Sonsteby and Wilmott) have no direct or indirect material relationship with us (other than their service as directors) and qualify as independent under the NYSE Rules. The Board has also affirmatively determined that each member of the Audit Committee and the Compensation Committee meets the applicable requirements of the NYSE Rules and the Exchange Act.
In making independence determinations, the Board considers that in the ordinary course of business, transactions may occur between the Company, including its subsidiaries, and entities with which some of our directors are or have been affiliated. The Board has concluded that any such transactions were immaterial in fiscal 2023.
Related Party Transactions
The Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines include a policy pertaining to related party transactions in which Interested Transactions with a Related Party, as those terms are defined below, are prohibited without prior approval of the Board. The Board will review the material facts of the proposed transaction and will either approve or disapprove of the transaction. In making its determination, the Board considers whether the Interested Transaction is consistent with the best interests of the Company and its shareholders and whether the Interested Transaction is on terms no less favorable than terms generally available to an unaffiliated third party under the same or similar circumstances, as well as the extent of the Related Party’s interest in the transaction. A director may not participate in any discussion or approval of an Interested Transaction for which he or she is a Related Party, except to provide all material information as requested. Only those directors that meet the requirements for designation as a “qualified director” under the Florida Business Corporation Act will participate in the approval of an Interested Transaction. If an Interested Transaction will be ongoing, the Board may establish guidelines for the Company’s management to follow in its dealings with the Related Party.
An “Interested Transaction” as defined in the policy is any transaction, arrangement or relationship (or series of similar transactions, arrangements or relationships) in which (i) the amount involved exceeds $120,000 in any fiscal year, (ii) the Company is a participant, and (iii) any Related Party has or will have a direct or indirect interest (other than solely as a result of being a director or a less than 10 percent beneficial owner of another entity), but does not include any salary or compensation paid by the Company to a director or for the employment of an executive officer that is required to be reported in the Company’s proxy statement (or that would have been so reported if the executive officer was a “named executive officer” as that term is defined in the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission).
A “Related Party” as defined in the policy is any (i) person who is or was since the beginning of the last fiscal year an executive officer, director or nominee for election as a director of the Company, (ii) beneficial owner of more than five percent of the Company’s common stock, or (iii) immediate family member of any of the foregoing.
An “immediate family member” as defined in the policy is any child, stepchild, parent, stepparent, spouse, sibling, mother-in-law, father-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, or sister-in-law of the person in question and any person (other than a tenant or employee) sharing the household of the person in question.
There are no Interested Transactions or related party transactions or relationships required to be reported in this Proxy Statement under Item 404 of the SEC’s Regulation S-K.
12 Darden Restaurants, Inc.
Director Election Governance Practices
We do not have a “classified board” or other system where directors’ terms are staggered; instead, our full Board is elected annually. The Company’s Bylaws provide that in an uncontested election, each director will be elected by a majority of the votes cast; provided that, if the election is contested, the directors will be elected by a plurality of the votes cast. In an uncontested election, if a nominee for director who is a director at the time of election does not receive the vote of at least the majority of the votes cast at any meeting for the election of directors at which a quorum is present, the director will promptly tender his or her resignation to the Board and remain a director until the Board appoints an individual to fill the office held by such director.
The Nominating and Governance Committee will recommend to the Board whether to accept or reject the tendered resignation or whether other action should be taken. The Board is required to act on the tendered resignation, taking into account the Nominating and Governance Committee’s recommendation, and publicly disclose (by a press release, a filing with the SEC or other broadly disseminated means of communication) its decision and the rationale within 90 days from the date of certification of the election results. If a director’s resignation is not accepted by the Board, such director will continue to serve until his or her successor is duly elected, or his or her earlier resignation or removal. If a director’s resignation is accepted by the Board, then the Board, in its sole discretion, may fill the vacancy or decrease the size of the Board. To be eligible to be a nominee for election or reelection as a director of the Company, a person must deliver to our Corporate Secretary a written agreement that he or she will abide by these requirements.
Under our Bylaws, the Board will consist of not less than three nor more than fifteen members as determined from time to time by resolution of the Board. The Board currently consists of ten members, nine of whom have agreed to stand for re-election at the 2023 Annual Meeting. On June 20, 2023, Mr. Lee informed the Board that he would not be standing for re-election to the Board of Directors and he will retire from service as a director of the Company at the end of the 2023 Annual Meeting. Following Mr. Lee’s announcement, on June 20, 2023, the Board resolved that effective upon Mr. Lee’s retirement from the Board, the size of the Board would be reduced to nine members.
Board Leadership Structure
The Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that the positions of Chairman of the Board and CEO may, in the judgment of the Board, be combined, and if the Chairman position is held by the CEO or another non-independent director, then the independent directors will choose a Lead Independent Director from among the independent directors. The Board believes that the decision as to whether the same person should serve in the roles of Chairman and CEO should be made by the Board, from time to time, in its business judgment after considering the relevant factors, including the specific needs of the business and the best interests of the shareholders. In December 2021, the Board voted to separate the roles of Chairman and CEO and elected Eugene I. Lee, Jr., who had been serving in both of those roles at the time, to serve as the Executive Chairman of the Board effective May 30, 2022 and the Board elected Ricardo Cardenas to serve as President and CEO and as a member of the Board of Directors, also effective May 30, 2022. As of September 21, 2022, Mr. Lee retired from employment at the Company and the Board of Directors elected Mr. Lee to serve as Chairman of the Board on that date. Charles M. Sonsteby, who had served as Chairman from April 2016 to December 2020, was elected to serve as Lead Independent Director in December 2020 and continues in that role to this date. As Lead Independent Director, Mr. Sonsteby, along with the other independent non-employee directors, brings experience, oversight and expertise from outside the Company and industry, while our Chairman, Mr. Lee, brings Company and industry-specific experience and expertise, including 7 years as CEO of the Company. Our President and CEO, Mr. Cardenas brings a long history of Company management experience in areas including finance,
2023 Proxy Statement 13
Proposal 5
Shareholder Proposal Requesting
the Company Issue Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Targets
The Sisters of the Order of St. Dominic-Grand Rapids (the “Dominican Sisters”), 111 Lakeside Dr., Grand Rapids, MI 49503, have notified us that the Dominican Sisters intend to present the following proposal for consideration at the Annual Meeting. As of April 5, 2023, The Dominican Sisters beneficially owned for at least three years at least $2,000 in value of our common stock. The Dominican Sisters are also serving as the representative of four other shareholders who co-filed the same proposal. In accordance with federal securities regulations, we have included the text of the proposal and supporting statement exactly as submitted by the Dominican Sisters. We are not responsible for the content of the proposal and the supporting statement or any inaccuracies they may contain.
