In the can’t catch a break category, P66 board structure is taken to task for failing to serve the interests of shareholders.
Nothing shocking here, just evidence of the company leadership’s insular nature.
https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2025/04/15/staggered-board-shenanigans-at-phillips-66/
It’s now as “clubby” a public board as exists in Corporate America, no question about that. There have actually been a couple of firebrands interested in governance and the shareholder in the past (in the 2015-2020 time period or so). Was heavy with CEO’s - and even a “tree-hugger” so to speak on the board - but truly diverse folks (some with industry CEO experience - chems) who did challenge the status quo and ask tough questions - that is - back then.
Pease should have been a welcome change, and does have the right experience; but supporting the Chair/CEO staying combined without explanation does seem like a “go along with the crowd” decision, which it feels like Elliott had major beef with.
Anyway-this is not a surprising sore spot at all.