Home / Companies / United Parcel Service, Inc.
United Parcel Service, Inc.
How funds and institutional managers reported voting their shares, year to 30 June 2026
- Filers reporting
- 1,600year to 30 June 2026
- Against management on pay
- 9.5%144 of 1,518 reporting filers
- Same, by reported shares
- 5.2%shares reported on Form N-PX
- Meetings on file
- 6across 3 seasons
foragainstabstain, withhold or otheramber tick: the portion cast against management
For the year to 30 June 2026, 1,600 funds and managers listed United Parcel Service, Inc. in their Form N-PX filings (3 meetings).
On the advisory vote on executive pay, 144 of the 1,518 filers that reported a position voted against management (9.5%), 2.9 percentage points above the median company on this site (6.6%). By reported shares the figure is 5.2% (median 2.9%). These are shares of the filers reporting on Form N-PX, not of all votes cast at the meeting.
Meetings
| Meeting date | Season | Filers reporting | Items | Against management on pay |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 May 2026 | year to 30 June 2026 | 1,583 | 8 | 9.5% |
| 9 Mar 2026 | year to 30 June 2026 | 3 | 1 | 33.3% |
| 5 Aug 2025 | year to 30 June 2025 | 3 | 1 | 0.0% |
| 8 May 2025 | year to 30 June 2025 | 1,628 | 7 | 8.8% |
| 2 May 2024 | year to 30 June 2024 | 1,617 | 9 | 9.1% |
| 5 Feb 2024 | year to 30 June 2024 | 5 | 1 | 0.0% |
Meetings with 20 or more reporting filers have their own page with every item. Dates are as filers typed them; dates up to three days apart are treated as one meeting.
Say-on-pay: this company and the median
| year to 30 June 2026 | United Parcel Service, Inc. | Median company |
|---|---|---|
| Reporting filers voting against management | 9.5% | 6.6% |
| Reported shares voted against management | 5.2% | 2.9% |
Among filers reporting on Form N-PX. The median is over 3,799 companies with a say-on-pay item reported by 20 or more filers.
How the largest families voted
Meeting of 7 May 2026: say-on-pay and each shareholder proposal that could be told apart.
| Family | Say-on-pay | Proposal A | Proposal B | Proposal C |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vanguard | For | For * | Against | Against |
| BlackRock and iShares | For | Against | Against | Against |
| Fidelity | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Dimensional | For | For * | Against | Against |
| State Street and SPDR | For | For * | Against | Against |
| American Century | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Franklin Templeton | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Invesco | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Equitable | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Charles Schwab | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Nuveen and TIAA | For | For * | Against | Against |
| ProShares and ProFunds | For | For * | Against | Against |
| John Hancock and Manulife | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Morgan Stanley, Eaton Vance and Calvert | For | For * | Against | Against |
| J.P. Morgan | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Goldman Sachs | For | For * | Against | Against |
| WisdomTree | For | For * | Against | Against |
| PGIM and Prudential | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Jackson National funds | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Northern Trust and FlexShares | For | For * | Against | Against |
| SEI | For | For * | Against | Against |
| T. Rowe Price | Against * | For * | Against | Against |
| Thrivent | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Lincoln Financial | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Voya | For | For * | Against | Against |
| First Trust | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Russell Investments | For | For * | Against | For * |
| Nationwide | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Victory Capital | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Brighthouse Funds | For | For * | Against * | Against * |
| Guggenheim and Rydex | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Columbia Threadneedle | For | For * | Against | Against |
| BNY Mellon | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Principal | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Capital Group and American Funds | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Pacific Life funds | For | Against | Against | Against |
| Global X | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Transamerica | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Federated Hermes | For | For * | Against | Against |
| AllianceBernstein | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Hartford Funds | For | For * | Against | Against |
| DWS | For | For * | Against | For * |
| PIMCO | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Allspring | For | For * | Against | Against |
| MassMutual | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Virtus | For | For * | Against | Against |
| VanEck | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Macquarie and Delaware Funds | For | For * | Against | For * |
| Janus Henderson | For | No report | No report | No report |
| Neuberger Berman | For | No report | No report | No report |
| Natixis and Loomis Sayles | For | For * | Against | Against |
| Lord Abbett | Split or no vote | No report | No report | No report |
| Baird | For | No report | No report | No report |
| Artisan Partners | For | For * | Against | Against |
* 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.
- Proposal A: To take steps to reduce the voting power of UPS class A stock from 10 votes per share to one vote per share.
- Proposal B: To require UPS to engage a third-party to audit and prepare an additional report on the impacts of UPS...
- Proposal C: To require UPS to provide an additional report describing the alignment of its operations and investments...
By season
| Season | Filers reporting | Against management on pay, filers | By reported shares | Say-on-pay split |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| year to 30 June 2024 | 1,627 | 9.1% | withheld | |
| year to 30 June 2025 | 1,651 | 8.8% | 4.6% | |
| year to 30 June 2026 | 1,600 | 9.5% | 5.2% |
Category mix
Share of the vote records reported for this company, by the category filers chose.
| Category | Vote records | Share |
|---|---|---|
| DIRECTOR ELECTIONS | 33,916 | 63.9% |
| SECTION 14A SAY-ON-PAY VOTES | 7,854 | 14.8% |
| ENVIRONMENT OR CLIMATE | 3,705 | 7.0% |
| AUDIT-RELATED | 2,823 | 5.3% |
| SHAREHOLDER RIGHTS AND DEFENSES | 2,727 | 5.1% |
| COMPENSATION | 1,018 | 1.9% |
| DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION | 1,000 | 1.9% |
| CORPORATE GOVERNANCE | 36 | 0.1% |
Questions
How did large funds vote at United Parcel Service, Inc.?
For the year to 30 June 2026, 1,518 Form N-PX filers reported a say-on-pay vote at United Parcel Service, Inc.; 144 voted against management (9.5%). The table on this page lists the position of each of the largest fund families on say-on-pay and on each shareholder proposal that could be told apart in the filings.
Were there shareholder proposals at United Parcel Service, Inc.?
Filers reported 3 proposals from security holders that could be told apart in the year to 30 June 2026. Across them, 12.8% of reporting filers voted for at the median proposal.
Is this the meeting result?
No. The figures are shares of the funds and managers that file Form N-PX, and of the shares they reported. Holders that do not file the form (individuals, most foreign investors, insiders) are not included, so the split here can differ widely from the certified result, which United Parcel Service, Inc. reports on Form 8-K.
Where does the data come from?
From Form N-PX filings on the SEC's EDGAR system, grouped by company. Filers type company names and meeting dates themselves; this site groups spellings of the same company and folds meeting dates up to three days apart. Data runs through 23 Sep 2026; the median compares 3,799 companies.
Provenance: SEC EDGAR, Form N-PX and N-PX/A filings that list United Parcel Service, Inc., grouped by company. The name is the most common spelling among filers; the ticker and SEC company number come from the SEC company tickers file, matched on the exact name. Not verified by the SEC. Filings read through 23 Sep 2026; page built 26 Sep 2026.