Whereas: As the world’s largest full service restaurant company with more than 1,800 restaurants, Darden Restaurants sources significant volumes of commodities that have high carbon footprints, including palm oil, soy, beef, and pulp/paper, which are also leading drivers of global deforestation. Darden acknowledges in its 10-K that climate change may adversely affect commodity costs and operating results.1
According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, agriculture, forestry, and other land use change is responsible for 23 percent of total net anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, nearly half of which are attributable to deforestation.
In its 2021 10-K, Darden discloses Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions for its company owned restaurants yet has not disclosed its full emission or forest footprint, lacks comprehensive policies for forest-risk commodities, and has not adopted any GHG emissions reduction targets. Further, Darden acknowledges that Scope 3 emissions account for approximately 80% of all value chain emissions,2 however it has not disclosed any steps to reduce these emissions.
By contrast, industry peers including Chipotle, Restaurant Brands International, and Yum! Brands have made commitments to reduce emissions throughout their full value chains, including from agricultural and land use sources. Many other leading food companies, including General Mills, Hershey, and Mondelez have already made progress in reducing emissions and joined the 2,468 companies that have set validated targets through the Science Based Target lnitiative. 3
As emissions disclosure, robust GHG reduction targets, no-deforestation policies and action plans become the industry standard, Darden’s lack thereof increasingly lags peer companies that are positioning themselves to address these climate and deforestation risks.
Furthermore, at COP26, financial institutions with nearly US $9 trillion in AUM committed to eliminate agricultural-commodity-driven deforestation from their portfolios by 2025. An increasing number of asset managers are incorporating deforestation risk into their investment decision making.
Failure to adopt policies and implement tactics that mitigate climate and deforestation risk may subject Darden to significant systemic and company-specific risks, including restricted market share, supply chain disruption, and reputational risk.
2023 Proxy Statement 31
Resolved: Shareholders request that Darden, within a year, issue near- and long-term science-based GHG reduction targets aligned with the Paris Agreement’s ambition of maintaining global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius and summarize plans to achieve them. The targets should cover the company’s full range of operational and supply chain emissions (including Scopes 1, 2 and 3).
Supporting Statement: In assessing targets, proponents recommend:
|
• |
|
Considering approaches used by advisory groups such as the Science Based Targets initiative; |
|
• |
|
Developing a transition plan that shows how the company plans to meet its goals; |
|
• |
|
Considering emissions reduction targets inclusive of all GHG Protocol-defined sources of Scope 3 emissions-including from agriculture, land use change, and deforestation; |
|
• |
|
Considering a no-deforestation policy for all forest-risk commodities in the company’s supply chain. |
1 |
https://s27.q4cdn.com/308865545/files/doc_financials/2022/q4/10K. pdf |
2 |
https://www.darden.com/our-impact/communities/sustainability/climate-risks |
3 |
https://sciencebasedtargets.org/companies -taking-action |
BOARD OF DIRECTORS’ RESPONSE
The Board recommends a vote AGAINST this proposal.
The Board of Directors has carefully considered this proposal and has determined that it is not in the best interests of our shareholders and not necessary because Darden is already implementing strategies to (1) evaluate climate risk to our operations with regular and appropriate Board oversight, (2) evaluate and manage the impact of our operations on the environment, including assessing emissions sources and other environmental impacts such as deforestation, from our operations and from our supply chain and (3) to disclose the material data and risk factors about such matters to our shareholders and other stakeholders.
Darden has a robust Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) process for strategically identifying, prioritizing and managing risks to our business, including climate risks, which includes regular and appropriate Board oversight.
The Company’s management maintains a robust enterprise risk management process, guided by oversight of the overall ERM process from the Audit Committee and risk management philosophy direction from the entire Board. The process also includes regular reports by management to the full Board on top risks identified by the process and periodic reports on other risks to relevant Committees of the Board. In the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines, oversight of risks relating to environmental and social responsibility are allocated to the Nominating and Governance Committee and the metrics reported by management and monitored by the Board are the source and structure for the metrics and data that management discloses externally.
Darden has performed deforestation risk assessments in commodities linked to deforestation and land conversion, which in our assessment, include beef, palm oil, soy, coffee, cocoa, and wood fiber products.
Darden has performed periodic deforestation screening of our supply chain since 2020 and engaged directly with suppliers on traceability and certification for commodities with deforestation risk. As of the end of fiscal 2023, we have assessed that approximately 80% of Darden’s spending on commodities linked to deforestation and land use change, including beef, palm oil, soy, coffee, cocoa and wood fiber, has low to no risk of contributing to deforestation or land use conversion using the definitions, assessment methodologies and reporting guidance from World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) and the Accountability Framework Initiative (AFi).
32 Darden Restaurants, Inc.
Proposal 6
Shareholder Proposal Requesting
the Company Issue a Report on Risks of State Policies Restricting Reproductive Health Care
RHIA Ventures as the representative of the Meyer Memorial Trust (the “Trust”), 2045 N. Vancouver Ave., Portland, OR 97227, has notified us that the Trust intends to present the following proposal for consideration at the Annual Meeting. As of May 8, 2023, the Trust beneficially owned for at least thirteen months 354 shares of our common stock with a value of $42,353.80 as of that date. In accordance with federal securities regulations, we have included the text of the proposal and supporting statement exactly as submitted by the Trust. We are not responsible for the content of the proposal and the supporting statement or any inaccuracies they may contain.
Report on Risks of State Policies Restricting Reproductive Health Care
WHEREAS:
Companies must navigate a patchwork of state laws with respect to the provision of reproductive health care. States have passed more than 1,380 restrictions on abortion access since 1973. Since June 2022, twelve states have banned most abortion services outright and more are expected to do so.
Darden Restaurants (“Darden”) has nearly 1,900 outlets nationwide, employing nearly 97,000 female employees (as of 2021) in all 50 states. Many now face challenges accessing reproductive healthcare for themselves or family members.
Employers, as well as employees, bear the cost of restricted access to reproductive health care.
Recruitment to states that have outlawed abortion may be more challenging (https://bit.ly/3Ctj3ZI). Retention may become more challenging as diminished reproductive health care weakens the talent pool. Women who cannot access abortion are three times more likely to leave the workforce than women who are able to access abortion when needed, and four times as likely to slip into poverty (https://bit.ly/37qrmMw). Research also indicates much higher maternal death rates in 2020 in states with greater restrictions on abortion access (https://bit.ly/40QLQEH).
The Institute for Women’s Policy Research estimated in 2021 that state-level abortion restrictions may have been keeping more than 500,000 women aged 15 to 44 out of the workforce annually (https://iwpr.org/costs-of-reproductive-health-restrictions).
