So was this vote against the remuneration about “following a...

So was this vote against the remuneration about “following a prescribed and rigid scoring system “ or an act of malice by proxy advisors?
And who are they ?
And hello Sammy Doe and thank you for those links ( it now seems even more of a strange and, apparently pointless act of institutional aggression )

Here’s what happened at Minerals Resources:
https://thewest.com.au/business/rem...r-strike-against-executive-pay-ng-b881029134z

Get off our register’: Minerals Resources boss Chris Ellison on the attack after another strike against executive pay

Stuart McKinnonThe West Australian
Thursday, 22 November 2018 1:55PM

“Mineral Resources boss Chris Ellison has again told institutional investors blindly following proxy advisers to get off the company’s share register after it received yet another strike against its executive remuneration report.

A whopping 63.3 per cent of votes cast by shareholders opposed MinRes’ remuneration, giving the company another first strike.

Today’s poll follows two similar strikes against the company’s remuneration report in the past two years.

Last year, the company’s second strike triggered a board spill motion but shareholders overwhelmingly voted to retain the existing board and management.

Speaking to reporters after the company’s annual meeting in Perth this morning, Mr Ellison insisted the company was not overpaying its people.

“The returns we give our shareholders is good, our people work hard and they deserve the remuneration they get,” he said.”


From last year :
https://thewest.com.au/business/remuneration/minres-chiefs-dig-at-proxy-advisers-ng-b88647297z
“MinRes blamed its first strike on proxy advisers adopting what it considers a prescribed and rigid scoring system.
The company said yesterday it had engaged with stakeholders since last year’s vote and made some changes, but insisted that a “one size fits all” approach to remuneration structures was not appropriate for its “unique business model”.