Sounds like the NZSA heard the pain of many shareholders following Ms Hrdlickas appointment and sell out:
They put a fine analysis and summary into their voting intentions. Obviously - if you want to read the whole thing, you should become a member, but here are some excerpts:
They intend to vote against her nomination as director, raising as well that they see it as poor governance to have the CEO sitting as first equal under the directors instead of reporting into the board.In our view, Ms Hrdlicka has impacted on confidence in the company by her (completely legal) actions in selling, and this must raise questions about her judgement. If the situation was unavoidable, it would surely have been better for ATM to disclose the need to sell at the time when she was employed, rather than after the event?
We will vote against her appointment as a director, as the lack of separation between the board and CEO is poor governance as noted above. This does not impact on Ms Hrdlicka’s ability to fulfil the CEO role.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by couta1
;
Bookmarks