These challenges may harm Darden’s ability to meet diversity goals, with negative consequences to performance, brand and reputation.
According to a 2022 Lean In survey, strong majorities of women under 40, regardless of political affiliation, would prefer to work for a company that supports abortion access (https://leanin.org/research/abortion-access-workplace-issue). A 2022 Harris Poll found that 69 percent of employees aged 18 to 34 want more clarity and transparency about their organization’s policies and benefits for reproductive healthcare (https://bit.ly/3OqENNL).
2023 Proxy Statement 35
Surveys have consistently shown that a majority of Americans wanted to keep the Roe v. Wade framework intact (https://bit.ly/3MskfFh). Sixty-four percent say employers should ensure that employees have access to reproductive health care; and forty-two percent would be more likely to buy from a brand that publicly supports reproductive health care (bit.ly/3nmzd2U).
RESOLVED:
Shareholders request that the Board of Directors issue a public report by March 2024, omitting confidential information and at reasonable expense, detailing any known and potential risks or costs to the company caused by enacted or proposed state policies severely restricting reproductive rights, and detailing any strategies beyond litigation and legal compliance that the company may deploy to minimize or mitigate these risks.
SUPPORTING STATEMENT:
Shareholders recommend that the report include evaluation of new laws and legislation severely restricting reproductive rights, and similar restrictive laws proposed or enacted in other states. In its discretion, the Board’s analysis may include any effects on employee hiring, retention, and productivity, and decisions regarding closure or expansion of operations in states proposing or enacting restrictive laws and strategies such as any public policy advocacy by the company, related political contributions policies, and human resources or educational strategies.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS’ RESPONSE
The Board recommends a vote AGAINST this proposal.
The Board has carefully considered this proposal and has determined that it is not in the best interests of our shareholders and not necessary for the protection of our employees.
Darden Provides a Competitive Employment Proposition
Darden’s people are our greatest competitive advantage, and our team members are at the heart of everything we do. We nourish and delight them by providing competitive wages and comprehensive benefits that allow our team members to be at their best. This includes programs that support our team members’ well-being, such as offering a wide variety of health benefits that fit varying needs of different families. Team members can take advantage of Paid Sick Leave so they can stay home if they do not feel well. We have also strengthened our free Employee Assistance Program to better support our team members and their families with mental health counseling, financial advice, legal consultations and professional referrals from licensed experts. We regularly review and enhance the benefits we provide to meet the workforce’s highest priority and emerging needs and to remain competitive in the market for talent. For example, in January 2023, we introduced a new benefit for restaurant team members called Fast Fluency – which offers Spanish-speaking team members the chance to learn English for free. Further, in 2022, the Darden Foundation introduced our Next Course Scholarship program for children and dependents of our team members and in its inaugural year, the program awarded scholarships worth $3,000 each to nearly 100 children or dependents of Darden team members.
We also offer other benefit programs that help our team members build wealth for their future. Team members who are 18 years of age or older can contribute to Darden’s 401(k) plan, and Darden provides a company match to eligible team members after one year of service. Our Employee Stock Purchase Plan also allows eligible team members to purchase Darden stock at a 15 percent discount based on the lowest price at the beginning or end of each quarter which in many instances results in tremendous return for our team members.
36 Darden Restaurants, Inc.
Meetings of the Board of Directors and its Committees
Board of Directors
Meetings. At the 2022 Annual Meeting, the following ten directors were elected to the Company’s Board of Directors: Margaret Shân Atkins, Ricardo Cardenas, Juliana L. Chugg, James P. Fogarty, Cynthia T. Jamison, Eugene I. Lee, Jr., Nana Mensah, William S. Simon, Charles M. Sonsteby and Timothy J. Wilmott. During the fiscal year ended May 28, 2023, the Board met six times. For the period of his or her Board service in fiscal 2023, each incumbent director attended at least 75 percent of the aggregate of the total number of meetings of the Board and the standing committees on which the director served.
Communications with Board. We believe that communication between the Board, shareholders and other interested parties is an important part of our corporate governance process. To this end, the Board has adopted Shareholder Communication Procedures that are available at www.darden.com under Investors — Governance. In general, shareholders and other interested parties may send communications to the attention of the Board, any individual director or the non-employee directors as a group, through the Lead Independent Director. Communications may be sent in writing or via email to: Charles M. Sonsteby, Lead Independent Director, Darden Restaurants, Inc., c/o Matthew R. Broad, Senior Vice President, General Counsel, Chief Compliance Officer and Corporate Secretary, 1000 Darden Center Drive, Orlando, Florida 32837, email: leaddirector@darden.com.
The Corporate Secretary will act as agent for the Lead Independent Director in facilitating direct communications to the Board. The Corporate Secretary will review, sort and summarize the communications. The Corporate Secretary will not, however, “filter out” any direct communications from being presented to the Lead Independent Director without instruction from the Lead Independent Director, and in such event, any communication that has been filtered out will be made available to any non-employee director who asks to review it. The Corporate Secretary will not make independent decisions with regard to what communications are forwarded to the Lead Independent Director. The Corporate Secretary will send a reply to the sender of each communication acknowledging receipt of the communication.
Identifying and Evaluating Director Nominees. Our Nominating and Governance Committee has adopted a Director Nomination Protocol that, together with our Bylaws, describes in detail the process we use to fill vacancies and add new members to the Board. The Protocol is available at www.darden.com under Investors — Governance, as Appendix A to the Nominating and Governance Committee charter.
Under the Director Nomination Protocol, in general, while there are no specific minimum qualifications for nominees, any candidate for service on the Board should possess the highest personal and professional ethics and be committed to representing the long-term interests of our shareholders. Director candidates should be committed to our core values (integrity and fairness, respect and caring, inclusion and diversity, always learning – always teaching, being “of service,” teamwork and excellence) and have an inquisitive and objective perspective, practical wisdom, mature judgment and a wide range of experience in the business world. We also will consider the candidate’s independence under applicable NYSE listing standards and our Corporate Governance Guidelines. In identifying and evaluating nominees for the Board, the Board assesses the background of each candidate in a number of different ways including a wide variety of qualifications, attributes
2023 Proxy Statement 39
and other factors and recognizes that diverse viewpoints and experiences enhance the Board’s effectiveness.
