Company: GE
Filing Date: 2025-03-13
Form Type: DEF 14A
Source: 0001308179-25-000114
Chunk: 64

Company: GENERAL ELECTRIC CO
Filing Date: 2025-03-13
Form: DEF 14A
Chunk 64
---
 Moreover, the policy is aligned with market practice and recent shareholder votes. In this regard, proposals such as Mr. Harangozo’s generally have received low levels of shareholder support in recent years at companies that have a cash severance approval policy similar to ours. The Board believes that our existing policy is the appropriate approach in aligning our executive compensation programs with shareholder value creation, rather than the overly broad policy requested by the proposal. See our Governance Principles (see Helpful Resourceson page 66) for the full policy. THE PROPOSAL’S OVERLY BROAD APPROACH WOULD PLACE GE AEROSPACE AT A COMPETITIVE DISADVANTAGE BY LIMITING OUR ABILITY TO ATTRACT AND RETAIN KEY EXECUTIVE LEADERS.The Board believes the proposal would adversely affect GE Aerospace’s ability to attract senior-level executive talent, for which we compete globally with other companies. The equity-related severance benefits that would be covered by the requested policy often arise in the context of negotiating an employment agreement with an external hire for a senior leadership position, where the overall compensation package typically must be crafted to induce the individual to leave a successful and well-compensated role at another company. As a result, adopting the requested policy would interfere with GE Aerospace’s ability to make binding offers of employment for roles that can have significant impact on GE Aerospace’s performance and results. Additionally, requiring sign-on packages for senior managers to be approved by shareholders would prevent us from being nimble and competitive in the recruiting process, as it is unlikely that candidates would be willing to let their hiring be subject to subsequent shareholder approval. The delay, uncertainty and expense of seeking shareholder approval in such circumstances demonstrate the impracticality of the requested policy. Unsurprisingly given the undue limitations and negative consequences that could accompany the policy requested by this proposal, the restrictions on severance arrangements imposed by this proposal materially deviate from reasonable market norms and most of the companies in GE Aerospace’s compensation peer group do not disclose having a policy similar to the policy requested by the proposal. As a result, adopting the proposal’s overly broad approach would disadvantage GE Aerospace relative to peers and other market participants in its ability to recruit and retain the best available executive talent. The need to retain competitive and flexible tools in the market for executive talent is particularly significant as the company now competes for talent in narrower talent pools for experienced leaders among aerospace and defense companies. For the foregoing reasons, the Board recommends a vote AGAINSTthis proposal. 60 GE Aerospace 2025 Proxy Statement Submitting 202