improving our diversity efforts at every level.  MORE >

At Fenwick, we are proud of our commitment to the community and to our culture of making a difference in the lives of individuals and organizations in the communities where we live and work. We recognize that providing legal services is not only an essential part of our professional responsibility, but also an excellent opportunity for our attorneys to gain valuable practical experience, learn new areas of the law and contribute to the community.  MORE >

Year after year, Fenwick & West is honored for excellence in the legal profession. Many of our attorneys are recognized as leaders in their respective fields, and our Corporate, Tax, Litigation and Intellectual Property Practice Groups consistently receive top national and international rankings, including:

  • Named Technology Group of the Year by Law360
  • Ranked #1 in the Americas for number of technology deals in 2015 by Mergermarket
  • Nearly 20 percent of Fenwick partners are ranked by Chambers
  • Consistently ranked among the top 10 law firms in the U.S. for diversity
  • Recognized as having top mentoring and pro bono programs by Euromoney

MORE >

We take sustainability very seriously at Fenwick. Like many of our clients, we are adopting policies that reduce consumption and waste, and improve efficiency. By using technologies developed by a number of our cleantech clients, we are at the forefront of implementing sustainable policies and practices that minimize environmental impact. In fact, Fenwick has earned recognition in several areas as one of the top US law firms for implementing sustainable business practices.  MORE >

At Fenwick, we have a passion for excellence and innovation that mirrors our client base. Our firm is making revolutionary changes to the practice of law through substantial investments in proprietary technology tools and processes—allowing us to deliver best-in-class legal services more effectively.   MORE >

Mountain View Office
Silicon Valley Center
801 California Street
Mountain View, CA 94041
650.988.8500

San Francisco Office
555 California Street
13th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
415.875.2300

Seattle Office
1191 Second Avenue
10th Floor
Seattle, WA 98101
206.389.4510

New York Office
1211 Avenue of the Americas
32nd Floor
New York, NY 10036
212.921.2001

Shanghai Office
Unit 908, 9/F, Kerry Parkside Office
No. 1155 Fang Dian Road
Pudong New Area, Shanghai 201204
P.R. China
+86 21 8017 1200


Corporate and Securities Alert: Say-on-Pay: Pay-for-Performance Can Turn an ISS Voting Recommendation

The 2011 proxy season is well underway and companies are taking seriously voting recommendations on Say-on-Pay proposals issued by Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS). Several companies, including, for example, Hewlett Packard, Walt Disney, Unisys Corporation and General Electric (GE) issued shareholder communications arguing against ISS' negative Say-on-Pay voting recommendations. GE went one step further and subsequently imposed performance conditions on Jeffrey Immelt's (GE's CEO) stock options prior to its annual shareholder meeting, which resulted in ISS changing its voting recommendation from "against" to "for" GE's Say-on-Pay proposal. One thing is clear: ISS' preference for pay-for-performance executive compensation is not to be underestimated.

GE's CEO Option Modification Earns a Positive Recommendation from ISS

As recently publicized, ISS initially issued a recommendation to shareholders to vote "against" GE's Say-on-Pay proposal, at least in part due to a perceived misalignment between GE's long-term performance and the CEO's compensation. In particular, it appears that the CEO's 2010 stock option grant to purchase 2,000,000 shares (vesting 50% after three years and 50% after five years) was at issue. ISS indicated that GE's move away from performance-based equity awards for its CEO to time-based stock options for 2010 was not adequately supported.

GE fought back. On April 7, 2011, GE issued a communication to its shareholders challenging ISS' recommendation. GE argued: (1) ISS failed to consider GE's actions that aligned pay-for-performance during the recession; (2) the CEO's pay increased only 6.4% since 2007, the last year in which he received a bonus; (3) ISS' valuation of the CEO's 2010 time-based stock option grant significantly overstated his total compensation and (4) ISS' model to value stock options differs from GE's model and is inconsistent with applicable accounting guidelines. (GE filed this communication as an additional proxy material with the Securities and Exchange Commission.)

Subsequently, on April 18, 2011 one week prior to the annual shareholder meeting, GE announced that after conversations with certain unnamed shareholders, it had modified the CEO's 2010 time-based stock option grant such that it would vest only upon the achievement of certain cash flow and stock performance targets. GE's CEO agreed to this modification. Likewise, GE reiterated that in 2011 it will resume the practice of granting only performance-based equity awards to its CEO. (Again, GE filed this communication as an additional proxy material with the SEC.)

GE's imposition of performance conditions on the CEO's 2010 stock option worked. It swayed ISS to change its recommendation to support GE's Say-on-Pay proposal. Plus, GE's Say-on-Pay proposal passed with (what we understand to be) 85% of the votes at the April 27th annual shareholder meeting.

Take-Away

Companies should be mindful of the important role that ISS plays with respect to Say-on-Pay proposals and of the weight that it places on pay-for-performance. Nevertheless, the GE experience illustrates how ISS encourages companies to take actions that it deems are in the best interests of shareholders. ISS will consider changing its voting recommendation if a company takes actions to address concerns raised in ISS' analysis and recommendation, discloses such actions in a filing with the SEC and if the shareholder meeting is at least five business days away.

For more information, you may contact any attorney in the Executive Compensation and Employee Benefits Group.


©2011 Fenwick & West LLP. All Rights Reserved.

The views expressed in this publication are solely those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Fenwick & West LLP or its clients. The content of the publication ("content") is not offered as legal should not be regarded as advertising, solicitation, legal advice or any other advice on any particular matter. The publication of any content is not intended to create and does not constitute an attorney-client relationship between you and Fenwick & West LLP. You should not act or refrain from acting on the basis of any content included in the publication without seeking the appropriate legal or professional advice on the particular facts and circumstances at issue.

IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: to ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice in this communication (including attachments) is not intended or written by Fenwick & West LLP to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the internal revenue code or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.