When reviewing and making initial recommendations on new candidates, the Nominating and Governance Committee considers how each prospective member’s unique background, expertise and experience will contribute to the Board’s overall perspective and ability to govern. In identifying or selecting nominees for the Board, the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines and the Director Nomination Protocol provide that the Company seeks Board members who will bring to the Board a deep and wide range of experience in the business world and who have diverse problem-solving talents. We seek people who have demonstrated high achievement in business or another field, so as to enable them to provide strategic support and guidance for the Company. The Company strives to maintain a Board that reflects gender, ethnic, racial and other diversity, and also fosters diversity of thought. Recruiting, hiring and nurturing the careers of women and minorities and increasing the diversity of our suppliers are top priorities, and the Company also intends to maintain the diversity of its Board.
The Nominating and Governance Committee will identify potential candidates to recommend to the full Board and a search firm may be engaged to identify additional candidates and assist with initial screening. The Nominating and Governance Committee will ensure that the initial candidate pool for any vacancy on the Board, including any pool developed by a search firm, will include candidates with diversity of gender, race and/or ethnicity. The Nominating and Governance Committee and the Chairman of the Board will perform the initial screening and review the credentials of all candidates to identify candidates that they feel are best qualified to serve. The Chairman of the Nominating and Governance Committee, working with the Chairman of the Board, will obtain background and reference information, as appropriate, for the candidates under consideration. The Nominating and Governance Committee will review all available information concerning the candidates’ qualifications and, in conjunction with the Chairman of the Board, will identify the candidate(s) they feel are best qualified to serve on the Company’s Board. The Chairman of the Nominating and Governance Committee, the CEO, and the Chairman of the Board (or the Chairman of the Board’s delegate from the Board) will meet with the leading candidates to further assess their qualifications and fitness, and to determine their interest in joining the Board. Following the meeting, the Board member participants and the Chairman of the Board will make a recommendation concerning the candidate to the Nominating and Governance Committee, which will consider whether to recommend the candidate to the full Board for election.
Director Candidates Recommended by Shareholders. The Nominating and Governance Committee will consider candidates recommended by shareholders. The procedures that shareholders should use to nominate directors are provided in our Bylaws. There are no differences in the manner of evaluation if the nominee is recommended by a shareholder.
Director Attendance at Annual Meeting of Shareholders. Our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that directors are expected to attend all scheduled Board and committee meetings and the annual meeting of shareholders. Each of the directors standing for reelection this year who was then in office attended the 2022 Annual Meeting.
Board Committees and Their Functions
General. Our Board has four standing committees that operate under charters adopted by the Board: Audit, Compensation, Finance, and Nominating and Governance. Each charter is available at www.darden.com under Investors — Governance. Copies are available in print free of charge to any shareholder upon written request addressed to our Corporate Secretary. Each member of every committee is an independent director as defined in our Corporate Governance Guidelines, the NYSE
40 Darden Restaurants, Inc.
President, Specialty Restaurant Group Special Award
On July 25, 2018, prior to becoming an executive officer, Mr. Martin was granted a special PSU award designed to reward management for achieving milestones with respect to opening new The Capital Burger restaurant locations. Under the terms of the award agreement, Mr. Martin is eligible to earn up to 10,423 PSUs, separated into two tranches of 50% of the total possible number, earned based on achieving Capital Burger new restaurant opening targets. These PSUs are earned and vested immediately upon achievement of the performance criteria. Effective April 28, 2023, the Compensation Committee Chair, pursuant to delegated authority from the Committee, certified that the Company had achieved the required performance criteria for the first tranche and that 5,212 of the PSUs were earned as of that date. The remaining 5,211 special PSUs are forfeited if not earned prior to July 24, 2024.
NEO Total Compensation Changes for Fiscal 2024
In accordance with our annual review process, the Compensation Committee (and the Board with respect to the President and CEO) reviews each actively employed NEO’s total direct compensation and evaluates each NEO’s individual performance, Company and business unit performance and each officer’s target compensation opportunity relative to updated market data provided by Pearl Meyer. In June 2023, the Board with respect to the President and the CEO, and the Compensation Committee with respect to the other NEOs, approved the base salary, annual incentive target bonus opportunity amount and long-term incentive program Target Grant Amount of each of our NEOs effective for fiscal 2024, which included increases to certain amounts to better align the total compensation of each of our NEOs with comparable positions within our peer group, reward individual performance, or to reflect tenure in position, retention priority for key positions and/or changes in responsibilities. Changes to Base Salary with respect to the NEOs were effective July 31, 2023.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Named Executive Officer |
|
Base Salary for fiscal 2024 |
|
|
Target Annual Incentive Percentage for fiscal 2024 |
|
|
Target Value of Long-term Incentive for fiscal 2024 |
|
Ricardo Cardenas |
|
|
$1,100,000 |
|
|
|
150% |
|
|
|
$7,500,000 |
|
Rajesh Vennam |
|
|
$750,000 |
|
|
|
90% |
|
|
|
$1,900,000 |
|
Todd A. Burrowes |
|
|
$750,000 |
|
|
|
95% |
|
|
|
$1,500,000 |
|
Daniel J. Kiernan |
|
|
$750,000 |
|
|
|
95% |
|
|
|
$1,700,000 |
|
M. John Martin |
|
|
$750,000 |
|
|
|
95% |
|
|
|
$1,500,000 |
|
Other Programs, Policies, and Practices
Perquisites
We provide limited perquisites to our NEOs that we believe are appropriate to enable business continuity and minimize work distractions. During fiscal 2023, these benefits included an allowance toward a company car, limited reimbursement for financial planning assistance, unsubsidized group liability insurance and an executive physical program.
Other Benefits
Our NEOs receive the same employee benefits provided to other salaried U.S. employees, but are not eligible to actively participate in Darden’s qualified savings plan (the Darden Savings Plan). Instead, we award amounts under our FlexComp Plan for our NEOs in place of participation under the Darden Savings Plan. The FlexComp Plan also allows participants (approximately 1,100) to defer receipt of portions of their base salaries and annual incentive compensation. See the discussion under the heading “Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation” for further details regarding the terms of participation under the FlexComp Plan.
62 Darden Restaurants, Inc.
Payments Made Upon Death. The Company pays for life insurance coverage for the NEOs and the amount paid for the insurance is included in the “All Other Compensation” column in the Summary Compensation Table. The life insurance benefit for the NEOs is equal to four times salary and bonus, with a maximum amount of coverage of $1,500,000. For accidental death, the benefit is twice the amount of the regular coverage with a maximum amount of coverage of $3,000,000. An additional $500,000 may be paid if death occurs while traveling on business. These benefits would be paid from term life insurance policies maintained by the Company. In the event of death, the beneficiary or estate of the NEO (as applicable) will receive the items identified under the heading above entitled “Payments Made Upon Any Termination of Employment,” except that the NEO would be fully vested in any employer contributions under the Darden Savings Plan upon death.
