Yesterday, Navigant Consulting filed this Form 8-K to report that it became the 9th company to fail to gain majority support for its say-on-pay, with only 45% voting in favor. Ted Allen’s blog provides some analysis.
Transcript: “What the Top Compensation Consultants Are NOW Telling Compensation Committees”
We have posted the transcript for the CompensationStandards.com webcast: Transcript: “What the Top Compensation Consultants Are NOW Telling Compensation Committees.”
Probably the most interesting development that happened while I was on vaca last week was the one noted by Mike Melbinger in his blog. Mike blogged about how some of the first companies to fail to receive majority support on their SOP have been sued (as well as their compensation committee members and even their compensation consultants) in shareholder derivative suits. Not only have the early failures of this proxy season been sued, but two of the companies that failed last year were sued (one case has been settled and one is still pending). We have begun to collect the pleadings from these cases for our “Say-on-Pay” Practice Area.
With the ante continuing to go up, take advantage of the early bird discount now for our pair of conferences – “The Say-on-Pay Workshop: 8th Annual Executive Compensation Conference” and the “6th Annual Proxy Disclosure Conference” (here’s the agendas) – which will be held on November 1st-2nd in San Francisco and via video webcast. Register now to obtain a 25% Early Bird Discount!
Last week, Stanley Black & Decker filed this Form 8-K to report that it became the seventh company to fail to gain majority support for its say-on-pay, with only 39% voting in favor. Not only did shareholders reject the company’s SOP, they also came down hard on the board – two directors had 49% withheld. Cooley’s Amy Muecke analyzes why the company failed in this memo.
Then on Friday – in a midst of a flurry of filings on a day when the markets were closed – Umpqua Holdings Corporation filed this Form 8-K to report it became the eighth failed say-on-pay with only 35% voting in support. Umpqua’s Form 8-K is unique in that it chose to include a narrative on why it believed it failed (ie. ISS recommended against the company and the company disagrees with ISS’s analysis).
In his “Proxy Disclosure Blog,” Mark Borges gives us the latest say-when-on-pay stats: with 2177 companies filing their proxies, 43% triennial; 4% biennial; 51% annual; and 4% no recommendation.
Here’s news from Jeannemarie O’Brien and Adam Shapiro as written in this Wachtell Lipton memo:
Recently, several federal agencies, including the OCC, Federal Reserve, FDIC, OTS, NCUA, SEC and FHFA, jointly issued a finalized proposed rule regarding incentive-based compensation under section 956 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Section 956 of Dodd-Frank prohibits covered financial institutions from having incentive compensation arrangements that encourage inappropriate risk because they provide excessive compensation or pose a risk of material financial loss to the covered institution.
The final proposed rule is substantially similar to the proposed rule approved by the FDIC on February 7, 2011 (see our February 18, 2011 memorandum). Certain agencies have modified the proposed general rule in their agency-specific rule. There is a 45-day comment period following publication of the proposed rule in the Federal Register, and the agencies have invited comments on a variety of topics, including with respect to the feasibility of complying with the final rule in the proposed time frame.
The final rule may become effective as early as year-end (six months after publication of the final rule in the Federal Register). As we previously advised, bank financials and non-bank entities that could be covered institutions, such as broker-dealers and investment advisers, should review the proposed rule, evaluate its potential application and impact and take the opportunity to seek clarification through the comment process. Companies should maintain flexibility in the design of their 2011 incentive compensation arrangements in order to accommodate the final rule and should consider creating a working group to develop a compliance action plan.
It’s also worth reading analysis of this proposal by Prof. Steven Davidoff…
We have posted the survey results regarding the latest clawback policy trends, repeated below:
1. Has your company adopted a clawback policy:
– Yes, we adopted a policy during 2010 for first time – 9.6%
– Yes, we already had one before 2010 but we recently amended it – 5.2%
– Yes, we already had one before 2010 and we intend to amend it soon – 28.9%
– Not yet – 56.3%
2. If you answered “Not yet” to question above, do you intend to take any of the following steps in advance of adopting or amending a clawback policy:
– Add provision into terms & conditions of certain incentive awards to enable a potential clawback – 22.5%
– Have executives sign an independent document to enable a potential clawback of incentive awards generally – 7.5%
– Add disclosure in proxy statement about the intention to adopt or amend a clawback policy after finalization of SEC rules implementing Section 954 of Dodd-Frank – 45.0%
– None of the above – 40.0%
3. Does your company plan to adopt a new clawback policy or amend an existing policy:
– Prior to finalization of SEC rules implementing Section 954 of Dodd-Frank – 7.5%
– After finalization of SEC rules implementing Section 954 of Dodd-Frank – 70.7%
– Don’t know yet – 15.8%
– No – 6.0%
4. Once fully completed or amended, does/will your clawback policy apply to:
– Executive officers only – 25.9%
– Group of key employees broader than executive officers – 20.7%
– All employees – 3.0%
– Some provisions of policy apply to certain group of employees and other provisions apply to other groups or all employees – 5.9%
– Don’t know yet – 44.4%
5. Once fully completed or amended, does/will your clawback policy apply to directors:
– Yes, the entire clawback policy will apply to directors – 8.2%
– Yes, but only part of clawback policy will apply to directors – 0.8%
– No, it will not apply to directors – 33.6%
– Don’t know yet – 57.5%
Like Disney and Hewlett-Packard before them (see this blog), General Electric and Northern Trust recently filed additional soliciting materials challenging ISS’s recommendations on their say-on-pay. We are compiling a list of all the companies that do this on CompensationStandards.com’s “ISS Policies & Ratings” Practice Area.
