Back to States List

Massachusetts

Massachusetts has two main public pension funds:

  • The MSRB board represents nearly state employees (excluding Boston) covered by Maryland SERS; the board consists of 5 members: 1 Ex Officio (State Treasurer); 1 appointed by the State Treasurer; 2 elected by members of MSRB; 1 elected by the other members of the board.
  • The MTRS board represents nearly all public school teachers (excluding Boston) and consists of 7 members: 3 ex officio (State Treasurer, State Auditor, Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education), 2 members who are elected by the active and retired members of the system, 1 member—who must be a retired teacher—who is appointed by the Governor, and 1 member who is chosen by the vote of the other six).

Averages

Pro-ESG

Anti-ESG

State Rank

38th

State Rank

15th

Asset Manager Average

44%

Asset Manager Average

6%

By Asset Manager

AQR Capital Management, LLC

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

80%

Aristotle Capital Management

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

77%

Boston Partners

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

71%

Brookfield Asset Management

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

71%

Coho Partners

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

70%

Copeland Capital Management

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

69%

Frontier Capital Management

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

65%

Goldman Sachs Asset Management

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

44%

Invesco Advisors

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

48%

JP Morgan Asset Management

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

47%

Loomis Sayles

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

47%

Lord, Abbett & Company

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

47%

Mondrian Investment Partners

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

47%

Morgan Stanley

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

48%

O’Shaughnessy

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

48%

PGIM Quantitative Solutions, LLC

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

47%

Polen Capital Management

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

47%

Principal Capital Investors LL

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

49%

Prudential Investments

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

49%

RBC Capital Markets LLC

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

49%

Riverbridge Partners, LLC

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

49%

Sands Capital Management, LLC

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

49%

State Street Funds

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

49%

State Street Global Advisors

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

49%

STERLING CAPITAL PARTNERS

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

49%

T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc.

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

44%

UBS

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

44%

Wasatch Advisors

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

44%

Pzena Investment Management, LLC

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

44%

Acadian Asset Management

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

44%

Baillie Gifford

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

44%

Fiera

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

44%

Asset Manager Voting

Board Diversity:

28%

Require Environmental/Social Qualifications:

10%

Establish Environmental/Social Committee:

8%

Link Executive Pay to Social Goals:

16%

Climate Change:

41%

GHG Emissions:

46%

Climate Change Action:

21%

Report on Healthcare/Abortion:

26%

Weapons-Related Proposals:

7%

Social Proposal:

19%

Income Inequality:

21%

Political Activities and Action:

8%

Political Contributions and Lobbying:

42%

Political Lobbying Disclosure:

51%

Racial Equity Audit:

43%

Management Environmental Proposals:

89%

Anti-Social (Anti-ESG):

4%

Charitable Contributions:

9%

**The Retirement Systems of Alabama (RSA) has denied that State Street invests equities or casts proxy votes for the State. RSA has yet to publish its proxy voting records or disclose its investment managers. RSA’s public records list State Street a custodial bank and as a fund manager. No other investment managers are named in RSA public records, which is what is reported on the 1792 Exchange Proxy Database. RSA claims that Glass Lewis conducts its proxy voting. 1792 Exchange encourages RSA to publish these voting records in order that these records might be updated on this page. 1792 Exchange also encourages RSA to retain authority over proxy voting for ESG resolutions and not entrust these duties to Glass Lewis, a firm the Attorney General of Alabama has investigated for promoting ESG priorities at the expense of fiduciary responsibility.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this report, ‘Proxy Voting,’ is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investment advice. Click here for the full disclaimer.

Generate Reports
Clear
Toast

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