Stock options, restricted stock, restricted stock units and PSUs will vest in full and stock options will be exercisable for the remainder of the original term.
Payments Made Upon Involuntary Termination Without Cause. In general, the Company may, but is not obligated to, provide separation pay and benefits to its employees in the event the employee is involuntarily terminated without cause. If provided, the separation pay and benefits available are generally contingent upon the Company receiving a general release of claims from the employee. In addition to the items identified under the heading above entitled “Payments Made Upon Any Termination of Employment,” such benefits to an executive officer may include severance payments of up to 12 months’ base salary and up to 12 times the monthly value of the Company’s contribution to health insurance benefits, among other benefits as the Company may determine to be appropriate under the specific circumstances.
For awards granted prior to July 29, 2020, if the executive’s age plus his or her years of service equals or exceeds 70 and the executive is involuntarily terminated without cause, accelerated vesting will be applied to a pro rata portion of the outstanding stock options, RSUs, and PSUs. Stock options will be exercisable for the lesser of five years or the remainder of the original term.
For awards granted on or after July 29, 2020, if the executive is involuntarily terminated without cause, accelerated vesting will be applied to a pro rata portion of the outstanding stock options, RSUs, and PSUs. Stock options will be exercisable for the lesser of five years or the remainder of the original term.
Payments Made Upon a Change in Control. The Company has entered into CIC Agreements with Messrs. Burrowes, Cardenas, Kiernan, Martin and Vennam. The CIC Agreements provide for, contingent upon the NEO executing a release of claims against the Company and complying with the non-competition, non-solicitation, confidentially and other restrictive covenants, severance payments equal to one and one half times the sum of the NEO’s base salary and target annual bonus for Messrs. Burrowes, Kiernan, Martin, and Vennam and equal to two times the sum of base salary and target annual bonus in the case of Mr. Cardenas. In addition, the CIC Agreements provide for payments of an amount equal to 18 times the monthly COBRA charge in effect on the date of termination for the Company-provided group health plan coverage in effect on the date of termination for each of Messrs. Burrowes, Kiernan, Martin, and Vennam and 24 times the monthly charge for Mr. Cardenas, less the monthly active employee charge for such coverage on the date of termination, if the NEO is terminated without cause or voluntarily terminates employment with good reason within two years of a change in control. The severance (including accelerated vesting of equity) associated with a change in control as estimated in the table below may be reduced to avoid the “golden parachute” 20 percent excise tax under federal law. The NEO may receive his full severance payment only if the net amount payable to NEO, after taking into account all taxes (including the 20 percent excise tax), would be least 10 percent higher than the net after-tax amount that would otherwise be payable by limiting severance to avoid the 20 percent excise tax. The CIC Agreement provides for an initial term ending on December 31 of the year the agreement is first in effect, and extended on December 31 of
74 Darden Restaurants, Inc.
Will the Company respond to shareholder questions during the Annual Meeting?
We currently anticipate taking questions from shareholders during the Annual Meeting through the virtual meeting website, although we may impose certain procedural requirements such as limiting repetitive or follow-up questions or requiring questions to be submitted in writing.
How many shares must be present to hold the Annual Meeting?
A majority of our outstanding common shares as of the record date must be present by participating through the internet or by proxy at the meeting. This is called a quorum. Your shares are counted as present at the meeting if you are participating as a shareholder and vote electronically during the meeting or if you have properly returned a proxy by Internet, telephone or mail. Abstentions and “broker non-votes” also will be counted for purposes of establishing a quorum, as explained above under the question “How do I vote?”
How many votes are required to approve each proposal?
Proposal 1: In an uncontested election, the nine director nominees shall be elected by a majority of the votes cast. This means that the number of votes cast “FOR” a director’s election exceeds the number of votes cast “WITHHOLD” relating to that director’s election as described under the caption “PROPOSAL 1 — ELECTION OF NINE DIRECTORS FROM THE NAMED DIRECTOR NOMINEES.” Failing to vote for all or some of the director nominees will have no effect on the election of directors. Broker non-votes will also have no effect on this proposal. However, under our Bylaws, if a director nominee in an uncontested election does not receive at least a majority of the votes cast for the election of directors at any meeting at which a quorum is present, the director must promptly tender his or her resignation to the Board and remain a director until the Board appoints an individual to fill the office held by such director, as more particularly described under the heading “Corporate Governance and Board Administration — Director Election Governance Practices.”
Proposal 2: This advisory vote as described under the caption “PROPOSAL 2 — ADVISORY APPROVAL OF THE COMPANY’S EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION” is non-binding but the Board and the Compensation Committee will give careful consideration to the results of voting on this proposal. The approval of the advisory resolution on executive compensation requires, under Florida law, the majority of the votes cast to be voted “FOR” the proposal. Abstentions and broker non-votes will not be counted as votes “FOR” or “AGAINST” the proposal.
Proposal 3: This advisory vote as described under the caption “PROPOSAL 3 — ADVISORY VOTE ON THE FREQUENCY OF FUTURE ADVISORY VOTES ON EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION” is non-binding but the Board and the Compensation Committee will give careful consideration to the results of voting on this proposal. The recommended outcome of the advisory resolution on the frequency of future advisory votes on executive compensation will be, under Florida law, the option with the greatest number of votes cast in favor. Abstentions and broker non-votes will not be counted as votes for any of the options for this proposal.
Proposal 4: The ratification of the appointment of KPMG LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending May 26, 2024 described under the caption “PROPOSAL 4 — RATIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM” requires, under Florida law, the majority of the votes cast to be voted “FOR” the proposal. Abstentions and broker non-votes will not be counted as votes “FOR” or “AGAINST” the proposal.
Proposal 5: The ratification of the shareholder proposal described under the caption “PROPOSAL 5 – SHAREHOLDER PROPOSAL REQUESTING THE COMPANY ISSUE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION REDUCTION TARGETS” requires, under Florida law, the majority of the votes cast to be voted “FOR”
90 Darden Restaurants, Inc.
the proposal. Abstentions and broker non-votes will not be counted as votes “FOR” or “AGAINST” the proposal.
Proposal 6: The ratification of the shareholder proposal described under the caption “PROPOSAL 6 – SHAREHOLDER PROPOSAL REQUESTING THE COMPANY ISSUE A REPORT ON RISKS OF STATE POLICIES RESTRICTING REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CARE” requires, under Florida law, the majority of the votes cast to be voted “FOR” the proposal. Abstentions and broker non-votes will not be counted as votes “FOR” or “AGAINST” the proposal.
How will voting on “any other business” be conducted?
