Back to States List

Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania has 2 main public pension funds:

The SERS board represents state employees and consists of 11 members: 2 Ex Officio (State Treasurer, Secretary of Banking and Securities); 5 appointed by the Governor; 2 appointed by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate; 2 appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

SERS discloses its specific proxy voting records on this website.

The PSERS board represents school teachers and employees and consists of 15 members: 4 ex-officio members (Secretary of Education, Treasurer of the Commonwealth, Secretary of Banking and Securities, and Chief Executive Officer of PSBA), 2 House members appointed by the Speaker of the House, and 2 Senate members appointed by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate, 1 Governor-appointed member, and 6 elected members (3 active certified, 1 active non-certified, 1 member of the annuitant group, and 1 member to be elected by the members of the Pennsylvania public school boards).

PSERS discloses its specific proxy voting records on this website.

The first table utilizes the state’s publicly disclosed proxy voting records for public securities that it directly owns through pension fund portfolios. The second table uses the aggregated proxy voting records of the state’s asset managers, who manage the pensions’ stock market portfolio either through mutual funds or ETFs, and are therefore exercising proxy voting privileges as well. Both of these tables are necessary to reflect an accurate and comprehensive picture of the state’s proxy voting records.

Averages

Pro-ESG

Anti-ESG

State Voting Average

28%

State Voting Average (Anti-ESG):

22.22%

State Rank :

17th

State Rank

37th

Asset Manager Average

37%

Asset Manager Average (Anti-ESG):

4%

By Asset Manager

BlackRock

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

30%

Copeland Capital Management

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

30%

Eagle Capital Management, LLC

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

30%

Emerald Asset Management

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

30%

LSV Asset Management

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

30%

Nuveen Real Estate

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

34%

PIMCO

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

36%

Polen Capital Management

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

36%

Prudential Financial

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

36%

Wasatch Advisors

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

37%

Oberweis Asset Management, Inc.

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

37%

Acadian Asset Management

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

37%

Macquarie Investment Management Advisers

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

37%

Salient

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

37%

Baillie Gifford

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

37%

Asset Manager Voting

Board Diversity:

22%

Require Environmental/Social Qualifications:

0%

Establish Environmental/Social Committee:

7%

Link Executive Pay to Social Goals:

7%

Climate Change:

29%

GHG Emissions:

33%

Climate Change Action:

13%

Report on Healthcare/Abortion:

30%

Weapons-Related Proposals:

10%

Social Proposal:

9%

Income Inequality:

0%

Political Activities and Action:

2%

Political Contributions and Lobbying:

20%

Political Lobbying Disclosure:

35%

Racial Equity Audit:

58%

Management Environmental Proposals:

95%

Anti-Social:

4%

Charitable Contributions:

5%

State Voting

Board Diversity:

21.5%

Require Environmental/Social Qualifications:

50.0%

Establish Environmental/Social Committee:

0.0%

Link Executive Pay to Social Goals:

0.0%

Climate Change:

13.8%

GHG Emissions:

37.0%

Report on Healthcare/Abortion:

30.0%

Weapons-Related Proposals:

20.0%

Social Proposal:

18.2%

Income Inequality:

10.0%

Political Activities and Action:

46.6%

Political Contributions and Lobbying:

75.0%

Political Contributions and Lobbying:

78.2%

Racial Equity Audit:

30.0%

Management Environmental Proposals:

100.0%

Anti-Social:

0.0%

Charitable Contributions:

46.2%

**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

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