Home
About us
Projects
Publications
Newsletters
Conferences
Media
News
Contact
Search
Login
News
Search
Sign up for Newsletter
29 September 2011
SRI-Adviser: Council of Institutional Investors Analyzes Say-on-Pay Proposals
Source:
www.sri-adviser.com
by Robert Kropp
A report from the CII finds that pay for performance issues were cited most often by institutional investors as the reason for voting against management proposals.
2011 was the first year in which the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) required that public companies hold shareowner votes on executive compensation. For sustainable investors and corporate governance advocates, the results were disappointing, as more than 90% of management proposals on the issue passed by an overwhelming majority.
As the shareowner activist Robert AG Monks stated in a recent speech, "The ugly reality (is) that many institutional shareholders—conspicuously those considered educational and philanthropic leaders—simply choose not to function as stewards of the equity shares in their portfolios."
Those institutional investors that do make the effort to vote their shares, along with investment management firms, proxy advisers and solicitors, and company officials, were surveyed in a recently published report that analyzes proposals rejected by a majority of shareowners at 37 companies in votes between January and July 2011.
The report, commissioned by the Council of Institutional Investors (CII) and authored by Farient Advisors, found that one-quarter of the management proposals rejected by shareowners occurred at companies in the real estate, homebuilding, or construction-related sectors; "industries," the report states, "that were hit hard in the economic downturn and mostly are still hurting." Prominent companies whose proposals were rejected include Constellation Energy, Freeport McMoRan, and Hewlett-Packard.
The authors asked investors—public pension plans, mutual funds, and union pension funds, with collective assets under management in excess of $7.9 trillion—how they decided on their votes at the 37 companies where management proposals were rejected.
According to the report, the factors most often cited by the investors were a disconnect between pay and performance (92%); poor pay practices (57%); poor disclosure (35%); and inappropriately high level of compensation (16%).
The investors also said that they focused on CEO pay, and viewed their vote as an opportunity to voice their concerns rather that deliver a referendum on the oversight of Boards of Directors.
"Boards at companies where say-on-pay proposals garnered significant opposition should be reaching out to their investors to discuss their concerns," Ann Yerger, executive director of the CII, said. "They should also review their pay practices and consider appropriate changes." The Council identifies itself as "a leading advocate for say-on-pay," according to the report.
News
24 March 2009
Responsible Investor: ATP seeds €400m sustainable forestry investment programme
23 March 2009
SocialFunds: Human Trafficking and Abortion Are Top Areas of Concern for Catholic Investors
23 March 2009
Responsible Investor: Danish pensions giant ATP invests $400m in clean energy and renewables
23 March 2009
FinChannel: Credit Suisse Fund (Lux) Global Responsible Equities Combines Sustainability and Returns
23 March 2009
World Resources Institute: Filling the Investment Information Deficit
18 March 2009
CSR Asia: Mainstreaming the inclusion of ESG issues in Asia Pacific markets
16 March 2009
SRI-Adviser: S&P Adds Carbon Index to Its Family of Environmental Indices
16 March 2009
Responsible Investor: Norway govt fund puts Siemens on 715m euro exclusion watch over corruption
16 March 2009
FT: Pension fund treads a thorny path
13 March 2009
SocialFunds: EPA Proposes Mandated National Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
[
1
][
2
][
3
][
4
][
5
][
6
][
7
][
8
][
9
][
10
][
11
][
12
][
13
][
14
][
15
][
16
][
17
][
18
][
19
][
20
][
21
][
22
][
23
][
24
][
25
][
26
][
27
][
28
][
29
][
30
][
31
][
32
][
33
][
34
][
35
][
36
][
37
][
38
][
39
][
40
][
41
][
42
][
43
][
44
][
45
][
46
][
47
][
48
][
49
][
50
][
51
][
52
][
53
][
54
][
55
][
56
][
57
][
58
][
59
][
60
][
61
][
62
][
63
][
64
][
65
][
66
][
67
][
68
][
69
][
70
][
71
][
72
][
73
][
74
][
75
][
76
][
77
][
78
][
79
][
80
][
81
][
82
][
83
][
84
][
85
][
86
][
87
][
88
][
89
][
90
][
91
][
92
][
93
][
94
][
95
][
96
][
97
][
98
][
99
][
100
][
101
][
102
][
103
][
104
][
105
][
106
][
107
][
108
][
109
][
110
][
111
][
112
][
113
][
114
][
115
][
116
][
117
][
118
][
119
][
120
][
121
][
122
][
123
][
124
][
125
][
126
][
127
][
128
][
129
][
130
][
131
][
132
][
133
][
134
][
135
][
136
]
Sustainable Investment Research Platform
Provided by Webforum