We have not received proper notice of, and are not aware of, any business to be transacted at the Annual Meeting other than the proposals described in this Proxy Statement. If any other business is properly presented at the Annual Meeting, the proxies received will be voted on such matter in accordance with the discretion of the proxy holders.
Where do I find the voting results of the meeting?
We will include the voting results in a Current Report on Form 8-K, which we will file within four business days after the date our 2023 Annual Meeting of Shareholders ends.
How do I submit a shareholder proposal, nominate directors or recommend director nominees, or submit other business for next year’s annual meeting?
If you wish to submit a proposal for inclusion in our Proxy Statement for our 2024 Annual Meeting, the proposal must comply with applicable requirements or conditions established by the SEC, including Rule 14a-8 under the Exchange Act, and must be received by our Corporate Secretary at our principal office no later than the close of business on Tuesday, April 9, 2024. Please address your proposal to: Matthew R. Broad, Senior Vice President, General Counsel, Chief Compliance Officer and Corporate Secretary, Darden Restaurants, Inc., 1000 Darden Center Drive, Orlando, Florida 32837.
Under our Bylaws (which are subject to amendment at any time), if you wish to nominate a director at our 2024 Annual Meeting and such nomination will not be included in the proxy statement for that meeting, or you wish to bring other business before the shareholders at our 2024 Annual Meeting, you must:
• |
|
Notify our Corporate Secretary in writing on or before Thursday, May 23, 2024; and |
• |
|
Include in your notice the specific information required by our Bylaws and otherwise comply with the requirements of our Bylaws and applicable law. |
Our Bylaws also provide a proxy access right to permit a shareholder, or a group of not more than 10 shareholders, owning continuously for at least 3 years shares of our Company representing an aggregate of at least 3 percent of the voting power entitled to vote in the election of directors, to nominate and include in our proxy materials director nominees constituting up to 25 percent of the number of the directors in office, provided that the shareholder(s) and the nominee(s) satisfy the requirements in our Bylaws. If you wish to exercise your proxy access right to nominate a director(s), you must:
• |
|
Notify our Corporate Secretary in writing on or before Tuesday, April 23, 2024; and |
• |
|
Include in your notice the specific information required by our Bylaws and otherwise comply with the requirements of our Bylaws and applicable law. |
If you would like a copy of our Bylaws, we will send you one without charge on request. A copy of our Bylaws also is available at www.darden.com.
2023 Proxy Statement 91
Pay vs Performance Disclosure - USD ($)
|
12 Months Ended |
May 28, 2023 |
May 29, 2022 |
May 30, 2021 |
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure, Table |
Pay Versus Performance Disclosure This disclosure has been prepared in accordance with the SEC’s pay versus performance rules in Item 402(v) of Regulation S-K under the 1934 Act (“Item 402(v)”) and does not necessarily reflect value actually realized by the Named Executive Officers or how the Compensation Committee evaluates compensation decisions in light of Company or individual performance. For discussion of how the Compensation Committee seeks to align pay with performance when making compensation decisions, please review the Compensation Discussion and Analysis beginning on page 52. The following tables and related disclosures provide information about (i) the total compensation (“SCT Total”) of our principal executive officer (“PEO”) and our non-PEO Named Executive Officers (collectively, the “Other NEOs”) as presented in the Summary Compensation Table on page 66 , (ii) the “compensation actually paid” (“CAP”) to our PEO and our Other NEOs, as calculated pursuant to Item 402(v), (iii) certain financial performance measures, and (iv) the relationship of the CAP to those financial performance measures for fiscal years 2021, 2022 and 2023:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary Compensation Table Total for PEO(2) |
|
Compensation Actually Paid to PEO(3) |
|
Average Summary Compensation Table Total for Non-PEO NEO(4) |
|
Average Compensation Actually Paid to Non-PEO NEO(5) |
|
Value of Initial Fixed $100 Investment Based on: |
|
|
|
Adjusted Darden Diluted Net EPS(8) |
|
|
|
Peer Group (6) Total Shareholder Return |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023 |
|
|
|
8,500,029 |
|
|
|
|
15,246,533 |
|
|
|
|
3,205,321 |
|
|
|
|
5,905,006 |
|
|
|
|
226.97 |
|
|
|
|
122.21 |
|
|
|
|
981.9 |
|
|
|
|
8.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022 |
|
|
|
11,891,841 |
|
|
|
|
8,852,886 |
|
|
|
|
3,517,201 |
|
|
|
|
2,886,390 |
|
|
|
|
171.15 |
|
|
|
|
123.74 |
|
|
|
|
952.8 |
|
|
|
|
7.40 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021 |
|
|
|
10,128,186 |
|
|
|
|
34,914,894 |
|
|
|
|
2,627,292 |
|
|
|
|
5,808,702 |
|
|
|
|
188.58 |
|
|
|
|
139.04 |
|
|
|
|
629.3 |
|
|
|
|
4.31 |
|
(1) |
“Year” means the fiscal year. |
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal 2023 |
|
Ricardo Cardenas |
|
|
Fiscal 2022 |
|
Eugene I. Lee, Jr. |
|
|
Fiscal 2021 |
|
Eugene I. Lee, Jr. |
(3) |
Adjustments to Calculate Compensation Actually Paid to PEO (Column (c)) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reported Summary Compensation Table |
|
|
|
8,500,029 |
|
|
|
|
11,891,841 |
|
|
|
|
10,128,186 |
|
|
|
|
|
Reported Value Equity Awards |
|
|
|
(5,562,526 |
) |
|
|
|
(5,982,682 |
) |
|
|
|
(5,496,847 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Year-End Fair Value of Outstanding Equity Awards Granted in Year |
|
|
|
9,961,422 |
|
|
|
|
5,163,812 |
|
|
|
|
13,430,669 |
|
|
|
|
|
Year Over Year Change in Fair Value of Outstanding Unvested Equity Granted in Prior Years |
|
|
|
2,219,441 |
|
|
|
|
(2,838,468 |
) |
|
|
|
15,438,828 |
|
|
|
|
|
Year Over Year Change in Fair Value of Equity Granted in Prior Years and Vested in Year |
|
|
|
(181,368 |
) |
|
|
|
(167,098 |
) |
|
|
|
979,895 |
|
|
|
|
|
Value of Dividends Paid on Unvested Equity |
|
|
|
309,535 |
|
|
|
|
785,481 |
|
|
|
|
434,163 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total Equity Award Adjustments |
|
|
|
15,246,533 |
|
|
|
|
8,852,886 |
|
|
|
|
34,914,894 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal 2023 |
|
Todd A. Burrowes, Daniel J. Kiernan, M. John Martin, Rajesh Vennam |
|
|
Fiscal 2022 |
|
Todd A. Burrowes, Ricardo Cardenas, M. John Martin, Rajesh Vennam |
|
|
Fiscal 2021 |
|
Todd A. Burrowes, Ricardo Cardenas, David C. George, Daniel J. Kiernan, M. John Martin, Rajesh Vennam |
(5) |
Adjustments to Calculate Average Compensation Actually Paid to Other NEOs (Column (e)) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reported Summary Compensation Table |
|
|
|
3,205,321 |
|
|
|
|
3,517,201 |
|
|
|
|
2,627,292 |
|
|
|
|
|
Reported Value Equity Awards |
|
|
|
(1,668,767 |
) |
|
|
|
(1,577,189 |
) |
|
|
|
(1,075,089 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Year-End Fair Value of Outstanding Equity Awards Granted in Year |
|
|
|
2,988,436 |
|
|
|
|
1,361,314 |
|
|
|
|
2,155,749 |
|
|
|
|
|
Year Over Year Change in Fair Value of Outstanding Unvested Equity Granted in Prior Years |
|
|
|
1,307,395 |
|
|
|
|
(550,759 |
) |
|
|
|
1,897,626 |
|
|
|
|
|
Year Over Year Change in Fair Value of Equity Granted in Prior Years and Vested in Year |
|
|
|
(87,150 |
) |
|
|
|
(29,572 |
) |
|
|
|
126,493 |
|
|
|
|
|
Value of Dividends Paid on Unvested Equity |
|
|
|
159,771 |
|
|
|
|
165,395 |
|
|
|
|
76,631 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total Equity Award Adjustments |
|
|
|
5,905,006 |
|
|
|
|
2,886,390 |
|
|
|
|
5,808,702 |
|
(6) |
Represents the cumulative TSR of the S&P Consumer Discretionary Select Sector Index. |
(7) |
The dollar amount represents the amount of net income reported in the Company’s audited financial statements for the applicable fiscal year. |
(8) |
Adjusted Darden Diluted Net EPS was selected as the Company-Selected Measure. A detailed Adjusted EPS reconciliation can be found in our Compensation Discussion and Analysis of the Company’s Proxy Statement for the applicable fiscal year, each as filed with the SEC on August 9, 2021, August 8, 2022 and August 7, 2023, respectively. |
|
|
|
Company Selected Measure Name |
Adjusted Darden Diluted Net EPS
|
|
|
Named Executive Officers, Footnote |
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal 2023 |
|
Todd A. Burrowes, Daniel J. Kiernan, M. John Martin, Rajesh Vennam |
|
|
Fiscal 2022 |
|
Todd A. Burrowes, Ricardo Cardenas, M. John Martin, Rajesh Vennam |
|
|
Fiscal 2021 |
|
Todd A. Burrowes, Ricardo Cardenas, David C. George, Daniel J. Kiernan, M. John Martin, Rajesh Vennam |
|
|
|
Peer Group Issuers, Footnote |
(6) |
Represents the cumulative TSR of the S&P Consumer Discretionary Select Sector Index. |
|
|
|
PEO Total Compensation Amount |
$ 8,500,029
|
$ 11,891,841
|
$ 10,128,186
|
PEO Actually Paid Compensation Amount |
$ 15,246,533
|
8,852,886
|
34,914,894
|
Adjustment To PEO Compensation, Footnote |
(3) |
Adjustments to Calculate Compensation Actually Paid to PEO (Column (c)) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reported Summary Compensation Table |
|
|
|
8,500,029 |
|
|
|
|
11,891,841 |
|
|
|
|
10,128,186 |
|
|
|
|
|
Reported Value Equity Awards |
|
|
|
(5,562,526 |
) |
|
|
|
(5,982,682 |
) |
|
|
|
(5,496,847 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Year-End Fair Value of Outstanding Equity Awards Granted in Year |
|
|
|
9,961,422 |
|
|
|
|
5,163,812 |
|
|
|
|
13,430,669 |
|
|
|
|
|
Year Over Year Change in Fair Value of Outstanding Unvested Equity Granted in Prior Years |
|
|
|
2,219,441 |
|
|
|
|
(2,838,468 |
) |
|
|
|
15,438,828 |
|
|
|
|
|
Year Over Year Change in Fair Value of Equity Granted in Prior Years and Vested in Year |
|
|
|
(181,368 |
) |
|
|
|
(167,098 |
) |
|
|
|
979,895 |
|
|
|
|
|
Value of Dividends Paid on Unvested Equity |
|
|
|
309,535 |
|
|
|
|
785,481 |
|
|
|
|
434,163 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total Equity Award Adjustments |
|
|
|
15,246,533 |
|
|
|
|
8,852,886 |
|
|
|
|
34,914,894 |
|
|
|
|
Non-PEO NEO Average Total Compensation Amount |
$ 3,205,321
|
3,517,201
|
2,627,292
|
Non-PEO NEO Average Compensation Actually Paid Amount |
$ 5,905,006
|
2,886,390
|
5,808,702
|
Adjustment to Non-PEO NEO Compensation Footnote |
(5) |
Adjustments to Calculate Average Compensation Actually Paid to Other NEOs (Column (e)) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reported Summary Compensation Table |
|
|
|
3,205,321 |
|
|
|
|
3,517,201 |
|
|
|
|
2,627,292 |
|
|
|
|
|
Reported Value Equity Awards |
|
|
|
(1,668,767 |
) |
|
|
|
(1,577,189 |
) |
|
|
|
(1,075,089 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Year-End Fair Value of Outstanding Equity Awards Granted in Year |
|
|
|
2,988,436 |
|
|
|
|
1,361,314 |
|
|
|
|
2,155,749 |
|
|
|
|
|
Year Over Year Change in Fair Value of Outstanding Unvested Equity Granted in Prior Years |
|
|
|
1,307,395 |
|
|
|
|
(550,759 |
) |
|
|
|
1,897,626 |
|
|
|
|
|
Year Over Year Change in Fair Value of Equity Granted in Prior Years and Vested in Year |
|
|
|
(87,150 |
) |
|
|
|
(29,572 |
) |
|
|
|
126,493 |
|
|
|
|
|
Value of Dividends Paid on Unvested Equity |
|
|
|
159,771 |
|
|
|
|
165,395 |
|
|
|
|
76,631 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total Equity Award Adjustments |
|
|
|
5,905,006 |
|
|
|
|
2,886,390 |
|
|
|
|
5,808,702 |
|
|
|
|
Compensation Actually Paid vs. Total Shareholder Return |
Compensation Actually Paid and Cumulative TSR The table below shows the relationship between the amount of compensation actually paid to the PEO and the average amount of compensation actually paid to the Company’s NEOs as a group and the Company’s Total Shareholder Return and Total Shareholder Return of our peer group, the S&P Consumer Discretionary Select Sector Index. Neither the Company’s Total Shareholder Return nor the peer group Total Shareholder Return are performance metrics in the Company’s incentive plans. The Company’s Total Shareholder return as a percentile rank versus the Total Shareholder Return of the constituents of a different peer group is a performance measure in the Company’s Performance Stock Unit Awards. Please see Compensation Discussion and Analysis in this Proxy Statement for a description of the Company’s Executive Compensation Philosophy and Strategy.