GE notes a “significant disagreement” with ISS. GE’s materials directly confront ISS. GE’s points are:
– ISS’s analysis fails to consider actions that aligned pay with performance during the recession.
– Mr. Immelt’s pay increased a modest 6.4% since 2007, the last year he received a bonus.
– ISS’s valuation of Mr. Immelt’s option grant significantly overstates his total compensation.
– ISS’s model to value options differs from GE’s model and is inconsistent with applicable accounting guidance.
Northern Trust
ISS claims Northern Trust has a pay-for-performance disconnect. Northern Trust’s materials reemphasize components of compensation related to equity-based incentive pay, cash incentives and business results. Northern Trust also claims that ISS’s calculations of comparative financial performance are flawed because the index includes several companies engaged in entirely different and unrelated businesses. Its also worth noting that Glass Lewis & Co. recommended shareholders approve executive compensation.
Yesterday, Allegheny Technologies joined those fighting their proxy advisor recommendation with these additional solicitation materials. And ISS’s Ted Allen blogged about how AFSCME has launched the first public “just vote no” campaign this proxy season against two companies over their pay practices.
I’m not sure what you heard from your spouse, friends and colleagues about the news from the past week that CEO pay has gone up in the double digits over the past year, but I’m getting an earful. They are angry that too many CEO are being rewarded for laying people off in a poor economy or having their incentive packages reset at the bottom of the market. They have also read that there is a widening gap between the CEO’s pay and the median pay of other Named Executive Officers. And the recent Transocean flap doesn’t help things – here’s an excerpt from this Houston Chronicle article:
Only a wily compensation consultant could come up with a rationale whereby Transocean not only rewards its executives but touts its safety record after an accident like that. Only a tone-deaf board could endorse such a proposal and only a myopic corporate counsel could allow it to be placed in the company’s proxy statement.
Anyways, here are the two 2010 CEO pay studies that have been released so far:
And this Gretchen Morgenson NY Times’ column entitled “Enriching a Few at the Expense of Many” is quite thought-provoking, featuring a money manager who uses pay as a “crucial tire” to kick when making investment decisions and how companies overseas seem to do a better job of paying their CEOs.
I’m still in the process of developing the agenda for “The Say-on-Pay Workshop: 8th Annual Executive Compensation Conference,” but I do know it will feature a number of prominent investors since they are so important going forward in a say-on-pay world. Remember that this conference is paired with the “6th Annual Proxy Disclosure Conference” and they will be held on November 1st-2nd in San Francisco and via video webcast. Register now to obtain a 25% Early Bird Discount!
The Forbes Fictional 15
Hat tip to Lois Yurow for pointing out this hilarious “The Forbes Fictional 15.” Here is an excerpt from the opening:
You’re not imagining it: The rich do keep getting richer. Even the fictionally rich. The members of our 2011 list of wealthiest fictional characters have an average net worth of $9.86 billion, up 20% from last year. In aggregate, the Fictional 15 are worth $131.55 billion -more than the gross domestic product of New Zealand.
Last week, Ameron International filed a Form 8-K to reveal it has become the sixth company to fail to receive majority support for its say-on-pay, with 42% voting in favor. As noted in this LA Business Journal article, the company also was the subject of a proxy fight. As I blogged earlier, I’m counting Hemispherx Biopharma as the 5th failed vote until someone convinces me otherwise (here is our list of failed votes so far)…
In his “Proxy Disclosure Blog,” Mark Borges gives us the latest say-when-on-pay stats: with 1689 companies filing their proxies, 42% triennial; 4% biennial; 51% annual; and 4% no recommendation.
Yesterday, the SEC issued this statement explaining that in the event of a government shutdown, EDGAR will remain fully functional – but that the SEC’s Divisions (including Corp Fin) will be unable to process filings, provide interpretive advice, issue no-action letters or conduct any other normal activities. As a result, new or pending registration statements or applications for exemptive relief will not be processed regardless of the status of any review of those filings.
There will be only an “extremely limited number” of Staffers working during the shutdown – so although the SEC’s statement provides an email address and phone number for emergencies, I imagine only true emergencies will be handled by the Staff. Other than these designated essential Staffers, any attempt to work during the shutdown is a firing offense – so there is nothing that a staffer can do for you even out of kindness of their heart. The government is scheduled to shutdown tonight at midnight.
Poll: How Many Corp Fin Staffers Will Be Working During the Shutdown?
As noted above, the SEC’s statement regarding the shutdown notes that only an “extremely limited number” of Staffers will be working if the shutdown is not avoided. Take a moment to predict how many Corp Fin Staffers that phrase means:
Last week, the SEC issued this “Small Entity Compliance Guide” regarding say-on-pay and say-on-golden parachutes. It’s brief and to the point and summarizes the new rules…