In 2020, executive leadership announced that all employee merit increases were being eliminated due to “financial troubles at Broadridge.” What they didn’t mention is that, according to Broadridge’s own proxy filings, the top executives were not sharing in that sacrifice:
CEO Timothy C. Gokey – Total Compensation
2019: $7.29 million
2020 (the year merits were cut): $9.15 million
Change: roughly +25.6% in a year when employees were told there was no money for merit increases.
The same pattern showed up again in 2025. This time, instead of removing merit, management cut almost 10% from everyone’s bonus, again citing “financial issues at Broadridge.” Meanwhile:
CEO Timothy C. Gokey – Total Compensation
2024: about $14.2 million
2025 (the year bonuses were cut): about $17.2 million
Change: roughly a 21% increase YEAR-OVER-YEAR, while employees’ bonuses were being reduced for “fiscal reasons”.
So, in both years where employees were told the company couldn’t afford normal merit or full bonuses, the CEO and other executives were seeing very large increases in total compensation. This is only made worse by the fact that, everyone typically has to wear multiple hats to get their job done, even if the task is outside the job description, and compensation is significantly lower per job than the the average for the given jobs.
Other cons:
Backfilling and hiring practices
When someone leaves, it can take months to get approval to backfill the role. In the meantime, the team just absorbs the workload. When they do hire, they often bring in new people at higher salaries than existing team members doing the same work. In practice, loyalty is punished, not rewarded—long-term employees are left behind while new hires are paid more, and if those new hires don’t stay, the team loses the headcount and has to start over again (often waiting 6+ months for a new req to be approved, if at all).
Benefits quality
Aetna is the health insurance provider, but we’re only allowed to choose from a few of the worst Aetna plans. Coverage and out-of-pocket costs feel more like a cost-cutting exercise than a benefit.