|
|
|
Compensation Actually Paid vs. Net Income |
Compensation Actually Paid and Net Income The table below shows the relationship between the amount of compensation actually paid to the PEO and the average amount of compensation actually paid to the Company’s NEOs as a group and the Company’s Net Income. Net Income is not a performance measure in any of the Company’s incentive plans and any alignment would be indirect. Please see Compensation Discussion and Analysis in this Proxy Statement for a description of the Company’s Executive Compensation Philosophy and Strategy.
|
|
|
Compensation Actually Paid vs. Company Selected Measure |
Compensation Actually Paid and Adjusted Diluted Net EPS The table below shows the relationship between the amount of compensation actually paid to the PEO and the average amount of compensation actually paid to the Company’s NEOs as a group and the Company’s Adjusted Diluted Net EPS. Adjusted Diluted Net EPS is the Company Selected Measure because it is a performance measure in the Company’s Annual Incentive Plan. Note, compensation actually paid to the PEO and the average amount of compensation actually paid to the Company’s NEOs as a group is impacted by changes in stock price and other performance metrics in the Company’s Incentive Plans. Please see Compensation Discussion and Analysis in this Proxy Statement for a description of the Company’s Executive Compensation Philosophy and Strategy.
|
|
|
Total Shareholder Return Vs Peer Group |
Compensation Actually Paid and Cumulative TSR The table below shows the relationship between the amount of compensation actually paid to the PEO and the average amount of compensation actually paid to the Company’s NEOs as a group and the Company’s Total Shareholder Return and Total Shareholder Return of our peer group, the S&P Consumer Discretionary Select Sector Index. Neither the Company’s Total Shareholder Return nor the peer group Total Shareholder Return are performance metrics in the Company’s incentive plans. The Company’s Total Shareholder return as a percentile rank versus the Total Shareholder Return of the constituents of a different peer group is a performance measure in the Company’s Performance Stock Unit Awards. Please see Compensation Discussion and Analysis in this Proxy Statement for a description of the Company’s Executive Compensation Philosophy and Strategy.
|
|
|
Tabular List, Table |
Pay versus Performance Tabular List The table below lists our most important performance measures used to link “Compensation Actually Paid” for our NEOs to company performance, over the fiscal year ending May 28, 2023. These measures are among the measures used to determine the annual incentive and the PSU component of long-term incentive payouts for each of the NEOs. For more information on annual incentives and actual payouts for each NEO, see “Annual Incentive Plan ” beginning on page 57 of this Proxy Statement. For more information on the PSU component of the long-term incentives for each NEO, see “Long-Term Incentives” beginning on page 60 of this Proxy Statement. The performance measures included in this table are not ranked by relative importance.
|
|
Darden Adjusted Diluted Net EPS |
|
Darden Same-Restaurant Sales Growth |
|
Relative Total Shareholder Return |
|
|
|
Total Shareholder Return Amount |
$ 226.97
|
171.15
|
188.58
|
Peer Group Total Shareholder Return Amount |
122.21
|
123.74
|
139.04
|
Net Income (Loss) |
$ 981,900,000
|
$ 952,800,000
|
$ 629,300,000
|
Company Selected Measure Amount |
8
|
7.4
|
4.31
|
PEO Name |
Ricardo Cardenas
|
Eugene I. Lee, Jr.
|
Eugene I. Lee, Jr.
|
Measure:: 1 |
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
Name |
Darden Adjusted Diluted Net EPS
|
|
|
Measure:: 2 |
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
Name |
Darden Same-Restaurant Sales Growth
|
|
|
Measure:: 3 |
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
Name |
Relative Total Shareholder Return
|
|
|
PEO | Reported Value Equity Awards [Member] |
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
Adjustment to Compensation, Amount |
$ (5,562,526)
|
$ (5,982,682)
|
$ (5,496,847)
|
PEO | YearEnd Fair Value of Outstanding Equity Awards Granted in Year [Member] |
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
Adjustment to Compensation, Amount |
9,961,422
|
5,163,812
|
13,430,669
|
PEO | Year Over Year Change in Fair Value of Outstanding Unvested Equity Granted in Prior Years [Member] |
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
Adjustment to Compensation, Amount |
2,219,441
|
(2,838,468)
|
15,438,828
|
PEO | Year Over Year Change in Fair Value of Equity Granted in Prior Years and Vested in Year [Member] |
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
Adjustment to Compensation, Amount |
(181,368)
|
(167,098)
|
979,895
|
PEO | Value of Dividends Paid on Unvested Equity [Member] |
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
Adjustment to Compensation, Amount |
309,535
|
785,481
|
434,163
|
PEO | Total Equity Award Adjustments [Member] |
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
Adjustment to Compensation, Amount |
15,246,533
|
8,852,886
|
34,914,894
|
Non-PEO NEO | Reported Value Equity Awards [Member] |
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
Adjustment to Compensation, Amount |
(1,668,767)
|
(1,577,189)
|
(1,075,089)
|
Non-PEO NEO | YearEnd Fair Value of Outstanding Equity Awards Granted in Year [Member] |
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
Adjustment to Compensation, Amount |
2,988,436
|
1,361,314
|
2,155,749
|
Non-PEO NEO | Year Over Year Change in Fair Value of Outstanding Unvested Equity Granted in Prior Years [Member] |
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
Adjustment to Compensation, Amount |
1,307,395
|
(550,759)
|
1,897,626
|
Non-PEO NEO | Year Over Year Change in Fair Value of Equity Granted in Prior Years and Vested in Year [Member] |
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
Adjustment to Compensation, Amount |
(87,150)
|
(29,572)
|
126,493
|
Non-PEO NEO | Value of Dividends Paid on Unvested Equity [Member] |
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
Adjustment to Compensation, Amount |
159,771
|
165,395
|
76,631
|
Non-PEO NEO | Total Equity Award Adjustments [Member] |
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
Adjustment to Compensation, Amount |
$ 5,905,006
|
$ 2,886,390
|
$ 5,808,702
|