The CEO Pay Ratio Rule: Determining Your Employee Population

Download a pdf of this article »

This Thoughtful Disclosure Alert is no longer current as it does not reflect the guidance issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission on September 21, 2017. An updated version of this Thoughtful Disclosure Alert, reflecting the September guidance, is available here [add link].

STARTING IN 2018, public companies will be required to disclose in their annual report on Form 10-K and definitive proxy statement the ratio of the median of the annual total compensation of their employees (other than the Chief Executive Officer) and the annual total compensation of their Chief Executive Officer (the “Pay Ratio Rule”). This initial disclosure will be based on the compensation paid for the first fiscal year beginning on or after January 1, 2017.

To assist you in understanding and complying with this new disclosure requirement, we have put together a guide, Complying with the CEO Pay Ratio Disclosure Requirement.

To determine the “median of the annual total compensation of their employees,” companies subject to this new disclosure requirement must first identify the “median employee” whose pay is to be compared to that of their CEO. For this purpose, the “median employee” is to be selected from all of a company’s employees.

Scope of “All Employees” Requirement

As a general matter, “all” employees means every individual employed by the company or any of its consolidated subsidiaries as of a date chosen by the company within the last three months of the company’s last completed fiscal year. Specifically, this includes:

  • all full-time U.S. and non-U.S. employees;
  • all part-time U.S. and non-U.S. employees;
  • all seasonal U.S. and non-U.S. employees; and
  • all temporary U.S. and non-U.S. employees.

Employees of Consolidated Subsidiaries

For purposes of the Pay Ratio Rule, a company’s employee population consists of all workers employed by the company and any of its consolidated subsidiaries. For this purpose, a “consolidated subsidiary” is a subsidiary whose financial results are consolidated in the financial statements of the subject company (which, under generally accepted accounting principles, occurs where the subject company holds a controlling financial interest (typically through majority ownership of over 50% of the outstanding voting shares) in the subsidiary).

Employees of Acquired Businesses

For purposes of the Pay Ratio Rule, you may omit any employees from the employee population that became your employees as a result of a business combination or acquisition of a business for the fiscal year in which the transaction becomes effective. To ensure transparency, you must include in the narrative disclosure that must accompany the CEO pay ratio the approximate number of employees that you are omitting as a result of the business combination or acquisition.

Treatment of Independent Contractors and “Leased” Employees

In determining your employee population, the Pay Ratio Rule indicates that you may need to include workers who provide services to the company or its consolidated subsidiaries as independent contractors and “leased” workers unless:

  • The individual is employed by a third party;
  • The third party determines the individual’s compensation; and
  • The third party is unaffiliated with the company (or consolidated subsidiary).

The SEC Staff has indicated that whether a worker providing services to a company as an independent contractor is to be included in its employee population is to be determined by considering the composition of the company’s workforce and its overall employment and compensation practices. Further, this determination is to be made without regard to whether the worker would be considered an “employee” for tax or employment law purposes.

  • Compliance Tip No. 1: Determining whether to include independent contractors in your employee population is likely to be one of the most challenging aspects of identifying the “median employee.” In most cases, the treatment of independent contractors will depend upon the particular facts and circumstances of your company’s specific relationship with these individuals.
  • Compliance Tip No. 2: In many cases, it will be clear when the exception for workers retained through an unaffiliated third party will apply. In other cases, the analysis will be more opaque. Notably, the SEC Staff has indicated that, for purposes of this exception, an individual who is an independent contractor who determines his or her own compensation, may be the “unaffiliated third party” referenced in the exception. This should enable a company that has engaged an external advisor to provide specific services for the organization (such as an attorney or consultant) to exclude such an individual from its employee population. We believe that this will be true even where his or her final compensation is the result of negotiations between the company and the contractor.
  • Compliance Tip No. 3: To determine the degree of attention to allocate to analyzing the appropriate treatment of the independent contractors who provide services to your company, it is important to understand how these individuals fit into the composition of your overall workforce.If such individuals represent a significant portion of your workforce, it may be inconsistent with the objectives of the disclosure to exclude them from your employee population, particularly where the company controls the working conditions and level of compensation these workers are paid. On the other hand, where such workers make up a nominal portion of a company’s workforce, their exclusion may be appropriate even where the unaffiliated third party exception is not otherwise satisfied.

Need Assistance?

Compensia can assist companies in preparing their CEO pay ratio disclosure, including developing a process for identifying their “median employee.” If you would like assistance in understanding how the CEO pay ratio disclosure requirement will affect your company, preparing your initial CEO pay ratio disclosure, or if you have any questions on the subjects addressed in this Thoughtful Disclosure Alert, please contact Mark A. Borges. 

Related

At an Inflection Point: Long-Term Incentive Design Post-ISS/Glass Lewis Ascendancy

Download a pdf of this article » For more than a decade, long-term incentive programs have largely converged around a single model: a mix of restricted stock units (RSUs) and performance-based awards (primarily PSUs), with 50% or higher weighting on the PSUs. The convergence on this model was driven more by proxy advisor expectations than business strategy. Two recent developments signal a major shift toward flexibility and innovation: ISS Policy Updates: ISS’s 2026 benchmark equity mix policy now recognizes that

Read More

Updating Proxy Advisor Peer Groups Ahead of 2026 Annual Meetings

Download a pdf of this article » For companies holding annual meetings February 1, 2026 through September 15, 2026, ISS’s peer group submission window is now open, through 8 PM ET on Friday, November 21st. We anticipate Glass Lewis’s window will also open in the near future. During this period, companies can update their self-constructed compensation peer groups for use in proxy advisors’ upcoming executive pay assessments. Absent a submission, both ISS and Glass Lewis will default to the peer

Read More

Have we reached the end of standardized proxy advisor voting recommendations? The looming ISS and Glass Lewis policy shifts

Download a pdf of this article » Overview In October, Institutional Shareholder Services, Inc. (“ISS”) and Glass Lewis & Co., Inc. (“Glass Lewis”) each announced major changes to their governance research models that mark a decisive shift away from standardized “benchmark” voting recommendations, towards a broad reorientation of the proxy advisor landscape centered on investor-specific customization – a change that is consistent with investors’ diversifying views regarding compensation program design that have led to questioning legacy views regarding the effectiveness

Read More

Glass Lewis Publishes 2025 Policy Survey

Download a pdf of this article » Glass Lewis & Co. (“Glass Lewis”) recently announced the opening of its 2025 Policy Survey. Glass Lewis conducts its annual policy survey to inform its Benchmark Voting Policy Guidelines and to gather diverse perspectives on evolving governance and compensation practices. The 2025 survey covers a wide range of topics relevant to both proxy voting and broader stewardship efforts. While some questions are tailored to institutional respondents, Glass Lewis welcomes input from all market

Read More

Connect with us

Receive our periodic news and publications

"*" indicates required fields

Name*

By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive emails from us. You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact