Home / Companies / Starbucks Corporation / 12 Mar 2025
Starbucks Corporation: meeting of 12 Mar 2025
Votes reported on Form N-PX, item by item
1,722 Form N-PX filers reported votes at the Starbucks Corporation meeting of 12 Mar 2025. Their records fall into 10 items below, in ballot order: management items first, then proposals from security holders. Each bar shows how the reporting filers split; it is not the result of the meeting.
foragainstabstain, withhold or otheramber tick: the portion cast against management
Items
DIRECTOR ELECTIONSIssuer
Director elections
9 nominees; 95.6% of reported votes for; 91 filers withheld from or voted against at least one nominee.
8,880 vote records from 392 filers. 5 of the 390 filers that marked the item either way voted against management. 2 filers reported this item without a management mark.
SECTION 14A SAY-ON-PAY VOTESIssuer
Advisory vote on executive pay (say-on-pay)
2,887 vote records from 1,695 filers. 392 of the 1,643 filers that marked the item either way voted against management. 52 filers reported this item without a management mark.
AUDIT-RELATEDIssuer
Audit-related items (auditor ratification)
990 vote records from 389 filers. 10 of the 387 filers that marked the item either way voted against management. 2 filers reported this item without a management mark.
COMPENSATIONIssuer
COMPENSATION: management items
Management items in this category are shown together; filers word and number them differently.
59 vote records from 23 filers. 4 of the 23 filers that marked the item either way voted against management.
OTHER SOCIAL ISSUESSecurity holder
Shareholder proposal requesting a report on human rights risks related to labor organizing
922 vote records from 368 filers. 15 of the 367 filers that marked the item either way voted against management. 1 filer reported this item without a management mark.
OTHER SOCIAL ISSUESSecurity holder
Shareholder proposal requesting an annual report on discrimination risks related to charitable giving
936 vote records from 373 filers. 18 of the 372 filers that marked the item either way voted against management. 1 filer reported this item without a management mark.
OTHER SOCIAL ISSUESSecurity holder
Shareholder proposal requesting disclosure on cage-free egg commitments in China and Japan
920 vote records from 367 filers. 49 of the 365 filers that marked the item either way voted against management. 2 filers reported this item without a management mark.
CORPORATE GOVERNANCESecurity holder
Shareholder proposal regarding independent board chair requirements
934 vote records from 372 filers. 74 of the 370 filers that marked the item either way voted against management. 2 filers reported this item without a management mark.
ENVIRONMENT OR CLIMATESecurity holder
Shareholder proposal requesting an annual emissions congruency report
933 vote records from 372 filers. 17 of the 371 filers that marked the item either way voted against management. 1 filer reported this item without a management mark.
Several categoriesSecurity holder
Shareholder proposals (not separable from the filings)
Filers described these proposals in wordings that could not be matched to one another, so they are shown together.
145 vote records from 17 filers. 6 of the 17 filers that marked the item either way voted against management.
How the largest families voted
| Family | 1. Directors | 2. Say-on-pay | 3. Auditor | 5. Proposal | 6. Proposal | 7. Proposal | 8. Proposal | 9. Proposal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vanguard | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| BlackRock and iShares | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Fidelity | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Dimensional | For | Against * | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| State Street and SPDR | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| American Century | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Franklin Templeton | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Invesco | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Equitable | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Charles Schwab | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Nuveen and TIAA | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| ProShares and ProFunds | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| John Hancock and Manulife | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Morgan Stanley, Eaton Vance and Calvert | For | Against * | For | Against | Against | For * | For * | Against |
| J.P. Morgan | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Goldman Sachs | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| WisdomTree | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| PGIM and Prudential | For | Against * | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Jackson National funds | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Northern Trust and FlexShares | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| SEI | For | Against * | For | Against | Against | Against | For * | Against |
| T. Rowe Price | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Thrivent | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Lincoln Financial | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Voya | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| First Trust | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Russell Investments | For | Against * | For | Against | Against | Against | For * | Against |
| Nationwide | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Victory Capital | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Brighthouse Funds | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against * | Against |
| Guggenheim and Rydex | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Columbia Threadneedle | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | For * | Against |
| BNY Mellon | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Principal | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Capital Group and American Funds | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Pacific Life funds | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Global X | For | Against * | For | No report | No report | No report | No report | No report |
| MFS | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Transamerica | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Federated Hermes | For | Against * | For | Against | Against | Against | For * | Against |
| AllianceBernstein | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Hartford Funds | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| DWS | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| PIMCO | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Allspring | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| MassMutual | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | For * | Against |
| Virtus | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| VanEck | For | Against * | For | Against | Against | Against | For * | Against |
| Macquarie and Delaware Funds | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Janus Henderson | No report | For | No report | No report | No report | No report | No report | No report |
| Neuberger Berman | No report | Against * | No report | No report | No report | No report | No report | No report |
| American Beacon | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | Against | Against |
| Natixis and Loomis Sayles | For | For | For | Against | Against | Against | For * | Against |
| Harris Associates and Oakmark | No report | For | No report | No report | No report | No report | No report | No report |
| Baird | No report | For | No report | No report | No report | No report | No report | No report |
* against management. A family's position is the way most of its reported shares were voted across its filers; "split" means no single position led. "No report" means none of the family's filers listed the item.
Questions
How did large funds vote at the Starbucks Corporation meeting?
1,722 Form N-PX filers reported votes at the meeting of 12 Mar 2025. On say-on-pay, 392 of 1,643 voted against management (23.9%). 5 proposals from security holders could be told apart in the filings. The family table lists each of the largest families item by item.
Is this the meeting result?
No. These are the votes of funds and managers that file Form N-PX, counted by filer and by the shares they reported. The certified result, which includes every shareholder, is reported by Starbucks Corporation on Form 8-K.
Why are director elections shown as counts only?
Director records name the nominee. This site does not publish pages or rows about individuals, so for director elections it keeps the number of nominees and the split of votes and discards the wording.
Every meeting on file for Starbucks Corporation
Provenance: SEC EDGAR, Form N-PX and N-PX/A filings listing Starbucks Corporation with a meeting date within three days of 12 Mar 2025. Proposal titles are the most common wording among filers and are replaced by the SEC category where a wording could name a person. Not verified by the SEC. Filings read through 23 Sep 2026.