Voting

LD Pensions actively participates in voting at general meetings in order to influence the companies in which we invest.

We make it a priority to vote in the following circumstances:  

• Danish companies
• companies that have breached global norms and standards, and with which we are in dialogue
• companies that account for more than 0.1% of our portfolio
• companies with a poor ESG rating (based on a rating from our Partners)

In addition, we prioritise voting on matters relating to the following three issues.

Climate and Environmental Conditions (E):

• companies deriving revenue from the extraction and production of oil and gas, including in environmentally sensitive areas such as the Arctic 
• the 10 highest-emitting companies among utility companies
• the 10 highest-emitting companies among manufacturing and industrial firms 
• companies that contribute to deforestation 
• companies that do not meet the EU Taxonomy’s DNSH criteria for biodiversity  

Social conditions (S):

• companies that actively refuse to negotiate with trade unions 
• companies involved in disputes relating to collective bargaining and trade unions 
• companies that undermine freedom of association 
• companies involved in controversies relating to workers’ rights in their supply chains  

Management matters (G):

• companies ranked in the lowest category in terms of management 
• companies categorised in the lowest category in terms of employee remuneration 
• companies with serious controversies relating to governance, based on input from our Partners. 

How we vote 

In LD Pensions, we work to promote diversity on boards, ensure boards are independent, promote transparency regarding bonus payments to management and boards, and prevent restrictions on shareholders’ rights.

If LD Pensions votes against a proposal on remuneration, we will, where possible, combine this with a vote against the chair of the remuneration committee to signal our dissatisfaction. We also vote against the chair of the audit committee and the nomination committee, respectively, if there are issues with the audit or the composition of the board. We believe that both the audit firm and the lead auditors should be replaced on a regular basis. Rotation rules vary from country to country. Companies that have had the same audit firm for several decades without disclosing any tendering process or auditor rotation will receive a vote against.

Our partners

Our partner, Minerva, helps to ensure that we are able to cast our votes at the general meetings.

How we evaluate polls

Many votes concern general issues such as the composition of the board, remuneration policies and auditing. In these cases, we follow the fixed criteria set out in our voting policy.

For more complex proposals, we carry out an individual assessment and consult with our Partners. 

See how we voted 

In our database, you can search for our voting records at the annual general meetings of listed companies.