Over the last few years, with fears increased in the healthcare industry that its top executives could be targets of violence—a concern which was tragically validated in December of last year by the shooting death of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson—several pharma companies have been beefing up security protocols for their CEOs.
As U.S. drugmakers have released their proxy statements in recent weeks, several reported six-figure expenditures to protect their top execs.
Last month, in divulging a $19.9 million pay package for its CEO, Stéphane Bancel, Moderna said that nearly $960,000 of his 2024 compensation was tied to security expenses.
Moderna said it began authorizing personal and home security services in 2020 as it was developing its COVID-19 vaccine. The security expenditures continued into 2024 “in response to the ongoing, heightened risk environment," the company said in its proxy.
A few days later, in Pfizer’s proxy, the company listed 2024 protection expenses for CEO Albert Bourla, Ph.D., at $661,133 “due to heightened security risks including threats made against our executives.” The company is providing such protection "pursuant to an independent security study and the advice of other security experts," Pfizer said in the proxy.
While Moderna and Pfizer played high-profile industry roles during the pandemic—and may have faced extra threats because of those public-facing roles—other drugmakers also are showing increased vigilance in response to what they perceive as a growing threat.
In Gilead Sciences' annual proxy statement, it reported (PDF) that it spent $285,269 to provide security services for CEO Daniel O’Day last year. In its proxy for 2023, Gilead listed (PDF) O’Day’s security expenses at $166,859.
“After considering the recommendation of an independent, third-party security study and in response to specific threats and incidents, our Board of Directors requires the use of company-provided personal security, aircraft and a car and driver for most of our CEO’s travel, including personal travel,” Gilead wrote.
Last year, on top of the security expenses Gilead listed for O’Day, the company also spent $240,998 and $35,517, respectively, for his personal use of corporate aircraft and automobiles.
“The incremental costs incurred by the company for these items has been determined to be necessary to promote our CEO’s personal safety and security,” Gilead added.
In its proxy, Johnson & Johnson listed $102,779 for “personal and home security services,” as part of CEO Joaquin Duato’s $24.3 million in compensation for 2024. In its proxy the previous year, J&J did not identify a security expenditure for Duato.
Without getting into specifics, AbbVie's proxy filing indicates the company spent somewhere in the neighborhood of $200,000 on "security services for personal travel" of CEO Robert Michael. Eli Lilly said it spent $73,630 in costs “related to security services” for CEO David Ricks. This compares to 2023, when Lilly did not include any protection costs for Ricks in its proxy.
Meanwhile, Merck revealed that it spent more than $81,000 for home and travel security for CEO Rob Davis, which was up from the $12,000 it spent for the same services in 2023. Davis' tab for his use of company aircraft came to $224,340.
"Our global security organization regularly evaluates the travel risk for our CEO," Merck explained. "As a result of these assessments and based on our security team’s recommendation, our Board of Directors has determined that our CEO must use company-provided aircraft for all business and personal travel."
In its proxy filing last month, pharmacy chain Walgreens listed more than $145,000 in security services and threat monitoring for CEO Tim Wentworth “in light of the heightened risk environment in the retail pharmacy industry.”
While the security expenditures cover the entire span of 2024, late last year the healthcare industry was shocked by the shooting of Thompson. An investigation revealed that he was targeted by a disgruntled assailant as bullet casings found at the scene read “deny,” “delay,” “defend” and “depose”—all terms associated with claims denials from insurance carriers.
Similarly unsettling, in the aftermath of the shooting, was the anti-healthcare venom that spread on social media.
The shooting has convinced major companies in healthcare and beyond to put a focus on security and safety, an expert told Fierce Healthcare in December.
“Sometimes it takes an event like this, where people open their eyes to what the reality and what the risk threshold really is out there,” Glen Kucera, president of enhanced protection services at Allied Universal, a global security firm, said.