Back to States List

Massachusetts

Massachusetts has two main public pension systems: the Massachusetts State Employees’ Retirement System (SERS) and the Massachusetts Teachers’ Retirement System (MTRS). The assets of SERS and MTRS are pooled together into the Pension Reserves Investment Trust (PRIT) Fund. The Pension Reserves Investment Management (PRIM) Board oversees the PRIT Fund.

The PRIM board consists of 9 members: 2 Ex Officio (Treasurer and 1 designee of the Treasurer); 4 elected members; 2 appointed members.

The “By Asset Manager” and “Asset Manager Voting” tables show the proxy voting records of the state’s asset managers who manage the pensions’ stock market portfolio through index, exchange-traded, or mutual funds. Since these are externally managed funds, the asset managers typically retain and exercise proxy voting privileges. This data is used to calculate the state’s pro-ESG and anti-ESG scores to see how the state leverages its externally managed funds in proxy voting.

The “State Voting” table shows PRIM’s proxy voting records for directly owned securities through pension fund portfolios. This data was obtained by a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request since Massachusetts does not publicly disclose this information to its pensioners. The 1792 Exchange encourages Massachusetts to publish its proxy voting records instead of keeping its pensioners in the dark about how the state votes on ESG issues with their money.

Both tables are important to show a comprehensive picture of the state’s proxy voting record.

By Asset Manager

AQR Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

82%

Aristotle Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

29%

Copeland Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

5%

Frontier Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

19%

Goldman Sachs Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

6%

Invesco Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

34%

Loomis Sayles

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

25%

Lord Abbett Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

13%

PGIM Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

42%

Principal Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

46%

Prudential Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

17%

State Street Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

18%

State Street SSGA

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

19%

T Rowe Price Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

3%

UBS Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

48%

Boston Partners Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

28%

Fiera Capital Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

32%

RBC Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

37%

Sands Capital Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

16%

Baillie Gifford Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

29%

Mondrian Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

47%

Polen Capital Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

24%

Sterling Capital Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

28%

Coho Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

51%

Pzena Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

0%

Wasatch Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

19%

O'Shaughnessy Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

55%

Brookfield Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

48%

Asset Manager Voting

Pro-ESG

28.7%

Anti-ESG

1.7%

Anti-Fossil Fuels

25%

Anti-Pollution/Waste

35%

Animal Rights

15%

DEI

26%

Weapons/Defense

11%

Human Rights

33%

Income Equality

33%

Political Speech/Lobbying Spending

33%

Health Care

14%

Race/Gender targets on Boards

45%

Non-Pecuniary

17%

ESG-Focused Governance

18%

Abortion

17%

Pro-Fossil Fuel

1%

Equality not DEI

1%

Controversial Cause Support

2%

Geopolitical Rivals/China

1%

State Voting

Pro-ESG

54%

Anti-ESG

0%

Anti-Fossil Fuels

59%

Anti-Pollution/Waste

39%

Animal Rights

40%

DEI

36%

Weapons/Defense

20%

Human Rights

56%

Income Equality

86%

Political Speech/Lobbying Spending

82%

Health Care

25%

Race/Gender targets on Board

100%

Non-Pecuniary Corporate Purpose

0%

ESG-Focused Governance

44%

Abortion

10%

Pro-Fossil Fuel

0%

Equality not DEI

0%

Controversial Cause Support

0%

Geopolitical Rivals/China

0%

Generate Reports

Clear

This website stores cookies on your computer. These cookies are used to collect information about how you interact with our website and allow us to remember you. We use this information in order to improve and customize your browsing experience and for analytics and metrics about our visitors both on this website and other media. To find out more about the cookies we use, see our Privacy Policy.

Accept